Jan
28
Objectivity, and the role of “bias” in review writing
January 28, 2007 |
So, it’s Sunday night and Roger Federer has just won the first slam (of what should be four) of the season. And I’m sitting in front of my computer trying to invent something to write about. See, I made this promise in my first post in this new blog to update weekly, and I only function properly if things are done regularly. So, earlier I chose Sunday night to be the weekly appointment for writing these entries. The problem: I have nothing to write about.
It’s been a rather inactive week as far as anime is concerned. Sure, we’ve had the big news of a Funi license rush (which included Mushishi, a must-buy in my mind, and Shuffle!, a must-avoid) and activity on asosbrigade.com, but the fansub circuit has been unusually quiet given this stage of a new season, and there haven’t been any major controversies taking the anime community by storm. Which leaves me with very little to talk about. So, what can I do in this situation? Flip through Answerman’s latest article, of course. Answerman has the unusual advantage of being always topical, but the disadvantage (or “privilege”) of having his readers decide his topics of discussion. So, in these situations where I’m too lazy to think of my own topic of discussion, I’ll just let his articles inspire me. It beats thinking of stuff.
So, it’s the concept of objectivity and bias in reviews that’s today’s topic of conversation, a theme I suspect I’ll be revisiting quite frequently over the course of this blog (I’m starting to hate this word, truth be told). It’s not really a new idea, and what I offer to this argument is only rehashed ideas of things people have said before. I do largely agree with Answerman’s stance on things (most of the time I do, except when it comes to the dreaded topic-of-debate of lolicon), i.e. there is no such thing as perfect objectivity and all reviewers have that oh-so human characteristic of bias, which simply differs from person to person. It all comes down to the idea that language determines meaning. While “bias” and “taste” are two sides of the same coin, the both carry differing connotations when discussing the opinions offered by a review. “Taste” immediately invokes a reference to opinion (which is what reviews are), while “bias” is used to dismiss a clear misinterpretation of what are obviously facts. The problem with “facts” is that they’re largely superfluous in reviews (particularly in the ones we write). Facts are what you look up on ANN or Wikipedia. They don’t serve as a recommendation, though. Opinions do a far better job at that, but it’s much easier to disagree with an opinion.
So, what position does that leave us, the reviewer in? A rather tricky one, truth be told. Many reviewers believe that the best approach is honesty. Call the review as one sees it and, if people disagree with it, so be it. That is probably the easiest approach to take, but it does make defending your opinion rather difficult. Then again, are reviews meant to be written to dissenters in the first place? Probably not. Reviews generally work best as recommendations to people who haven’t already seen the title in question. Many reviewers argue that it is the obligation of the reader to find a reviewer that shares a similar taste and follow their advice. I suppose that works in a sense, but I hate the idea that we have to put such a demand on our readers when the goal is to provide a service to them, not the other way around.
I suppose the other possible approach is to bring the idea of objectivity into the review. I think it is important in a given title as a reviewer to recognize its flaws and recognize a section of the audience that is going to be turned off by these given flaws and then describe your own impact to them. For example, in a recent review I wrote on Bokura ga Ita, I noted that the series is slow and minimalist, which probably won’t appeal to a lot of fans, but then noted that I didn’t really didn’t consider this a great flaw in the context of my own taste. In a sense the idea of objectivity comes back to the idea of intention of a title (a theme I was debating in a forum thread recently). It’s far easier to be objective when discussing a title’s execution (one only has to look at the walking controversy that is The Melancholy of Suzumiya Haruhi), but as far as intention is concerned, whether one likes it or not will almost totally depend on their individual taste. When the intention of a series like Bokura ga Ita is to be slow-paced and tell a character-focused story with minimalist animation and low-impact plot-points, there will inevitably be a section of the audience that is unimpressed with such a concept. And then there will be people like me that couldn’t be happier with such an anime. Similarly, when the intention of an anime is to recount the entire series of Shuffle! in ultra-fast-forward with no consideration towards chronology or spoilers, I’m not going to be terribly enthralled. But some people dig that.
It is important to recognize intention. Many people critique their source material with the given criteria that goes something like “did the title execute itself in such a way that allowed it to succeed in reaching its intention”. Others think that the intention defines the maximum possible rating a title can give, and then give a rating which makes consideration of both intention and execution. In other words, since ones opinion of intention almost totally depends on taste, such reviewers don’t think objectivity is a great definer of how a review should be written. I’m somewhere in between, maybe leaning towards the latter. While I think it is important to recognize that different people have different tastes within a review and that such tastes need to be addressed as a sign of recognition to my readers, ultimately the final conclusion of the review will be largely determined by my own “biases”.
Comments
4 Comments so far
I really enjoyed this article. I think you hit the nail on the head. I consider reviews as only opinion, as I can never find a way to define “Good” or “Bad” as fact. This allows me to find reviewers who share my opinion, so if they think something is horrible, chances are I will too.
When people take reviews as fact, it gets rather annoying.
Look up facts on Wikipedia…
Like I’ve said in the forums, the most important thing one can do to make their reviews poignant is to be consistant in their tastes. Don’t give a title a “5″ and then give a nearly identical title a “7″ because you were more in the mood for it when you watched it.
Speaking of Answerman, I think he/she/cat said it best, that “bias” is a word people use to render someone else’s opinion worthless, instead of realizing that the opinion is different but valid. It takes a lot of evidence to prove bias.
It’s a REVIEW.
A review is an opinion. There is almost no justification to give a “unbiased” review; that’d just make it boring and lifeless to read. We must bring out our own biases, let the people know about them, and like you said, be honest. And Kuma makes a great point: Consistency counts for a lot.
And my blog is up too. Go take a look!
I won’t make any general statements simply because I’ll be rehashing what has already been said; just let it be known that I agree with your mentality.
I would, however, like to comment on the segment regarding readers finding a reviewer that shares a similar taste. I personally find this to be in discord with what I think the ideal should be. Rather than find a reviewer who appeals to the specific taste of the reader, the reader should look at as many conflicting opinions as well as agreeing opinions, and formulate a conclusion based on that. After all, one may prefer fast-paced actions, but if everyone’s liking Honey and Clover, it may be worth the time to watch it.
Hence, the review. I only somewhat agree with the mentality that the review should be a recommendation guide. It can be perfectly valid as such a tool, however I believe the primary purpose of the review is to compare anime to others.
So yeah, subjectivity should exist in a review, simply because it’s a great way to find out and try new anime. After all, someone could easily be thrown off of certain genres because they’ve never seen a high quality example of such.
Just my opinion…