Shocked's Blog

Anime Relations: Tetsuwan Atom

Words, stories, and yes, anime, are not entirely dead things. They are living things capable of growth, not just within themselves, but also through the eyes of viewers. Once an anime is released, it's watched by thousands, even millions of viewers, all of whom have their own interpretations of what they've just seen. The anime will be praised, criticized, thrown around and eventually pushed aside for the next batch of anime released. Yet, as time passes and viewership goes down, there will always be people discovering it. With the wonders of the internet, anime from all ages, out of print or otherwise, have been archived in some shape or form, made available for anyone to access so long as they are resourceful enough. Every time a show is watched, a new interpretation of it is created, and the show will continue to evolve with the times.


Functions of Time

However, this is a weak way to develop a show, and lends to a lifespan equivalent to surviving on life support. Every so often, a spasm will occur, reviving the show for a bit before it goes back being a vegetable. A show with an extended lifetime - one that remains timeless - is difficult to come by, especially in today's transient world. Creating them is even more difficult, since it's near impossible to predict if the future will still remember present-day shows. In developing for the short term, it's possible for the creator to make a quick buck off of temporary success. On the flip side, it's possible for a viewer to get enjoyment from a transitory show, filling up a boring weekend. In the former case, the amount of resources and creative talent invested could have went to a, for lack of another word, "better" show. The latter, in comparison, could have had that time invested in a title more fulfilling, educational, thoughtful or simply better made. However, there's always the need to pay the bills and to string along work, even if it's not particularly exciting nor dignified. In some respects, the whims of the market's ephemeral preferences, assumed or measured, make designing for timelessness difficult to accomplish. To clarify, this is not the same as designing for a long-running title, but rather, a title whose contents, characters, and messages persist beyond the show's running duration. In other words, titles where fans, new and old, keep the series alive through constant discussions and references.

In some respects, timelessness overlaps with conversations surrounding passing fads and trends, for where jokes, memes, styles and references local to a title's temporal frame of reference are utilized to appeal to a specific target audience. In doing so, we have instances ranging from the cheesy opening episodes of Gunbuster reenacting a 1970s school girl's sports drama with giant robots, all the way to present-day titles such as KonoSuba making fun of JRPGs, otaku culture and the isekai genre. These kinds of titles take their own spins on recognizable narrative tropes, of which accomplishes two particular goals: connecting the creators and characters to their target audience by acknowledging the tropes' existences, and cementing the anime into its present-day setting, making for a remarkably contemporary title which services the current market. However, by doing so, this limits the lifespan of the anime. Beyond the localized time frame of which such anime are created in, they rely on the specific audience of that time to connect to and understand such references. Once that era of fans are grown and the next influx of industry trends settle in, such transient anime can only be looked back as artifacts of previous times, for where they were left to collect dust as newer jokes, tropes and genres are cycled into the mainstream.

By servicing the contemporary time, such titles are given time stamps for which they can be dated back to. In terms of creating history for the purposes of discussion, it's possible to group titles created within certain time frames in order to create a sense of likeness, as if all titles made within a the specified period followed the same guidelines and are, thusly, all the same. As such, it's possible to create generalizations within anime, such as attempting to claim the 1970s and 1980s were a mixing point between real and super mecha, or using specific early to mid-2000s titles such as Azumanga Daioh, Love Hina, Haruhi Suzumiya, or K-on as catalysts for an influx of school-centralized shows about cute characters doing wacky things at the time. This act draws a hard line for where history appears to flow linearly, beginning and ending sequentially as each show is released one after another. In actuality though, conversations surrounding titles can extend far beyond their airing date, as well as cease before they've even ended. These lines can be argued back and forth, for where the influence of one show may appear to supersede another based on one's perspective. There can also be the recognition and denial of the existence of industry movements, such as claiming anime is currently dying due to any given title being representative of whatever given trends. The lack of consensus may be indicative of a lack of solid understanding of anime's directionality, as well as a lack of awareness to the manner which history can be misused to create evidence within itself. If anything, the concept of history, as created by people whom look back retrospectively, highlights the disconnection between the present-day and the past.



Re-Appropriation

The re-contextualization of past knowledge does not necessary translate well into the present. By re-appropriating the past into the present, we view the past from our specific contextual setting, retaining our own experiences and knowledge while attempting to interpret the past. In doing so, even if it's a retrospective look from someone who had lived the time, such actions create a false sense of history, where we try to understand the past through what we know now, as opposed to how such information would be interpreted from individuals from that given time. An argument could be made to justify the retrospective approach, as a holistic interpretation of the past, provided by our vantage point of looking back, allows for a greater scope of understanding as we look back, knowing what follows beyond the limited scope of the past individual. However, this doesn't lend very well to a present-day argument leveraging information from the past. As such, when we attempt to make claims regarding trends of the present by observing the progression of time, localized or far-reaching, we attempt to create recognizable patterns that can then be interpreted by others, regardless of whether such correlations result in actual causation.

Additionally, for anime viewers whom have not been watching anime attentively since the 1960s, for example, their knowledge of everything prior to their time is limited, thus their experience of watching titles could, for example, follow by watching Kimi no Na wa immediately after watching Hakujaden. The juxtaposition of titles from different eras blend, and thus erase the thought of anime being a continuous, linear experience. Instead, the viewer is capable of watching anime from any time, ignoring chronological progression in favor of a more fluid, dynamic, and malleable experience. In this regard, the manner which certain anime titles resurface along time becomes dependent on a number of factors, such as their iconography and industry impact. To put it simply, if not elementary, popular titles are popular, and they will remain popular so long as they are in the the public's conscience. However, to create the foundation for developing timelessness, I can think of two particular examples with regards to the complete abstraction of a title from its contextual time.

In the case of abstraction, this would be a show such as Astro Boy, to which is so abstracted and unspecific that it could exist in any place or time. Astro Boy, as a series, exists Post-WWII just after Reconstruction, to where the impact of destructive technologies had left its mark on history, much less Japan. In this same conversation, the manner which technology is viewed in Japan, as compared to European and Western nations, can be understood through the differentiation between Metropolis (1927) directed Fritz Lang, and Metropolis (1949) written by Osamu Tezuka. The original film, as a German expressionist film harboring roots of futurism and Post-WWI sentiments regarding the advent of Modernism and the technological age, imagines Metropolis, located in an unspecific place, exists as a living dichotomy of rich and poor, as well as man and machine. The film looks as the issue of technology from a social standpoint, understand its impacts on a general populace, especially the working class. Comparatively, the Metropolis manga by Osamu Tezuka also imagines the titular city trying to cope with its dichotomies of social hierarchies and identity, but instead takes the more personal approach by centralizing the story on its characters in addition to the themes of technology. In other words, rather than focusing on individuals being part of a greater societal machine, the manga instead uses the large scale impacts of technology to narrate the story of its characters. We understand the themes by how they impact the characters, rather than understanding the themes by how the characters play into it. The slight variation lends to a decentralization of narrative from being about the overlying message into being about how the characters act and react in their world.

This leads into Astro Boy, which also takes place in a metropolitan, futuristic world, but with a new cast of characters. The international release of Astro Boy lends to a "washing out" of the Japanese aesthetic, where the art style does not imply the characters are Japanese, but are cartoons characters with attributes of characters living in a city in some unspecified country. This allows for the show to be redubbed into a number of languages and aired in a multiplicity of settings, making the show seem like it could take place in nearly any geographic location. At the same time, the show still retains its Japanese origins through the show's approach to technology, personalizing and internalizing its social implications within its characters to where Astro Boy, as a character, must come to understand his place in society as a mediator between human and machine. In any given time, the concept of technology and its societal impact is an ever emerging conversation, and thus the story can be retold over and over, being re-contextualized to fit whatever present-day through its ethnically ambiguous aesthetics. Following this trend, a number of titles released over the years, ranging from the Leiji Matsumoto works and Dragon Ball Z to recent titles such as Ghost in the Shell and Attack on Titan, are capable of placing themselves into nearly any cultural setting due to being culturally porous, allowing various cultural lenses to interpret these titles and re-adapt them to their own context. This is made possible by these stories containing aesthetic attributes to which makes them difficult to culturally identify, as well as possessing themes and stories which could occur anywhere, and as such, can be continued to be discussed far beyond their original airing dates.



In Creating Timelessness

By creating a timeless anime, it's possible to create long-standing pillars of anime to which all others may build from. I'm reminded of various jokes I've seen in titles oriented towards girls and young adult women featuring the sparkles, the theme of flowers, gender ambiguity, the general aesthetic design derived from Rose of Versailles. While it was made in the 1970s, the series takes place in 18th century France, to which is also completely abstracted from its Japanese context. To this end, while it does not occur in any sort of fantasy land, its historical context is disassociated enough from the present-day to which it can be interpreted as another reality. Once again, the series possesses themes of which can be transplanted into a multitude of cultures: issues of growing up, gender identity, the obligations of the nobility, the struggles of the working class, struggles of government power and the concept of revolution. Told as a historical drama as opposed to non-fiction, Rose of Versailles frames its story theatrically, to where it does not speak towards people who've lived the time, nor does it contain particular transient tropes specific to the 1970s. While the title can be dated physically, the series itself is capable of being viewed from any point in time, as it does not require knowledge of the 1970s to understand the show's ongoings. Instead, any knowledge required would be presented in the show itself, with any additional knowledge being gained from personal searches about the French Revolution.

In a sense, the concept of timelessness is used to describe anime which have transcended their time of creation, becoming a pillar of anime to which other titles reference and build off of. These are titles that aren't just created at the spur of the moment, nor are they created to follow in the footsteps of other successful titles. They are anime titles which can be revisited over and over, constantly brought up as they would always remain relevant to the discussion of the medium.





tl;dr - A timeless anime goes beyond referencing contemporary trends, attempting to associate itself with the audience of its day. Instead, it speaks to a general audience, carrying themes, concepts and their own brands of entertainment which can be enjoyed no matter what geographical or temporal context an anime fan may be viewing from.

Anime Relations: The iDOLM@STER

Profile Images





Avatars





Signatures





Miscellaneous

Anime Relations: Tetsuwan Atom

(Cover Image: Betty Boop: A Language All My Own, 1935)



In defining anime in the global sense, immediate thoughts come to the image of anime's presence in multiple markets, finding fan bases in countries from around the world. However, with globalization, which I have come to understand as the sense of connective and reciprocal relationships across multiple times and places, this begins to look at anime through its presence in the world's history, set in a network founded in foreign technologies and native cultural aesthetics.



Historical Contextualization

Japan is a country founded on Chinese characteristics with both friendly and unfriendly relationships with its surrounding nations, with Korea of particular interest. This then draws a link between Korea and China, then China with various European nations, specifically England due to their cultural and commercial trade businesses (albeit including opium). Going back to Japan, they also received forms of European influence, specifically the Portuguese and Dutch. Due to fears of a cultural invasion, the Portuguese missionaries were removed from Japan, but the Dutch remained in certain locations to continue instructing the Japanese on European art, technology, sociology, politics and economic systems.

After some time, due to their isolationist policies, Japan was finally opened up by American ships headed by Commodore Perry. Becoming aware of their lack of modernization, begun to do so with great haste, consuming literature of the West ranging from books on government to works of fiction. With regards to anime, the technologies associated with cinematography, film, cameras and art were introduced to this island nation, where concepts of realism and animation were combined with Japanese traits of visual poetry, valuing the pause between thoughts to contemplate and leave contextual subjects up to interpretation. This lends to an abstract awareness of the world, which is then combined with the realistic representation of the world through both Western art and photographic technologies - of which was able to capture real life, removing the explicit necessity of implicative communication.

Anime's influence by Disney, specifically Bambi, has become common knowledge, but the techniques associated with animation have been founded in the French. The themes of technology, particularly of the awareness of their implications on society, can be founded in Italian Futurism, extending to the German 1927 film Metropolis (which in turn influenced the Osamu Tezuka and Rintarou versions). This is influenced by WWI war machines, the machine aesthetic being associated with Fascism and Communism beginning in the late 19th century/early 20th century, the advent of Modernism contributing to the international infatuation with technology and abstracted, Utopian-esque all-encompassing design philosophies, and the fear of weapons of mass destruction as per WWII. This close association with technologies of both creation and destruction, combined with Japanese philosophy, gave birth to anime.



Technological and Cultural Development

It first begins with manga, created through printing press technologies, associated with the technology of mass production. This, partially, lends to literacy of the populace, though the use of imagery instead of pure text allows for easier access and a lower base for shared understanding. The inner ideas present in early works, such as heroism, nationalism, the presence and implications of a technologically-enhanced world, and even down to the drawing methods communicate to a multiplicity of people both within the Japanese demographic and global markets. This is evident in the culturally neutral aesthetics of anime and manga, where characters and ideas are based on international, unspecific contexts. The idea of, for example, Astro Boy's futuristic world describing both the heroic and villainous uses of technology, is present as much in Western literature as it is in Japanese literature. In addition to the characters being drawn without any specific cultural qualities, this is made further evident as manga became adapted to anime, and their languages and aesthetics are voiced into localized languages, framed and animated. This allows for easier access to anime, which, due to the absence of any cultural context, is then colored based on one's individual education, life experiences and beliefs.

From here, the distinct Japanese quality of anime is carried throughout its produced works, which is why we can, with confidence, claim one work is anime and another isn't. In fact, this lends to the the qualifying statement that "anime exists." The very term's existence is based on the common understanding that a work contains a certain Japanese characteristics, whether linked to a physical location, ideas specific to geographies, or drawing techniques specific to certain schools of art and animation.

However, while the idea of globalization has been present in anime for a good century, it is only recently that, through the advent of the internet, we can truly begin to understand the effects globalization has had on anime. In the past, we've had futuristic anime, anime set in France, and anime featuring sports and activities not specific to Japan. In recent times, we have begun to see experimentation and interest in locales and subjects beyond what we'd normally attribute to the phrase "Japanese animation." We can now have anime set in Italy or Brazil, telling stories ranging from Korean to a hybrid of Spanish, French and German, pulling stories from Western literature, engaged in American sports, or using multicultural music pulled from every nation under the sun and moon. Or at least, the potential for such connections now exist given the variety anime has shown to facilitate thus far.

This then plays into a question that has come into conversation a number of times within the past few years: how does one define anime? We can see this any time Avatar: The Last Airbender or RWBY is brought to a group of anime fans, where arbitrary lines are drawn to somehow delineate the differences between titles based on geographic location, drawing techniques, creator backgrounds, target audiences and so on. The definition of anime, as defined through geography, however, is limiting and constricting. The definition of anime through techniques fails to account for techniques and technologies learned from Western countries, developed over the course of a century. Creator backgrounds oversimplify the effects of media from multiple cultures directly and indirectly affecting the development of creators through their lives. Target audiences forget international markets that, in the past and present, facilitated the creation of culturally neutral titles that have garnered fans globally, allowing for continued sustained popularity for years.



Globalization Enactment

Once globalization is taken into account, the concept of physical location dissolves. The main issue here is the lack of boundaries present through modern day cities and corporations, where people network through intellectual and metaphysical means as opposed to the purely physical. As a result, the work performed in a Japanese studio may be outsourced to subcontractors in South Korea, broadcasted back in Japan, sold back to South Korea and redubbed in Korean, be talked about in a website that is accessed by individuals from across the world, and have the word spread about that show among other individuals with similar interests. However, these individuals would not necessarily need to be defined by their nationality. Instead, they're defined by their interests: anime. They're defined by the creative content they choose to consume; anime becomes an intellectual product distributed across networks which connect pockets of people across the world, allowing for the theoretical development of isolated communities, forming a global city of anime fans. As anime fans, we have more in common with people halfway across the world than with our own neighbors.

If anime is to be defined as a global phenomenon, then in addition to its acknowledgement of its presence in popular entertainment around the world, it should also be studied as the product of global influences. Anime wasn't invented in a vacuum, nor was it created as a result of pure Japanese ingenuity. It is the result of ongoing sociopolitical processes, dictated by the growth and development of technologies adapted, interpreted, repurposed and reengineered for local use. Or, in our case, the reuse of Western cinema, in combination with Japanese aesthetics, to create our beloved Chinese cartoons.





tl;dr - Anime has always been in the presence of the global market, but it is only now through recent advancements in technology that anime can be observed and understood as a global phenomenon.


Sources:

Brown, Steven T. Cinema Anime: Critical Engagements with Japanese Animation. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006. Print.

Hu, Tze-Yue G. Frames of Anime Culture and Image-building. Hong Kong: Hong Kong UP, 2010. Print.

Leonard, Sean. "Progress against the law: Anime and fandom, with the key to the globalization of culture". International Journal of Cultural Studies. Sage Publications. 2005. Vol. 8(3): 281-305.

McKevitt, Andrew C. "'You Are Not Alone!': Anime and the Globalization of America". Diplomatic History, Vol. 34, No. 5 (November 2010). The Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations. Wiley Periodicals, Inc., Maldan, MA. Pg. 893-921.

Napier, Susan Jolliffe. From Impressionism to Anime: Japan as Fantasy and Fan Cult in the Mind of the West. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007. Print.

Anime Relations: Ashita no Joe, Toaru Kagaku no Railgun

Commonly, spoilers can ruin one's viewing experience by giving away the major plot and character details surrounding an anime before one is capable of experiencing them first hand. However, the extent to which spoilers may affect a viewing experience can be related to the manner which particular anime may structure their narratives. Are these titles reliant on their particular twists and revelations for their enjoyment, or can they be enjoyed through simply experiencing their character interactions, atmospheric presentation, and general audiovisuals? What particular qualities make certain titles more susceptible to spoilers, to where discussion threads and communities would lend to extreme sensitivity toward the disclosure plot details? To what extent are particular details considered spoilers, and upon their utterance, what can be done after the fact? Or, even prior, what can be done to discourage the usage of spoilers? Going back even further, through the design and writing of anime, to what extent should spoilers be taken into consideration when planning for their future release?

These are some of the questions surrounding the concept of spoilers I wish to look at, to which I'd hope to demonstrate ways of approaching spoilers not necessarily in terms of a casual viewer reaching for brain bleach, but as a means to understand their function in the greater scope of things.



Spoilers and Rewatches

Planning for spoilers varies from narrative to narrative, where the more plot-oriented anime suffer much greater than other titles. The manner which the creators construct their anime will decide how susceptible an anime is to becoming spoiled. Does an anime revolve around solving a mystery or discovering a secret location? Is the anime about a character choosing between romantic love interests, where the final winner is only revealed at the very end? Or, perhaps it's a story of survival where it's a question of who would still be alive by the end of the series. The anime could also have a plot revolving around sports, competition, or fighting, where the victorious individual, side, party or group is undetermined. There could also be dramas where a character could be deathly ill, and it's a question of whether the character would live long enough to accomplish their goals. Perhaps the illness itself is a secret, to which the plot would reveal until a certain point. In these examples, a spoiler would conceptually shortcut to the end of those titles, circumventing any and all experiences and developments to the end result. Depending on the anime, this may destroy the viewing experience if the anime heavily leverages upon these particular reveals. In this, however, I'd also like to highlight the act of rewatching titles.

Certain titles rely on reveals for enjoyment, where one is at the edge of their seats awaiting for the plot to shock and awe. Upon rewatching though, when knowing all these developments ahead of time, one loses that sense of wonder and uncertainty, instead replacing those sentiments with expectation, patience, or in the more unfortunate cases, indifference once you already know what's going to happen. In these cases, the lifespan of an anime is put under scrutiny, to where a title can only be viewed certain amounts of times before the predictability of the plot becomes second hand, and enjoyment of aspects outside of the plot thins. If an anime exists in service of its own plot, then upon knowing the plot, enjoyment is potentially lost as it would become a wait until the anime comes around to its eventual reveal stage. While enjoyment can be found in watching these developments repeatedly, possibly due to the want to relive the initial viewing experience with renewed eyes or forgetfulness regarding particular points, there's a need for supplementary material to accompany the plot for the rewatcher. Otherwise, while the anime could be a great viewing experience the first time, subsequent viewings would lessen in impact, lending to the anime being a short-lived experience that would pass on as a minor hit.

In relationship to spoilers, how dependent is a given anime on its plot? Can the spoiler be uttered without affecting a new viewer's experience? While blame can be thrown at the individual speaking the spoiler, the anime itself can also be studied for how much prior knowledge can affect a viewing. Much like rewatching, a spoiled viewer would know knowledge coming into the anime, but how does a spoiled viewer compare to someone who goes in unknowingly? Additionally, how does a new viewer learn of the anime, what prior knowledge convinces them to begin watching, and to what extent is this information critical in preserving an obstructed viewing experience?



The Spoiler as Disruption

Speaking personally, I try my hardest to avoid episode discussion topics for the more popular titles, as I'm always sure that there's someone speaking about future events. I enjoy going into different shows as blind as I can, knowing only the barest of minimums so I may come to my own conclusions about how the anime performed. Despite this, it's difficult to avoid other people and discussion boards at times, and speaking as a forum moderator at the moment, I've gone into a number of discussion topics to clean up spoilers for titles I was hoping to watch first. In some respects, it can't be helped, but by being spoiled, it does allow for me to look for signs and foreshadowed details alluding to any particular twists. At the same time, it does remove the mystique and fun associated with trying to guess at what's going to happen.

As a disruption, spoilers can remove the fun associated with watching anime. Without watching the anime, you would know what's going to happen, so there would be little incentive to actually watch the anime if the whole show revolves around the particular reveal. I've seen this come about from unknowing individuals asking innocent questions, to which someone else comes and answers openly and without filter. This can also occur when an individual decides to analyze a title from either a retrospective or with knowledge of a source material, either through an individualized exposition or through argumentation with another person. And, at times, there exists people whom post spoilers for the sake of purposeful disruption and, well, trolling. Fault does exist for those whom detail the spoilers, to which moderation and mediation is required to encourage a healthy discussion where everyone can feel at ease and without fear of connecting their thoughts to others.

It's a terrible scenario for where people are afraid to talk to each other, for fear of being spoiled. It's even worse when arguments spiral out of control for when particular people attack each other over anime, of which is ideally supposed to exist for entertainment and enjoyment. On the viewer's side, we can at least attempt self-mediation and control to where we can speak about shows without becoming a nuisance to others. If that is, for some reason, the intended goal of a given individual, then they cannot complain if they are ostracized and alienated for their self-destructive tendencies.

For the creators, thoughts of how anime fan discussions could carry out should be kept in mind. How is an anime to be enjoyed by fans? What can you predict they will talk about? What is the anime's narrative flow, for where the ebb and flow of action and engagement may cause certain reactions by the fanbase? How are the show's plot events timed in relationship to one another? How should an anime be experienced by a first time viewer? A second time viewer? A third? What qualities about your anime would make someone watching it more than once? And, in that thought, for a late arriving anime fan, what information might they have come across that may influence their viewing experience, and can the anime accommodate viewers with that prior knowledge? Of course, it's difficult to control and predict how fans may act in terms of marketing and socialization, but at the very least, creators would have a level of control of how their anime is advertised and depicted in the public eye.



The Spoiler as Advertisement

Again, speaking personally, I try to avoid advertisement because I like going into anime blind. At times, advertisement may spoil anime for the characters whom are important to the plot by their significance on image-based ads. Trailer videos, in comparison, can give away initial twists to differentiate a given anime from its competitors. An anime's initial twist may be part of its marketing, for where it may be treated as a selling point, such as "fantasy medieval city attacked by giant monsters", "ordinary high school student time travels, or "French Revolution being a historical event". While they may not be regarded as spoiler content on the surface, they still speak on events in the plot, to which may either draw or repel interest based on how it's marketed.

To that end, as far as a capitalist, free market economy goes, anime is created within their contextual geographical and sociopolitical location of Japan, marketed within those arbitrarily defined boundaries, exported through creator intended, fan-driven, and alternative means to a variety of other locations, both in terms of the physical world and the internet, to have their imagery be re-represented in an equally variable set of contexts, adjacent to other imagery other than what may have been intended. This can come in the form of anime being sold in a local electronics store next to Disney products, or anime being shown at a film festival along with other international films. Or, anime could also be represented on an international news source in ways that can speak to far more people than any anime could ever hope, for better or worse. Controlling the spread of information and the types which get out is important to developing the image of anime as a medium, much less individual titles, making for a very large subject of debate and discussion.

In terms of spoilers and viewers, however, the images and stories marketed and spread about a given anime will color their their experience, especially if they're not well-versed in anime, film, literature, video games, or some other form of entertainment media that contains a large variety of stories to be exposed to. It's difficult to discern usable information from mass marketed and unfiltered public information, especially if you don't have a developed enough mental filter. As such, in terms of the text, images, and videos put out to the world, which includes material from anime episodes themselves, the creator should ask: "how is my anime represented, in what ways do I want it to be represented, and do these two match?"



The Spoiler as Artifact

At times, certain anime have been around long enough that they can be referenced and parodied without hesitation. Or, rather, without consideration for newer viewers. As a personal anecdote, Seitokai no Ichiban almost spoiled Air for me. The original visual novel for Air was released in 2000, to which later inspired the 2004 anime by Kyoto Animation. Seitokai no Ichizon, whose anime aired in 2009, had a reference to the final scene of Air of which, while iconic in its own right, I had only watched the year before. That being said, I wasn't so lucky with other shows such as Ashita no Joe and Clannad, of which I've been spoiled for by virtue of seeing them referenced in other anime and various discussion boards. Either by being around long enough, by being iconic and popular, or some combination of both, certain shows are perceived as capable of being referenced without fear. It's expected that any anime fan worth their salt should be familiar with the referenced joke or allusion, even if the have not watched the original source anime. Due to this, any late-arriving anime fan faces the potential for being spoiled just for not keeping up with popular and mainstream titles.

This is a somewhat unorthodox scenario, where information expected to be common knowledge is treated as taboo in different circles. Citing another personal experience, I once encountered an experience in a Dragon Ball Z discussion thread, where transforming into a Super Saiyan was referenced prior to the actual event in a discussion thread, to which was reported as a spoiler. While it was not an incorrect assertion given the constraints of discussion outlined in MAL's rules, it was odd realizing that not everyone may be familiar with certain characters being Super Saiyans, the concept of the Super Saiyan itself, or the Dragon Ball franchise itself.

Sensitivity toward spoilers is an interesting subject, as it takes into account personal tolerance with regards to spoilers. As such, the manner which spoilers are addressed is specific to the location in which discussion is had, as well as the other people present. With that variable tolerance, it's at least polite to assume at least one person present is ignorant to everything, and to never make the assumption that your knowledge is commonplace in order to avoid ruining some else's day. Of course, this is also problematic with regards to oversensitivity, where there's an unspoken censorship to how much one can speak on certain anime titles before needing to ask permission to spoil. It's an extra step to preserve discussion and to ensure no one is inconvenienced, but at the same time, it's difficult to hold limited conversations in where only the most basic, bare minimum points can be safely brought up.

Perhaps, as a whole, spoilers act as the antithesis to the spread of information, where too much information becomes undesired or harmful. As for myself, I can only hope that I'm not exposed to any spoilers on my most anticipated shows, because that would really, really suck.







tl;dr -

Spoilers can exist as disruptions, advertisement, and artifacts of iconic and popular titles. By understanding how the function, it's possible to better understand how the anime itself functions in the context of anime design and discussion.

Anime Relations: Kino no Tabi: The Beautiful World

With the upcoming second adaption of the light novels coming up, I felt it was appropriate to take another look at episode 2 of Kino's Journey, "A Tale of Feeding Off Others." It's one of my favorite episodes in all of anime, if not all of fiction, and I'd like to make a little write up on my observations.



Ambiguity is great within this episode, as much of it is left to interpretation. Upon rewatching the episode, I was reminded three minutes in that the emphasis placed on the killing of both the rabbits and the slavers are about equal. So, based on one's own interpretation, one could make an argument over the weights of the deaths.

From a neutral stance, the deaths hold equal weight. Not in the sense that both deaths don't matter, but both deaths carried the same amount of severity. Kino chose to kill the rabbits not for herself directly, but through indirect motivations as explained by her in the episode. By helping her fellow humans, she hopes that if she were in a similar situation where she was stranded, another human would help her in the same way. In a sense, she was building good karma. Also, because she was rewarded a valuable ring, it also appealed to her own vanity, chipping away at her stance as a distant observer. She's human after all, and she her own wants and needs aren't just limited to the purely pragmatic. This created an extra obligation for her to assist these stranded travelers, even though it lead to her being betrayed.

As such, the next way to interpret the scene is through the killing of the slavers being justified, as well as the killing of the rabbits being a horrific waste of life. This interpretation paints the slavers as being criminals, dehumanized and deserving of death. It takes the stance of a viewer of the anime, where one is distant from both Kino and the slavers. In this case, one would feel bad for Kino, who was almost captured and sold as a slave after showing much generosity and kindness. The slavers deserved death for their actions, and Kino's actions were fully justified. Additionally, the rabbits, whom were given a significant emphasis for their killings, would seem wasted on the slavers. Their lives were given up for a lost cause. The slavers' deaths, while were given emphasis, wouldn't have been to highlight the horror of the death, but to give satisfaction, much like a bullet piercing an enemy person in a shooting game would feature that slow down effect, helping us appreciate our skill at killing our fellow man. It's celebratory in a sense, but in another interpretation, it would feel the complete opposite.



In this case, the deaths of the slavers would feel heavier than the rabbits. This would be, arguably, from the eyes of Kino. She was visibly shaken from the ordeal, displaying one of her few brief moments of vulnerability in the series. Truthfully, it's difficult to tell how she may have felt, which is in part due to great writing and animation. From my own perspective, however, I interpreted her reaction to the slavers' deaths to be of mourning. She consciously chose to help them. She befriended them. She ate meals with them and listen to stories about their friends and families, their dreams and ambitions, and their love of their homeland. She learned of their traditions, their culture, their history, and was even invited to visit their homeland one day for festivities and fun. She toiled and struggled with them to dig their truck out of the snow, and was equally joyous upon it being freed. Then she was betrayed.

Was she shocked? Was she half-expecting the betrayal after Hermes asked about their cargo earlier? Was she used to this sort of treatment, especially remarking how she was "almost done for this time?" Was she exasperated and tired? Was she frightened and caught in inner turmoil? Was she vengeful and spiteful? Or did she have traits of all of the above, uncertain of which emotion to prioritize at the moment, instead choosing to embrace her revolver - one of her many metallic allies in place of absent human connections? Did this, as a result, make her feel sad for the slavers, but also feel like she were a horrific person for killing three fellow travelers whom she had just befriended?

Much like herself, these three slavers wanted to survive, and it just so happened that their method of doing so was through the sacrifice of others. Indeed, slavery is horrific, but through the eyes of Kino, it's possible to justify it as another way to live, much like how she would kill rabbits to ensure her own survival. Or, in this case, killing other humans.

From a neutral stance, both the lives of the rabbits and the humans are equal. Therefore, it would be hypocritical to judge the slavers for their lifestyle. By saying that the killing of the slavers was justified, it would also be hypocritical to say that the killing of the rabbits was wrong. However, as a viewer, it would be possible to place the lives of the rabbits above the slavers based on the thought of slavery being wrong. It's also possible to say that human lives weigh more than animals. Or, even if they were equal, Kino did spend more time with the slavers than with the rabbits, and any bad feelings over the rabbits would be through transient semantics and morals. The time spent with the slavers was more meaningful, and thus more tragic.



For the longest time, this episode has been one of my favorites of any anime I've seen, and it has yet to fail me. I've rewatched this episode intermittently throughout the past 5 years, and I'm still finding new things every time I rewatch it. Great stuff.

Anime Relations: Piano (TV), Byousoku 5 Centimeter

These aren't diametrically opposite ideas, but in order to developing and understanding characters, there exists a need to at least distinguish these types of intents with regards to communicating character information to viewers.



Past Retrospection

In the past year, I had started watching an anime simply known as Piano. From what I inferred from the first episode, the anime lives up to its name: the show is about a young girl who enjoys the piano and classical music. Highlights of the first episode include the young girl hanging out with a friend from school, forgetting her music sheet for her lesson, realizing she forgot her umbrella after getting caught in a downpour, getting saved by her doting father who she ran into at a train stop, getting confronted by her stern by whimsical mother with a weakness for cakes, hearing news about her sister in Europe, and eventually finding her music sheet among her belongings. With no character drama in sight, it set itself up to be a pleasant little gem that's both understated and overlooked.

Character development is an element of anime I find to be over emphasized in reviews and expectations. There seems to be a misconception that a character changing their personality or outlook on life over the course of an anime is inherently good, while characters who remain static are inherently flawed. Granted, this probably stems from various anime featuring cardboard cutouts as characters, reacting to every scenario the same without any changes to actions or emotions. However, the development of character is only one tool that makes for great anime. Just as any tool, it can be misused and abused, utilized haphazardly with the intent to feign dynamic characters.

Rather than the development of character, I see the challenge of character as the overarching umbrella term describing the phenomenon of characters being placed in unfamiliar, uncertain, or threatening scenarios which challenges their personalities. The intent of this is to portray a character in an alternative light, adding another dimension to the character. This may or may not result in actual personality changes, which is where the development of characters come into play.
I've seen many anime criticized for their lack of character development, a number of which had no intent to develop their characters from the start. Their intents weren't to create dynamic characters that change over the course of a series. Rather, their intents are to create stable characters that act differently based on different scenarios, which is another form of a dynamic character - non-permanent changes based on specific scenes. Thus, my intent with this post is to define the challenge of character and the development of character as similar yet different ways to introduce character dynamics, hopefully disproving the sentiment that development is necessary for quality.



Assessment of Character

When a character is studied for the breadth and depth of their person, as viewers, we can only use what information is given to us through the viewing experience and whatever supplementary material is provided on the side. Some interpretations and extrapolations based on our experiences can be performed, but such thoughts are subject to being discerned by other fans due to their differing set of experiences. From there, any evidence brought forward would be in the form of canon material provided by the creators, citing in-series expositions, character backgrounds, data books, and imagery detailing anything which could be called factual. Such information can also be used for the purposes of reviews and analyses, for where characters are assessed for how "interesting" they may be, whether this is done comparatively within the scope of the host series, or in comparison to other titles of similar natures. In essence, how well developed are characters in a given anime, and how can we, as viewers, dissect their personalities to figure out which are the most well written?

This serves as a dangerous rabbit hole to fall into, as such questions imply a hierarchy of characters to which others should attempt to follow. Additionally, such questions also create the opportunity to formulaically create and evaluate characters, as if all characters in anime were capable of being systematically pushed through a reviewing machine, only to be spat out at the end with some arbitrary rating provided by the most contemporary methodology of assessment. In opposition, I would propose the individual assessment of each character on a case-by-case basis, to where comparisons can be made between differing characters for how they're developed, but not in a manner which a hierarchical or systematic approach would lend to the quantification of what is deemed "good." Rather, the qualitative understanding of characters would instead help to better understand characters in terms of the purpose behind how they're written, showing how successful they were written in that regard. To do so, it's necessary to explain a bit about the developing and challenging characters. For the former, it's the act of explaining what a character is about, giving information through audiovisuals. In the latter, it's the act of, through writing and action, depicting how characters think, act, and react to their world, often in the form of being challenged by their surroundings. In doing so, I'd hope to at least give a bit of insight into another way of looking at characters, as well as to pick apart the more casual and highbrow approaches of character assessment.

As a preface, this post was brought about by a bit of bias, where I've seen the absence of character details in various titles, particularly slice-of-life ones, be treated as inherently negative. By not knowing much about a character, they are, by default, lesser in worth than a character with more information on them. This thought discredits character strengths found in interactions, conversations, and actions, instead leveraging heavily on expositions and flashbacks to replace personality. In other words, knowing more about a character is one thing, but the manner which this information affects the character themselves is an entirely different matter. A show can alter one's perception of a character through exposition, changing them from an archetypal flagship figurehead to a rounded, multifaceted character, but it can also explain a lot about its characters to where a greater emphasis is placed on their past than their present actions. This results in viewers sympathizing with characters through their experiences through information given, as opposed to sympathizing with their characters through how they think, feel, or act. One approach is not better than the other, but by alternating definitions, it's possible to act as if information dumps equate to viewer sympathy, to which can give creators the wrong idea as to the manner which sympathy is invoked. To feel for what a character went through is one thing, but to feel for a character by their actual thoughts and emotions is something different.



On Development

Develop, as a word, has roots in the Old French word desveloper, meaning "unwrap, unfurl, unveil; reveal the meaning of, explain," (etymology), to which lends to a sense of pulling out a physical or conceptual component, of which is original of a single entity, and make known what the object is through a visual, computational, qualitative, or verbal assessment. By unwrapping, one would peel off layers to reveal the desired interior of the component. Unfurling would imply the spreading out of a singular object that was once taut and bound. By unveiling, the component would be removed from a once mysterious or obscured position, brought out into view by the result of the assessor. Unwrapping, unfurling, and unveiling utilize the prefix "un-," as to negate a previous state for the object or concept was once in. The component would then be altered in its physical or conceptual state, becoming something else which can be better understood. The meaning of the component is thus revealed or explained by the actions taken. Hence, des-, or "undo," and -veloper, or "wrap up."

Throughout this etymology, it is understood that there must first exist something physical or conceptual, of which contains something of value, which must be uncovered by an action taken by an individual. In here, there is something that is already in existence, and there is a desire for the content held within. With regards to anime characters, they exist in concept, and their inner person, as dictated by the show's writing or a viewer's extrapolated thoughts, is thus developed over the course of a series. By doing so, we, as the viewers, will know more about the character at hand, undoing their previous state of not being known. In this, we, as viewers, are given the opportunity to watch and learn as the show reveals more about the characters in its world.

In the world of casual discussions, development is used interchangeably with the general idea of simply knowing more about a character. At some point, if we know more about a character, they are somehow better than a character we know less about. This transition in thought, as I can perceive, is derived from a sense that if we know more about a character, we can provide more commentary on them, we can create more interpretations about them, and we can act as if we know them better, both in terms of being conceptual manifestations of a narrative and recognizable human beings, capable of intelligent thought and conversation. To turn this around, what would we learn about a real person through reading their written biography? We may be able to understand and sympathize with what they went through event-wise, but it's difficult to understand their personality through pure descriptions. That is, unless we were literally told they were a jolly or uptight individual, to which is a quality found in narratives telling viewers how to think, rather than having viewers come to their own conclusions. Alternatively, rather than a written biography, what of a recorded television interview? In some respects, this may give more information as to the manner of their speech and their physical presence, but this is still limited by its scripted nature. In this case, the interview would give information in the form of questions and answers, along with potentials for side conversations and digressions, but the interview format is still structured to give controlled amounts of information in a controlled setting.

Now, what about an impromptu candid conversation, perhaps over lunch? How does the person behave outside the comfort zone of a stabilized environment? What habits do they have in speech and actions? Do they seem discomforted by the weather or the food menu? Did they seem like they had a chance to bathe and dress properly, or did they wake up late and they rushed out without thinking? What are their thoughts on the latest films? Do they have hobbies or interests that are useless in resumes? Beyond the factual questions of the "what," in this case, approach with the "why." So they grew up working with their hands, so why does that matter to them in the present day? So they went to a half-decent school and are currently making ends through their full-time job, why would that affect their worldview? Or, does it not, and their worldviews are personalized and internalized, rather than being affected by education or work? Are they aware of why they think they way they think? If they cite particular influences such as role models and particular literatures, what about those venues influenced their present-day, and why do they continue living as such? To simply put it, beyond the factual [u]what[u] of what caused them to think and act, instead, why does their past and present affect them, and in a step beyond, how does this help them move forward, and how does this, in turn, affect you as the other party?

In terms of an anime character, these kinds of thoughts can be applied in understand the manner which a character is presented. Do we know about them through facts provided? Do we know about them through the manner which they conduct themselves? We can know about a character's dreams and aspirations, and we can know about what caused them to come to such conclusions about their lives. Now, why does this matter to them in the present? How do these facts affect the way they think and act? For developing characters doesn't come only in the form of factual statements explaining what a character is about. Developing characters can also be done by depicting their mannerisms, thoughts, and the way which they act and react in constantly evolving conversations and settings, challenging their person by taking them away from structured, controlled, and comfortable environments, instead placing them in locales where they must adapt and adjust accordingly.



Singular Usage of Developing and Challenging

When an anime expounds on a character, it divulges upon their person, explaining who they are and how they came to be. This can come in the form of a variety of sources, including anecdotes, expositions, peripheral characters, and various reveals that may come about in the course of a narrative. For example, the retrospectives of the past detailing the physical and mental health of a character, the manner which past events can influence a character's economic position in life, or how such events may have caused characters to have varying levels of optimism and pessimism. In doing so, we would have a variety of ways for characters to be developed in the eyes of the viewer, but primarily in the sense of knowing characters through facts. In conjunction with the character expressing their feelings about the detailed events, we can learn about what the experience and what they think about them, but it takes an extra step to then show what about these new developments affect the character's present.

When studying such characters, is knowing background information required to understand them? In other words, do their thoughts and actions need to be reasoned through background information, or could a viewer not know anything and still understand the character through how they behave in real time? Is it possible to make inferences just based on how they're depicted to act, or is it necessary to explain how they came to be first? Are their characters leveraged through an exposition or flashback, or can they be enjoyed in absence of such? Does the information add to the character, helping viewers know them better and give heightened insight into how they came to be? Is the information simply an added benefit to which we can put in the back of our minds for when we need to talk about the character in episode discussions? Or, is the information critical to understanding the character, to which had development not occurred, the character would have been a walking cardboard cutout, to which now we know the cardboard cutout once had a cat that they really liked, but was lost and now the cardboard cutout cries every time it sees a cat? This last point doesn't give insight to characters, but simply explains a present-day behavior. In terms of development, this, at the very least, allows viewers to understand a character for what they are, but not why think, act, or feel in ways beyond the particular detail.

When challenging characters, it's possible to create scenarios for where characters, outside of their comfort zones, must act differently to adjust to a new environment. This could be a spatial change like as being plucked out of one's home and placed in a foreign environment, or a personal change in the sense of physically transforming into something other than human. This happens in real time, for where the past matters less than what's going on in the present. In this, a character may change physically and/or mentally in adjusting to the change of setting. Or, they may refuse to change, instead staying true to what they previously were. This gives insight into a character's personal and mental strength, their general behaviors before and after the change, their resourcefulness, and their tendencies on relying on themselves or others.

However, this can still be applied clumsily and erroneously, as with any other narrative tool. A character may constantly react to their surroundings, but this can also lead to a character becoming reactionary, only observing and responding rather than taking charge of the narrative. While this may work when intended, such as titles for where a character is intentionally weak or timid, this can also backfire by having character whom remain static only up to when the plot demands they act differently, serving as a rigid transition between character thoughts and actions. This can be done effectively when an anime relies on character reactions to garner interest, but even in those cases, the absence of actions taken would make for a pleasantly orchestrated amusement park ride, but not something to which the viewer can take part in. This can be alleviated through interactions and conversations with other characters, to where all participating characters can be developed through simply how they speak and act as various subjects and thoughts pass through the spoken dialogue.

If the anime is adept enough, a number of mannerisms and behaviors seen through the characters' physical appearance can also be observed, for where viewers can draw from to make conclusions as to how the characters may think and act. In essence, drawing information from the unspoken. As a visual medium, anime is capable of showing changes in physical behavior, but it's not an easy task to accomplish. Due to the abstracted nature of anime, what is rendered in art and animation are the details made most apparent and important by the creators, to which is condensed for viewers to receive. All the extra noise and clutter in real life is de-emphasized in order to highlight that which is most important in particular scenes. Due to this, subtlety is lost, and the slightest movements in characters can be more easily observed as compared to a live action show or a theater performance.

Both developing and challenging may be used to develop characters over the course of an anime, but the end goal of both is to portray a character in certain ways to viewers. To do so, the anime should decide whether the act of discovery should be done by the anime relaying information to the viewer, or if the viewer should be given information by the narrative to then create interpretations on their own. These create different scenarios, where a character may exist on a spectrum of mysteriousness and legibility, lending to characters whom one could write a biographical book on, or a character whom one could have an extended, colorful conversation with. They are tools of narratives, and when assessing anime from the viewer's perspective, we should be mindful of the manner which shows dictate the type and amount of information given, the intentions behind the anime's actions, the sources from which a character's information originates from, the possibilities for which you may use the information, and if the given information speaks more on the character's thoughts, behaviors, actions, past, present, and/or future.




Final Thoughts

In order to effectively portray characters, developing and challenging can both be used, together or independently, to portray characters in different lights. They don't exist in a particular dichotomy, but at the same time, they may be viewed as different methodologies to represent characters in a narrative. Developing a character's person can give insight into what they are how they came to be, but it requires an extra step to then link to the manner which they think, act, and feel. Comparatively, a challenge to a character's person may cause them to act and react differently depending on the drastic nature of their displacement, but in order to make this effective, there's a need to also apply it while still having the character seemed changed by the new circumstances. The character doesn't need to suddenly change abruptly in personality, they just need to demonstrate that they, in fact, recognize their ever-evolving world and visibly show their conscious decisions in either adapting to the changes, or remaining content and comfortable as they are.

You can know a person through written text and video archives about who they are, and you can also have a conversation with them to understand them at a personal level. Using both in the context of anime, it's possible to better develop characters and achieve the fabled fully realized, fleshed out, three-dimensional character.










tl;dr -

Developing: Expounding upon characters through information divulging on who they are and how they came to be. Affects viewers by letting us know more facts about them.

Challenging: Giving insight into characters through alterations in their present setting. Does not necessarily create new factual information, but gives plenty of opportunities for characters to display how they think, feel, and act in different scenarios.