Risa92 said: Here I disagree again, because I think it's nobody's place to tell other people how to spend their time or what they should consume or shouldn't. Instead of putting the dogma of "don't watch those isekai" on people, rather try to get them excited for other shows too. You actually did a good job arguing here; thank you. I'm going to defend the notion of trying to tell people how they should spend their time, though: People are stupid. And it's not just that they don't know what's good for them; there are oppressors in the world, and these oppressors actively teach people to like bad things. Like cigarettes, Harry Potter, and the abomination that is hot dogs with cheese inside. People are taught to waste their money gambling or buying lottery tickets, and they're taught to be addicted to political propaganda. It is good and right to intervene, to teach people otherwise. This is the basis of activism, and of all politics really. Of course, as you say, it is also possible to exhort people to like the good, but attacking the bad is also important. And it is indeed possible to be able to tell better from worse art; this is the whole of literary criticism. But more concretely, we live here on MAL, which is an enormous ratings aggregator, and to the extent we believe that is good we believe in saying some anime is better than other anime—and we expend a great deal of effort in doing so. For me in particular, I am a punisher of detective anime and speculation fodder; these are bad and lazy art, and they function primarily to dupe people into wasting their time (and spending their money) on rote stuff simply because capitalism allows these works to net a profit. Surely it's clear that not everything that makes money is good, that some of what makes money is bad, and that some things that flop are more deserving of money than others that succeed. EDIT: I see that you say some more: Risa92 said: I go farther and say professional criticis shouldn't be recognized that much as they are. There lot of movie fanboys and close-minded people, who don't think for themselves but just copy-paste the opinion of some critics, who seemed convincing to them and those people don't have really varied tastes or more open look to everything outside of their comfort zone. This isn't a complete analysis, because in addition to "professional critics" there is also the air: The standard public forum, and the milieu of everyday conversation, are both socially and historically determined. People who blindly follow the crowd are just as blind as people who hang on every word of their favorite critic. Nobody formulates everything they think for themselves, from the ground up; very little of what each of us thinks is original to us. I agree that the popular critics we have now suck and shouldn't be recognized, but that doesn't mean I don't think there can't be better critics, or that there aren't people already out there who are smarter than the critics. Because our society has an unhealthy overemphasis on STEM, we don't hear much about famous philosophers, historians, or literature professors, but they definitely exist. If such people bothered to get into anime criticism, they'd sweep all the pretenders (e.g., Gigguk) before them. Part of the reason we don't have serious anime criticism is that people don't take anime seriously anyway. This is partially anime's fault for being mostly crap. But even crap can be analyzed, and given that so many people partake of this crap it's good if we get good analysis of it. |
auroralooseAug 6, 2023 2:46 PM
| I love him who is ashamed when the dice fall in his favour and who then asks: Am I then a cheat? – for he wants to perish. |
| Every trend will meet its end it's no big deal tell me of your favorit meal how will the answer help in this situation simple, like all trends, it will die of saturation RIP isekai 2032 |
| Kingdom Come Deliverance II GOTY 2025 Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 is another worthy GOTY contender I tip my fedora to Sandfall Interactive, excellent debut gentlemen! If digital buying isn't owning, then piracy isn't stealing |
MangoSamurai said: BilboBaggins365 said: The idea you need to make people enjoy stuff they don't like at the moment because you don't like current trends is entitled though. Who are you to decide what "art" is (I hate the idea of associating terms like cinema or art with some factor of quality). Plus it's easy to say these decades were so amazing with such risk taking shows. Yeah the industry back then wasn't just Monster and Mushishi it was also Love Hina and DearS. Shows that were catering to the "lowest denominator" just like isekai. I want more mil dramas again. I would love sci fi and mecha to return but it's a business I get that. I will go to where I am being best served. If I can't get sci fi and war dramas here I go to other mediums like novel fiction. That's why I am here in the first place instead of watching primarily Western animation. Personally I find the complaining about isekai more annoying than the trend. I barely watch modern isekai. I think in the last six years I have only given a handful a try some good like (Re Zero and Konosuba) some not so good (Shield Hero, Overlord and Death March). I don't like how a lot of Japanese writers take on typical DnD plots so I don't actively look for them unless they get a lot of praise (and end up actually being quite good like Frieren). I enjoy anime for what it does have and I will go to actually good fantasy writers like Jordan or Sanderson. Guess what I still have way more seasonals than I know what to do with from a variety of genres. Fair if you feel that way but to me it's just another back in my day take that I don't really see. People overfocus on isekai but man you know how many shows that were received decently well or other highly anticipated titles I could name that aren't isekai? Tons. You can make any decade look amazing if you only focus on that. Plus again what right does anyone have to determine what "cinema" is. Lots of isekai fans enjoy the genre and they are fair to. If you don't like it then you got to market what you like better. Because that is what this discussion actually is about. Here is the thing nothing about Vinland Saga, Monster even Mushishi is that creative. Sure of course I think it's way better executed than many isekai but you could do that within the isekai genre as well. Ask yourself why are Isekai shows made in the first place? Engagement right? You said it yourself "people overfocus of Isekai'. So with a feedback loop that is what will get made, in return those shows will get more funding, in return more people engage with it, and now what.. you are stuck in a lull. With almost the impossibility for any sort of different media compete. I am anti monopoly. Your direct engagement or complience leads to the failure or prominence of shows to return. That is in fact why i am criticizing fans. the question is less "who are you to decide what cinema is" and moreso: "why are you spending your time on, and if you do - do so wisely". People are unaware the power they posses. Why would i be critical of people who watch shorts all day? Because it affects me in the end and an entire market. I am not saying i know best, i am saying go out there and explore for yourself. Also There is a reason why Vinland Saga, Monster even Mushishi are critically acclaimed, they defy the majority of any anime tropes, and they deserve to ge treated with respect because of it. Isekai can be good, but they are not, they arent because thats not whats valued in the feedback loop i mentioned before. What gets popularity is the same cliche tropes over and over again. The issue isnt with Isekai, it lies much larger. The same are all true in Superhero movies. They could be great but momentarily in culture they inspire nothing but mediocrity. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLNuqYgmwS0. There are artist working decades perfecting their craft only for conglomorates to create market testtubes for the masses to swep i up and you think thats a fair fight. Its not, it doesnt have to be. But it could be. One I said overfocus in terms of discussion both praise and hate which you are contributing to because in terms of people actually watching isekai? I mean if you aren't a big name like Re Zero or Jobless the amount of people paying attention to you is no different than any seasonal. Plus I think shows like Pluto, Apothecary Diaries, Frieren, Spice and Wolf Remake, Metallic Rogue, Uzumaki, Lazarus and many other titles I am looking forward to will do well enough if the anime is received well enough. Still again how do you claim to be anti monopoly? Instead of supporting what Kadokawa publishing you want us to support Kodansha? A decent amount of those LN start out as self published web novels in the first place. I know what you actually mean (stop the domination of isekai/and again I reject the idea that isekai in fact dominates our industry) but again this term just feels so over the top to what we are talking about. The feedback loop occurs because it's profitable and yeah attacking people for liking content they enjoy isn't going to change that. If anything they are going to just harden their response to critiques see how the MCU fanbase responded against Scorsese (and his comments weren't even hostile) Secondly I mean no you are "criticizing" fans because you are upset you don't get as much content out of the medium that you want. Like I don't pretend I care about cinema or whatever that means. I know what I want and ideally I want more of it. So sure I will say hey go check this out, hey this seasonal is good whatever to make my small contribution to drive attention to it. I am not going to be some self righteous kill joy telling fans of generic isekai to stop watching because at the end of the day they are having fun. I may not understand it but that is their prerogative. There is a difference between critiquing a work and critiquing fans for enjoying the work. The first is justifiable the second you are just being a killjoy. Finally again why is it just that those works are acclaimed? Plenty of people hate or don't get those works. They honestly don't defy any tropes. Monster is a classic crime drama, Vinland Saga starts out a classic viking adventure story probably the only "trope it defies" is genre switching and I guarantee that has been done even if I am not informed to tell you where. Even then the whole anti violence take is pretty classic anime trope writing even if I think Yukimura does it well. Mushishi's takes on nature and family are nothing new and they basically are just ghost stories. In reality nothing here is new. Just because it's less common in anime doesn't mean I am going to neglect my experience with tons of other media. And that's okay because artistic innovation is quite rare and is something that we shouldn't focus on. Again a decent amount of Isekai suck or are meh because they don't execute classic fantasy tropes well. You could totally take a classic DnD setting with every trope imaginable and do a great story on par with some of those titles you named in the hands of the right creator. I mean should be obvious because of my name but yeah Tolkien is my favourite writer. The thing is he is acclaimed not because he invented a lot of high fantasy tropes (I mean he was stealing ideas from classic Western mainly Germanic myths and stories) but because he executed a great adventure story well. And even still that is a subjective point not everyone gets Tolkien. Regardless I like Mushishi, Monster, VS but it's because I know what I like and want more of it. I am not going to stand up here and say all bow before my superior taste this is what anime needs to be. At the end of the day I watch for entertainment. The reason I watch Interspecies Reviewers and Monster is the exact same. Some people don't get the appeal of those works and do get entertainment from some meh isekai and who am I to deny them? I am just one more fan. The market will decide who deserves to get catered to. There are enough unique and different works out there and on the horizon. If you want things to be different well you have to show where the profit is. At the end of the day I don't care you like those shows, I don't care if you hate current anime or the direction of it but yeah I don't like the overall self righteous of fans who claim they care about art when it's just please cater to me more. I have become jaded with certain fandoms and mediums but then I just either leave or reduce my time investment in and go where I am being catered to. |
BilboBaggins365Aug 6, 2023 3:05 PM
SkyfallStar said: Dulonkk said: However, I think that SAO serves as one of the most prominent influences to many modern isekais that we see released seasonally. The fantasy setting, the gamification, quests, magic, and all of the other elements that make SAO are prominent influences to these generic isekai shows that we see. That does not make SAO an isekai anime, but it does make SAO an influence or a reference and a cultural barometer to where Japan was at the time SAO started publishing and circulating. The popularity of games such as the Dragon Quest series, the popularity of SAO, and the commonality between SAO and the many trope-filled isekais which came after it aren't a coincidence. So, to me, my stance on SAO is that it isn't an isekai but it was influential to many which came after it for popularizing many of the tropes that we see within them. Escapism sells no matter how you dress it up. I agree with this to an extent as well. At it's cored it did most definetely inspire escapistic stories that just happen quite often to be isekais. But one thing many people confuse that the main influence was actually promoting light novels to anime adaptation scene as being the first major success in that kind of work. There are already were some amount of similiar stories written before or in parallel with SAO, but SAO got all the "praise" for popularizing those ideas. Though, I would say that the fantasy elements you listed are more thanks to whole JRPG market and what Japanese gamers like. It just happens that a lot of these things aligned with SAO's setting. And isekai elements should be attoned more to Mushoku Tensei that introduced us to a lot of tropes and even isekai truck. I too agree with most of the dialogue between you two on this. Yes, a Virtual World is "another world" as in 'not reality', but for me, isekai means being reicarnated/summoned/teleported to another world, not one you just "log in" to. This is also why, for me, Overlord is an "undecided" if it fits as an isekai. He logged in, but there are certain elements that imply it's similar, but not actually the game world any more. We may never know if the ability to log back out is even possible or ever found. In the end, each person has to decide how strictly they define isekai. For some, it seems, even a game/virtual world qualifies. |
 You're never too old to watch anime. If I ever stop watching anime, check my pulse I'm likely dead. I wake up with coffee & anime, I go to sleep with coffee & anime. Sorry if my sarcasm is bad, it's not my first language. |
| well, depends on how we look at the word. technicaly speaking. I could say my top 3 isekai are: 1. death parade 2. sonny boy 3. spirited away and not be lying. ok listen on a serious note, this does suck. I wouldn't give a single shit if 90% of anime was garbage, as long they at least tried to do something new. there are so many mid-shit isekai. like, for example, last year there was this show called something like sabakoi bisco, and fell off and I ended up thinking it was pretty mid by the end. but it was unique, it had ideas, it did somethings really well, and failed at other aspects. it's a mixed bag, and to me that's worth a lot more than being the 1 bilion-th version of the same exact story but with a slightly different gimick. I just want to ask, has any of these gimick isekai's ever ended? they all just kinda exist for 1 season before people get bored of it. how does a show with a gimmick that wears off, end? I am genuinely curious. |
| Also available at: YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCK8spdL1M_J-z0vO2C7jPLw Second Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@AshPolygonsDo/videos Twitter: https://x.com/APolygons2 Backloggd: https://backloggd.com/games/lib/rating?page=8 IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/user/ur107632777/?ref_=uspf_nv_profile |
petran79 said: That's all about perspective though. Like Miyazaki to be fair I have only seen Spirited Away (one of this most praised works) and Future Boy Conan but while they are well animated and good stories nothing there is that more visionary than any shows that are well done today. I don't get why you guys are concerned with "serious cinema" anyway. We right now are at a plane where anime is vastly more popular than when those guys were at their heights. Lucifrost said: It suffers that it does not get mainstream tv exposure and ads like the 2000s shonen and dragon ball, thus reducing potential viewer numbers. While late elementary schoolers, its most lucrative demographic, are left out. Internet streaming is a completely different metric.That's exactly what Demon Slayer is. MangoSamurai said: But its a shame isnt it? at a time when fans took equal time with their backlog as well as seasonal, people had a much better understanding of the variety of anime. Something being nostalgic does not make it wrong perse, things in ways were better. Cinema fans are always expanding their variety yet animefans have mostly been stagnating. It is a shame when i think of anime as varied medium of shows like Monster, Mushishi, Patlabor, Children of the Sea, etc etc. Yet outsiders, or people with one foot in the door think it is synonymous with things i do not want any relation to. Now that you mentioned cinéma, at that time there were still many auteurs with a vision. But the auteur type of creator is not as popular anymore. Miyazaki is the last of the Mohicans in a way. It also matters that Satoshi Kon left this world. He was one of the few that bridged the gap between Anime and serious cinema and his movies had an audience and critics, delved both in cinema and anime. This helped Anime tremendously being accepted by adult audiences. But that audience and critics did not bother with anime after Satoshi Kon. Mamoru Oshii was similar to Satoshi Kon, but he is semi-retired now. Eg Patlabor 2 was also critically acclaimed abroad. I do not see M. Hosoda bridging that gap. Makoto Shinkai and KyoAni do not target that audience anyway. Same with Studio Trigger, having seen Promare on cinema. Streaming made things actually worse because every service tries to please it's fanbase with the lowest cost possible instead of offering something unique When I think film critic only two images come to mind art snobs or mindless corporate PR guys. Neither is good. I mean Miyazaki only got promoted to get his Oscar because Disney lobbied for him because they were distributing it. You are fair to have your opinion but looking at what is coming out on average no I don't agree. I also don't see the value in catering to the types of people you think we should. Nor do I think guys like Miyazaki or Kon were essential for anime being 'taken seriously" (again why does this matter). It's something I see a lot in mediums that are seen to be for children by some old boomer but again I honestly don't see why it matters to anime fans how we are seen by some cinema elite critic. I rather be dismissed by people like that honestly. |
BilboBaggins365Aug 6, 2023 5:11 PM
APolygons2 said: That is a very good question. I don't think I've ever watched more than a couple of seasons, because I always lose interest in the gimmick even when the show starts off strong.I just want to ask, has any of these gimick isekai's ever ended? they all just kinda exist for 1 season before people get bored of it. how does a show with a gimmick that wears off, end? I am genuinely curious. |
| その目だれの目？ |
| I'm not going to lie that some time ago, before ChatGPT and other AI tools became available to the masses and popular, I had thoughts about how isekai shows might be generated randomly one day, because of how dull and similar they were. The "isekai formula" (let's call it like that) is rather easy to notice and deciphering it shouldn't be hard even for people who are not much into the world of anime. That's why, with knowing pattern that most of isekais follow faithfully to the point of absurd, one could write their own story that wouldn't be any different from "professionally crafted isekai anime's scenario". ;p Risa92 said: Oh damn, hahaha. :D So even without saying a lot about the genre itself, an AI tool can write its own, original story. A good one, to be fair. I'd watch such show. Perhaps just mentioning "isekai" in the prompt field tricked ChatGPT. Maybe it decided to actually create something decent, fitting into general boundaries of the genre, instead of just following the trend present in the anime industry and go with a lazy concept for a generic isekai.You are not that wrong, but ChatGPT wrote me a better isekai than any harem isekai that came out lately. (...) Memore said: For real. Sometimes it might feel you're watching the same show. Hell, not even main characters, but even their harem members have similar looks and roles in the party.I agree, MAJORITY OF ISEKAI WORKS LOOKS LIKE THEY ARE DONE ON ONE FACTORY. |
Adnash said: I'm not going to lie that some time ago, before ChatGPT and other AI tools became available to the masses and popular, I had thoughts about how isekai shows might be generated randomly one day, because of how dull and similar they were. The "isekai formula" (let's call it like that) is rather easy to notice and deciphering it shouldn't be hard even for people who are not much into the world of anime. That's why, with knowing pattern that most of isekais follow faithfully to the point of absurd, one could write their own story that wouldn't be any different from "professionally crafted isekai anime's scenario". ;p Risa92 said: Oh damn, hahaha. :D So even without saying a lot about the genre itself, an AI tool can write its own, original story. A good one, to be fair. I'd watch such show. Perhaps just mentioning "isekai" in the prompt field tricked ChatGPT. Maybe it decided to actually create something decent, fitting into general boundaries of the genre, instead of just following the trend present in the anime industry and go with a lazy concept for a generic isekai.You are not that wrong, but ChatGPT wrote me a better isekai than any harem isekai that came out lately. (...) Memore said: For real. Sometimes it might feel you're watching the same show. Hell, not even main characters, but even their harem members have similar looks and roles in the party.I agree, MAJORITY OF ISEKAI WORKS LOOKS LIKE THEY ARE DONE ON ONE FACTORY. Yes, I absolutely agree with you. Better create nothing or work on something really noticeable than copy-paste same methods and plots in ANY work. |
 |
| why people get mad at isekai always get beyond me, we literally have every season of new anime while only 10% of them being tisekai theme yet people still get bothered by it. |
 |
petran79 said: Did Pokemon need a "push" to "create an adult market?" No! Fans who are raised on these franchises will continue to enjoy them after growing up. Pushing anime as a "mature" hobby hurt the industry in that it led companies to stop dubbing "kiddy" anime such as Doraemon, Detective Conan, Pretty Cure, and your beloved World Masterpiece Theater.Anime needed a push with its own film and animation theory to create an adult market |
| その目だれの目？ |
| Still waiting for a Steampunk Isekai ...that's never gonna happen, is it? |
 |
petran79 said: That's because they dub everything in Italy.Lucifrost said: In the USA maybe but not in Italy. They dubbed even the final 3 WMT series in the 2000s.Did Pokemon need a "push" to "create an adult market?" No! Fans who are raised on these franchises will continue to enjoy them after growing up. Pushing anime as a "mature" hobby hurt the industry in that it led companies to stop dubbing "kiddy" anime such as Doraemon, Detective Conan, Pretty Cure, and your beloved World Masterpiece Theater. |
| その目だれの目？ |
Risa92 said: auroraloose said: You actually did a good job arguing here; thank you. I'm going to defend the notion of trying to tell people how they should spend their time, though: People are stupid. And it's not just that they don't know what's good for them; there are oppressors in the world, and these oppressors actively teach people to like bad things. Like cigarettes, Harry Potter, and the abomination that is hot dogs with cheese inside. People are taught to waste their money gambling or buying lottery tickets, and they're taught to be addicted to political propaganda. It is good and right to intervene, to teach people otherwise. This is the basis of activism, and of all politics really. Of course, as you say, it is also possible to exhort people to like the good, but attacking the bad is also important. And it is indeed possible to be able to tell better from worse art; this is the whole of literary criticism. But more concretely, we live here on MAL, which is an enormous ratings aggregator, and to the extent we believe that is good we believe in saying some anime is better than other anime—and we expend a great deal of effort in doing so. For me in particular, I am a punisher of detective anime and speculation fodder; these are bad and lazy art, and they function primarily to dupe people into wasting their time (and spending their money) on rote stuff simply because capitalism allows these works to net a profit. Surely it's clear that not everything that makes money is good, that some of what makes money is bad, and that some things that flop are more deserving of money than others that succeed. Wow ... now that sounds pretentious lol. So, let's someone who's self-delusional enough to think they are both you, could dictate you how you spend your time, logging out discussing on an anime site and doing something productive instead? I don't think you should stay away from other people's business and don't try to influence how other people spend their time. I don't see any difference between your analyses and mine in their directions and aims, in that you make pronouncements about what society is like, how it should change, and what people should be doing. The difference is that yours is the standard capitalist ideology/common sense one finds all over the place, while mine is against bad ideologies. |
| I love him who is ashamed when the dice fall in his favour and who then asks: Am I then a cheat? – for he wants to perish. |
petran79 said: BilboBaggins365 said: That's all about perspective though. Like Miyazaki to be fair I have only seen Spirited Away (one of this most praised works) and Future Boy Conan but while they are well animated and good stories nothing there is that more visionary than any shows that are well done today. I don't get why you guys are concerned with "serious cinema" anyway. We right now are at a plane where anime is vastly more popular than when those guys were at their heights. When I think film critic only two images come to mind art snobs or mindless corporate PR guys. Neither is good. I mean Miyazaki only got promoted to get his Oscar because Disney lobbied for him because they were distributing it. You are fair to have your opinion but looking at what is coming out on average no I don't agree. I also don't see the value in catering to the types of people you think we should. Nor do I think guys like Miyazaki or Kon were essential for anime being 'taken seriously" (again why does this matter). It's something I see a lot in mediums that are seen to be for children by some old boomer but again I honestly don't see why it matters to anime fans how we are seen by some cinema elite critic. I rather be dismissed by people like that honestly. This was necessary in the 90s and 2000s. The thing is that even Akira needed that kind of push by cinema critics, to make Anime attractive to older audiences. Cowboy Bebop movie got a similar treatment. Prior to Akira there was a similar effort with Choujin Locke in the 80s, but it failed because at that time there was not an anime market for teens and adults and they cut some scenes too. Miyazaki, Takahata, Oshii and others had already participated in Anime series for kids that were popular worldwide in the 70s and 80s, though not so much in English speaking regions. Canada imported some French dubbed series at least. It is just that back then no one was interested in knowing more about the names behind the series. Only when films like gits or princess mononoke were shown abroad were their names starting to become relevant. But on the other hand this also created a cult following behind their names, which is some of the worst things that can happen to any artist. there was not an adult market outside Japan and the only anime movie on cinemas would be Pokemon, while on TV it was seen as cheap yet some times controversial kids entertainment Anime needed a push with its own film and animation theory to create an adult market Again I don't see how Miyazaki specifically did that though. Sure stuff like Akira and GiTS I can see that but Ghilbi films I feel were just another title Disney could push alongside other media they feltl was targeted to kids. Secondly maybe anime isn't taken seriously for longer but again why did anime actually take off internationally? It's because there was a huge domestic industry of animation that hit on a variety topics and had been since the 60s and longer. The internet would have eventually caught on and like other foreign media dispered and popularized it. I mean that is why we are currently having a boom right now. Again I don't see how Miyazaki specifically did that though. Sure stuff like Akira and GiTS I can see that but Ghilbi films I feel were just another title Disney could push alongside other media they felt was targeted to kids. Secondly maybe anime isn't taken seriously for longer but again why did anime actually take off internationally? It's because there was a huge domestic industry of animation that hit on a variety topics and had been since the 60s and longer. The internet would have eventually caught on and like other foreign media dispersed and popularized it. I mean that is why we are currently having a boom right now. |
auroraloose said: Risa92 said: Wow ... now that sounds pretentious lol. So, let's someone who's self-delusional enough to think they are both you, could dictate you how you spend your time, logging out discussing on an anime site and doing something productive instead? I don't think you should stay away from other people's business and don't try to influence how other people spend their time. I don't see any difference between your analyses and mine in their directions and aims, in that you make pronouncements about what society is like, how it should change, and what people should be doing. The difference is that yours is the standard capitalist ideology/common sense one finds all over the place, while mine is against bad ideologies. If you want to argue that complaining people don't like the same Japanese cartoons as you is bad ideology sure. I wouldn't use such a self righteous term. You can say whatever you like but a spoonful of honey attracts more than vinegar. Even if you are so full of yourself to have some belief that you have insight on what is actually good and bad your phrasing will never get a single person to care. Literary criticism may identify trends, tropes, certain story formats even things we may agree as objective problems like plot holes however no they never will judge the quality of an art piece to someone. Even again in objective cases of flaws like plot holes that one plot hole's meaning and impact on quality is variable to the person. So even if we take a very scientific approach to literary criticism it still would not determine the actual quality of a work to an individual person. Art is emotion and to argue that someone should go against their emotion simply because another person tells them it's wrong rather considering for themselves if it is wrong.... that is just again self righteous grandstanding. You have no right to shame another for simply not valuing the same things you do. You want to critique art fine but if you make it personal where you argue this person is an idiot for liking this yeah I am sorry you are just a snob who is full of themself and isn't as intelligent as they may believe. This isn't serious business it's entertainment and no matter how much art can talk about our world and experience it should be treated simply as that. I would go so far to say that a decent amount of problems today within the media space is that many have taken media way too seriously as some force of good when it should be treated as the bread and games nonsense it is. |
BilboBaggins365Aug 7, 2023 12:17 PM
BilboBaggins365 said: auroraloose said: I don't see any difference between your analyses and mine in their directions and aims, in that you make pronouncements about what society is like, how it should change, and what people should be doing. The difference is that yours is the standard capitalist ideology/common sense one finds all over the place, while mine is against bad ideologies. If you want to argue that complaining people don't like the same Japanese cartoons as you is bad ideology sure. I wouldn't use such a self righteous term. You can say whatever you like but a spoonful of honey attracts more than vinegar. Even if you are so full of yourself to have some belief that you have insight on what is actually good and bad your phrasing will never get a single person to care. Literary criticism may identify trends, tropes, certain story formats even things we may agree as objective problems like plot holes however no they never will judge the quality of an art piece to someone. Even again in objective cases of flaws like plot holes that one plot hole's meaning and impact on quality is variable to the person. So even if we take a very scientific approach to literary criticism it still would not determine the actual quality of a work to an individual person. Art is emotion and to argue that someone should go against their emotion simply because another person tells them it's wrong rather considering for themselves if it is wrong.... that is just again self righteous grandstanding. You have no right to shame another for simply not valuing the same things you do. You want to critique art fine but if you make it personal where you argue this person is an idiot for liking this yeah I am sorry you are just a snob who is full of themself and isn't as intelligent as they may believe. This isn't serious business it's entertainment and no matter how much art can talk about our world and experience it should be treated simply as that. But oh, literary criticism absolutely encompasses an academic study of entertainment. What you say it cannot do—explain the quality of a work to an individual person—is exactly what it does. And what you say should not be done, go against emotion, is precisely what we do all the time in politics and communal life. Further, it is not I who shame people, but the monstrous capitalist culture industry that enslaves people to evil entertainment that shames people. I wish to set them free and elevate them. Ideology is precisely the word for the argument you just gave, as ultimately it excuses evil governance. But if not everyone wants to learn, fine. He who has ears to hear, let him hear. I think the problem is that our civilization has accustomed everyone to being quite boring. Have some hope, and live a little. |
| I love him who is ashamed when the dice fall in his favour and who then asks: Am I then a cheat? – for he wants to perish. |
auroraloose said: BilboBaggins365 said: If you want to argue that complaining people don't like the same Japanese cartoons as you is bad ideology sure. I wouldn't use such a self righteous term. You can say whatever you like but a spoonful of honey attracts more than vinegar. Even if you are so full of yourself to have some belief that you have insight on what is actually good and bad your phrasing will never get a single person to care. Literary criticism may identify trends, tropes, certain story formats even things we may agree as objective problems like plot holes however no they never will judge the quality of an art piece to someone. Even again in objective cases of flaws like plot holes that one plot hole's meaning and impact on quality is variable to the person. So even if we take a very scientific approach to literary criticism it still would not determine the actual quality of a work to an individual person. Art is emotion and to argue that someone should go against their emotion simply because another person tells them it's wrong rather considering for themselves if it is wrong.... that is just again self righteous grandstanding. You have no right to shame another for simply not valuing the same things you do. You want to critique art fine but if you make it personal where you argue this person is an idiot for liking this yeah I am sorry you are just a snob who is full of themself and isn't as intelligent as they may believe. This isn't serious business it's entertainment and no matter how much art can talk about our world and experience it should be treated simply as that. But oh, literary criticism absolutely encompasses an academic study of entertainment. What you say it cannot do—explain the quality of a work to an individual person—is exactly what it does. And what you say should not be done, go against emotion, is precisely what we do all the time in politics and communal life. Further, it is not I who shame people, but the monstrous capitalist culture industry that enslaves people to evil entertainment that shames people. I wish to set them free and elevate them. Ideology is precisely the word for the argument you just gave, as ultimately it excuses evil governance. But if not everyone wants to learn, fine. He who has ears to hear, let him hear. I think the problem is that our civilization has accustomed everyone to being quite boring. Have some hope, and live a little. You can evaluate the success and failures of political theory by judging utility and even then yeah what a just or good society is very debatable...just like art. Those topics aren't hard sciences but again unlike entertainment they actually can impact someone's life. Therefore, it's worth actually taking seriously. Entertainment does not have purpose beyond giving someone some 20 minutes of escapism from their life. It's not like art before capitalism was better. I mean define the ideal period for art by your Marxist standards (or whatever you believe in). Art can express many things such as yeah ideology. No matter the message or intent the purpose of art though at the end of the day is just to be a source of escapism for someone for a brief moment in their mostly boring lives. Or something else of that nature to impress, to entice take your pick but it's always about some base appeal. I have read novels from Antiquity, seen enough paintings and sculptures, dramas and the like from a variety of cultures to feel that way. There is no higher purpose of art beyond giving us a bit of a break and to be lost in the fantastic and mundane elements of life. Sure literary criticism is academic and again you can look at it from that perspective but at the end of the day functionally beyond maybe giving some people again something interesting to read to again escape their boring lives...it is functionally worthless. No one reads a film review or analysis by some academic because they think it's going to better themselves or society. They do it because hey I like this film, hate this film or just generally find it interesting and I am going to listen to someone who knows more about this medium than me to explain to me why I like hate or find this film interesting. That is it. At the end of the day a critic can tell me hey this film has tons of plot holes and even if they academically prove that to me if I say "but who cares" what is the response then? Nothing because I still like the film. I am not an idiot for doing so I am just responding to the electricity in my brain telling me this is enjoyable. It is very rare even when someone tackles media academically I find people ever changing their opinions. People just either seek people that agree with them or say well agree to disagree. Also boring is good. I am happy with boring there are a lot worse outcomes than that. |
BilboBaggins365Aug 7, 2023 12:56 PM
petran79 said: ? Are you arguing anime in the 80s and 90s was sustained by Europe? I am just confused what you are arguing here? BilboBaggins365 said: In the 80s Japanese banks used to give huge loans to European countries. We are talking about hundreds of billions of dollars, which eventually was a factor in Japan's 90s collapse too. Japanese goods and media did profit from that deal. Again I don't see how Miyazaki specifically did that though. Sure stuff like Akira and GiTS I can see that but Ghilbi films I feel were just another title Disney could push alongside other media they felt was targeted to kids. Secondly maybe anime isn't taken seriously for longer but again why did anime actually take off internationally? It's because there was a huge domestic industry of animation that hit on a variety topics and had been since the 60s and longer. The internet would have eventually caught on and like other foreign media dispersed and popularized it. I mean that is why we are currently having a boom right now. |
BilboBaggins365 said: auroraloose said: But oh, literary criticism absolutely encompasses an academic study of entertainment. What you say it cannot do—explain the quality of a work to an individual person—is exactly what it does. And what you say should not be done, go against emotion, is precisely what we do all the time in politics and communal life. Further, it is not I who shame people, but the monstrous capitalist culture industry that enslaves people to evil entertainment that shames people. I wish to set them free and elevate them. Ideology is precisely the word for the argument you just gave, as ultimately it excuses evil governance. But if not everyone wants to learn, fine. He who has ears to hear, let him hear. I think the problem is that our civilization has accustomed everyone to being quite boring. Have some hope, and live a little. You can evaluate the success and failures of political theory by judging utility and even then yeah what a just or good society is very debatable...just like art. Those topics aren't hard sciences but again unlike entertainment they actually can impact someone's life. Therefore, it's worth actually taking seriously. Entertainment does not have purpose beyond giving someone some 20 minutes of escapism from their life. It's not like art before capitalism was better. I mean define the ideal period for art by your Marxist standards (or whatever you believe in). Art can express many things such as yeah ideology. No matter the message or intent the purpose of art though at the end of the day is just to be a source of escapism for someone for a brief moment in their mostly boring lives. Or something else of that nature to impress, to entice take your pick but it's always about some base appeal. I have novels from Antiquity, seen enough paintings and sculptures, dramas and the like from a variety of cultures to feel that way. There is no higher purpose of art beyond giving us a bit of a break and to be lost in the fantastic and mundane elements of life. Sure literary criticism is academic and again you can look at it from that perspective but at the end of the day functionally beyond maybe giving some people again something interesting to read to again escape their boring lives...it is functionally worthless. No one reads a film review or analysis by some academic because they think it's going to be better themselves or society. They do it because hey I like this film, hate this film or just generally find it interesting and I am going to listen to someone who knows more about this medium than me to explain to me why I like hate or find this film interesting. That is it. At the end of the day a critic can tell me hey this film has tons of plot holes and even if they academically prove that to me if I say "but who cares" what is the response then? Nothing because I still like the film. I am not an idiot for doing so I am just responding to the electricity in my brain telling me this is enjoyable. Also boring is good. I am happy with boring there are a lot worse outcomes than that. You could have been angrier, and you weren't, so thank you. That was a good and honorable response. As to boredom, and as to who actually cares: The thing is that human beings need narrative to live. It's narrative that gives us a notion of what we're doing in our lives, and gives us satisfaction. We really do get our ideas of how to live from art and its narratives; if we can't imagine a narrative for our lives, we really don't know what to do with ourselves. So bad narratives, like the ones capitalism and individualism give us (I'm not a Marxist, actually, though I like Marx's perspective on history), actually teach people to live their lives worse than they could live them. And entertainment is a huge source of our narratives in society, and it always has been. Even the idea of entertainment as escapism is ideology; entertainment directly represents our valuation of the good in life. And yes, nobody's an idiot for enjoying what they've been conditioned to enjoy; none of us can do anything else. But we've been conditioned to enjoy stuff that enslaves us, rather than stuff that sets us free. I want people to be set free. Yes, this makes me a philosophy and politics chuunibyou, but these are good, I think. It is true I spout stuff that is ridiculously pretentious; I literally quote Derrida, the premier postmodernist, and Nietzsche, the premier existentialist, on the regular. But this pretension is for everyone, not just for some elite ruling class. I am against the oppressor, not the common person. |
| I love him who is ashamed when the dice fall in his favour and who then asks: Am I then a cheat? – for he wants to perish. |
auroraloose said: BilboBaggins365 said: You can evaluate the success and failures of political theory by judging utility and even then yeah what a just or good society is very debatable...just like art. Those topics aren't hard sciences but again unlike entertainment they actually can impact someone's life. Therefore, it's worth actually taking seriously. Entertainment does not have purpose beyond giving someone some 20 minutes of escapism from their life. It's not like art before capitalism was better. I mean define the ideal period for art by your Marxist standards (or whatever you believe in). Art can express many things such as yeah ideology. No matter the message or intent the purpose of art though at the end of the day is just to be a source of escapism for someone for a brief moment in their mostly boring lives. Or something else of that nature to impress, to entice take your pick but it's always about some base appeal. I have novels from Antiquity, seen enough paintings and sculptures, dramas and the like from a variety of cultures to feel that way. There is no higher purpose of art beyond giving us a bit of a break and to be lost in the fantastic and mundane elements of life. Sure literary criticism is academic and again you can look at it from that perspective but at the end of the day functionally beyond maybe giving some people again something interesting to read to again escape their boring lives...it is functionally worthless. No one reads a film review or analysis by some academic because they think it's going to be better themselves or society. They do it because hey I like this film, hate this film or just generally find it interesting and I am going to listen to someone who knows more about this medium than me to explain to me why I like hate or find this film interesting. That is it. At the end of the day a critic can tell me hey this film has tons of plot holes and even if they academically prove that to me if I say "but who cares" what is the response then? Nothing because I still like the film. I am not an idiot for doing so I am just responding to the electricity in my brain telling me this is enjoyable. Also boring is good. I am happy with boring there are a lot worse outcomes than that. You could have been angrier, and you weren't, so thank you. That was a good and honorable response. As to boredom, and as to who actually cares: The thing is that human beings need narrative to live. It's narrative that gives us a notion of what we're doing in our lives, and gives us satisfaction. We really do get our ideas of how to live from art and its narratives; if we can't imagine a narrative for our lives, we really don't know what to do with ourselves. So bad narratives, like the ones capitalism and individualism give us (I'm not a Marxist, actually, though I like Marx's perspective on history), actually teach people to live their lives worse than they could live them. And entertainment is a huge source of our narratives in society, and it always has been. Even the idea of entertainment as escapism is ideology; entertainment directly represents our valuation of the good in life. And yes, nobody's an idiot for enjoying what they've been conditioned to enjoy; none of us can do anything else. But we've been conditioned to enjoy stuff that enslaves us, rather than stuff that sets us free. I want people to be set free. Yes, this makes me a philosophy and politics chuunibyou, but these are good, I think. It is true I spout stuff that is ridiculously pretentious; I literally quote Derrida, the premier postmodernist, and Nietzsche, the premier existentialist, on the regular. But this pretension is for everyone, not just for some elite ruling class. I am against the oppressor, not the common person. I will be honest there hasn't been once in my entire life where art has actually given me a single idea of how to live my life or imparted anything on how or what to believe. I have sought out works that validate what I believe because hey I need some validation here and there. I have sought works that go against what I believe because hey it can be interesting and some humour can be found in there as well. But I reject that I get ideas from art I don't. I get them from my family, friends, life experiences, political, social and economic situations but not art. I largely believe art is reactive and at least in European art movements you can see that art was reacting to effects from their society it didn't cause any sort of change within them on their own. Most people are not seeking art or anime to give them some good moral understanding. They do it because it's fun or if they even are looking for "deeper ideas" are largely looking for stuff that validates what they believe in. Secondly I mean conditioned? That implies that people unconsciously and unwantedly chose what they enjoy. Really? Do people enjoy wishful escapist isekai because someone conditioned them to like it. Nah just the social forces on the audience have given people the want to "escape to another world" and the medium has stepped in to meet that desire. So it gets made. Just like viewers of Jacques-Louis David wanted art work to commemorate their fascination with Enlightenment thought and Greco Roman civilization or Westerns existed to commemorate America's past in an ever changing country socially and economically through urbanization and the suburban life from the rustic life so too anime is just catering to the needs of the audience. I mean even if you argue it's bad personally I think people need to engage in some healthy sin as long as it isn't destroying you or others. Trash TV or not I think many fans are still having fun and that is the purpose of anime at the end of the day. |
BilboBaggins365 said: auroraloose said: You could have been angrier, and you weren't, so thank you. That was a good and honorable response. As to boredom, and as to who actually cares: The thing is that human beings need narrative to live. It's narrative that gives us a notion of what we're doing in our lives, and gives us satisfaction. We really do get our ideas of how to live from art and its narratives; if we can't imagine a narrative for our lives, we really don't know what to do with ourselves. So bad narratives, like the ones capitalism and individualism give us (I'm not a Marxist, actually, though I like Marx's perspective on history), actually teach people to live their lives worse than they could live them. And entertainment is a huge source of our narratives in society, and it always has been. Even the idea of entertainment as escapism is ideology; entertainment directly represents our valuation of the good in life. And yes, nobody's an idiot for enjoying what they've been conditioned to enjoy; none of us can do anything else. But we've been conditioned to enjoy stuff that enslaves us, rather than stuff that sets us free. I want people to be set free. Yes, this makes me a philosophy and politics chuunibyou, but these are good, I think. It is true I spout stuff that is ridiculously pretentious; I literally quote Derrida, the premier postmodernist, and Nietzsche, the premier existentialist, on the regular. But this pretension is for everyone, not just for some elite ruling class. I am against the oppressor, not the common person. I will be honest there hasn't been once in my entire life where art has actually given me a single idea of how to live my life or imparted anything on how or what to believe. I have sought out works that validate what I believe because hey I need some validation here and there. I have sought works that go against what I believe because hey it can be interesting and some humour can be found in there as well. But I reject that I get ideas from art I don't. I get them from my family, friends, life experiences, political, social and economic situations but not art. I largely believe art is reactive and at least in European art movements you can see that art was reacting to effects from their society it didn't cause any sort of change within them on their own. Most people are not seeking art or anime to give them some good moral understanding. They do it because it's fun or if they even are looking for "deeper ideas" are largely looking for stuff that validates what they believe in. Secondly I mean conditioned? That implies that people unconsciously and unwantedly chose what they enjoy. Really? Do people enjoy wishful escapist isekai because someone conditioned them to like it. Nah just the social forces on the audience have given people the want to "escape to another world" and the medium has stepped in to meet that desire. So it gets made. Just like viewers of Jacques-Louis David wanted art work to commemorate their fascination with Enlightenment thought and Greco Roman civilization or Westerns existed to commemorate America's past in an ever changing country socially and economically through urbanization and the suburban life from the rustic life so too anime is just catering to the needs of the audience. I mean even if you argue it's bad personally I think people need to engage in some healthy sin as long as it isn't destroying you or others. Trash TV or not I think many fans are still having fun and that is the purpose of anime at the end of the day. Well, there's more to life than conditioning, but ultimately yes: Both the suffering of general life and the conditioning of our particular situation get people hooked on particular art. This is absolutely the case. And people don't seek art for particular understandings of life, but they enjoy certain types of art because their rulers, and ideology, have taught them to. And there's no way that at least the crappy isekai would survive if people weren't taught to enjoy it. And I would say it's pretty unlikely art hasn't given you your notions as to how to live your life. But if you really want to talk about this stuff, what we're talking about is actual literary theory, which is deeper than literary criticism. For this I suggest Literary Theory: An Introduction by Terry Eagleton. |
| I love him who is ashamed when the dice fall in his favour and who then asks: Am I then a cheat? – for he wants to perish. |
auroraloose said: BilboBaggins365 said: I will be honest there hasn't been once in my entire life where art has actually given me a single idea of how to live my life or imparted anything on how or what to believe. I have sought out works that validate what I believe because hey I need some validation here and there. I have sought works that go against what I believe because hey it can be interesting and some humour can be found in there as well. But I reject that I get ideas from art I don't. I get them from my family, friends, life experiences, political, social and economic situations but not art. I largely believe art is reactive and at least in European art movements you can see that art was reacting to effects from their society it didn't cause any sort of change within them on their own. Most people are not seeking art or anime to give them some good moral understanding. They do it because it's fun or if they even are looking for "deeper ideas" are largely looking for stuff that validates what they believe in. Secondly I mean conditioned? That implies that people unconsciously and unwantedly chose what they enjoy. Really? Do people enjoy wishful escapist isekai because someone conditioned them to like it. Nah just the social forces on the audience have given people the want to "escape to another world" and the medium has stepped in to meet that desire. So it gets made. Just like viewers of Jacques-Louis David wanted art work to commemorate their fascination with Enlightenment thought and Greco Roman civilization or Westerns existed to commemorate America's past in an ever changing country socially and economically through urbanization and the suburban life from the rustic life so too anime is just catering to the needs of the audience. I mean even if you argue it's bad personally I think people need to engage in some healthy sin as long as it isn't destroying you or others. Trash TV or not I think many fans are still having fun and that is the purpose of anime at the end of the day. Well, there's more to life than conditioning, but ultimately yes: Both the suffering of general life and the conditioning of our particular situation get people hooked on particular art. This is absolutely the case. And people don't seek art for particular understandings of life, but they enjoy certain types of art because their rulers, and ideology, have taught them to. And there's no way that at least the crappy isekai would survive if people weren't taught to enjoy it. And I would say it's pretty unlikely art hasn't given you your notions as to how to live your life. But if you really want to talk about this stuff, what we're talking about is actual literary theory, which is deeper than literary criticism. For this I suggest Literary Theory: An Introduction by Terry Eagleton. Okay then explain how isekai came about due to this conditioning. Where does anyone benefit from it? Where did this start and how was it popularized. How are you sure fans don't you know simply enjoy it not because they were taught but because there is some base aspect within those stories that are appealing. |
| pick and choose not all isekai is good not all of it is bad. so i'm a spider (novel only cgi ruined the anime.) is great rencarnated as a slime, jobless reincarnation, eminence in shadow and accendence of a bookworm are probably what i would pick as really good isekai. then you have some of the more middle ground ones and then their are the trash fires. ateks said: SkyfallStar said: Maybe because the author Reki Kawahara told himself that the series is not an isekai? https://twitter.com/kunori/status/1117418009679683585 Nowhere in this tweet does it say it's not isekai ? also SAO isn't an isekai digimon is more isekai then sao is. |
| "among monsters and humans, there are only two types. Those who undergo suffering and spread it to others. And those who undergo suffering and avoid giving it to others." -Alice “Beauty is no quality in things themselves: It exists merely in the mind which contemplates them; and each mind perceives a different beauty.” David Hume “Evil is created when someone gives up on someone else. It appears when everyone gives up on someone as a lost cause and removes their path to salvation. Once they are cut off from everyone else, they become evil.” -Othinus  |
| I was laying in bed the other day and tought "... who the heck make music for all those uninspired, boring isekai? Like, how do you get inspiration for it?" |
| Location: Turin, Italy Hobby: Music, karate, manga Favourite food: Hey, why are still interested in my stuff? |
BilboBaggins365 said: auroraloose said: Well, there's more to life than conditioning, but ultimately yes: Both the suffering of general life and the conditioning of our particular situation get people hooked on particular art. This is absolutely the case. And people don't seek art for particular understandings of life, but they enjoy certain types of art because their rulers, and ideology, have taught them to. And there's no way that at least the crappy isekai would survive if people weren't taught to enjoy it. And I would say it's pretty unlikely art hasn't given you your notions as to how to live your life. But if you really want to talk about this stuff, what we're talking about is actual literary theory, which is deeper than literary criticism. For this I suggest Literary Theory: An Introduction by Terry Eagleton. Okay then explain how isekai came about due to this conditioning. Where does anyone benefit from it? Where did this start and how was it popularized. How are you sure fans don't you know simply enjoy it not because they were taught but because there is some base aspect within those stories that are appealing. @petran79 gave a good answer to this; I'll add that it's easier to sell people what they know, and it's easier for them to know things that are simple. (I gestured in this direction in my first comment on this thread, though I didn't go out of my way to say it explicitly.) Also, these kinds of things aren't all-or-nothing; I wasn't at all saying isekai can't have good or enjoyable properties, even among the trashier ones. I was saying rather that we're stuck in a rut of the trashy, and that people like trash doesn't mean it's good for them to consume trash. |
| I love him who is ashamed when the dice fall in his favour and who then asks: Am I then a cheat? – for he wants to perish. |
More topics from this board
» Different views of certain anime caused by generational gap?thewiru - 12 hours ago |
9 |
by Darkfiend47
»»
20 seconds ago |
|
» Most boring anime you've ever seen? ( 1 2 3 )selfawarecorpse - Oct 1 |
101 |
by Robin-Sama68
»»
3 minutes ago |
|
» Worst anime openingsRetroCagliostro - Oct 5 |
30 |
by Robin-Sama68
»»
5 minutes ago |
|
» Are there Anime songs you like but haven't seen the anime?Dragevard - Oct 9 |
12 |
by Robin-Sama68
»»
19 minutes ago |
|
» ⌛ Best Girls of the Past Eras >Increased Limit ( 1 2 3 )Shizuna - Oct 10 |
119 |
by Shizuna
»»
39 minutes ago |