Kuma said: You said: i though communist it self is just escapism from society with social class.all entertainment=escapism. People who hates escapism is just a communist. isn't communist is a condition where everyone gets everything equally? how can it be an escapism? |
 |
You said: exacly. no one richer or poorer. everyone equaly rich and equaly poor. no burjoism, no herarchy, no social class, no one look down to another. what a perfect world. /sarcasmKuma said: isn't communist is a condition where everyone gets everything equally? how can it be an escapism?i though communist it self is just escapism from society with social class. |
 "If taking responsibility for a mistake that cannot be undone means death, it's not that hard to die. At least, not as hard as to live on." |
Kuma said: You said: exacly. no one richer or poorer. everyone equaly rich and equaly poor. no burjoism, no herarchy, no social class, no one look down to another. what a perfect world. /sarcasmisn't communist is a condition where everyone gets everything equally? how can it be an escapism? It is actually a perfect world for those extremely lazy and pessimistic people tbh, but for the creative and innovative poeple, it's the opposite. |
|
You said: that's why it escapism for them....Kuma said: exacly. no one richer or poorer. everyone equaly rich and equaly poor. no burjoism, no herarchy, no social class, no one look down to another. what a perfect world. /sarcasm It is actually a perfect world for those extremely lazy and pessimistic people tbh, |
"If taking responsibility for a mistake that cannot be undone means death, it's not that hard to die. At least, not as hard as to live on." |
Kuma said: that's why it escapism for them.... now that actually makes sense..oh wait, so basically everything is an escapism then? |
|
TheBrainintheJar said: I use Keely's definition: http://starsbeetlesandfools.blogspot.co.il/2012/12/on-escapism.html An escapist anime contributes nothing. It's not odd, or pretty, or exciting. I can't agree with such a definition. Any good escapist show has to be pretty and exciting. Kuma said: escapist for me of make the viewer want to discarding their real life problem and trade it with fiction works. So, any show that is not as grimdark as real life? That's still an whole lot of works! Basically, you say any work that isn't meant for masochists and their catharsis = escapist work? GesuYarou said: flannan said: Why? Why people demand inner conflict and boring greyness everywhere?? These things just get in the way of the fun parts - the ones where the protagonist kicks ass, heals hearts or whatever he is doing. >Inner conflict >Boring greyness. Que? Seeing a protagonist fighting off inner conflict is what the audience is here for... If the only way a character thinks he can entertain us is by kicking ass then there's no point in even continuing watching because then I know he's gonna kick some more ass & that's all there is to it.. People like to see new things. Watching someone kick asses & win all the time is repetitive hence boring. Protagonists with major flaws are good for comedy. For example, the Neighbors Club in Haganai is going to fail hilariously whatever they're doing, and it's entirely their fault. But for serious stories, I prefer characters who aren't their own worst enemy. In this world, there are plenty of things that are hard to do even when you're sane. I like seeing them done. GesuYarou said: flannan said: Of course everything should work itself out. Otherwise the story wouldn't get a proper conclusion and will keep going on forever. And that works badly, as we know from the long-runners like Naruto and Bleach, which run themselves into the ground sooner or later. No, things shouldn't work themselves out. It has to be worked upon by the main cast. Of course, things have to end sooner or later but then again, people watch anime to be entertained.. Uhm... can you give me an example of a show where things worked themselves out without the protagonists doing anything? There are plenty of works where things work themselves out after the MCs have kicked the right ass, and there are a few works where MCs work to make things right on a global scale, but for things to change for the better without MCs having any part of it? What would be pretty unique. Maybe the new Utawarerumono will turn out like that. GesuYarou said: I have a very good education, thank you. My work is mostly applying my brain and my knowledge to things. No part of my education and my work requires working with people and their insanity, and I'm very thankful for that.I'm guessing you're the kind of guy who'd drop out of college because "It's too hard" (not saying that that's what you did because I'm sure you're gonna use that against me later on)... Also I'm pretty sure that as long as the people involved aren't being evil or criminally stupid, things do work themselves out easily. GesuYarou said: So apparently your main argument is that Gary Stu MCs, shallow characters & deus ex machina > Actual good stories with well realized, well thought out & written characters? My argument is that actual good stories with meaningful conflict and interesting fights > deep characters wallowing in self-pity and able to win any battle as soon as they stop squabbling among themselves. |
You said: yes, but escapism for one doesn't mean escapism for everyone. city people find escapism to the village, when village people find escapism to the city.Kuma said: that's why it escapism for them.... now that actually makes sense..oh wait, so basically everything is an escapism then? |
"If taking responsibility for a mistake that cannot be undone means death, it's not that hard to die. At least, not as hard as to live on." |
flannan said: i prefer to take my original post. it's explain how i view escapism. with edited of course. Kuma said: So, any show that is not as grimdark as real life? That's still an whole lot of works! escapist for me of make the viewer want to discarding their real life problem and trade it with fiction works. Basically, you say any work that isn't meant for masochists and their catharsis = escapist work? Kuma said: i feel that a shows being an escapism or not is depend not on shows it self but how a person see it as such as. if you see a series that being acclaimed as "escapism" shows but you don't feel it. it's not escapism shows for you. so as it reverse, if many people said it's not escapism but you feel it as one, than it's escapism for you. |
"If taking responsibility for a mistake that cannot be undone means death, it's not that hard to die. At least, not as hard as to live on." |
CrappyGod-sama said: TheBrainintheJar said: What I mean is that storytelling is a tool for escapism regardless of content. If you read my other posts, you'd see that I said that we look for new perspectives through storytelling. Trying to label something that you deem shallow as escapist is a pretty juvenile method of criticizing - it just seems like middle schoolers calling each other names during recess. You mean that there aren't stories that examine the nature of existence, themes and help us view them from a new perspective? What are Catch-22 or Denou Coil or the Social Network then? No, calling something escapist is not name-calling because escapism has clear definitions. I just linked you to one. If I find a show to be oversimplified and not provide anything but a distraction, then it's escapist. Storytelling isn't escapism. It's a way to connect to others. People communicate by telling stories. flannan said: TheBrainintheJar said: I use Keely's definition: http://starsbeetlesandfools.blogspot.co.il/2012/12/on-escapism.html An escapist anime contributes nothing. It's not odd, or pretty, or exciting. I can't agree with such a definition. Any good escapist show has to be pretty and exciting. Using a different definition isn't disagreeing with another definition. This is now semantics. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
TheBrainintheJar said: Wow, what a convincing argument that was. So the next time I sit down, immerse myself in reading a novel about a nonexistent, fictional world, I'm not escaping reality by seeking entertainment or distracting myself from my own world, I am seeking to be communicated to by the author of the work. Thanks for the insight.CrappyGod-sama said: What I mean is that storytelling is a tool for escapism regardless of content. If you read my other posts, you'd see that I said that we look for new perspectives through storytelling. Trying to label something that you deem shallow as escapist is a pretty juvenile method of criticizing - it just seems like middle schoolers calling each other names during recess. No, calling something escapist is not name-calling because escapism has clear definitions. I just linked you to one. If I find a show to be oversimplified and not provide anything but a distraction, then it's escapist. Storytelling isn't escapism. It's a way to connect to others. People communicate by telling stories. And trying to super impose some reviewer's definition of the word that he, himself, is saying he does not believe should be imposed as anything other than his own definition isn't going to convince anyone on anything when they don't believe in the same definition. |
HolybaptiserMar 2, 2016 3:25 AM
I'm also filled with pure-hearted ulterior motives. |
CrappyGod-sama said: TheBrainintheJar said: Wow, what a convincing argument that was. So the next time I sit down, immerse myself in reading a novel about a nonexistent, fictional world, I'm not escaping reality by seeking entertainment or distracting myself from my own world, I am seeking to be communicated to by the author of the work. Thanks for the insight.No, calling something escapist is not name-calling because escapism has clear definitions. I just linked you to one. If I find a show to be oversimplified and not provide anything but a distraction, then it's escapist. Storytelling isn't escapism. It's a way to connect to others. People communicate by telling stories. And trying to super impose some reviewer's definition of the word that he, himself, is saying he does not believe should be imposed as anything other than his own definition isn't going to convince anyone on anything when they don't believe in the same definition. Wow, what a convincing argument. Next time I sit down, immerse myself in reading a novel about a nonexistent world that still has similarities to my own and still deals with subjects I face in my life, I am actually escaping reality. Honestly now, I don't see the escapsim in WataMote, Catch-22 or the Social Network. These are stories that take their subject matter seriously and explore it, find ways to express it and give us insight. How is storytelling escapist by nature? When you tell a story to a friend, are you escaping reality or communicating? |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
TheBrainintheJar said: CrappyGod-sama said: Wow, what a convincing argument that was. So the next time I sit down, immerse myself in reading a novel about a nonexistent, fictional world, I'm not escaping reality by seeking entertainment or distracting myself from my own world, I am seeking to be communicated to by the author of the work. Thanks for the insight. And trying to super impose some reviewer's definition of the word that he, himself, is saying he does not believe should be imposed as anything other than his own definition isn't going to convince anyone on anything when they don't believe in the same definition. Wow, what a convincing argument. Next time I sit down, immerse myself in reading a novel about a nonexistent world that still has similarities to my own and still deals with subjects I face in my life, I am actually escaping reality. Honestly now, I don't see the escapsim in WataMote, Catch-22 or the Social Network. These are stories that take their subject matter seriously and explore it, find ways to express it and give us insight. How is storytelling escapist by nature? When you tell a story to a friend, are you escaping reality or communicating? Escapism is not a synonym of shallowness. Escapism is something that disconnects you from reality. You can argue that shows that are particularly deep or thorough in daily subject matters are not escapist, but the contrary could very well be mentioned if such shows present a set of conflicts and viewpoints that have no use in the viewer's personal routines. WataMote may nail the issue of social anxiety, but as long as we observe it as external factors and the story is not going to have a major impact in the development of our lives we can consider it escapist as well. I think that escapism also has to do, to a point, with the state of mind of the viewer. That is, it is not an immutable trait; it depends on the personal context of the viewer at the moment they watch a show. It's not the same an approach to WataMote through the mind of a socially anxious person who can identify with Tomoko than another from somebody who just wants to enjoy dark and cruel comedy to evade their reality for a while. |
TheBrainintheJar said: What I meant by storytelling to be escapism wasn't the act of storytelling, but the act of indulging in a story. Yeah, I worded it poorly, but for the sake of clarification, I'll say that immersing yourself in a story is escapism. CrappyGod-sama said: Wow, what a convincing argument that was. So the next time I sit down, immerse myself in reading a novel about a nonexistent, fictional world, I'm not escaping reality by seeking entertainment or distracting myself from my own world, I am seeking to be communicated to by the author of the work. Thanks for the insight. And trying to super impose some reviewer's definition of the word that he, himself, is saying he does not believe should be imposed as anything other than his own definition isn't going to convince anyone on anything when they don't believe in the same definition. Wow, what a convincing argument. Next time I sit down, immerse myself in reading a novel about a nonexistent world that still has similarities to my own and still deals with subjects I face in my life, I am actually escaping reality. Honestly now, I don't see the escapsim in WataMote, Catch-22 or the Social Network. These are stories that take their subject matter seriously and explore it, find ways to express it and give us insight. How is storytelling escapist by nature? When you tell a story to a friend, are you escaping reality or communicating? Surely, when we want to watch a television show or read a book, we do it for the sake of entertainment to some degree and not completely just for the sake of gaining something from it. Whether you take something from the story, like a moral objective or a life lesson, shouldn't be a defining trait for escapism. If I go to read a historical piece about the Third Reich while I need to go to the bank to make a payment before a deadline, I am procrastinating and escaping from the reality of my responsibilities. If I read a piece of literary fiction that brings forth themes of anything ranging from moral dilemmas, existentialism and the state of our society, it shouldn't change the fact that I might be distracting myself from my own very reality and finding entertainment through it. I just find it an unfair and unjustified use of criticism to try and say that if you are not to gaining something other than just entertainment that it is escapism. Like I said earlier and how jal90 has said, trying to deem something shallow as escapism is not how it should work. If you find entertainment and can temporarily distract yourself from the reality of your own life, whether or not you gain some kind of knowledge or intellectual thought, it is still escapism, as the literal definition of escapism is to distract yourself of your reality through entertainment. |
| I'm also filled with pure-hearted ulterior motives. |
CapitalistGod said: What's wrong with a show conveying an ideal? I see this word being thrown around in a bad way too. I just have to ask. Nothing. If there's anything that's wrong it's with the people with no imagination who don't like it. If you've lose the ability to dream or play around like a kid, you might as well be dead. |
| "Laws exist only for those who cannot live without clinging onto them." -Souske Aizen "Bleach"  |
| nothing, unless they are glorying things that shouldn't be glorified, example anti-social behavior in sword art online. |
| I agree there's nothing wrong with escapism, but I think there's something wrong with power fantasy. I think what OP is trying to mention are the crappy Gary Stu-self insert harem stories, which I totally agree there should be less of. |
CrappyGod-sama said: TheBrainintheJar said: What I meant by storytelling to be escapism wasn't the act of storytelling, but the act of indulging in a story. Yeah, I worded it poorly, but for the sake of clarification, I'll say that immersing yourself in a story is escapism. Wow, what a convincing argument. Next time I sit down, immerse myself in reading a novel about a nonexistent world that still has similarities to my own and still deals with subjects I face in my life, I am actually escaping reality. Honestly now, I don't see the escapsim in WataMote, Catch-22 or the Social Network. These are stories that take their subject matter seriously and explore it, find ways to express it and give us insight. How is storytelling escapist by nature? When you tell a story to a friend, are you escaping reality or communicating? Surely, when we want to watch a television show or read a book, we do it for the sake of entertainment to some degree and not completely just for the sake of gaining something from it. Whether you take something from the story, like a moral objective or a life lesson, shouldn't be a defining trait for escapism. If I go to read a historical piece about the Third Reich while I need to go to the bank to make a payment before a deadline, I am procrastinating and escaping from the reality of my responsibilities. If I read a piece of literary fiction that brings forth themes of anything ranging from moral dilemmas, existentialism and the state of our society, it shouldn't change the fact that I might be distracting myself from my own very reality and finding entertainment through it. I just find it an unfair and unjustified use of criticism to try and say that if you are not to gaining something other than just entertainment that it is escapism. Like I said earlier and how jal90 has said, trying to deem something shallow as escapism is not how it should work. If you find entertainment and can temporarily distract yourself from the reality of your own life, whether or not you gain some kind of knowledge or intellectual thought, it is still escapism, as the literal definition of escapism is to distract yourself of your reality through entertainment. Your definition of 'escape from reality' is so narrow, it reminds me a bit of those weirdos who think that what doesn't get you paid is useless. Just because a work doesn't deal with your immediate problem, doesn't mean it's escapist. It may be distract you currently, but in general a work like Catch-22 isn't escapist. If you try to use it to escape from your reality, fine. But a book that presents a complex sets of viewpoints and a sharp dead-on satire isn't escapist by any means. My military experience would've been completely different without that novel. Here's a simpler definition: By escapist, I mean a work that leaves you unchanged. You're done reading/watching, and besides mild distraction it had nothing to offer to you. It didn't give you more insight into anything, into the nature of military, social anxiety, human beauty/sexuality or even aesthetic value. jal90 said: TheBrainintheJar said: Wow, what a convincing argument. Next time I sit down, immerse myself in reading a novel about a nonexistent world that still has similarities to my own and still deals with subjects I face in my life, I am actually escaping reality. Honestly now, I don't see the escapsim in WataMote, Catch-22 or the Social Network. These are stories that take their subject matter seriously and explore it, find ways to express it and give us insight. How is storytelling escapist by nature? When you tell a story to a friend, are you escaping reality or communicating? Escapism is not a synonym of shallowness. Escapism is something that disconnects you from reality. You can argue that shows that are particularly deep or thorough in daily subject matters are not escapist, but the contrary could very well be mentioned if such shows present a set of conflicts and viewpoints that have no use in the viewer's personal routines. WataMote may nail the issue of social anxiety, but as long as we observe it as external factors and the story is not going to have a major impact in the development of our lives we can consider it escapist as well. I think that escapism also has to do, to a point, with the state of mind of the viewer. That is, it is not an immutable trait; it depends on the personal context of the viewer at the moment they watch a show. It's not the same an approach to WataMote through the mind of a socially anxious person who can identify with Tomoko than another from somebody who just wants to enjoy dark and cruel comedy to evade their reality for a while. The state of mind of the viewer is important. An escapist state of mind would make you miss out all the great stuff. However, even if the themes aren't present in a person's life the show may not be escapist. In fact, because it presents something so different it expands the viewers' mind, shows them a world they didn't consider before. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
TheBrainintheJar said: Your definition of escapism is what's narrow here. In the context of your argument, you could also argue that any form of entertainment, especially television shows, could allow you to gain something from them intellectually whether it was implicitly or explicitly input and therefore be valuable and not a form of escapism.CrappyGod-sama said: What I meant by storytelling to be escapism wasn't the act of storytelling, but the act of indulging in a story. Yeah, I worded it poorly, but for the sake of clarification, I'll say that immersing yourself in a story is escapism. Surely, when we want to watch a television show or read a book, we do it for the sake of entertainment to some degree and not completely just for the sake of gaining something from it. Whether you take something from the story, like a moral objective or a life lesson, shouldn't be a defining trait for escapism. If I go to read a historical piece about the Third Reich while I need to go to the bank to make a payment before a deadline, I am procrastinating and escaping from the reality of my responsibilities. If I read a piece of literary fiction that brings forth themes of anything ranging from moral dilemmas, existentialism and the state of our society, it shouldn't change the fact that I might be distracting myself from my own very reality and finding entertainment through it. I just find it an unfair and unjustified use of criticism to try and say that if you are not to gaining something other than just entertainment that it is escapism. Like I said earlier and how jal90 has said, trying to deem something shallow as escapism is not how it should work. If you find entertainment and can temporarily distract yourself from the reality of your own life, whether or not you gain some kind of knowledge or intellectual thought, it is still escapism, as the literal definition of escapism is to distract yourself of your reality through entertainment. Your definition of 'escape from reality' is so narrow, it reminds me a bit of those weirdos who think that what doesn't get you paid is useless. Just because a work doesn't deal with your immediate problem, doesn't mean it's escapist. It may be distract you currently, but in general a work like Catch-22 isn't escapist. If you try to use it to escape from your reality, fine. But a book that presents a complex sets of viewpoints and a sharp dead-on satire isn't escapist by any means. My military experience would've been completely different without that novel. Here's a simpler definition: By escapist, I mean a work that leaves you unchanged. You're done reading/watching, and besides mild distraction it had nothing to offer to you. It didn't give you more insight into anything, into the nature of military, social anxiety, human beauty/sexuality or even aesthetic value. Edit - I get this vibe that you're trying to draw a line between what makes someone think and what doesn't based on your own experience. That a piece of work needs to present you with a different mindset on serious matter in order to be thoughtful and/or a good method to provoke intellectual thought. Some of time, you can have the most amount of thought be provoked by something seemingless in themes. After watching a show that I would call mindless fun, Katanagatari, I ended up thinking a lot about morality and human relationships, and much more than what the show itself provoked. It's not the shallow show that is escapist, it's the stagnant mind - the person who watches/reads a story and just takes everything for its surface value and brushes it all of without thought after finishing it; the person that refuses to think about anything and only looks for flashy action-packed stories, like the works of Michael Bay. |
HolybaptiserMar 3, 2016 10:25 PM
| I'm also filled with pure-hearted ulterior motives. |
ZECHS96 said: nothing, unless they are glorying things that shouldn't be glorified, example anti-social behavior in sword art online. 1) Please define "anti-social" and "glorified", because in my vocabulary, "anti-social behavior" is what the villains of SAO do, and they get punished for that, so it isn't "glorified" under my definition. 2) Estimating what you've probably meant: why shouldn't anti-social behavior be glorified, you extravert pig-dog? TheBrainintheJar said: The state of mind of the viewer is important. If the state of mind is what's important, why don't you allow the viewers to just immerse themselves in the stories without expecting some grand revelations? It's good for their state of mind, and that's what matters. |
CrappyGod-sama said: TheBrainintheJar said: Your definition of escapism is what's narrow here. In the context of your argument, you could also argue that any form of entertainment, especially television shows, could allow you to gain something from them intellectually whether it was implicitly or explicitly input and therefore be valuable and not a form of escapism.Your definition of 'escape from reality' is so narrow, it reminds me a bit of those weirdos who think that what doesn't get you paid is useless. Just because a work doesn't deal with your immediate problem, doesn't mean it's escapist. It may be distract you currently, but in general a work like Catch-22 isn't escapist. If you try to use it to escape from your reality, fine. But a book that presents a complex sets of viewpoints and a sharp dead-on satire isn't escapist by any means. My military experience would've been completely different without that novel. Here's a simpler definition: By escapist, I mean a work that leaves you unchanged. You're done reading/watching, and besides mild distraction it had nothing to offer to you. It didn't give you more insight into anything, into the nature of military, social anxiety, human beauty/sexuality or even aesthetic value. Edit - I get this vibe that you're trying to draw a line between what makes someone think and what doesn't based on your own experience. That a piece of work needs to present you with a different mindset on serious matter in order to be thoughtful and/or a good method to provoke intellectual thought. Some of time, you can have the most amount of thought be provoked by something seemingless in themes. After watching a show that I would call mindless fun, Katanagatari, I ended up thinking a lot about morality and human relationships, and much more than what the show itself provoked. It's not the shallow show that is escapist, it's the stagnant mind - the person who watches/reads a story and just takes everything for its surface value and brushes it all of without thought after finishing it; the person that refuses to think about anything and only looks for flashy action-packed stories, like the works of Michael Bay. I don't believe in the concept of 'mindless fun'. If I need to turn my mind off to enjoy it, it means there's nothing specific about the show that makes it fun. I don't think sexy characters or great action is in and of itself 'escapist'. These shows DO add something to ourselves - a sensory experience of beauty and aesthetics. John Woo's films, JoJo, Kill la Kill, Freezing's character designs are all things I enjoy without turning my mind off. The expand these concepts. Not everything has to be deeply intellectual (Food and music are amazing and they're pure sensory information) but there needs to be something about it that makes it interesting, that gives me a sense of wonder. Again, when I use 'escapism' I refer to any activity that leaves the person unchanged and doesn't add anything to their world. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
TheBrainintheJar said: it was fun talking to you, friend. I understand your perspective, but I don't agree with it, and I feel like if we go at each other any longer, we're just going to be like two chained dogs barking at each other from a distance. Don't get me wrong, cause I mean no disrespect, but I just fundamentally don't agree with your perspective. It's fine that you use your own definition, but I just have my own perspective on the matter and what it means to enjoy something. I usually just call the things that leave me with no real evolution after the fact poor and shallow, instead of referring to them as escapist.CrappyGod-sama said: Your definition of escapism is what's narrow here. In the context of your argument, you could also argue that any form of entertainment, especially television shows, could allow you to gain something from them intellectually whether it was implicitly or explicitly input and therefore be valuable and not a form of escapism. Edit - I get this vibe that you're trying to draw a line between what makes someone think and what doesn't based on your own experience. That a piece of work needs to present you with a different mindset on serious matter in order to be thoughtful and/or a good method to provoke intellectual thought. Some of time, you can have the most amount of thought be provoked by something seemingless in themes. After watching a show that I would call mindless fun, Katanagatari, I ended up thinking a lot about morality and human relationships, and much more than what the show itself provoked. It's not the shallow show that is escapist, it's the stagnant mind - the person who watches/reads a story and just takes everything for its surface value and brushes it all of without thought after finishing it; the person that refuses to think about anything and only looks for flashy action-packed stories, like the works of Michael Bay. I don't believe in the concept of 'mindless fun'. If I need to turn my mind off to enjoy it, it means there's nothing specific about the show that makes it fun. I don't think sexy characters or great action is in and of itself 'escapist'. These shows DO add something to ourselves - a sensory experience of beauty and aesthetics. John Woo's films, JoJo, Kill la Kill, Freezing's character designs are all things I enjoy without turning my mind off. The expand these concepts. Not everything has to be deeply intellectual (Food and music are amazing and they're pure sensory information) but there needs to be something about it that makes it interesting, that gives me a sense of wonder. Again, when I use 'escapism' I refer to any activity that leaves the person unchanged and doesn't add anything to their world. |
| I'm also filled with pure-hearted ulterior motives. |
CrappyGod-sama said: TheBrainintheJar said: it was fun talking to you, friend. I understand your perspective, but I don't agree with it, and I feel like if we go at each other any longer, we're just going to be like two chained dogs barking at each other from a distance. Don't get me wrong, cause I mean no disrespect, but I just fundamentally don't agree with your perspective. It's fine that you use your own definition, but I just have my own perspective on the matter and what it means to enjoy something. I usually just call the things that leave me with no real evolution after the fact poor and shallow, instead of referring to them as escapist.I don't believe in the concept of 'mindless fun'. If I need to turn my mind off to enjoy it, it means there's nothing specific about the show that makes it fun. I don't think sexy characters or great action is in and of itself 'escapist'. These shows DO add something to ourselves - a sensory experience of beauty and aesthetics. John Woo's films, JoJo, Kill la Kill, Freezing's character designs are all things I enjoy without turning my mind off. The expand these concepts. Not everything has to be deeply intellectual (Food and music are amazing and they're pure sensory information) but there needs to be something about it that makes it interesting, that gives me a sense of wonder. Again, when I use 'escapism' I refer to any activity that leaves the person unchanged and doesn't add anything to their world. Well, at least you know how to end a discussion civilly. But once we discuss what the group of letters 'escapism' means, we're off-topic. What we should discuss is, using a certain definition, escapism is good or not. Whenever I use 'escapist', I'm talking about shows that don't give you anything. They're not exciting or particularly fun. They're just generic and provide some distraction. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
TheBrainintheJar said: I don't believe in the concept of 'mindless fun'. If I need to turn my mind off to enjoy it, it means there's nothing specific about the show that makes it fun. On the other hand, for me to enjoy almost any show, I have to turn off large parts of my brain that are responsible for knowing all the things that are wrong with the show. Heroes destroying parallel worlds by flexing their muscles; Heroines flying to another star system for some shopping on the way to a party; militaries fielding giant robots armed with giant swords - all of this has happened in shows that I have enjoyed a lot. Psychology is just as weird - part of that is japanese being weird people, part of that is anime tropes, but in the end, I just can't believe they treated little Asada Shino for killing that robber that harshly. How did they manage so well in the past wars if they lack warrior spirit to this extent? |
flannan said: ZECHS96 said: nothing, unless they are glorying things that shouldn't be glorified, example anti-social behavior in sword art online. 1) Please define "anti-social" and "glorified", because in my vocabulary, "anti-social behavior" is what the villains of SAO do, and they get punished for that, so it isn't "glorified" under my definition. 2) Estimating what you've probably meant: why shouldn't anti-social behavior be glorified, you extravert pig-dog? TheBrainintheJar said: The state of mind of the viewer is important. If the state of mind is what's important, why don't you allow the viewers to just immerse themselves in the stories without expecting some grand revelations? It's good for their state of mind, and that's what matters. Pig dog? Either your insulting me or referencing Monty Python I'm not sure which? By anti social I meant, isolating ones self from society ( generally not good for a person, humans being social animals and what not) and by Glorying it, I would say the anime basically portraying there to be nothing wrong with that. As for what you said about the villain of SAO, I'm not sure which your referring to, the creator or the elf king rapist? What's wrong with antisocial behavior, name me one thing healthy or beneficial about it? It's self destructive teaching people not to face reality and honestly that should not be glorified and SAO takes it to pandering territory. Is SAO a hill you want to die defending? |
ZECHS96 said: Yes, "pig-dog" was a cultural reference. In American English, communists are supposed to call their class enemies "pig-dogs". I'm not sure that it comes from Monty Python or Animal Farm or anything else.flannan said: 1) Please define "anti-social" and "glorified", because in my vocabulary, "anti-social behavior" is what the villains of SAO do, and they get punished for that, so it isn't "glorified" under my definition. 2) Estimating what you've probably meant: why shouldn't anti-social behavior be glorified, you extravert pig-dog? Pig dog? Either your insulting me or referencing Monty Python I'm not sure which? ZECHS96 said: I said "villains", plural. All of them (except, arguably, Kayaba), from the thugs Kirito intimidated with his regeneration, to the elf king rapist, are quite antisocial. Antisocial generally means "evil".As for what you said about the villain of SAO, I'm not sure which your referring to, the creator or the elf king rapist? Wikipedia said: Anti-social behaviours are actions that harm or lack consideration for the well-being of others.[1] Many people label behaviour which is deemed contrary to prevailing norms for social conduct as anti-social behaviour.[2] Rationalwiki redirects anti-social as "psychopath" - a person with no conscience, concern for other people and such. That's probably what elf king rapist was. Judging by your response, most likely you meant something else. Something like "asocial" or "introverted". I have a distaste for people trying to push extroversion as the norm, the way everybody should be, that's why I referred you as if you were my class enemy. ZECHS96 said: "If you want something done right, do it yourself." A lot of things are better done on your own. It's also good for an introvert's mental health.What's wrong with antisocial behavior, name me one thing healthy or beneficial about it? It's self destructive teaching people not to face reality and honestly that should not be glorified and SAO takes it to pandering territory. People are not all there is to reality. ZECHS96 said: Nobody died from internet arguments yet. And I'm not that old to risk dying of old age.Is SAO a hill you want to die defending? |
Buo said: The only escapist anime worth watching is "Rainbow: Nisha Rokubou no Shichinin". How is Rainbow an example of an escapist show? That place is a hellhole |
I guess it did. ///////////////////////////////////////////////////FUKDALIMITZJUSTDOITSHIALEBAOUF |
hoopla123 said: some people escapism is SNK. how fucked up people can be? it's not surprising dude.Buo said: The only escapist anime worth watching is "Rainbow: Nisha Rokubou no Shichinin". How is Rainbow an example of an escapist show? That place is a hellhole |
"If taking responsibility for a mistake that cannot be undone means death, it's not that hard to die. At least, not as hard as to live on." |
Tarextherex said: Sure, all entertainment can be considered as escapism, why are you spending your time relating to Welcome to the NHK when you could go outside and socialize However, anime like nhk actually have morals and messages, they encourage you to live by connecting to you emotionally. The problem is anime that glorify escapism and portray it as a way of life, SAO is literally about being op in a virtual world, it's basically saying "keep playing videogames, the real world doesnt matter you'll find a perfect waifu like asuna there!". People also call harem anime escapism because of course you would get all the girls irl by being dull as hell and not acting proactively at all, that's how it works right? As a mildly asocial, introvert person who loves video games and doesn't care if he has any real friends or not (even though I do have and I do appreciate them), I'd prefer to keep playing video games over socializing in stupid clubs, events, chitchatting or whatever the hell extroverts do, thank you. Also, what's wrong with watching shows about OP protagonists? Nobody sane watches them and thinks: "Yes, that's me". And btw, you also "don't get" girls by being a freaking asocial neet with anxiety issues and no skills whatsoever, and yet Sato did; two of them, mind you. |
TheBrainintheJar said: Well, for that conversation to be had, I would have to adopt an idea that leads me to believe a show is more escapist than another based on its merits or demerits, which is a conversation I find redundant due to what I've expressed already. CrappyGod-sama said: it was fun talking to you, friend. I understand your perspective, but I don't agree with it, and I feel like if we go at each other any longer, we're just going to be like two chained dogs barking at each other from a distance. Don't get me wrong, cause I mean no disrespect, but I just fundamentally don't agree with your perspective. It's fine that you use your own definition, but I just have my own perspective on the matter and what it means to enjoy something. I usually just call the things that leave me with no real evolution after the fact poor and shallow, instead of referring to them as escapist. Well, at least you know how to end a discussion civilly. But once we discuss what the group of letters 'escapism' means, we're off-topic. What we should discuss is, using a certain definition, escapism is good or not. Whenever I use 'escapist', I'm talking about shows that don't give you anything. They're not exciting or particularly fun. They're just generic and provide some distraction. Even if I were to adopt that idea, I would argue that under your definition, your example of WataMote (a manga I dropped years ago prior to even an announcement of it's adaptation) offered me nothing and was an escapist show because it hardly expresses the same ideas of social anxiety, incompetence, escapism through video games and delusion out of desperation as well as Welcome to the NHK! did. I also believe that what you choose to take from a show depends on you and how you do it. I normally allow myself to be immersed until I am done watching a show. After an episode I think to myself about what I'm watching, whether it has any value, what I enjoy about it and whether I should continue watching it based on what it has to offer. If I don't see it offering me anything of value, I drop it. And by what I mean when I say offering me something of value would be ideas, exceptional comedy, an exploration of themes or a character study - these are the things I find entertaining. As I sit here and write this, I find myself thinking that I might be willing to come to a common ground and express the idea that what I would define as an escapist show would be something that fails to entertain me - a show I would watch simply for the sake of watching and not necessarily enjoy doing so. You know, the idea of completionism. Watching shows for the sake of watching them even if you don't find them to offer you entertainment. If I were to pick up WataMote all over again, I would be reading something I don't enjoy and would be reading it only for the sake of killing time. |
| I'm also filled with pure-hearted ulterior motives. |
TheBrainintheJar said: But once we discuss what the group of letters 'escapism' means, we're off-topic. What we should discuss is, using a certain definition, escapism is good or not. Whenever I use 'escapist', I'm talking about shows that don't give you anything. They're not exciting or particularly fun. They're just generic and provide some distraction. It would be best to ask the person who asked the initial question what he meant to say. But he seems to be quoting some abstract other people, so the only way out is to assume some common and authoritative definition. Like the one on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escapism or tvtropes: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Escapism Speaking of tvtropes, this article might be useful: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Analysis/Escapism |
Tarextherex said: Sure, all entertainment can be considered as escapism, why are you spending your time relating to Welcome to the NHK when you could go outside and socialize However, anime like nhk actually have morals and messages, they encourage you to live by connecting to you emotionally. The problem is anime that glorify escapism and portray it as a way of life, SAO is literally about being op in a virtual world, it's basically saying "keep playing videogames, the real world doesnt matter you'll find a perfect waifu like asuna there!". People also call harem anime escapism because of course you would get all the girls irl by being dull as hell and not acting proactively at all, that's how it works right? You had it backward sao is trying to 'redeemed' the gaming world and its usual bad 'reputation' by trying to show that it can have worth, that it isn't Brain jar definition of escapism, it can help people, within those worlds they can freely be and openly express their (inner)trueself, they can equally grow, learn and mature in VR, just as much as in real life, because what's the difference? What is fake? The differences are just getting thiner and thiner whereas the possibilities just keep going off the charts. it's basically saying "keep playing videogames, the real world doesnt matter you'll find a perfect waifu like asuna there!" And yet kirito retook a liking for the real world along the way. ZECHS96 said: What's wrong with antisocial behavior, name me one thing healthy or beneficial about it? It's self destructive teaching people not to face reality and honestly that should not be glorified and SAO takes it to pandering territory. Is SAO a hill you want to die defending? Like i wrote above this isn't what emerges from sao when you're not weak and close-minded enough to let yourself be blinded and misguided by panty shots and stuffs like a stupid fly. |
 |
Lap1 said: Tarextherex said: Sure, all entertainment can be considered as escapism, why are you spending your time relating to Welcome to the NHK when you could go outside and socialize However, anime like nhk actually have morals and messages, they encourage you to live by connecting to you emotionally. The problem is anime that glorify escapism and portray it as a way of life, SAO is literally about being op in a virtual world, it's basically saying "keep playing videogames, the real world doesnt matter you'll find a perfect waifu like asuna there!". People also call harem anime escapism because of course you would get all the girls irl by being dull as hell and not acting proactively at all, that's how it works right? You had it backward sao is trying to 'redeemed' the gaming world and its usual bad 'reputation' by trying to show that it can have worth, that it isn't Brain jar definition of escapism, it can help people, within those worlds they can freely be and openly express their (inner)trueself, they can equally grow, learn and mature in VR, just as much as in real life, because what's the difference? What is fake? The differences are just getting thiner and thiner whereas the possibilities just keep going off the charts. it's basically saying "keep playing videogames, the real world doesnt matter you'll find a perfect waifu like asuna there!" And yet kirito retook a liking for the real world along the way. ZECHS96 said: What's wrong with antisocial behavior, name me one thing healthy or beneficial about it? It's self destructive teaching people not to face reality and honestly that should not be glorified and SAO takes it to pandering territory. Is SAO a hill you want to die defending? Like i wrote above this isn't what emerges from sao when you're not weak and close-minded enough to let yourself be blinded and misguided by panty shots and stuffs like a stupid fly. ? i said that SAO glorified anti-social behavior ( i meant recluse not anti social i used the wrong word). i never said anything about panty-shots. i have no idea were you got that from. also your definition of escapism had me in stitches , benefit of the doubt and you were being serious, that is absolutely laughable. |
ChadAznable0079Mar 5, 2016 10:46 PM
flannan said: Yes, "pig-dog" was a cultural reference. In American English, communists are supposed to call their class enemies "pig-dogs". I'm not sure that it comes from Monty Python or Animal Farm or anything else. ZECHS96 said: I said "villains", plural. All of them (except, arguably, Kayaba), from the thugs Kirito intimidated with his regeneration, to the elf king rapist, are quite antisocial. Antisocial generally means "evil".As for what you said about the villain of SAO, I'm not sure which your referring to, the creator or the elf king rapist? Wikipedia said: Anti-social behaviours are actions that harm or lack consideration for the well-being of others.[1] Many people label behaviour which is deemed contrary to prevailing norms for social conduct as anti-social behaviour.[2] Rationalwiki redirects anti-social as "psychopath" - a person with no conscience, concern for other people and such. That's probably what elf king rapist was. Judging by your response, most likely you meant something else. Something like "asocial" or "introverted". I have a distaste for people trying to push extroversion as the norm, the way everybody should be, that's why I referred you as if you were my class enemy. ZECHS96 said: "If you want something done right, do it yourself." A lot of things are better done on your own. It's also good for an introvert's mental health.What's wrong with antisocial behavior, name me one thing healthy or beneficial about it? It's self destructive teaching people not to face reality and honestly that should not be glorified and SAO takes it to pandering territory. People are not all there is to reality. ZECHS96 said: Nobody died from internet arguments yet. And I'm not that old to risk dying of old age.Is SAO a hill you want to die defending? ok i misused the word anti-social, i meant recluse ( as in someone who shuts them self of from society) or loner i was using the wrong word, thanks for bringing to my attention. that being said, i think SAO glorify's/ normalizes recluse behavior. humans or sort of meant to function in groups, the invention of the internet didn't negate that, ( i think that was were you were going with the " people are not all there is to reality" comment, correct me if im misunderstood what you said. by the way that comment seemed sort of odd, would you elaborate on that, it sort of sounded like you were quoting ghost in the shell ( good anime btw, hopefully we can at least agree on that) |
ZECHS96 said: ok i misused the word anti-social, i meant recluse ( as in someone who shuts them self of from society) or loner i was using the wrong word, thanks for bringing to my attention. that being said, i think SAO glorify's/ normalizes recluse behavior. humans or sort of meant to function in groups, the invention of the internet didn't negate that, ( i think that was were you were going with the " people are not all there is to reality" comment, correct me if im misunderstood what you said. by the way that comment seemed sort of odd, would you elaborate on that, it sort of sounded like you were quoting ghost in the shell ( good anime btw, hopefully we can at least agree on that) Working in groups has its advantages, usually in the amount of raw power humans can bring together. But it has its risks too! The first problem is logistics. Feeding armies has always been a problem, yet scouts can live off the land. (in a RPG, this means experience, in commerce this means demand). Making a lot of people cooperate requires a lot of skill and talent. So in most circumstances, player cooperation in RPGs is limited to parties of no more than 4-6 people. (there is some RW theory on the practical limit of a unit, which I don't remember) At some point, Asuna, with her beauty and people skills, became one of the few people who can lead larger fights, like boss fights. The second problem is exploration. SAO required lengthy periods of exploration before decisive battles. An army can't explore - people need to spread out and think for themselves. In a military context, they also need stealth (that is, they can't talk much). In a science context, they need some time alone with their thoughts. Kirito was such a scout. The third problem is groupthink. People who cooperate too much can stop properly thinking (look it up on Wikipedia, it has a lot more to say). Kirito and Asuna had a good dynamic in the war councils, preventing things from becoming like that. This might have saved many lives. Finally, you should notice that while Kirito did a lot of solo action, he was never truly alone. He bought information from information broker (Argo the rat, that girl in a hood with facial markings), he had the whole economy of mid-power players to provide him with gear and consumables, he gave away the maps he explored, and he participated in all those boss battles with lots of other players. And he never hesitated to help weaker players like Silica (the cute little girl) when they were in trouble. Cooperation is not all about cuddling together. P.S. Yes, I also watched Ghost in the Shell, and it was good (but totally different from SAO). I did not quote it here - I was talking about the fact that there aren't just humans in this world - there are gadgets, there are animals, there are stars in the sky... And IRL, people would often leave the comfort of their homes to learn about them, repair them and so on. |
I thought i was clear enough, sao doesn't glorify recluse behavior, as soon as the anime commence kirito is portrayed as having negative addiction to games and presented as a shut-in but it also hint you that this behavior is understandable and is a solution to escape social problems to a more interesting world easier to dominate, also he's quite a greedy person and in those worlds he can far more easily satisfied himself. And even in kirito case apart from feeding his desires it shows that VR can effectively helps him connecting with people again and helps him be lifted from his state and reopen up to people. |
|
flannan said: TheBrainintheJar said: But once we discuss what the group of letters 'escapism' means, we're off-topic. What we should discuss is, using a certain definition, escapism is good or not. Whenever I use 'escapist', I'm talking about shows that don't give you anything. They're not exciting or particularly fun. They're just generic and provide some distraction. It would be best to ask the person who asked the initial question what he meant to say. But he seems to be quoting some abstract other people, so the only way out is to assume some common and authoritative definition. Like the one on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escapism or tvtropes: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Escapism Speaking of tvtropes, this article might be useful: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Analysis/Escapism I think it's best not to discuss what 'escapism' means, but whether our specific definitions of 'escapism' make shows good or not. What 'escapism' means is semantics. Whether definition no.1/no.2/no.3 is good or bad in fiction is the real interesting discussion. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
TheBrainintheJar said: flannan said: It would be best to ask the person who asked the initial question what he meant to say. But he seems to be quoting some abstract other people, so the only way out is to assume some common and authoritative definition. Like the one on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escapism or tvtropes: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Escapism Speaking of tvtropes, this article might be useful: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Analysis/Escapism I think it's best not to discuss what 'escapism' means, but whether our specific definitions of 'escapism' make shows good or not. What 'escapism' means is semantics. Whether definition no.1/no.2/no.3 is good or bad in fiction is the real interesting discussion. I have seen too many discussions breaking down because people were using the same word, yet meant quite different things. They weren't anime discussions, but I still think the danger remains. |
flannan said: TheBrainintheJar said: I think it's best not to discuss what 'escapism' means, but whether our specific definitions of 'escapism' make shows good or not. What 'escapism' means is semantics. Whether definition no.1/no.2/no.3 is good or bad in fiction is the real interesting discussion. I have seen too many discussions breaking down because people were using the same word, yet meant quite different things. They weren't anime discussions, but I still think the danger remains. That's why it's important to first of all define what you're talking about, and then choose which definition you're discussing. People who don't stop to clarify their words, or don't offer to aren't people to talk to. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
| not really familiar with the word but if my guess why then I don't see any prob with it |
“The greatest crimes in the world are not committed by people breaking the rules but by people following the rules. It's people who follow orders that drop bombs and massacre villages.” -Bansky  |
More topics from this board
» mal/ConfessionsNoelleIsSleepy - 2 hours ago |
13 |
by kusairo
»»
44 seconds ago |
|
» Woke Companies Force Japanese Sites to Censor Anime and Manga Content or Shutdown ( 1 2 )rohan121 - Yesterday |
67 |
by Abomination_suah
»»
4 minutes ago |
|
» Do you care about gambling anime?Cammell - May 8 |
26 |
by sofiekujo33
»»
6 minutes ago |
|
» Disney Japan Executive Promises to Censor Anime ( 1 2 )rohan121 - May 7 |
86 |
by Neterosan
»»
19 minutes ago |
|
» If there a Cute Guys doing cute thing would you watch it?RedTea33 - Yesterday |
23 |
by Daviljoe193
»»
38 minutes ago |