The fight for the best scoop is an ongoing battle that ever since the dawn of time has been apart of the lives of the human race. A question that is as old as such competition is the perspective in which the story is given from. Should the story be objective, being more of an on look including a more vast spectrum, or subjective, being more precise and direct usually varying from person to person.
Personally, I prefer the subjective view rather than the objective view due to this increase in focus. This focus allows more important details within conflicts such as the Egypt uprising. By learning about the individual details one can imply the objective view.
I believe subjectivity its self gives a great scoop of the situation or ideas as you mentioned on your thesis. If a story is subjective it adds more meaning to the scene, the situation and the story it self. for example, Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, the monsters and victors side of the story added more to the overall meaning of having created two feelings, one being the monsters and the other victors. i also prefer subjectivity, clearly captures ones attention faster(as we will see in the memoirs).
ReplyDeleteHubert, I like how you brought in Shelly's unique writing style in having point of views from both Victor and Frankie Jr. Nevertheless, there are a lot of pros and cons with subjective and objective point of views. Being objective keeps rationality intact and allows us to control our emotions whereas subjectivity takes a hold of us and triggers so much within us. I think that each point of view is subject to different forms of writing and there is no right or wrong way. When I want to read something exciting and adventurous I so prefer subjective because it's so emotional and I feel a connection with the text. Like Hubert said, our memoirs are a good example. When it comes to news, I like objective because I want to be influenced by details and not by people's opinions. I really hate when liberal and conservative news clash with one another and their biased commentary. That's just me though.
ReplyDeleteObjectivity can also cause us to become infatuated with emotion. An example can be seen with genocide in Africa. That is the objective view. Since I'm pretty sure (at least I hope) we all don't like genocide, I believe that it evokes the emotion of anger and sadness. Such emotions can cause facts to be thrown out (what little is provided through objectivity).
ReplyDeleteYou make a valid point because when a piece of work triggers emotions we often do tend to act irrationally and like Blankenship says, that's not always good. We tend not to wait for all of the facts because emotions blind our ability to reason.
ReplyDeleteAnd the last thing that the people want is to be misinformed because of something as simple as unaimed emotion. Either way, both objectivity and subjectivity each involve emotion, through the necessity of evoking an emotional responce from the audience. This is done because hopefully the audience will become inspired to do something about the issue at hand.
ReplyDelete*Applause* Very well said John Christopher!
ReplyDeleteJust a question, because it seems like both are being addressed without specification, are we talking about observing objectivly/subjectivly or reporting objectivly/subjectivly? Because we do both daily. In writing novels (Frankenstein) we report, and in listening to news (genocide in africa) we observe, both of which can be done Objectivly/subjectivly. Objectivly/subjectivly observing/reporting is an everyday conscious choice. Or, are we talking about generally being objective/subjective in our everyday lives.
ReplyDeleteI think im gonna use Ob vs. Sub from now on. It just gets wordy after a while. =P
We are talking about the role in which the ob/sub viewpoint plays in our daily lives. I presented the arguement that subjectivity is better than objectivity since it provides a stronger focus on individual details.
ReplyDelete