Is subjectivity overly celebrated in the arts but unfairly condemned in history?

Discuss
with reference to the arts and history.

Not being limited to time, form, shape or medium has allowed for the existence of art within
this universe. Throughout the evolution of societies vast history, artistic expression and
creation can be found, scattered yet prevalent. Being an extension of its creators’
imaginations, arts’ limitless existence has seen countless iterations and definitions. While
such a broad spectrum of definition has gifted it its’ innate beauty and accessibility, it also
empowers a concept that have a worse reputation in other fields of knowledge. More
specifically, arts’ unclarity and seemingly formless abstractedness have made it: “subjective”.
Within the realm of history, such a term is condemned greatly, and could be the historian
equivalent of muttering the name “Voldemort”. Yet while this has been the case within the
field of history, and other similar fields in research and science, the term has seen appropriate
celebration and appraisal within the world of art, perhaps should be too in other areas of
knowledge.

The very existence of art proclaims a sense of freedom and boundlessness that justifies the
celebration of its subjectivity. Such a case of this is prevalent with the band “Ponytail” and
experienced within the roll out of one of their first albums. Here, as fans and listeners alike
listened to the experimental sound of its songs, the band was met with a polarizing
judgement, dividing listeners into various distinct categories. (Vulture) The pure chaos that
ensued made it painstakingly obvious that not a single individual, regardless of their previous
experiences or professions could objectively agree on the quality of the album. For every
detailed explanation on the beauty of its distorted guitars and wailing pianos, would be an
equally lengthy argument on how its dissonant sound created for a noisy and unpleasant
atmosphere. (Maneater) The subjective nature of the album defined its existence, as some
fans were able to relate to its contents while others found it all the more alien. Likewise, such
a case is found a countless of times, and even within your favourite pieces of art. Surely,
something that you cherish deeply, will mean little or nothing to someone else, despite the
equal experience that you had with that piece of art. As this is an objective fact and remains
true on an individual scale, it can be therefor concluded that such subjectivity is present, and
valid within the assessment and judgement of art.

Alternatively, however, there are certain cases where such a notion bears an unjust amount of
imbalance to consider its validity. The “worst TV show of all time” titled “cop rock” has
received an IMDB score of 4.6, one of the lowest to ever be given. (IMDB) When viewing
some comments and reviews about the show, it has little to no defenders, with most of its
viewing population claiming that they have wasted their time and would rather have not seen
the show at all. In this case it would then be fair to assume that objectively, that the show as a
piece of art is “bad”.

These 2 cases beg the question of the weight of multiple accounts when claiming the validity
of subjectivity in art. On one hand, it would be easy to claim that since pieces of art are
perceived differently by different people, that its subjectivity should be celebrated. Using this
perspective, while individually, you may disagree upon its quality, the notion that another
person highly regards its quality, is enough for its appreciation and quality. However, when
considering the case where a piece of art only has a limited or no amount of support, it would
then be fair to claim that it is objectively of low quality. Thus, the subjectivity of Art within
society is appropriately celebrated, as it is a quantifiable and effective measure of truth, when
determining its quality.
In history however, this notion of subjectivity makes a strong case for being condemned
fairly. Throughout the vast accesses of research and studies done within this field, the work
that has contributed towards progress, have only been validated through objective means. As
an example of this, Georgio Vasari who has dedicated their life towards the creation of art,
but more importantly, its history as an art historian. In his field, to accurately depict and
document the existence and credibility of art, a streamlined and objective timeline of its
creation and materials had to be properly documented. (Britannica) This included interviews
and thorough research, taken primarily from primary sources. The level of work this takes, is
heavily credited within the realm of journalism and more specifically history. Through a
process as such, one is able to accurately judge and document these cases and present them
scientifically towards an audience. For a maximum level of understanding for research
purposes, and study material for aspiring artists, Georgio maintained this level of
professionalism, straying away from incorporating any subjective information.

In some cases, however the presence of history has been distorted and scattered to the point
where some subjectivity was needed in furthering the research. In the case of ancient Rome,
many integral pieces of its timeline were loosely strung together, before officially dated and
scientifically proven. Things such as the fall of Rome have always been loosely understood.
Yet through the subjectivity of certain concepts and theories that were crafted and understood
during that time, more concrete evidence was able to be sought after. To this day, the fire
allegedly started by Nero, bears no concrete evidence, besides the implications that it had on
their society and cultural standing. (Rome) Thus, by subjectively examining his motifs and
aligning the timelines of other known events, theories and matching ideas to the occurrences
of that day were able to further research hand the understanding of the mad emperors’ motifs.

Generally, while the presence of subjectivity has been condemned as historians strive to
provide perfect articles of knowledge and objective information, a reality where such a thing
is possible is simply unattainable. The need for subjectivity should be appraised in history as
historians should be able to use what little objective information they possess in the discovery
of new information and new truths. In many cases, that has been the only path in which
research has moved forward, and rather than scrambling for such information, should more
consideration be placed into speculation, or subjectivity.

In comparing both these realms of knowledge, it is clear that they each have their own uses
for subjectivity, and yet, seemingly intertwine in their inherent need for it. As we lack pure
objectivity in both fields, the most reasonable methodology of progression is that of
subjective evaluation. In music, as there is no objective means of rating an album or song, we
are instead able to base it subjectively off of our previous tastes and experiences. While this
may not come out the same universally, at the minimum will a general consensus be built
around a topic. This is how music has been conceived and understood for ages, and thus why
it celebrates subjectivity to such a degree. In the case of history, while subjectivity can be
seen as a catalyst of misinformation and confusion, it is often a last hope of sorts for
progression. Where factual information and data can only be collected to a certain extent, the
creativity and contextual understanding of historians should be able to propel and extend our
understanding of certain cases and historic periods.

Works Cited:
“Giorgio Vasari.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, inc.,
www.britannica.com/biography/Giorgio-Vasari. Accessed 11 Jan. 2024.

“Great Fire of Rome.” Great Fire of Rome, education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/great-

fire-rome/. Accessed 11 Jan. 2024.

Taylor, Benedict. “Defining Subjectivity (Chapter 1) - Music, Subjectivity, and Schumann.”

Cambridge Core, Cambridge University Press,
www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/music-subjectivity-and-schumann/defining-
subjectivity/1C3DF20FA68AA33E587456C870B4BB66#:~:text=Subjectivity%20in
%20music%20refers%20to,while%20metaphorical%2C%20is%20relatively
%20uncontentious. Accessed 11 Jan. 2024.

Subjective History | Definition, Examples & Importance - Video & Lesson ...,
study.com/academy/lesson/understanding-the-subjective-nature-of-history.html.
Accessed 11 Jan. 2024.

“Objectivity vs. Subjectivity in Music.” The Maneater, themaneater.com/objectivity-vs-

subjectivity-music/. Accessed 11 Jan. 2024.

Curto, Justin. “At Least Chromatica Wasn’t as Bananas as These 12 Recent Album Rollouts.”
Vulture, 29 May 2020, www.vulture.com/article/worst-album-rollouts-list.html.

Excellent Good Satisfactory Basic Rudimentary 0

9-10 7-8 5-6 3-4 1-2
The discussion The discussion The discussion is The discussion is The discussion The discussion
has a sustained is focused on focused on the connected to the is weakly does not reach
focus on the title the title and is title and is title and makes connected to the standard
and is linked developed with superficial or the title. described by the
Linked effectively to some links to limited links to other levels or
effectively to areas of areas of areas of While there may is not a
areas of knowledge. knowledge. knowledge. be links to the response to one
knowledge. areas of of the
Arguments are Limited knowledge, any prescribed titles
Arguments are Arguments are offered and are arguments are relevant points for the correct
clear, coherent clear, coherent supported by offered but they are descriptive examination
and effectively and supported examples. are unclear and or consist only session.
supported by by examples. are not supported of unsupported
specific by effective assertions.
examples. There is some examples.
There is awareness of
There is clear awareness and different points The discussion is
awareness and some of view. largely
evaluation of evaluation of descriptive.
different points different points
of view. of view.

The implications
of
arguments are
considered.
Possible Characteristics
Insightful Pertinent Acceptable Underdeveloped Ineffective
Convincing Relevant Mainstream Basic Descriptive
Accomplished Analytical Adequate Superficial Incoherent
Lucid Organized Competent Limited Formless