One of the central question in an ethnographic writing is how do we characterize the different peoples we encounter? How do we speak about their cultures, customs, and languages as objectively as possible, and let the descriptions speak for themselves. Some argue that this is inherently impossible, because no matter how objective the descriptions are, the underlying basis of choosing what aspects the ethnography should be on is subjective. Certainly, there is some truth to this idea, but since we relate the surrounding experiences to those of our own, it is pointless to argue whether the ethnography is biased or not. The central question should be, how do we ourselves perceive the experiences the author has detailed? For instance, in chapter 8, when describing the physical characteristics of the savage women, Lery relates his observations back to the standard of European beauty, and through this, we can have a better picture of the idea Lery is attempting to express. Even with an objective description of the savage women, without a familiar context (European standard), his intended audience would not have grasp the meaning behind his observations. Another instance occurs in chapter 16, where he details his observations of and interactions with the savages. Lery goes to great length to describe their errors, as the savages did not believe in one true God. While Lery is biased in his accounts, he certainly places his observations from the perspectives of Europeans, who are likely to be Christians. This would then allow his intended audience, the Europeans back home, to better understand Lery’s work.