Shin is one of the best male mcs in recent years in LN adaptations(This thread has spoilers from LN)
86--EIGHTY-SIX (light novel)
addie1998 said: Thigh_Tide said: As I stated last time, the fact that you disagree with my opinions on other anime doesn't mean anything. What is there to prove that the above shows are not 9s? What is there to prove I shouldn't have dropped HxH, AoT and Vivy? If you do want to discuss those shows, I am willing to hear out what complaints you have with them, and of course, explain why you're wrong. But just stating "oh you disagree with me in all these shows so you're wrong" is just a completely invalid argument. As I said, nothing suggests your opinions are the correct ones. And in addition to that, the fact that you're once more trying to dodge the existing debate of whether or not Shin is a badly written character further proves that you can no longer defend your point, which means your stance on the matter is wrong. Like i said how could i trust your own reasoning, thus making arguments that are purely based on wrong assumptions for a show you didn't even finished watching you are not making a lot of sense here dude good try π You appear to be going in circles. I already pointed out 2 comments ago: Thigh_Tide said: Again, these aren't rebuttals to anything I said, but attempts at diminishing the entire argument. Nothing suggests I am making a "bad take" or "confusing" people other than you disagreeing, which is, as mentioned, in no way an objective measure of "correct." The same is the case with "not finishing" the show - no part of that means my view is incorrect, but you imply as such in lieu of having any way to further argue your mistaken point. You say that I am making "assumptions," but omit the fact that you haven't shown if or how said "assumptions" are incorrect, instead you're trying to use the insinuation as an excuse to avoid having to defend your view. The same is also the case with your claim that you "couldn't trust my reasoning," you're not saying why my reasoning is wrong, other than, as I've pointed out, the fact that you disagree. I'll inform you once more, if you don't intend to attempt any further support of your view on Shin, I will assume you have come around to my view on the matter. |
| Well I for one already loved Lain. |
Thigh_Tide said: You're moving the goalpost. Whether or not you think I should "be here" is irrelevant to whether or not I am right. In short, if you don't have any way to disprove what I said in my previous response, I'll assume you admit you're wrong. Can I watch 2 hours long movie, or 10+ episodes of 20+ minutes show, for less than 5 minutes and claim one or a few characters from the start to the end of that show as good, decent, or bad? Can I use the screentime of a character only from the first episode to represent how that character is like from episode 2 - 12 or more? Do you know how many show that have good characters at the start of the story, that fuck up the character development and ruin the characters at the end of the story? Do you know how many story that have bad characters at the start and surprise a lot of people after the story progress with those characters good development? No, I'm not only talking about anime, but all the media with storytelling like: film, novel, theater, etc. |
YuvensiusSep 1, 2021 2:03 PM
addie1998 said: You only watched until episode 3 thus your information is limited to that point, why in the hell would i trust you? addie1998 said: And you said this: Shin's major issues come from his mishandling of his position in the storyline. He is supposed to be the deuteragonist, yet is completely extraneous to much of the narrative. His mindset isn't explored to any degree, we never see any sort of growth, we don't even know what his views on critical aspects of the plot and world. -How in the hell did you come up to this conclusion as if you watched the whole show when in fact you didn't wtf, you are trying so hard my goodness π€‘ π€£ Yuvensius said: Can I watch 2 hours long movie, or 10+ episodes of 20+ minutes show, for less than 5 minutes and claim one or a few characters from the start to the end of that show as good, decent, or bad? Can I use the screentime of a character only from the first episode to represent how that character is like from episode 2 - 12 or more? Do you know how many show that have good characters at the start of the story, that fuck up the character development and ruin the characters at the end of the story? Do you know how many story that have bad characters at the start and surprise a lot of people after the story progress with those characters good development? No, I'm not only talking about anime, but all the media with storytelling like: film, novel, theater, etc. Both of you forget 2 things: 1 - That there is such a thing as research. I went ahead with the light novel, I read others' analyses of the work and compared it against the text. I can safely say it's a pile of shit and Asato Asato is worthless as an artist. 2 - You're only implying I may be wrong, not proving that I am. Both of your arguments centre on the idea that "he could improve later on," but you very tellingly don't actually state how he improves. If it truly was the case that you were privy to more information than I, you would be able to easily and immediately contradict everything I've said, yet you fail to. Just as I said previously, for perhaps the fourth or fifth time by now, neither of you are actually backing the idea that "Shin is a good character," instead you're trying to justify ignorance. This only demonstrates a lack of faith in your own opinions, and a lack of analytical ability. |
| Well I for one already loved Lain. |
Thigh_Tide said: Both of you forget 2 things: 1 - That there is such a thing as research. I went ahead with the light novel, I read others' analyses of the work and compared it against the text. I can safely say it's a pile of shit and Asato Asato is worthless as an artist. 2 - You're only implying I may be wrong, not proving that I am. Both of your arguments centre on the idea that "he could improve later on," but you very tellingly don't actually state how he improves. If it truly was the case that you were privy to more information than I, you would be able to easily and immediately contradict everything I've said, yet you fail to. Just as I said previously, for perhaps the fourth or fifth time by now, neither of you are actually backing the idea that "Shin is a good character," instead you're trying to justify ignorance. This only demonstrates a lack of faith in your own opinions, and a lack of analytical ability. "I went ahead with the light novel, I read others' analyses of the work and compared it against the text." Nice, if only you can say that you already read the LN from beginning instead of saying it now... well anyway, next. ----- "You're only implying I may be wrong, not proving that I am. Both of your arguments centre on the idea that 'he could improve later on', but you very tellingly don't actually state how he improves.", "you would be able to easily and immediately contradict everything I've said, yet you fail to." Good, by waiting and holding information that you already read the LN until I made that reply, you successfully make my entire reply useless... congratulations! I wrote that argument because you dropped the show and never said you already read the LN, at least until now... what a genius. So of course I made that reply at first to make sure you didn't made a full conclusion based on the limited episodes you watched. Thank you very much. ----- "neither of you are actually backing the idea that "Shin is a good character," instead you're trying to justify ignorance. This only demonstrates a lack of faith in your own opinions, and a lack of analytical ability." Damn... did I ever literally, explicitly, or vaguely said that "Shin is a good character" or "Shin is a bad character"? If you want to interpret my questions in that way, welcome and be my guest. That entire reply just became useless anyway when you revealed that you already read the LN. As an additional note, I think Kaie (yes, the dead girl) and Victor Idinarohk (yes, that prince in Volume 5) are better characters than Shin anyway. ----- Now that I finally know you already read the LN, I have no business here anymore as my original goal to stop 'any claim that based on limited information' is over. But if you want to continue, I will try to reply during my free time. Maybe I can find you make another full conclusion of your dropped show while also hiding the fact that you already read the source material to trap another person like me (which would be fun to see). |
Yuvensius said: Thigh_Tide said: Both of you forget 2 things: 1 - That there is such a thing as research. I went ahead with the light novel, I read others' analyses of the work and compared it against the text. I can safely say it's a pile of shit and Asato Asato is worthless as an artist. 2 - You're only implying I may be wrong, not proving that I am. Both of your arguments centre on the idea that "he could improve later on," but you very tellingly don't actually state how he improves. If it truly was the case that you were privy to more information than I, you would be able to easily and immediately contradict everything I've said, yet you fail to. Just as I said previously, for perhaps the fourth or fifth time by now, neither of you are actually backing the idea that "Shin is a good character," instead you're trying to justify ignorance. This only demonstrates a lack of faith in your own opinions, and a lack of analytical ability. "I went ahead with the light novel, I read others' analyses of the work and compared it against the text." Nice, if only you can say that you already read the LN from beginning instead of saying it now... well anyway, next. ----- "You're only implying I may be wrong, not proving that I am. Both of your arguments centre on the idea that 'he could improve later on', but you very tellingly don't actually state how he improves.", "you would be able to easily and immediately contradict everything I've said, yet you fail to." Good, by waiting and holding information that you already read the LN until I made that reply, you successfully make my entire reply useless... congratulations! I wrote that argument because you dropped the show and never said you already read the LN, at least until now... what a genius. So of course I made that reply at first to make sure you didn't made a full conclusion based on the limited episodes you watched. Thank you very much. ----- "neither of you are actually backing the idea that "Shin is a good character," instead you're trying to justify ignorance. This only demonstrates a lack of faith in your own opinions, and a lack of analytical ability." Damn... did I ever literally, explicitly, or vaguely said that "Shin is a good character" or "Shin is a bad character"? If you want to interpret my questions in that way, welcome and be my guest. That entire reply just became useless anyway when you revealed that you already read the LN. As an additional note, I think Kaie (yes, the dead girl) and Victor Idinarohk (yes, that prince in Volume 5) are better characters than Shin anyway. ----- Now that I finally know you already read the LN, I have no business here anymore as my original goal to stop 'any claim that based on limited information' is over. But if you want to continue, I will try to reply during my free time. Maybe I can find you make another full conclusion of your dropped show while also hiding the fact that you already read the source material to trap another person like me (which would be fun to see). Like you say, your "original goal" is done, but I would like to make it clear that I never "trapped" anyone, or "withheld" any information. You chose to assume my conclusion was insubstantial, and you chose to pursue that idea rather than the actual argument in question. In this same way, you did implicitly suggest your view of Shin was positive, since you joined into a thread on that very subject in opposition to a negative view. In fact, it occurs to me, by you assuming my only exposure to the work was through the anime, you yourself were making a claim based on limited information. |
| Well I for one already loved Lain. |
| One of the main reason why shin feel one of the most realistic mcs because unlike Ainz Rimuru Anos or Any other high fantasy Isekai/Fanatsy novels his world is rather almost down to earth sci fi setting he doesnt have magic powers like those but still have to fight and survive in a harsh environment Notsure i can properly wrote my thoughts here but thats how i see it the reason shin is like this because his overall grounded world settings gives him an advantage over High magical fantasy Mcs in terms of being relate too. Oh well i enjoy both sci fi and high fantasy and sci fi needs more stuff like 86 |
Thigh_Tide said: Like you say, your "original goal" is done, but I would like to make it clear that I never "trapped" anyone, or "withheld" any information. You chose to assume my conclusion was insubstantial, and you chose to pursue that idea rather than the actual argument in question. In this same way, you did implicitly suggest your view of Shin was positive, since you joined into a thread on that very subject in opposition to a negative view. In fact, it occurs to me, by you assuming my only exposure to the work was through the anime, you yourself were making a claim based on limited information. For the trap part, you can think of it as the usual accidental trap. For example: a leg-hold trap meant for wild boar that accidentally trapped wild tiger. For "withheld" information part, let me explain it like this: 1. Addie1998 mention that you dropped the anime at episode 3 "why are u even here when you completely drop the show after ep3 it doesn't make any fxxking sense...". 2. You can just shut him up and make him almost defenseless with a fact by saying "I already read the LN up to Volume X." <-- opinions on any shows are subjective, if he try to keep going he will lose his credibility faster. 3. But instead of simply telling him that you already read the LN, your reply is: "You're moving the goalpost. Whether or not you think I should "be here" is irrelevant to whether or not I am right. Not to mention, the fact that you question this rather than returning to the matter at hand suggests you cannot back your view up any longer, which lessens your credibility and further supports mine.". 4. You have a few additional chance to tell him you already read the LN and thus you also know how Shin character will look like beyond the anime. This way, your credibility will raise while he can't mention that you have limited information anymore. 5. Because when I read this thread you still didn't mention anything about reading the LN, suddenly mention that out of nowhere just to counter my questions when you can tell that to addie1998 from the beginning. But somehow, your anime list are open to public while your manga and novel list status are: "Access to this list has been restricted by the owner.". After all of that you still expected me to not think that you withheld an important information which can end your argument with addie1998 faster? ----- "In fact, it occurs to me, by you assuming my only exposure to the work was through the anime, you yourself were making a claim based on limited information." Should I assume it is unreasonable and illogical for me to think that you never read the LN when you never mention it to addie1998 when he ask for why are you here when you dropped 86 at episode 3, and then suddenly mention that you already read the LN when I reply with my questions? Not to mention, that restricted manga and novel list just make the situation worse. |
YuvensiusSep 2, 2021 8:05 AM
Yuvensius said: For the trap part, you can think of it as the usual accidental trap. For example: a leg-hold trap meant for wild boar that accidentally trapped wild tiger. That's a nonsensical and meaningless analogy. As I pointed out, I never made any "trap," because I was never making a point of whether I had or had not read it. You decided to come in to an existing conversation and make an entirely unrelated point, so how could I have "set up" any trap without knowing the direction in which you want to argue? For "withheld" information part, let me explain it like this: 1. Addie1998 mention that you dropped the anime at episode 3 "why are u even here when you completely drop the show after ep3 it doesn't make any fxxking sense...". 2. You can just shut him up and make him almost defenseless with a fact by saying "I already read the LN up to Volume X." <-- opinions on any shows are subjective, if he try to keep going he will lose his credibility faster. That wouldn't answer the question, though. I'm not here because I read the LN, I'm here because I want to argue that Shin is a badly written character, as I was already doing. Also, you erroneously imply they had any defence or credibility to begin with, but that's besides the point. 3. But instead of simply telling him that you already read the LN, your reply is: "You're moving the goalpost. Whether or not you think I should "be here" is irrelevant to whether or not I am right. Not to mention, the fact that you question this rather than returning to the matter at hand suggests you cannot back your view up any longer, which lessens your credibility and further supports mine.". 4. You have a few additional chance to tell him you already read the LN and thus you also know how Shin character will look like beyond the anime. This way, your credibility will raise while he can't mention that you have limited information anymore. You forget that A) I already used information from further in the storyline to discuss the work's issues, so it is already evident that I know how the series develops (or rather, fails to) moving forward, and B) My point was never about proving my knowledge of the series, but pointing out that the claim "oh well you dropped it" does not invalidate my criticisms, and only demonstrates that the opposing party has resorted to panicked floundering. 5. Because when I read this thread you still didn't mention anything about reading the LN, suddenly mention that out of nowhere just to counter my questions when you can tell that to addie1998 from the beginning. But I didn't mention it out of nowhere, I mentioned it only once the point of "how can you make critique when your information is limited" was brought up. After all, "oh you dropped it so shut up" and "how can you make this claim?" are two completely different arguments, and require different responses. But somehow, your anime list are open to public while your manga and novel list status are: "Access to this list has been restricted by the owner.". After all of that you still expected me to not think that you withheld an important information which can end your argument with addie1998 faster? Not actively broadcasting and withholding are not the same thing. The information in question was always available to you should you have taken the analogue route, that is to say, just outright asked. The point, you'll find, is that I at no point concealed my knowledge of the series until it was explicitly brought into question. Should I assume it is unreasonable and illogical for me to think that you never read the LN when you never mention it to addie1998 when he ask for why are you here when you dropped 86 at episode 3, and then suddenly mention that you already read the LN when I reply with my questions? Not to mention, that restricted manga and novel list just make the situation worse. It doesn't matter whether you think you should or should not assume anything, it matters that you did. You did exactly what you claimed it was your objective to stop, and that's hypocritical. Trying to justify it only exacerbates that fact by highlighting precisely where you made assumptions from limited information. |
| Well I for one already loved Lain. |
addie1998 said: Yuvensius said: "I went ahead with the light novel, I read others' analyses of the work and compared it against the text." Nice, if only you can say that you already read the LN from beginning instead of saying it now... well anyway, next. ----- "You're only implying I may be wrong, not proving that I am. Both of your arguments centre on the idea that 'he could improve later on', but you very tellingly don't actually state how he improves.", "you would be able to easily and immediately contradict everything I've said, yet you fail to." Good, by waiting and holding information that you already read the LN until I made that reply, you successfully make my entire reply useless... congratulations! I wrote that argument because you dropped the show and never said you already read the LN, at least until now... what a genius. So of course I made that reply at first to make sure you didn't made a full conclusion based on the limited episodes you watched. Thank you very much. ----- "neither of you are actually backing the idea that "Shin is a good character," instead you're trying to justify ignorance. This only demonstrates a lack of faith in your own opinions, and a lack of analytical ability." Damn... did I ever literally, explicitly, or vaguely said that "Shin is a good character" or "Shin is a bad character"? If you want to interpret my questions in that way, welcome and be my guest. That entire reply just became useless anyway when you revealed that you already read the LN. As an additional note, I think Kaie (yes, the dead girl) and Victor Idinarohk (yes, that prince in Volume 5) are better characters than Shin anyway. ----- Now that I finally know you already read the LN, I have no business here anymore as my original goal to stop 'any claim that based on limited information' is over. But if you want to continue, I will try to reply during my free time. Maybe I can find you make another full conclusion of your dropped show while also hiding the fact that you already read the source material to trap another person like me (which would be fun to see). Man he is such a bad actor and obviously didn't read the LN because i am caught up the LN and the points that he made earlier doesn't make any sense if he read the LN You disagreeing isn't "not making sense." What I've told you is perfectly understandable, and doesn't contradict anything in the text. If it did, you could just point it out immediately, yet you don't, you stick with vague shut-downs like "oh it doesn't make sense," instead of actual rebuttals. Either give a counterargument to my criticisms of the work, or tell me how what I said doesn't make any sense. Anything else and I will assume you mean to admit you're wrong. |
| Well I for one already loved Lain. |
Thigh_Tide said: addie1998 said: Man he is such a bad actor and obviously didn't read the LN because i am caught up the LN and the points that he made earlier doesn't make any sense if he read the LN You disagreeing isn't "not making sense." What I've told you is perfectly understandable, and doesn't contradict anything in the text. If it did, you could just point it out immediately, yet you don't, you stick with vague shut-downs like "oh it doesn't make sense," instead of actual rebuttals. Either give a counterargument to my criticisms of the work, or tell me how what I said doesn't make any sense. Anything else and I will assume you mean to admit you're wrong. I'm new to this thread but I wouldn't say Shin is like an amazing male character or anything. it's really just a trait to be an emotionless type character. Not only in anime but in many non-animation shows as well. I wouldn't describe him as bad but more just a trope really. Personally, in this anime some of my favourite characters are Lena, Raiden, and Anju. Maybe even Theo, Kurena is pretty cute too. Shin's cool but again not the most lovable character, because of his 'trope' he's stuck in. What I DO enjoy though is that he is not endlessly trapped in this trope, for example he is actually not comically unemotional/unsympathetic like a certain MC from Classroom of the Elite and actually changes throughout time as he discovers himself more. I hope we can see this in season 2 I guess. |
addie1998 said: Thigh_Tide said: Using PTSD to excuse the bastard's lack of personality is both an immature and offensive misunderstanding of the condition. If you can get attached to that complete literary failure, you must be as shallow as he is. The first point you make highlights the author's inability to engender personal development, for instance, as you mention several events that should drastically alter a character's temperament in a well-written piece, but with Shin being a flanderised, empty character, no such changes are made to him. Your second point also shows this, by noting the character settle into the same, repetitive role, another symptom of the author's failure to make him any more profound than a mere archetype. The third comes close to saying something of value, by attributing a short-term goal to him, but this again just highlights that for the majority of the storyline, he had none. This is shallow, plain and simple. And finally, him reading again fails to tell anything of his character, since as you say, he's reading only as a result of his previous, one-note characterisation. Where you appear to be going wrong is by assuming that facile tropes amount to a well-written character. This is, of course, not the case. As I mentioned earlier, and I referred you towards, Shin's major issues come from his mishandling of his position in the storyline. He is supposed to be the deuteragonist, yet is completely extraneous to much of the narrative. His mindset isn't explored to any degree, we never see any sort of growth, we don't even know what his views on critical aspects of the plot and world. He's a character with all the depth of a saucer, a bad attempt by a bad creator. But you think that having 2 or 3 stereotypical quirky anime traits equates to good writing, so you're oblivious to that. -All of this nonsense you said. If you read the the LN as you have said there's no way you can make up all of this statements and also the fact that you didn't finish the anime, it's very obvious dude π I'll ask again, how does this "not make sense?" Did I contradict anything present in the LN? Did I complain about anything that is actually rectified later on? Did I, at any point, make any claim that is provably untrue? All you're doing is making the blanket statement that "it doesn't make sense" so as to cowardly avoid having a reasonable discussion. Moreover, the fact that you continually make this claim without elaboration demonstrates that you are unable to make any sort of justification to your view, or refute mine. You are showing that your hand is empty, that you are panicking. Furthermore, your claim that it "doesn't make sense" is inherently fallacious. You earlier claimed "how could i trust your own reasoning...purely based on wrong assumptions." However, now you are saying "If you read the the LN...there's no way you can make up all of this statements." In other words, you are saying my criticisms are wrong because I don't know what happens later on, and you can tell I don't know what happens later on because my criticisms are wrong. You're saying A because B, and B because A. This is a circular argument. So, I will put it to you directly: If your claim was true, that would mean that one or more of my a criticisms goes directly against something shown in the Light Novel. Since you believe that is the case, that must mean that you have identified at least one contradiction between what I said and what is present in the work. Therefore, you should be entirely capable of telling me what it is that you think proves I am unfamiliar with the work. So, I request that you do so, and tell me precisely what it is that "does not make sense" about my criticism. If you can not do this simple task, then there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that I am not familiar with the further content of the series. In the absence of evidence, your belief that I "can't be trusted" no longer applies, as there is no reason to do so. Since your belief would then be invalid, you have nothing that prevents you from taking my criticisms into account. And since you have not shown any intention or ability to make a counterargument to said criticisms, that can only mean you are unable to argue your view further, which would mean that you are willing to let my criticisms stand, as the final verdict of this debate. In other words, if you cannot provably, substantially demonstrate why I am "not making sense," then you are wrong. I doubt you want that to be the conclusion, so now you have the opportunity to provide the necessary proof. And I remind you, if your previous claims were truthful that would be entirely and easily possible, so any complaint you may have with this ultimatum can only mean you cannot do so, and by the logic explained above, are wrong. |
| Well I for one already loved Lain. |
addie1998 said: Thigh_Tide said: I'll ask again, how does this "not make sense?" Did I contradict anything present in the LN? Did I complain about anything that is actually rectified later on? Did I, at any point, make any claim that is provably untrue? All you're doing is making the blanket statement that "it doesn't make sense" so as to cowardly avoid having a reasonable discussion. Moreover, the fact that you continually make this claim without elaboration demonstrates that you are unable to make any sort of justification to your view, or refute mine. You are showing that your hand is empty, that you are panicking. Furthermore, your claim that it "doesn't make sense" is inherently fallacious. You earlier claimed "how could i trust your own reasoning...purely based on wrong assumptions." However, now you are saying "If you read the the LN...there's no way you can make up all of this statements." In other words, you are saying my criticisms are wrong because I don't know what happens later on, and you can tell I don't know what happens later on because my criticisms are wrong. You're saying A because B, and B because A. This is a circular argument. So, I will put it to you directly: If your claim was true, that would mean that one or more of my a criticisms goes directly against something shown in the Light Novel. Since you believe that is the case, that must mean that you have identified at least one contradiction between what I said and what is present in the work. Therefore, you should be entirely capable of telling me what it is that you think proves I am unfamiliar with the work. So, I request that you do so, and tell me precisely what it is that "does not make sense" about my criticism. If you can not do this simple task, then there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that I am not familiar with the further content of the series. In the absence of evidence, your belief that I "can't be trusted" no longer applies, as there is no reason to do so. Since your belief would then be invalid, you have nothing that prevents you from taking my criticisms into account. And since you have not shown any intention or ability to make a counterargument to said criticisms, that can only mean you are unable to argue your view further, which would mean that you are willing to let my criticisms stand, as the final verdict of this debate. In other words, if you cannot provably, substantially demonstrate why I am "not making sense," then you are wrong. I doubt you want that to be the conclusion, so now you have the opportunity to provide the necessary proof. And I remind you, if your previous claims were truthful that would be entirely and easily possible, so any complaint you may have with this ultimatum can only mean you cannot do so, and by the logic explained above, are wrong. Can you get a perfect score on the examination if you didn't finished studying If you want to critique on something make sure you watched or read the whole goddamn thing first and you saying the author is a worthless artist & the people who like this show must be shallow okay π you already lost me, so I'm gonna leave & say goodbye to this nonsense waste of time I requested that you demonstrate why my criticisms "do not make sense," by way of identifying any sort of contradiction I made against the work, as this would be the only feasible way you would be able to tell at a glance I was unfamiliar with it, as you claimed was evident. You have not done so. Worse, you have not even made an attempt to do so. As per the logic I discussed above, logic that you have raised no issue with, it follows that your claim is completely incorrect, and since you have elected to not make counterarguments to my criticisms of the work, in the absence of any conflicting evidence the only possible conclusion is that you are willing to yield that my judgement was correct. If you are unhappy with this conclusion, I will permit you to make an additional response. Should it consist of actual justification of your belief I "wasn't making sense," a counterargument to my criticism, or any error with the process that led to this conclusion, this debate can continue. If it does not, or if you do not raise any further opposition at all, that will be taken as a complete forfeit of your view, for reasons previously established. |
| Well I for one already loved Lain. |
Fantyyy said: Thigh_Tide said: Using PTSD to excuse the bastard's lack of personality is both an immature and offensive misunderstanding of the condition. If you can get attached to that complete literary failure, you must be as shallow as he is. You think you understand good writing but you completely ignore every aspect and role of a character in a story except for MUH MUH PERSONALITY. Imagine believing bullshit like a character being stoic and not showing much emotion to the outside is inherently a bad thing. I chuckle when people come with this personality crap, and then fanboy shallow and recycled tropes like tsunderes or lolis for example. Yeah that's some realistic personality lmao. You're tastes are just not catered to, but you act like you're superior or some shit. Embarassing. I suggest you read the rest of this thread. I've already within it elaborated on what I mean by personality, and how my complaints with him are not for being stoic, but being badly written as a whole. |
| Well I for one already loved Lain. |
| Yeah I can agree as a light novel reader, his character is well written compared to other male characters I've seen in LN adaptations. |
Thigh_Tide said: Fantyyy said: You think you understand good writing but you completely ignore every aspect and role of a character in a story except for MUH MUH PERSONALITY. Imagine believing bullshit like a character being stoic and not showing much emotion to the outside is inherently a bad thing. I chuckle when people come with this personality crap, and then fanboy shallow and recycled tropes like tsunderes or lolis for example. Yeah that's some realistic personality lmao. You're tastes are just not catered to, but you act like you're superior or some shit. Embarassing. I suggest you read the rest of this thread. I've already within it elaborated on what I mean by personality, and how my complaints with him are not for being stoic, but being badly written as a whole. Nah you're just embarassing just stop. |
Sene0 said: Thigh_Tide said: I suggest you read the rest of this thread. I've already within it elaborated on what I mean by personality, and how my complaints with him are not for being stoic, but being badly written as a whole. Nah you're just embarassing just stop. Do you mean to suggest my critique is incorrect? And if so, what leads you to that belief? |
| Well I for one already loved Lain. |
Thigh_Tide said: In the sense of fictional characters, to not have a personality is to lack the elements that flesh them out as a person and dictate their later actions. For instance, not being given goals and desires outside of basic amenities, not having any distinguishing traits that seperate them from the rest of the cast, and not having any meaningful presence or investment in the events unfolding. That is where Shin lies, and that is the part I am critiquing. Irrespective of his informed trauma, he lacks agency, depth and development. Did you miss the part of the show where we get clear statements about Shin's goals? Isn't the way Shin has closed himself off and taken on an excessive burden a distinguishing trait? That's right, no-one ever talks about Shin, he barely has a place in the story!? Oh and he never does anything to further his goals either, what a total lack of investment!? Ah yes, everything he does is forced on him definitely no agency there. Same Shin at the end as at the start... but wait, from being totally dismissive of his handler he grows to a point of trust and collaboration, he opens up and talks, he lets her in so much it seriously pisses someone else off. I'll take a guess that you're the kind who likes characters that are wild caricatures, in shows where shouting a lot, really really believing in something and punching stuff always saves the day. You've proven nothing except you dislike this show, I look forward to your whining on the Season 2 thread. |
| Quantum ille canis est in fenestra |
borderliner said: Did you miss the part of the show where we get clear statements about Shin's goals? Explain what goals he had. You will find, of course, he didn't have any, since he has no actual drive behind his actions. Isn't the way Shin has closed himself off and taken on an excessive burden a distinguishing trait? It fails to contrast him against any other character in both it and other shows, so it isn't a distinguishing trait. You may as well say having black hair is a distinguishing trait, it contributes as much to his characterisation. That's right, no-one ever talks about Shin, he barely has a place in the story!? Being talked about doesn't at all equate to agency in a story. Making meaningful, justifiable actions does, which he fails to do. Oh and he never does anything to further his goals either, what a total lack of investment!? Again, you are free to explain what you think he did that shows any sort of relevance to the plot, but you'll, again, find he didn't. Ah yes, everything he does is forced on him definitely no agency there. Considering he is perpetually in no control over his own situation, I really don't see how you can even think to dispute this point. Same Shin at the end as at the start... but wait, from being totally dismissive of his handler he grows to a point of trust and collaboration, he opens up and talks, he lets her in so much it seriously pisses someone else off. Clearly you're just in denial about the show to fit your narrative, because he immediately places his trust in the woman from virtually their first meeting. Not only that, but even such a fictive change wouldn't demonstrate a personality, since it doesn't give him any internal depth. I'll take a guess that you're the kind who likes characters that are wild caricatures, in shows where shouting a lot, really really believing in something and punching stuff always saves the day. That's just a rude assumption, and entirely irrelevant either way. You've proven nothing except you dislike this show, I look forward to your whining on the Season 2 thread. I would ask what you think constitutes proof, but that which you have attempted to provide fails to even address many of the criticisms I made. Many don't even try to say anything contradictory, such as your first, third, fourth and fifth sentences. Not to mention everything you've said is about nine-tenths similar to a previous comment in this thread, that I already responded to and disproved at length, so you could at least put in a little bit of effort in your argument. |
| Well I for one already loved Lain. |
Thigh_Tide said: borderliner said: Did you miss the part of the show where we get clear statements about Shin's goals? Explain what goals he had. You will find, of course, he didn't have any, since he has no actual drive behind his actions. Isn't the way Shin has closed himself off and taken on an excessive burden a distinguishing trait? It fails to contrast him against any other character in both it and other shows, so it isn't a distinguishing trait. You may as well say having black hair is a distinguishing trait, it contributes as much to his characterisation. That's right, no-one ever talks about Shin, he barely has a place in the story!? Being talked about doesn't at all equate to agency in a story. Making meaningful, justifiable actions does, which he fails to do. Oh and he never does anything to further his goals either, what a total lack of investment!? Again, you are free to explain what you think he did that shows any sort of relevance to the plot, but you'll, again, find he didn't. Ah yes, everything he does is forced on him definitely no agency there. Considering he is perpetually in no control over his own situation, I really don't see how you can even think to dispute this point. Same Shin at the end as at the start... but wait, from being totally dismissive of his handler he grows to a point of trust and collaboration, he opens up and talks, he lets her in so much it seriously pisses someone else off. Clearly you're just in denial about the show to fit your narrative, because he immediately places his trust in the woman from virtually their first meeting. Not only that, but even such a fictive change wouldn't demonstrate a personality, since it doesn't give him any internal depth. I'll take a guess that you're the kind who likes characters that are wild caricatures, in shows where shouting a lot, really really believing in something and punching stuff always saves the day. That's just a rude assumption, and entirely irrelevant either way. You've proven nothing except you dislike this show, I look forward to your whining on the Season 2 thread. I would ask what you think constitutes proof, but that which you have attempted to provide fails to even address many of the criticisms I made. Many don't even try to say anything contradictory, such as your first, third, fourth and fifth sentences. Not to mention everything you've said is about nine-tenths similar to a previous comment in this thread, that I already responded to and disproved at length, so you could at least put in a little bit of effort in your argument. His primary goal was of course to lead whoever was left in the squad through legion territory to a place of possible sanctuary. His ancillary goal was of course to track down and confront his brother. Both as a personal task and as means of disrupting the Legion. He also set himself the goals of remembering his fallen comrades and denying the legion access to their brains. Your assertion about his distinguishing traits is complete bullshit, how about him being able to "hear" the legion, how about you give an example of a character with a distinguishing trait? You said presence, he exerts his presence in the way he is spoken about in the way Lena reacts to him I will answer your assertion that he has no relevance to the plot once you tell me what you think the plot is. Further to you likely not understanding the plot, you clearly don't understand the context of the story either, or that the whole point of agency is you judge it within the constraints imposed. Shin chooses the how, the where and the why to an extent that has earned his reputation with military command. He certainly doesn't immediately place his trust in her, you don't see that because you don't understand his character. And now you're rather desperately employing circular reasoning by linking your false assertion about his personality to his development. What was rude about my assumption, these are common themes in anime, plenty of people like shows of that type, I do too when they're done well. Did you think I was trying to offer a proof in my previous comment !? Why would I bother to do that since you have offered no proofs either. |
| Quantum ille canis est in fenestra |
Seriously !? That would be funny if it wasn't so sad ;-) |
| Quantum ille canis est in fenestra |
borderliner said: His primary goal was of course to lead whoever was left in the squad through legion territory to a place of possible sanctuary. His ancillary goal was of course to track down and confront his brother. Both as a personal task and as means of disrupting the Legion. He also set himself the goals of remembering his fallen comrades and denying the legion access to their brains. You're conflating the conventional definition of a goal with the literary concept of the same name. A goal, for a character such as Shin, would be a prevailing ideology that their entire being is built around pursuing. Something that explains their presence in the narrative, justifies all their actions within, and gives the reader a complete image of what they are thinking and why. Can you say why Shin came to be in this particular story? Can you say how that ties into the little tasks you list him doing? Can you put this knowledge forward, and explain what he'd do in a better, or worse situation? Your assertion about his distinguishing traits is complete bullshit, how about him being able to "hear" the legion, how about you give an example of a character with a distinguishing trait? As I said, a distinguishing trait is something that separates them from other characters in the same work or the same archetype, so it's not at all bullshit, whereas of course "hearing" the legion is - It's the equivalent of flavour text, not a critical piece of characterisation. Proper distinguishing traits might touch upon personal philosophies, or temperaments, allowing for natural variety in how the members of the cast contribute to a work's story and theme. You said presence, he exerts his presence in the way he is spoken about in the way Lena reacts to him That's a genuinely stupid attempt at a defence. Have you never heard of "show, don't tell?" If you need some other character to talk about how important someone is, that's just amateur. Any actually present character would impact their show directly, not second-handedly. I will answer your assertion that he has no relevance to the plot once you tell me what you think the plot is. The plot doesn't change depending on who watches it. It has a synopsis written next to it, that's the plot. Rather than trying to fit your answer to match with whatever I say, why not just say outright how he is relevant? Further to you likely not understanding the plot, you clearly don't understand the context of the story either, or that the whole point of agency is you judge it within the constraints imposed. "Likely," that's an assumption. Explain what the plot and context really is, if I "likely" don't know them. Additionally explain what "agency is judged within the constraints imposed" is supposed to mean, since that doesn't make any sense on its own - if a character doesn't drive the plot forwards, they have no agency in its proceedings, that's constant. Shin chooses the how, the where and the why to an extent that has earned his reputation with military command. Meaningless. We're not arguing how important he is as a member of a fictional military force, but as a character in a piece of literature. He certainly doesn't immediately place his trust in her, you don't see that because you don't understand his character. And now you're rather desperately employing circular reasoning by linking your false assertion about his personality to his development. "You don't see that because you don't understand his character" is a fallacious statement. If what you claim is the case, point out where such a thing occurs. And while you're on that, point out, quote blocks and all, where I have used circular logic, because I simply haven't. What was rude about my assumption, these are common themes in anime, plenty of people like shows of that type, I do too when they're done well. Making the assumption is rude. What you think I might possibly enjoy doesn't alter any part of the work in question, and bringing such a baseless statement up is completely pointless. Did you think I was trying to offer a proof in my previous comment !? If you weren't, then what makes you think you have the authority to state what isn't proof? Why would I bother to do that since you have offered no proofs either. Your doing so is not dependent on if I did, and, as previously established, without showing yourself to do the opposite, you cannot truthfully say that I didn't. |
| Well I for one already loved Lain. |
addie1998 said: borderliner said: His primary goal was of course to lead whoever was left in the squad through legion territory to a place of possible sanctuary. His ancillary goal was of course to track down and confront his brother. Both as a personal task and as means of disrupting the Legion. He also set himself the goals of remembering his fallen comrades and denying the legion access to their brains. Your assertion about his distinguishing traits is complete bullshit, how about him being able to "hear" the legion, how about you give an example of a character with a distinguishing trait? You said presence, he exerts his presence in the way he is spoken about in the way Lena reacts to him I will answer your assertion that he has no relevance to the plot once you tell me what you think the plot is. Further to you likely not understanding the plot, you clearly don't understand the context of the story either, or that the whole point of agency is you judge it within the constraints imposed. Shin chooses the how, the where and the why to an extent that has earned his reputation with military command. He certainly doesn't immediately place his trust in her, you don't see that because you don't understand his character. And now you're rather desperately employing circular reasoning by linking your false assertion about his personality to his development. What was rude about my assumption, these are common themes in anime, plenty of people like shows of that type, I do too when they're done well. Did you think I was trying to offer a proof in my previous comment !? Why would I bother to do that since you have offered no proofs either. Is there any point in arguing someone who dropped the show after ep3 I've already addressed that in this thread. I read the book, and even if I didn't, me dropping it doesn't automatically mean I'm wrong. @addie1998, prancing around other people who disagree with me won't improve the result of the debate you had with me. It's up there if you want to go back and have another crack at it, but until then your contributions to this thread are meaningless, as I've already shown your opinion on the matter is insubstantial. @borderliner, what you may think is sad or funny is also entirely non-contributory to the conversation at hand. |
| Well I for one already loved Lain. |
Thigh_Tide said: borderliner said: His primary goal was of course to lead whoever was left in the squad through legion territory to a place of possible sanctuary. His ancillary goal was of course to track down and confront his brother. Both as a personal task and as means of disrupting the Legion. He also set himself the goals of remembering his fallen comrades and denying the legion access to their brains. You're conflating the conventional definition of a goal with the literary concept of the same name. A goal, for a character such as Shin, would be a prevailing ideology that their entire being is built around pursuing. Something that explains their presence in the narrative, justifies all their actions within, and gives the reader a complete image of what they are thinking and why. Can you say why Shin came to be in this particular story? Can you say how that ties into the little tasks you list him doing? Can you put this knowledge forward, and explain what he'd do in a better, or worse situation? Your assertion about his distinguishing traits is complete bullshit, how about him being able to "hear" the legion, how about you give an example of a character with a distinguishing trait? As I said, a distinguishing trait is something that separates them from other characters in the same work or the same archetype, so it's not at all bullshit, whereas of course "hearing" the legion is - It's the equivalent of flavour text, not a critical piece of characterisation. Proper distinguishing traits might touch upon personal philosophies, or temperaments, allowing for natural variety in how the members of the cast contribute to a work's story and theme. You said presence, he exerts his presence in the way he is spoken about in the way Lena reacts to him That's a genuinely stupid attempt at a defence. Have you never heard of "show, don't tell?" If you need some other character to talk about how important someone is, that's just amateur. Any actually present character would impact their show directly, not second-handedly. I will answer your assertion that he has no relevance to the plot once you tell me what you think the plot is. The plot doesn't change depending on who watches it. It has a synopsis written next to it, that's the plot. Rather than trying to fit your answer to match with whatever I say, why not just say outright how he is relevant? Further to you likely not understanding the plot, you clearly don't understand the context of the story either, or that the whole point of agency is you judge it within the constraints imposed. "Likely," that's an assumption. Explain what the plot and context really is, if I "likely" don't know them. Additionally explain what "agency is judged within the constraints imposed" is supposed to mean, since that doesn't make any sense on its own - if a character doesn't drive the plot forwards, they have no agency in its proceedings, that's constant. Shin chooses the how, the where and the why to an extent that has earned his reputation with military command. Meaningless. We're not arguing how important he is as a member of a fictional military force, but as a character in a piece of literature. He certainly doesn't immediately place his trust in her, you don't see that because you don't understand his character. And now you're rather desperately employing circular reasoning by linking your false assertion about his personality to his development. "You don't see that because you don't understand his character" is a fallacious statement. If what you claim is the case, point out where such a thing occurs. And while you're on that, point out, quote blocks and all, where I have used circular logic, because I simply haven't. What was rude about my assumption, these are common themes in anime, plenty of people like shows of that type, I do too when they're done well. Making the assumption is rude. What you think I might possibly enjoy doesn't alter any part of the work in question, and bringing such a baseless statement up is completely pointless. Did you think I was trying to offer a proof in my previous comment !? If you weren't, then what makes you think you have the authority to state what isn't proof? Why would I bother to do that since you have offered no proofs either. Your doing so is not dependent on if I did, and, as previously established, without showing yourself to do the opposite, you cannot truthfully say that I didn't. You asked for goals, I outlined them and now you've come up with some ridiculous nonsense about "a prevailing ideology" that an entire being is built around. Doesn't Shim have a very particular temperament, I also asked for an example of a character with a distinguishing trait you didn't give one. And you dismiss him hearing the Legion as "flavour" when it's one of the cruxes of the story. That's a genuinely stupid response, what do you think the words in a story are for? No-one had to say how important he is, they way the other characters speak about him shows how important he is. Which synopsis are you referring to, not the MAL one I hope, after all what has that got to do with the plot? So you don't understand agency it's simply the ability to make a choice, if you are constrained in your choices then small things count. But let's use your dumb definition, what drove the plot forwards, by that definition linking his handler to the voices of the legion is agency, choosing to face his brother is agency, saying "we go this way" is agency, inviting Lena to follow is agency. You also don't understand what a proof is, I'm not offering proofs because there are no proofs to offer. What you think is proof is just your own opinion, I happen to think it's a ridiculous opinion backed up by nothing better than your continued posturing. |
borderlinerSep 13, 2021 1:25 PM
| Quantum ille canis est in fenestra |
Thigh_Tide said: I've already addressed that in this thread. I read the book, and even if I didn't, me dropping it doesn't automatically mean I'm wrong. @addie1998, prancing around other people who disagree with me won't improve the result of the debate you had with me. It's up there if you want to go back and have another crack at it, but until then your contributions to this thread are meaningless, as I've already shown your opinion on the matter is insubstantial. @borderliner, what you may think is sad or funny is also entirely non-contributory to the conversation at hand. Unfortunately, you do not get to chose what I express to another poster. But just to return the favour I had a look at addie1998's first post and your response. I defined what a personality constitutes for a fictional character earlier in this thread. None of what you have listed demonstrated Shin having a personality. wow, that was condescending, and well, since when do you personally get to define stuff like that. (unless perhaps you can turn up the research that you were citing) |
| Quantum ille canis est in fenestra |
borderliner said: You asked for goals, I outlined them and now you've come up with some ridiculous nonsense about "a prevailing ideology" that an entire being is built around. I already explained that you outlined mere intentions, not motivations, as the term refers to. What I spoke of is not at all nonsense, as you will find that every single good character is rooted in a singular, unique desire that informs their worldview and choices. If you think this is nonsense, explain why. You also failed to answer the questions I posed in this point previously. Doesn't Shim have a very particular temperament, I also asked for an example of a character with a distinguishing trait you didn't give one. And you dismiss him hearing the Legion as "flavour" when it's one of the cruxes of the story. If he does, explain what it is and how it is used to contrast him against others. I gave examples of what distinguishing traits are, bringing in specific alternative characters would be moving the goalpost. We're talking about why Shin is a bad character full stop, not bad in comparison to someone else. If hearing the Legion is meant to be a crux, explain how it reflects on the plot or theme of the piece. That's a genuinely stupid response, what do you think the words in a story are for? No-one had to say how important he is, they way the other characters speak about him shows how important he is. As I said previously, show, don't tell, one of the most basic tools of writing. It's an attempt at artificially inflating a character. Consider - If nobody in the story ever spoke about how great and strong he was, would that reduce his importance to the plot (assuming he were)? Which synopsis are you referring to, not the MAL one I hope, after all what has that got to do with the plot? A synopsis is "the outline of the plot of a piece of media." It tells you what the plot is. You also failed to do what you said you intended to, and claim why you find he was relevant. Do so. So you don't understand agency it's simply the ability to make a choice, if you are constrained in your choices then small things count. Completely incorrect. As I said, agency is the ability to push the story forward, to alter what is expected to follow in order to aid pursuit of their desire, as I spoke of earlier. By your misunderstanding of the term, the protagonist choosing what type of cereal to have in the morning, or choosing whether to wash his left or right hand first, would all be "agency," yet such minor, constrained choices have absolutely nothing to do with the story. But let's use your dumb definition, what drove the plot forwards, by that definition linking his handler to the voices of the legion is agency, choosing to face his brother is agency, saying "we go this way" is agency, inviting Lena to follow is agency. Straw man, see above. You've also failed to explain "what the plot and context really is" as requested, casting doubt on your assumption that I don't understand them. You've also failed to back up your idea that I am using circular reasoning, or demonstrate where events occurred as you claimed, as requested, which must also mean those points are to be discarded. You also don't understand what a proof is, I'm not offering proofs because there are no proofs to offer. I already discussed that you aren't an authority on what is and isn't proof. Define a proof, then, if you think otherwise. What you think is proof is just your own opinion, I happen to think it's a ridiculous opinion backed up by nothing better than your continued posturing. However, your disagreement with that "opinion" has been shown to involve a lack of basic knowledge in literary terms and concepts, so it amounts to nothing. Until you can prove otherwise, what I've said is just a fact. If you think that what I say is backed up by nothing, you are free to attempt to probe into it. Ask why this, why that, until you find that nothing you believe is behind everything I've said. Except, of course, you won't, because I've actually put thought into my critique. borderliner said: Unfortunately, you do not get to chose what I express to another poster. I never said you couldn't say that. You're free to talk about me however you want, I'm just reminding you that it means nothing to this debate and wouldn't at all aid your point should you intend to bring it up. wow, that was condescending, and well, since when do you personally get to define stuff like that. (unless perhaps you can turn up the research that you were citing) What you interpret as condescension is likewise irrelevant. The definition of the word isn't my own, nor anything that needs researching, it's simply what the word means. If you think you have an alternative interpretation, say so now, but you'll find it demonstrably inaccurate. |
| Well I for one already loved Lain. |
Silent2000 said: Thigh_Tide said: Using PTSD to excuse the bastard's lack of personality is both an immature and offensive misunderstanding of the condition. If you can get attached to that complete literary failure, you must be as shallow as he is. Do you have a master's degree on psychology? Are you sure you're not the one who's being offensive to those people who have PTSD Right literature idk it essentially sounds like elitism to me and then you come here and implying that these people who like this show must be shallows because duh "literary failure" is a pretty weak no true scotsman type argument tbh. Were you in a bad mood or just totally being in disingenuous I've already spoken of the issues with Shin's portrayal as a character with PTSD and how it may paint those actually suffering from the condition in a negative light earlier in this thread, refer to that. "Elitism" is a meaningless statement, and you'll find no use of the Scotsman fallacy in anything I said. He is a poorly written, empty character, and if someone finds themselves relating to them, then they themselves must be equally empty. If you think otherwise, you're entitled to justify why. |
| Well I for one already loved Lain. |
You really haven't explained anything. You simply think that Shin is a poorly written character in a story by some hack author. I contend that Shin is a deliberately constrained character written that way with intent. Your "proof" is a bunch of statements about how a character "should" be written that you have transmuted into absolute edicts. I contend that meeting arbitrary criteria is trumped by telling an engaging story with compelling protagonists. The stats available on MAL bear out my contention. |
| Quantum ille canis est in fenestra |
borderliner said: You really haven't explained anything. You simply think that Shin is a poorly written character in a story by some hack author. I contend that Shin is a deliberately constrained character written that way with intent. Your "proof" is a bunch of statements about how a character "should" be written that you have transmuted into absolute edicts. I contend that meeting arbitrary criteria is trumped by telling an engaging story with compelling protagonists. The stats available on MAL bear out my contention. Well, yes, I am discussing how a character "should" be written, in order to be a compelling protagonist. The "criteria" I am talking about is precisely how to write an engaging story. The fact that I can tell you that, that I know how to write, is supposed to make me wrong how, exactly? All you're really saying in deference of how I've laid out the issues with the story is that you somehow like the show regardless, but it's already been shown that you fail to understand the most basic of terminology and technique so what does that amount to, really? If you close your eyes and can't understand what's going on, it's a good show? Ridiculous. If you think what I've talked about is "arbitrary," explain why you think that is the case. Otherwise, that's just a groundless statement, much like when you earlier brought up circular reasoning then failed to point to where I did so, despite being asked to twice. And of course, bringing up the stats on MAL is just an embarrassing fallacy. Most importantly, I posed several damning questions in my last response, and you haven't even attempted to answer them. If you won't make any attempt to do so, I will assume you realise and accept how they disprove your view. |
| Well I for one already loved Lain. |
Silent2000 said: Thigh_Tide said: I've already spoken of the issues with Shin's portrayal as a character with PTSD and how it may paint those actually suffering from the condition in a negative light earlier in this thread, refer to that. "Elitism" is a meaningless statement, and you'll find no use of the Scotsman fallacy in anything I said. He is a poorly written, empty character, and if someone finds themselves relating to them, then they themselves must be equally empty. If you think otherwise, you're entitled to justify why. Okay you're not an expert how psychology works and you don't have any proof that this is what happening to those who suffer from ptsd In conclusion you're just saying this is how a story "should be" written ehhh, who are you again? Im done with this stupid argument Explain from where you figure out that I'm not an expert on psychology. Am I to believe you are? Yes, I am saying how a story should be written in order to be good, as you can see in my previous comment. Me knowing what is needed to make things good is not something you can take offence at, that's like getting angry at a doctor for giving you a diagnosis. |
| Well I for one already loved Lain. |
Silent2000 said: Thigh_Tide said: Explain from where you figure out that I'm not an expert on psychology. Am I to believe you are? Yes, I am saying how a story should be written in order to be good, as you can see in my previous comment. Me knowing what is needed to make things good is not something you can take offence at, that's like getting angry at a doctor for giving you a diagnosis. So you are saying you are better than the author himself lmfao what books did you write huh? Saying I am better than the author is like saying I am taller than a dwarf. It's not an accolade worth boasting about. I write under my real name, so I'm not linking anything, but I've an anthology or two under my belt. More importantly, you're dodging the question I asked - Am I to believe you are a qualified psychologist? |
| Well I for one already loved Lain. |
Silent2000 said: Thigh_Tide said: Saying I am better than the author is like saying I am taller than a dwarf. It's not an accolade worth boasting about. I write under my real name, so I'm not linking anything, but I've an anthology or two under my belt. More importantly, you're dodging the question I asked - Am I to believe you are a qualified psychologist? I ask you first did I? So in conclusion this series is a pile of shit and the author is a worthless artist as you have said because you claimed to be a writer yourself? lmao No, that's not at all the reason. You're making a blatant and ridiculous Straw Man. I listed many reasons why the series is, quote, "a plie of shit," namely weak attempts at character that lack depth and development, as well as struggling to make a coherent narrative that utilised said characters in any meaningful way. None of that is in any way dependent on my own profession - I don't need to write myself to know that such things are inarguably bad and speak of a lack of talent. You "asked me first," then assumed an answer. I'm asking you how you assumed that answer. |
| Well I for one already loved Lain. |
More topics from this board
Poll: » 86 Episode 9 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Stark700 - Jun 5, 2021 |
466 |
by VarunaBles
»»
Sep 27, 7:50 AM |
|
Poll: » 86 Episode 3 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Stark700 - Apr 24, 2021 |
303 |
by shingekiN0kyojin
»»
Sep 20, 11:07 AM |
|
» Will there be an 86 Season 2 ? Only time will tell i guess π₯ ( 1 2 )JUSTDAVE212 - Oct 11, 2024 |
88 |
by Nano_Frieren
»»
Sep 13, 8:56 AM |
|
» Series 8.6th anniversaryAP24 - Aug 22 |
19 |
by SATAN19
»»
Sep 13, 4:41 AM |
|
Poll: » 86 Episode 10 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Stark700 - Jun 12, 2021 |
275 |
by narlzac85
»»
Sep 3, 7:57 PM |