While this argument certainly appears in places other than discussions on anime, these buzzwords seem to continuously pop up on forums and in videos by fans attempting to discuss the nature of opinion and critical review. Discussions on video game reviews and objectivity have probably tackled this topic even further, but with the rise in the number of anime reviewers presenting their opinions via blog, video, and podcast comes this inevitable topic of conjecture. There has been a lot of confusion within the fandom on what exactly is necessary for something to be subjective or objective, and arguments concerning how much of which is necessary in a review of a piece of media have accrued on countless forums and comment sections across the Internet for some time. Misinformation about these two concepts has festered even further and is in desperate need of clear and concise definitions.

For as long as written and presented opinion has been available to the public, there have also come questions concerning how personal someone’s criticism is and whether that opinion is trustworthy. Audiences will judge a person’s critique in comparison to their own opinions or experiences about the same topic and will normally agree or disagree depending on how much they differ. Occasionally you will find a reader/listener/viewer that are going out of their way to find reviews against their own opinion in order to better bolster their own or understand the opposing viewpoint, but the majority of people will be one of two parties: someone who is already a fan of the material in question and wants their opinion verified, or someone who has not seen the material who is looking to see if it is worth their time. So, generally, reviews normally serve the role of presenting the opinion of someone meant to be experienced in the media they’re discussing so that they can give a well versed, educated judgement that others may use to validate and strengthen their own, or be read as someone simply looking for information.

Since reviews are normally written for those looking to hear an opinion regardless of whether they have witnessed the work in question, a balancing act needs to be made by the reviewer, particularly in determining what sort of review they want to give and if they want to target a particular audience: the viewership being the experienced, inexperienced, or both. This decision will affect their general ratio of objective and subjective reasoning in their critique. So, what’s the difference between these two words? Everything.

Objective:[1] (adj.) 1. not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased:

Subjective:[2] (adj.) 1. based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.

Objectivity is typically what people strive for when they are relaying information to a group of people in regards to something impersonal. It’s what journalists strive for and attempt to use in order to write news and scientific articles, and is a very important aspect to any form of writing in general whether it be technical or fictional. Fledgling critics stumble on this road block when writing reviews and analyzing shows to give their declarations a factual basis for one very big reason: criticisms of art are inherently subjective. It can be difficult learning how to use objectivity in a review that is primarily built on your opinion, but nevertheless it is necessary to use facts if only to give your audience a firm ground to stand on, much less yourself.

There are people who will complain about a critic’s use of their own opinions in a piece, or will cast off someone’s analysis because it was “too subjective,” and a lot of these people are doing so because they don’t agree with the person’s conclusion, not because they actually did a poor job. A large number of these same individuals will cry out for “more objectivity” or even worse, for “complete objectivity” in reviews, which shows a marked misunderstanding of what exactly it means to review something and/or a failure to understand what they wanted from the review in the first place. The following is an example of what a “completely objective review” might read like for an anime. Let’s pick Zankyou no Terror.

Zankyou no Terror, or Terror in Resonance, is an animated television show produced by Studio MAPPA and was directed by Shinichiro Watanabe. It has an eleven episode run that started from mid July to late September and has a story that features Tokyo being hit by a series of terrorist attacks with two teenage boys as the perpetrators. They plan to “wake the world up” and, when a series of events leads them to harbor a teenage runaway and a shadow from their past begins to seek them out, their plans begin to go awry. The soundtrack was composed by Yoko Kanno whom used Icelandic lyrics and references during the show. The show opened to high praise from anime fans, which dwindled as the series continued on.

In this paragraph we are given information about the show, mostly comprised of background information as well as a brief statement regarding story and fan reception. The problem is that this isn’t a review, it’s a dry opening paragraph for one at best, but is more then likely the kind of writing that you would read on the back of a box or as a description on an anime listing site. Furthermore, the paragraph is not a review at all; It is a stale, straight-forward summary with no pizzazz or spunk, and definitely no opinion or claim. When people are limited to only using factual knowledge or observable information, they write something like this, because there is no conclusion or recommendation to create when you adhere strictly to “the facts” and the only thing you can do is present them as they are. An opinion is required as a starting place to make any kind of declaration to merit discussion, and that opinion is the reason that people come to a reviewer in the first place. Without an assertion, be it of quality, merit, moral, or whatever, there is no review.

Just as taking out one aspect from a review makes it worthless as a review, so too does taking out the facts. Very few people appreciate someone talking about their opinions, feelings, and ideas without referencing back to the material they are discussing to back up their claims. Anyone can talk about their opinions, but those looking for a recommendation will normally be put off by the glaring lack of evidence-based logic and thought put into the assessment, viewing the piece as nothing more than a rant unworthy of serious contemplation, since the writer clearly didn’t bother putting in any sizable amount of effort. This is the mark of a lazy and indignant writer who takes their fans for granted and shills out worthless pieces under the guise of “critique.”

No matter what anyone may tell you, being a critic isn’t initially all that difficult. Criticizing something you don’t like, or something you do like, is fairly easy, but it gets tricky when you want to garner an audience that respects what you have to say and wants to hear it. You have to do research to back up your ideas, and you learn over time what to look for when watching an anime, what viewers and readers want you to comment on or what in particular they come to you for. For instance, when I watch Arkada, I do it knowing that he will remark on the soundtrack and music of a series in some sort of depth, which is fairly rare for other reviewers to do, or if I go to Demolition D I expect a generally well articulated and grounded opinion submerged in off the wall, weird, and probably offensive humor and editing. Most reviewers who are well known, stick out, or are noteworthy have something unique about their presentation, and it’s difficult for fledgling reviewers to get a foot-hold as a critic. Before they can worry about standing out, they need to get the basics down, and those basics are finding the happy-medium in regards to balancing subjectivity and objectivity in their pieces.

There is also the mental push towards an extremity for anime (or anything that’s garnered a fandom for that matter) that a critic must resist. It’s far too easy to rip on something that’s popular for the attention, or gushing over something equally as unworthy for the same reason. Interestingly, these two tend to follow the above examples in terms of lacking: bashing a show usually has a high emphasis on nitpicking flaws or faults the reviewer finds in the material while blindly praising it takes sweeping positive aspects the reviewer likes and speaking in a vague, general sense about them. While these are still very distinctly subjective and opinionated, they still lack a finesse that people want, and they are extremes that tend to drive inexperienced viewers away and attract only like-minded people, creating the intolerably awful circlejerk.

There are a decent amount of other considerations to make when deciding how you want to review anime, from presentation, to spoiler content, to what you want to focus on in particular for each show. Developing your own style and articulation takes practice and time and isn’t something that anyone can really tell you how to do. What is certain, however, is that the very basis of creating a review for a show is to state your personal opinions and observations based on evidence found in the work. People can go to Wikipedia or any anime listing site for a summary of Zankyou no Terror, but what makes your opinion something that is worthy of their attention; why do you want to share your observations about it? Don’t be afraid to play with our language, to slide around on the gradient between subjective and objective to find your voice, just as listeners/viewers/readers should understand why they seek reviews and understand what they are comprised of accordingly. While it may not be objectively true to say that the anime community is a worthwhile one to help educate and foster good discussion, it is certainly this reviewer’s subjective opinion.

Banner from here.

Sources:

Thanks to everyone who has been with me throughout this series so far! It would not be what it is without your feedback and attention, and I can’t stress that enough. I did not imagine this series would go for ten parts, but I’m certainly happy it did. Click the buzzwords tag to view more of these, and feel free to email me if you like at lyonfacedblog@gmail.com!