Anime fans have inferiority complex (are jealous?)

Poltergeist18 said:

Enjoyment isn't really something constant, and neither is critical thinking because it changes over time. It's like when you get a new toy. It feels fresh and fun for the first few times, but it becomes a bit stale over time.
You can still enjoy playing with it at least a bit, but it just isn't the same as the first go.

And with that said, you start to notice flaws in the show you watch when enjoyment becomes lesser. I highly doubt anyone wants to appear professional by rating an anime based on the objective aspects. Even when you talk about objective aspects, stuff like music and art still depend on your personal preferences, you know... Probably not only that...

The thing is, a score lessens with the passing of time and the rise of critical thinking or better to say, giving points about a series beyond the enjoyment. You still can't escape subjectiveness, but it's not like it's wrong to find flaws in stuff if you back it up with more articulated thoughts on it.

Gotta think up more shit to back this up...

Zeus4President said:
Wrong. There is certain standards in professional criticism when it comes to movies, theater, music and anime. Plot depth, animation quality, sound quality, character development are not subjective things. They are all objective and easy to critique at an objective level; by professionals.

The people that say Bebop is crap critically simply do not know how to objectively critique. They just state their feelings towards the anime, which of course is correct to do, but they express it in a wrong way.

Orinsurs said:
]A) Objective writing
B) Objective animation
C) Not everything is subjective

let's debunk one at a time, but first establish what objective means or people will get confused.

Objective means "inherent of the Object".

Let's take a object: Water.

Water above 0°C on normal pressure is liquid. It's the inherent property of water.
Water below 0°C on normal pressure is solid. Everyone can test this, just pick up a piece of ice, it is solid.
Water above 100°C is gas. People everywhere can test these things. There are no interpretations or opinions needed on this.

These are inherent objective properties of water.

Subjective means what a Subject (aka a MIND) interprets into these objective facts.

"Icewater is good because you can ice skate on it" Is an subjective interpretation of an objective fact.
Yes it is objectivity right that you can ice skate on solid water. but whether that is a good or bad thing is subjective, a mind created the value, or the subjective property of "goodness" for the solid water.

Values are by definition subjective. So whatever purpose you see in an objective is always a subjective interpretation.

The only way you can make values objective is within a framework, with a predefined purpose.

Poison is by definition just poisonous, neither good or bad.

Drinking poison therefor has no objective meaning. It will simply kill you. That is an objective fact.

A person who wants to live (subjective framework = staying alive) is doing a mistake by drinking deadly poison.
Hence, poison is bad.

A person who wants to die (subjective framework = being dead) is doing the right thing by drinking deadly poison.
Hence, poison is good.

Let's apply this method to reviewing.

"Objective" good writing.

It is true that humanity came up with ways to tell a story and that our brain reacts to certain stimuli better than to others. But let's not forget every brain (mind) is different and has different values.
We already see the framework.
Mind
Values
Subjective things.
Humans are by definition subjective when they judge. Depending on your culture, upbringing, education and personal experiences your value will be different to that of another person.
That means there must be a form of writing that applies to all brains equally, like we can all identify liquid water and solid water.

But that's not the case because the writing of a story is not objective. There are parts of it that are objective, but whether our subjective brains are stimulated by them or not can not be guarantied.

However long humanity defined the way they tell stories, in the end it is just as subjective as taste in music, or art.

Only under a framework we can talk about objectivity.
A Hentai without sex is clearly a bad hentai because it defies it's own definition (framework).

A show that aims to have no fanservice and yet offers plenty of nipple scenes and boobgrabs fails and thus defied it's own framework and hence is objectively bad.
Yet fanservice in it self is neither good or bad.

So are stories.
A) has plotholes
B) offers no clear ending
C) is slow

These are all objective facts, but how you interpret them is dependent not only on the given framework, but also on your values.
Since all these frameworks are equally valid because no one can prove their objective purpose it's a matter of personal taste what you like and what not.

Objective Animation Quality

One might question if not animation can be stated in facts.
No it cannot, for the same reason. There is always a subjective framework.
We might see mistakes, or see how one show makes it more fluid, or more correct. But those things are all based on the assumption that there is an objective purpose.

Yes under that framework animation quality can be good or bad, and we all use it. But since we gain new information every time our standards change.
A kid who only watched pokemon might think this is totally fine, while someone who watched GitS thinks it's the worst shit ever (in animation).

Our minds are by definition subjective, thus whatever we judge is only as valid as the information we had at that given time. It is limited and not complete, it relies on preconceived notions on how things ought to be. All artificial rules created by humanity.

If reviews are objective then the purpose of Mountains is to climb them, because that's what people do.

Just because fact A is true (you can climb mountains) you cannot say "therefor B is the right thing" (mountains are for climbing).


tl;dr

You cannot derive and IS from an OUGHT.

How anime is supposed to be is based on the individual giving the framework in which the medium is judged.
Every human being has a different framework thus, every judgement is inherently different => subjective.
Things are just.
We give them value based on our subjective minds that seek meaning.

Things that come from a mind are subjective, because a SUBJECT is projecting them onto objects.
Like Values, Meaning, Purpose and Morals.

justvincexd said:
Apparently the older the anime you watch, the more OG you are. Don't know how it works, but it's the same with manga readers vs anime watchers.

Dark_Chaos said:

I'm not quite sure how this has any relevance to my post :S

Poltergeist18 said:

Nothing is really wrong with change, the thing is...
Feelings and enjoyment don't change for the better. They don't progress, they regress. Everything loses its charm over time like a new toy you overplayed with, feelings get dragged around because there exist emotionally manipulative stuff and also wear out in the end.
Articulating your thoughts on something can always progress if you enchance your experience with any medium.

tsudecimo said:

Oh good lord, you have no idea what you are talking about.

Orinsurs said:
A kid who only watched pokemon might think this is totally fine, while someone who watched GitS thinks it's the worst shit ever (in animation).

Deus-Vult said:
our primitive ancestors changed the course of history oz of teh discovery of fire
dunno if this will change the course of history also

DejWo said:


Ouf course,it will ignite the flames of war.