of steer into that subjectivity. But that's to me the wrong way of looking at objectivity. Like the goal of objectivity is not to be perfect. It's to come as close to that as possible by sort of thinking of your biases, recognizing them and sort of implementing that into the way you investigate or explain a situation. So when you're working from a subjective point of view, you are the arbiter, you are the judge, you are the jury, you are the executioner, you're all of it. OK, if something feels true to you, like there are things, I wrote a book called Frogger Rock City about listening to like hair metal bands growing up in the Midwest. And if I had a feeling about Cinderella or I had a feeling about Judas Priest, that was enough. What I'm trying to translate is that feeling. When you're working in a more objective paradigm, you're not trying to translate a feeling. You're hoping that a feeling emerges from the fact that you are looking at this thing from a degree of attachment and (10/57)
You are viewing a single comment's thread from: