Friend and reviewer Ria, over at her blog Bibliotropic, posted a while back about subjectivity and objectivity in reviews. Her post was borne out of her experience reading a novel that, while in and of itself was a good piece of fiction, did not measure so well when put in context of the genre it was written in. In short, she was writing about subjectivity and objectivity in reviews as an experience, rather than a review style or mindset.
And it got me thinking about my own experiences. I had never really considered this before, you see. I approach each novel, each comic, as an object on its own, without the context of the wider genre or industry first and foremost. That evaluation is something I do subconsciously, without thought, and it is automatic. In my reviews, I rarely if ever mention whether the piece of fiction being reviewed compares to the industry/genre at large. I merely note if it is as good as other books/comics I’ve read, and even then, I use a very sample of such works, only the ones that I consider to be absolute best.
And therein is the contradiction of it.
I’ve mentioned before that one of the main attractions I have for Gail Simone’s The Movement is that it is well-off the oft-trodden path that superhero comics generally take. They are loud and grand and often quite fantastical. In an almost complete about-face, Gail’s new series for DC is something much more personal, much more relevant. This is a series that deals with vigilantism and corruption with a superhero flavour. It posits a situation where the people rise up en masse to protest against those in power, those are abusing and corrupting the system for their own gains, and showing them where the true power is.
The first issue of the series was a great opener. The second and third issues set a high bar. And now, the fourth issue has raised the stakes once again. The Movement is a series that seems to be getting better with each issue.