Is it truly difficult for any author to be purely objective?

I think that it is truly difficult for any author to be purely objective because the very act of writing about something already indicates a choice of topic and consequently a choice of message to share to the readers. They write about what they write for a reason – and as writing goes it is to delight and enlighten. Delight when it is for entertainment, enlighten when it seeks to push the reader to look at what he previously did not see. In terms of forms, it is easier to grasp the author’s message in non-fiction as these tend to be straight-forward and usually indicates the message clearly.

Fiction reflects reality and illustrates the message in a story, whereas poetry seeks to do the same with less words. Of all the forms, poetry asks the most skill because it uses the least number of words and yet seeks to deliver the same impact as other forms of writing. Personally I prefer poetry, because it uses so little words for more impact. It is compact but it speaks to the core, and has to be read several times for its meaning to sink in.

Also, it lends itself to many layers of interpretation as compared to fiction and non-fiction, but its core message remains the same. Although a lot of people would say that poetry is not easy to understand, the demands of poetry on one’s attention is precisely what makes me prefer it because it asks for focus and time. In this sense, because poetry appears difficult, although of course I would say it is a labor of love to read poetry, the pay off is much greater as well, and because of the effort leaves a mark as I try to make sense of its message in my life.