| Yes. For example, I got bored watching Aria but I can see how it is good and why it appeals to others. It has great worldbuilding and it executes it very well. However, I'm much more of a character's person and I find the characters more lacking. That said I still rate it not that highly because my list is more about my opinions than it is about objectivity. |
Joven said: @TripleSRank Uhhh... If it made me think, I do still think it's good and it won't bore me. Most of my highly rated stuff is like that... Lain being the shining example. And yes, the chances of me finding something where they do contradict would be pretty much nil. Okay, wording. I find stuff that makes me think interesting too (and hence not boring), but I still wouldn't describe it as "enjoyable" since that has a more emotive connotation: Your mental state is much different when you're thinking about something like that compared to how you feel when watching a really great fight scene, for example, right? (It you don't like fight scenes, then replace it with something analogous... say, a scene where a ship you like has a really cute or romantic moment together). That's the difference I'm marking. I'd call the former aesthetic appeal and the latter emotive appeal. This is why I figured it was a semantics issue. If you think of both of those as a form of enjoyment, then we aren't really disagreeing. We're just wording things differently. |
TripleSRank said: Joven said: @TripleSRank Uhhh... If it made me think, I do still think it's good and it won't bore me. Most of my highly rated stuff is like that... Lain being the shining example. And yes, the chances of me finding something where they do contradict would be pretty much nil. Okay, wording. I find stuff that makes me think interesting too (and hence not boring), but I still wouldn't describe it as "enjoyable" since that has a more emotive connotation: Your mental state is much different when you're thinking about something like that compared to how you feel when watching a really great fight scene, for example, right? (It you don't like fight scenes, then replace it with something analogous... say, a scene where a ship you like has a really cute or romantic moment together). That's the difference I'm marking. I'd call the former aesthetic appeal and the latter emotive appeal. This is why I figured it was a semantics issue. If you think of both of those as a form of enjoyment, then we aren't really disagreeing. We're just wording things differently. I certainly enjoy stuff that makes me think since it's one of the things I value or I look for in my entertainment... That's why I don't really see a separation between the two. "My emotions comes from my values", I'm just applying my general philosophy in life here too. |
Joven said: TripleSRank said: Okay, wording. I find stuff that makes me think interesting too (and hence not boring), but I still wouldn't describe it as "enjoyable" since that has a more emotive connotation: Your mental state is much different when you're thinking about something like that compared to how you feel when watching a really great fight scene, for example, right? (It you don't like fight scenes, then replace it with something analogous... say, a scene where a ship you like has a really cute or romantic moment together). That's the difference I'm marking. I'd call the former aesthetic appeal and the latter emotive appeal. This is why I figured it was a semantics issue. If you think of both of those as a form of enjoyment, then we aren't really disagreeing. We're just wording things differently. I certainly enjoy stuff that makes me think since it's one of the things I value or I look for in my entertainment... That's why I don't really see a separation between the two. "My emotions comes from my values", I'm just applying my general philosophy in life here too. Well, I obviously like everything that I like too, no matter how I describe it. It would be pretty nonsensical if I didn't like what I like. Haha. I believe we're in agreement. I'm just talking about how I like things in a different way-- perhaps I could improve the way I talk about it somehow, but I have yet to discover it. I'd really rather not lump every form of liking something under the term "enjoyment" though since that already has a lot of connotations. |
| I don't know anymore, it's subjective. But moe is crap for sure! |
(｀∀´)Ψ xoxo gossip girl |
| In my own ways, then yes. Of course how can you give a good score if you dint even enjoy it? But then, there's anime that i would enjoy but others won't. |
on 
TripleSRank said: Conclusion. On the contrary, I fully endorse and encourage one to explore the whys when one's values and taste conflict, as these are often rather unusual and interesting cases. The reason I portray taste or emotive appeal as the more "selfish" of the two is because of how difficult that is to share with others in a direct way, whereas values or aesthetic appeal is something that can be far more easily conveyed or "shared" with others who can appreciate that dimension of things and thus provides more opportunities when it comes to discussion. Mm, so simply put, you're pushing people to view quality and enjoyment as separate values because it simply makes discussion and sharing thought easier and you work entirely off of the basis that discussion leads to growth. Because of that, we must view things in a way acceptable to the community and then hold our own thoughts separate instead of together - it's basically just saying we should form our own thoughts on stuff for the sake of other people while keeping our personal thoughts on it separate. Which is the entirety of your conclusion post right there, so don't even say I'm strawmanning this. Also, because I want to get this out of the way, a response to your third paragraph: no, I'm not the type to concern myself with meaningless trivialities such as how a car engine works, I'm the type to wake up and go to work and then come home and do what I want to in my downtime. Any philosophies or thoughts I come up with are generally borne out of a distaste for specific types of attitudes and behaviors - in this specific context, I have an extreme distaste for the faux-intellectualist mindset I perceive many anime fans to have, that tends to breed intolerance for people who don't try to view things in a critical context and focus primarily on simple fun or how much something can entertain them, which is also something I strongly believe doesn't necessarily hamper the discussion that so many people act like they crave for - rather than something I just so happen to be pondering over in my downtime. However, I feel a need to emphasize that personal philosophies and opinions are different beasts, and what I like is generally based on tastes and perceptions centered around simply what entertains me the most - how it was made, for what purpose or reason, and any ideas it tries to express often hold little bearing to me by themselves so long as they don't impact my enjoyment positively or negatively, and in these cases they tend to only really impact negatively when they're overdone or preachy or whatever. I'd rather have something that gives me an experience I can look back on fondly be made entirely for the sake of profit than shallowly praise something for possessing artistic integrity and having a meaningful message in spite of neither of those things possessing intrisic value to me, so on and so forth. If me getting the most out of what I watch is something somebody like you would deem as selfish and arrogant because I'm more concerned with myself getting the most out of something rather than bowing down to my surrounding circumstances, then I don't think we're going to get anywhere by discussing things with each other. I'm not buying into your bullshit rhetoric that's simply trying to mask a communal mentality under the guise of being pro-individual parameters. inb4 blah blah i didn't say that, you're projecting onto me in spite of the fact my literal last post featured a tl;dr saying that opinions based on quality should be formed primarily for the sake of discussing things with others, you're just strawmanning me manaban ptooey. As you say you're tired of me strawmanning you, I'm tired of you plugging your ears and just spouting off projection and strawman when I'm trying to further understand the core concept of your idea, since I don't believe what you're telling me at face value for even a second. I understand that you're saying these standards of quality can still be rooted in individual perception and are far from absolute, but I don't believe that you actually think that; on the grounds that you're saying you're entirely against the idea of melding the two together because it's more focused on individual pleasure, as if quality based on personal logic wouldn't be rooted in individual ideals and values to begin with, making the idea that it makes for better discussion seem absurd and fabricated to me - and, as an aside, your attitude of dismissing opinions not rooted in ideals you agree with isn't any less selfish just because you say that it's rooted in being for discussion amongst more than just yourself. Like I'm about to do in my next paragraph, you're just dismissing ideals that don't go within your own narrative because of the sole fact they don't go within your own narrative and values. The only difference between the two of us is that I wear as much on my sleeve by outright stating that opinions that can't provide any actual gain to me achieving my endgoal aren't ones I really consider incorporating into my own outlook, whereas you try to pigeonhole around it by acting like you're above it in spite of dismissing ideals that don't fall within how you think thoughts and opinions should be presented and formed. As such, I see no need to continue this specific discussion further on my end either, because we'll just be continuing at an eternal standstill. Like you refuse to be anything but dismissive of incorporating quality into enjoyment for the sake of individual gain, I refuse to be anything except dismissive of the idea of separating the two primarily for the sake of discussing thoughts with others. There will be no progress made in this discussion because of that, no matter how long we go at it. I will not see where you're coming from, entirely because I choose not to - because your stated ideals hold no direct benefit to any experience I can gain from watching anime, and I'm not going to pass off a bullshit act like they actual possess worth to me in spite of that. You will not see where I'm coming from, entirely because you choose not to - forming separate opinions for the sake of discussing them with others instead of something being entirely rooted in personal benefit is the only actual thoughts worth discussing, and no matter how well somebody who treats enjoyment and quality as synonymous presents their thoughts on something, you're going to dismiss it as selfish and worthless to you because it's not separating quality from personal feeling. Call me arrogant or selfish as you may, I'm not going to compromise on my own personal standards of how I deem something good when it holds no direct benefit to how I enjoy what I watch. Trying to subtly pressure me into doing so by constant namecalling is going to be especially counterintuitive to convincing me to view what you have to say as anything but impressionist drivel, as well. |
ManabanMar 27, 2017 6:48 AM
 |
TripleSRank said: Joven said: I certainly enjoy stuff that makes me think since it's one of the things I value or I look for in my entertainment... That's why I don't really see a separation between the two. "My emotions comes from my values", I'm just applying my general philosophy in life here too. Well, I obviously like everything that I like too, no matter how I describe it. It would be pretty nonsensical if I didn't like what I like. Haha. I believe we're in agreement. I'm just talking about how I like things in a different way-- perhaps I could improve the way I talk about it somehow, but I have yet to discover it. I'd really rather not lump every form of liking something under the term "enjoyment" though since that already has a lot of connotations. 'Enjoyment' is such an amorphous term that doesn't capture the fact fiction works in various ways. Some works are satirical. Others include serious insight to the human psyche. Some are about visual aesthetics. 'Enjoyment' might as well mean 'the process of finding good qualities in a given art piece'. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
| @Manaban I will transparently admit that when I first read your post I was saddened, disappointed, ticked off, and a variety of other negative emotions because you are treating me with a great deal of rudeness in your belief that you understand my "actual" perspective. I thought about writing it off as you you writing off whatever is inconvenient for you because you don't like my perspective, and that made me angry. I wrote a lot of stuff in that anger that I've since deleted... After taking the time to calm my emotions and read your post fully (I had read all of your posts fully until this last post of yours, but my indignation was very hot), I have come to the conclusion that you are being completely and utterly sincere and genuine with me, and that you aren't just trying to write off what I'm saying out of dubious motives. That's a bitter pill to swallow because that makes this discussion hard, probably the hardest one I've encountered in my time on MAL. How can we come to any mutual understanding when we're both assuming the worst of the other? How can we even now? I reconize that my recognition of this state does not compel you to believe I am being any more genuine or less manipulative than you apparently currently think I am being, so after some thinking, I have an idea. It would be a lot easier for me to ignore your post or for you to ignore mine, but please, please bear with me. I say this with a bit of deliberate pretentiousness and humor, but perhaps we can solve one of the great mysteries of MAL together if we stick it out just a little longer and build a bridge between those who are stereotyped as casuals and those who are stereotyped as elitists. Anyway, since my character has become an integral part of the conversation, my idea is to explain to you my history and how I came to view and explain things the way I do. Maybe you will still think I'm being manipulative, elitist, and faux-intellectual after, but again, if you could find it in you to continue to humor me, please do. Memories being memories, this is to the best of my memory. Some details and such may be wrong since it's been a long time. When I first came to MAL back when I was a young teen... say, 13 or 14, it was shortly after I had discovered anime. I had no sense of critical perspective then. I couldn't even explain why I enjoyed the things I enjoyed. The reason I came here, if my memory serves, was to read the subforums of the greatest piece of fiction I had ever consumed until that point in my life, something that had reduced me to a sobbing mess and revealed to me things about myself I hadn't realized before. That anime was Clannad: After Story. My experience was pretty traumatic, being that I was still new to the communities of the internet. Many, many people in the subforum trashed the anime extremely harshly, and I perceived that as a criticism of me because I loved the anime so much and had gotten so much out of it. I literally could not comprehend how those people could hate it so much, so, in my naivety, I concluded that some people were just out there to ruin the experience for everyone else, and I mostly abandoned the anime medium for many years. Flash forward a few years until I was 18, late in 2013. I was thinking back to my childhood and remembered that one cartoon that was completely different from all the other ones I had seen on TV, the one I had only seen a little bit of. Since I was already somewhat familiar with anime, it didn't take too long to find the Wikipedia page for One Piece. I decided that I'd try watching it again all the way through to the current episodes, and I did. It took me several months and during that time I came back to MAL. I wiped my old list of all its entries (a dozen or two I think) with the intent to start fresh and re-watch any of the old titles I wanted on my list. I changed my username to the current one, TripleSRank, and I started lightly reading around in the community. My return to online communities had actually started slightly before my return to MAL, so from the Mighty No. 9 kickstarter community I got some recs for other anime, the most important of which was Hunter x Hunter (2011) since it's what "locked in" my eventual integration into the MAL community. This is a snapshot from back then. My description of "how I rate" in my about me from that snapshot already shows the seeds of another development. Around the same time I returned to MAL, I was extensively involved in reading articles from TVTropes, which I found both entertaining and fascinating. I was well aware of my previous experiences in the community as a young teen, so in my mind I thought I had to create a weapon with which to combat the "hateful people". At first I decided to embrace subjectivity, the "ironclad defense"; if someone disagreed with me I could just say I mostly rate subjectively and leave it at that. But, that wasn't satisfying. I didn't want to defend. I wanted to fight back! I wanted to stand on my own with those hateful people and best them with their own arguments... and I was a fool. Tropes and "objectivity" became my core weapon of choice, but I "needed" to make some changes in the perspective I took when watching anime in order to bear such a weapon. I needed to analyze what I was watching as I watched it so I would have the materials with which to create my arrows. So I did, and it "worked". I had good reasons for enjoying the things I enjoyed, and it was objective. Take that, vile haters. I knew I was virtually always right, and the ever so small caveats I had to make, openness to new genres and art styles, were worth it to fight those people. I ignorantly continued on in that state for awhile, until some point in 2015, I think. I didn't realize what my forcefullness and aggression had become. I didn't realize I had become exactly like the people in the Clannad: After Story subforum who completely destroyed my experience in my early teenage years, the people I had hated. But I had. I was insufferable, faux-intellectual, and nearly impossible to talk to if you disagreed with me unless you were extremely humble, patient, or timid. I was a jerk. A couple things eventually drawed me out of that. The biggest thing on MAL that pointed out my overwhelming obnoxiousness were the objectivity/subjectivity threads that continually dominated discussion on AD for nearly a year. I argued relentlessly in almost all of them until after repetition, one day it just kinda hit me what a supreme douchebag I had been for so long. It was actually quite scary. I knew I had to change and soften my views somehow, and although I subtly shifted the way I was arguing in the final few objectivity/subjdctivity threads that popped up to minimize the obviousness of it, my perspective had changed. I finally knew my opinions were nothing more than opinions. I took another break from MAL around that time, if memory serves. When I finally found myself drawn back to anime again, I had to figure out yet again how I would approach watching anime. On the one hand I definitely didn't want to be a douchebag in the community anymore, but on the other I had grown extremely fond of the new ways I had learned to watch anime. You see, for all of the filth and garbage and obnoxious bullcrap I had dumped on the community during that period, I had also opened myself up to new genres, new art styles, and new methods of watching I absolutely never would have tried had I not attempted to wield the false weapon that is "objectivity". But I liked all those new things and the way I came to like them, the more open-minded and analytical approach. How then was I to mend my favored way of watching with the truth that my opinions were not inherently better than that of others while still allowing myself to take part in discussions, an activity I had grown to so enjoy? My conclusion was to marry the two perspectives into something more moderate than either extreme. I liked it when stories developed a theme or made me think-- I genuinely did-- but I also liked the adrenaline rush of an epic action scene or the gushy feelings you'd get from a romance. MAL tends to view these things as if they were opposites and contradictory in nature, that the former is "quality" and the latter is "enjoyment", so I decided, hey, screw that, I like both! Now, "quality" unfortunately has a lot of very bad connotations associated with it, connotations I myself had perpetuated during my time of foolishness. How then would I express my like for when a story does something "interesting" that MAL would call "quality", but something that is actually still very personal to me? I decided to call those my "values"-- a word more neutral in connotation-- while still calling the other ways I liked stories "enjoyment" since MAL used it to mean "that was fun" anyway. Further, I decided that my enjoyment, my emotive pleasure would actually make up a large portion of those "values" of mine, since in the end I wanted my ratings to reflect every way I liked an anime. Here I am. Hello, I'm TripleSRank. Call me TSR, SSS, Triple, or TripleS. Nice to meet you. I think it would be wise to allow you to share any thoughts you have on my history and development, and how I came to my current way of looking at things before trying to explain the way I look at things any further. Shoot. Questions, criticisms, whatever. I don't think there's any further way for me to open myself up to you to show my sincerity. Edit: I was 18 in late 2013, not 17. Doh. |
TripleSRankMar 28, 2017 8:37 PM
| good anime isn't always enjoyable, it's like with video games, there are amazing games that I don't always enjoy but I still play for the "experience"(or the story in the case of anime ) , and games that I enjoy although they might be a bit shitty, I appreciate both sides both in anime and in vgs |
TheBrainintheJar said: TripleSRank said: Well, I obviously like everything that I like too, no matter how I describe it. It would be pretty nonsensical if I didn't like what I like. Haha. I believe we're in agreement. I'm just talking about how I like things in a different way-- perhaps I could improve the way I talk about it somehow, but I have yet to discover it. I'd really rather not lump every form of liking something under the term "enjoyment" though since that already has a lot of connotations. 'Enjoyment' is such an amorphous term that doesn't capture the fact fiction works in various ways. Some works are satirical. Others include serious insight to the human psyche. Some are about visual aesthetics. 'Enjoyment' might as well mean 'the process of finding good qualities in a given art piece'. That's what makes it such a poor term, honestly. If I said I'm enjoying Kino's Journey and that I enjoyed Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann, it would appear that my response to both shows is identical when in fact they are very different. I like Kino's Journey so far because it makes me think, while I liked TTGL mostly because it was adrenaline-rush fun. Those are extremely different responses, and although they're both desirable to me specifically, in the context of discussion (where not everyone will find both types desirable) I find it tends to be better to differentiate those types of desirable response. I just call the former values and the latter enjoyment, though I guess that causes some semantics problems on occasion. That way, when I tell someone I thought Ping Pong the Animation was enjoyable or fun, they know I mean I liked it in the way people tend to like TTGL rather than the way people tend to like Kino's Journey. |
| @TripleSRank Very well then. I apologize for my previous assumptions about your motives and retract them. I feel like to understand exactly why I hold my point of view as strongly as I do, though, you should hear a bit of my story as well. Plus, it can go towards forwarding the idea that individual experiences ultimately are what shapes our perspectives and outlook on what we watch, which is something I believe very strongly in anyway. I haven't been into anime as long as most people here - year and a half or so now, I think. I created my account on this site two days after I started my first one. I've never been the best at making my point, and even wherever I'm at now isn't something that just happened with time, y'know? I've lost far, far more arguments than I've won, and I recognize as much. Prior to using this site, I used a thread in the off-topic part of a site I had used since before I got into anime. The site itself was far smaller than here, and as such the faces I saw were often the same ones; and, furthermore, since it was a small site, there was a much more dominant idea of the accepted taste, which, obviously, wasn't my goofy harem stuff I like so much. so on and so forth Often times I would do things like try to appeal to their stated values whenever I brought something I like into the fray, which completely faltered and made me look stupid whenever somebody tried to hold it under scrutiny. Like I said, my arguments weren't the best and I've lost a lot more than I've won. And then I tried to sort of stake out my own claim; like a small child, I ragequit that place because I couldn't get people to like what I like or even at the least convince them it was worth existing. And, when I left that small little thread on that small little site, I found that it was kind of tame in comparison to the way people just really loved to tear apart things I liked. I couldn't present myself well, I couldn't form lines of logic and opinions to make what I had to say worth listening to, and it felt like there were very few people similar to me against a horde of people against the stuff I liked. I've grown thicker skin since then and now I don't care nearly as much as I did at the time, but everything felt really fuckin' hostile at that time. Even more annoying was that a lot of people had pre-formed ideas and notions about how something they don't even like on a conceptual level should be made, which would often be ideas that remove the entire core of why the genres appealed to me to begin with; they would shit themselves about the importance of critical analysis and apply a lot of vague literary terminology to their opinions to create this false idea that they had more value. It pisses me off, even now, honestly, even though I really do force myself to be as tolerant of people who disagree with me in terms of what we like or dislike as possible just for the sake of refusing to compromise on my principles. Although that applies to tastes and standards, and not ideals or how opinions are formed, I admit. So, ultimately, I ended up trying to better myself. I didn't do that through discussion or with other people, really - at most it'd just be sitting back and listening to the thoughts of others to kind of give myself a needed push at times, but at the heart of things I just started looking a bit more at what I liked and realized that yeah, it was often shallow and trashy; it didn't have the deepest narrative or anything, and that I could either compromise liking the kind of stuff I like and cede it under the idea that it doesn't fall in line with what's traditionally considered good, or just...not really care and free myself from the binds of worrying about what other people think of what I like. I went with the latter. What I liked was what I liked and the reasons I like it can vary from series to series, but what ultimately caused me to make the most gain in expressing my opinions and thoughts like I can now was shirking the notions of things needing to hold up to a checklist of critical do's and dont's, and instead of trying to vaguely apply a set group of literary terms to what I liked to give it the impression that it's something that it isn't, I ultimately just embrace what I like for what it is, since that's why I like it in the first place. On the surface, yes, it sounds like it's all just dismissing ideas and forms opinions that can't really contribute positively to group discussions over specific series and standards since, yes, I am completely married to how what I like makes me feel instead of trying to look at things in a way that's free of bias and discerning the pros and cons of it, but because I'm so married to this idea of having a set of tastes that is entirely, undeniably my own, I've gained more introspective on myself than I could've ever had by trying to form thoughts and opinions based on the standards of those around me, and as such I've gotten far, far better at expressing myself than where I was at as early as a year ago. And yeah, I'm proud of myself for coming this far. I'm not perfect and I know I'm not perfect, but compared to where I was a year ago, I'm almost an entirely different person in terms of how I present myself and how I view others around me. Obviously I'm still very skeptical and cynical, given the post you just responded to, and I'm not made of steel and things can get under my skin sometimes, but I can listen to people who don't agree with me now without really feeling attacked or getting frustrated. And instead of feeling forced to take their opinions in and apply them to what I like, I only feel a need to do that if, well, it's something that furthers my own endgoal of what I want to achieve. If it's something that doesn't really help me expand my parameters or holds little bearing into how I get the most out of what I watch, then I see no need to take it on. It doesn't mean that I think they're wrong necessarily, it just means that it's not compatible with what I hope to achieve through watching anime and as such I don't apply it to myself. Through thoroughly embracing subjectivity, I've really gained a lot of new insight on myself and why I like what I like. It's a selfish outlook centered entirely around getting the most out of what entertains me, yes, and it can cause me to go against the standards of critical discourse by being dismissive of new ideas sometimes. It isn't intellectual or intelligent at all on its surface and a lot of people can, and will, write it off as a form of cowardly, spineless self-preservation of my own thoughts and ideas in the same vein that I wrote off your ideas as being exploitative and subtly manipulative. But ultimately, nothing's changed my outlook and ideas more than what I've accomplished myself through embracing my own individual parameters; nobody lifted me up from being a blithering idiot like I was a year and a half ago through constant discussion. They served as a catalyst, sure, but ultimately what's brought me to where I stand now and why I continue to grow and learn more is that I've figured out what set of ideals that I abide by and I look at things from the lens of "how does this benefit me more?" It is totally selfish, but just because it's selfish doesn't mean that nothing comes from it. -------------------------------------------- With all of that out of the way, it's why I so thoroughly disagree with the idea that people with my outlook can't discuss things as well because their thoughts are rooted in feelings as opposed to logic. During the short time I've actively used this site, I've taken part in more long, drawn out discussions than most people who abide by critical standards and logical outlooks have in this same time span, I'd wager. This isn't even the first or the second discussion I've had where me and the person I'm talking to have thrown out walls of text at each over the course of a few days - and it's not in spite of my outlook that this is the case, it's because of my outlook that this is the case. It's probably harder to change the ideals of somebody who isn't open to it to begin with - which I will not ignore the fact that a lot of people do try to hide behind subjectivity to prevent themselves from being challenged, which I dislike immensely - but I think that if somebody applies subjectivity to their thoughts and ideas instead of just using it as a shield to hide behind, then they will grow rapidly from it, moreso than any kind of critical discourse can provide. And the reason I think that is entirely based on my own experiences and growth to where I'm at now, just like the reason you think the way you do is just based on your own experiences and growth since starting to take part in this kind of discourse. Probably why we're not really getting anywhere, truthfully ._. I mean, I see where you're coming from better than I did initially, sure, but in truth, I'm no closer to accepting it as the right way to look at things than I was at the very beginning. Maybe it's because it's entirely contradictory from what my own experiences have taught me as being the best way to improve and grow mentally and as a person when it comes to forming opinions on anime, or maybe it's because of what I was talking about earlier to where I don't really see how it benefits me in obtaining my end goal - and like I'll admit, yes, my outlook is entirely selfish in that regard. At the same time I feel less opposed to the idea of how it's being promoted however, I guess. My ultimate problem will always lie with the idea that there's a correct way to approach the topic instead of a way that's set on an individual basis, which is what I perceived you as initially saying because of the talk of separating quality and enjoyment, which seemed implicit of a set of qualities making something "good" that's separate from what standards an individual viewer may set. It's entirely possible, if not probable, that I just took that in the wrong way, but it wasn't an attempt at projection or strawmanning or a deliberate misunderstanding, I can promise you that much. Understanding my own motivations as well as I know I do doesn't translate into always fully understanding the motivations of everybody around me, but at the same time I still think the best way to better learn and fully understand the perspectives and motivations of others is when they don't separate enjoyment from quality and speak as an individual viewer rather than speaking as if logic and reason are an absolute and bias and personality are inherently wrong ways to approach a topic, but maybe that's just me. It's also something I don't put a lot of stock into in many cases because I believe that, at most, there are many different small groups of people who possess similar outlooks and trying to understand each individual perspective is beyond anybody's grasp. It's not even on such a level that "every person who likes ecchi likes ecchi for this," or "every person who likes psychological thrillers like them for this," it's that even amongst those groups of people there are many different outlooks and reasons for gravitating to that, and that the best arguments are formed by people who understand why they like what they do to the fullest extent, hence why I don't think critical discourse is very valuable; I view it as simply an easier way of learning how to present ones' self via people who actually understand themselves and their own outlooks, and that people will take on the opinions of whoever can present themselves the best. And the people who present themselves the best tend to understand their own outlooks and thought processes the best, hence why they can argue their points better. As such, I tend to value self-perspective more than understanding the perspectives of others. I will admit that I was completely wrong about my perception of you, however, based on this last post, and again, I apologize for being so accusatory. When I woke up this morning and saw a response, I fully expected something angry like you said you were originally going to post, yet given that you were able to recognize that it wasn't an attempt to call your character into question in order to dismiss your thoughts as opposed to just calling your character in question in general and then responding to that in a way that was explanatory and earnest is enough to tell me that I was dead on wrong about that perception, however. I don't think I would've been so patient there, or rather, I wasn't as patient when I had felt my character was being called into question at several points during this discussion xP |
ManabanMar 28, 2017 8:02 AM
|
TripleSRank said: TheBrainintheJar said: 'Enjoyment' is such an amorphous term that doesn't capture the fact fiction works in various ways. Some works are satirical. Others include serious insight to the human psyche. Some are about visual aesthetics. 'Enjoyment' might as well mean 'the process of finding good qualities in a given art piece'. That's what makes it such a poor term, honestly. If I said I'm enjoying Kino's Journey and that I enjoyed Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann, it would appear that my response to both shows is identical when in fact they are very different. I like Kino's Journey so far because it makes me think, while I liked TTGL mostly because it was adrenaline-rush fun. Those are extremely different responses, and although they're both desirable to me specifically, in the context of discussion (where not everyone will find both types desirable) I find it tends to be better to differentiate those types of desirable response. I just call the former values and the latter enjoyment, though I guess that causes some semantics problems on occasion. That way, when I tell someone I thought Ping Pong the Animation was enjoyable or fun, they know I mean I liked it in the way people tend to like TTGL rather than the way people tend to like Kino's Journey. The problem here is unclarified terms. I think it's better to just talk why an anime is good instead of saying you 'enjoyed' it, whatever that means. Solaire-Q said: No, not at all. A good example is Rakugo. I know it's not everyone's cup-of-tea, but anyone who is honest and can actually recognize quality wouldn't deny it's a remarkable drama. I don't know. You know you have to prove value is an objective thing before value judgment becomes objective. Values cannot be objective unless they're an object. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
| Wouldn't say so at all. I know a lot of anime I disliked that I didn't outright dismiss as being bad. All just a matter of preference. |
 |
| Yes, but acknowledging it depends on the level of your enjoyment, too, I think. Like, if you're just indifferent towards it or just slightly dislike it, you may acknowledge that it's good and if you deeply dislike it you can't. Or maybe you can, depends on the person too and this is getting too paradoxical. |
| @Manaban Whew. I'm glad I calmed myself now. It's interesting how much pre-supposing things about someone that you really don't know can color a discussion-- and I mean that as much about me judging you as the reverse. Sorry. This actually quite interesting. I think I've been waiting to talk to someone like you for a long time now. There just seem to be so few people that adopt a perspective like yours without the sole intent to deflect-- or rather, even amongst those that don't, I don't think there are many that could explain said perspective in the way you have. That in itself has made this worthwhile, regardless of whether we can go any further from here. In light of BrainintheJar's last response to me, and especially in light of our very different backgrounds, in this specific case I think it would be better and easier to explain my viewpoint by minimizing the enjoyment and quality/values terminology as much as I can and just explaining bare naked how I like things in different ways-- and how that relates to the original opinion I expressed to you. But first let me clarify a few things to minimize any chance of further misunderstanding. As I think you now know, I believe expressing your views is the best and obvious way to approach any discussion about something, full stop. I don't care what perspective someone tries to take, how they try explain, even if they can explain anything at all. They need to be expressing what they themselves think. If you aren't explaining your own views, what's the point? Others can explain their views for themselves; you don't need to take their views as your views unless you just like those views that much. In that sense, when I talked about how I thought only responding to things through raw emotions-- excitement and adrenaline, sadness and catharsis, cuteness-affection and lovey-dovey-empathizing-- when I said I thought only viewing things in that perspective was shallow, unreflected, etc., first of all that wasn't a criticism of you as a person. That's also not me saying the things that caused you to feel something are bad, shallow, or of little worth. Responses like don't just "exist"; they came from somewhere. Something pulled them out, and to whatever extent they pulled them out, I'd say that's generally (95%+ of the time) praiseworthy. It had to do something "right" for you for that to happen. I myself highly value those kinds of responses. I explicitly seek out shows that can draw out those emotions often. What else is there, then? When people think about something like artistic merit or worth, I think they have a tendency to make a lot of false assumptions and over-inflate the idea into something bigger than it is. In the end, casting aside the less noble sorts and those who use the term as an excuse to try to force their preferences on others, I think you could summarize the concept as "what was this work trying to say/do". Not everyone cares about that, but a lot of people do-- I do myself. I like it when a work says something... it gives it a sense of meaning and purpose beyond the temporal emotions it can elicit from me. So if it manages to "say something" in a way I find to be particularly effective, I'm going to say, hey, that's a great work of art. That's "good". I liked that. Note that all of that is from my perspective as an individual. Also note that recognizing a point being made, even if you think it's made well, doesn't necessarily provide you with any emotional satisfaction-- or at least not in a direct way. It's a mental assent that you think the work did a good job at playing with an idea, and if you like to think about stuff a lot then you're probably going to like that in your fiction too. That's all there really is to it, but I think you can see how easy it would be to jump from that idea, that a given piece of fiction said something in a particularly effective way (from your perspective) to the idea that the work is inherently more valuable or important than another. One issue with that lies in determining "what's worth saying" (which can get very messy very fast). However, explaining why "saying something" is supposedly inherently better than, say, making people feel good is much more problematic because you literally can't do it. That all goes straight back to the realm of personal preference. Neither is inherently more important; some people just like one perspective more than the other. So, let's come back again to what I said about "shallowness" again. To reiterate, keep in mind that I'm not criticizing you as a person, nor that your way of watching is literally "wrong"-- just that I think there are better ways to watch with which you and others may be able to enjoy and get more out of more shows. It's not an attempt to force you to change the way you watch, to say you're bad for watching the way you do, or anything like that, and it's not a criticism I would only levy at your way of watching either. There are lots of people who get way too caught up in the idea of "what a work says" and "worth" to the point that they seem to forget how to just have fun with a show without demanding all this stuff from it. Thus, my proposal is in actuality a very, very benign idea. Here it is: To the people who get so caught up in caring about "what a work says" and "worth", if they would chill out a bit, relax, and stop demanding artistic value out of literally everything they watch, they might find that that they would have a lot of fun with and enjoy many shows they otherwise wouldn't. To the people who only care about fun, if they would put in a little effort to think about some shows that don't go as much for the emotions as they do an idea, they might find a great deal of intrigue and a "new way to enjoy things" that was previously closed off to them. In other words, I'm just suggesting that people on both sides of the spectrum be more open-minded and moderate, that they at least attempt to see things from the other major perspective, because if they do and it works even slightly they have substantially increased the number of shows they can have a good experience with. I can say that with credibility because I've visited and lived in both extremes at different points in time, and I get way more out of anime as a medium now than I did in either extreme, and it took a lot to shake me out of those extremes because of how closed-minded I was to trying to use the alternate perspective. You don't have to be dishonest with yourself or pretend you like something you don't, and you should definitely still explore what you did and didn't like about what you watched. Just making the attempt to broaden your horizons and understand the alternative viewpoint is what's important. So, in the end, if I tell you I'd be inclined to view your opinions on various anime more dubiously than that of those who take the above more moderate approach (and they do exist, they're who I jokingly like to think of as "the normal people"), it's not just because we have different tastes. It's because there's an entire alternative perspective that's important to me that your opinions will lack no matter how well you explain them. It is, to me, more "shallow" even though there's nothing inherently wrong with it, and although this might sound ironic to you, I would view the opinions of those who only care about "what a work says/does" as being shallow as well for the same reasons. They're lacking in an entire dimension of perspective as well no matter how much I agree or disagree with them about how well a work does or says something. They're limiting themselves. Does that make sense? |
TripleSRankMar 28, 2017 5:39 PM
| yes, however, they are ended on 7-8 range... because in the end, enjoyment and quality is correlated to each other... something must succesful in both to make me considered rate tham 9 or 10... |
 "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." |
Solaire-Q said: TheBrainintheJar said: The problem here is unclarified terms. I think it's better to just talk why an anime is good instead of saying you 'enjoyed' it, whatever that means. I don't know. You know you have to prove value is an objective thing before value judgment becomes objective. Values cannot be objective unless they're an object. I suppose if you put it like that, you're sort of at square one. I believe if you can pin down the intent of the anime-- what was it trying to do-- and determine if it did it well, then that could be enough to determine if it's 'good'. You're still using value judgment. Remember there is no 'high' in nature or 'big'. A whale looks big to us. To him, the concept 'big' doesn't even exist. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
TheBrainintheJar said: Solaire-Q said: I suppose if you put it like that, you're sort of at square one. I believe if you can pin down the intent of the anime-- what was it trying to do-- and determine if it did it well, then that could be enough to determine if it's 'good'. You're still using value judgment. Remember there is no 'high' in nature or 'big'. A whale looks big to us. To him, the concept 'big' doesn't even exist. If you are using unclear and not precise words and sentences like that than yes. However, when a whale A has 35 meters and weight of 173 tonnes and whale B has 33 meters and weight of 164 tonnes and you say that whale A is bigger than whale B by pointing this out, it is a fact that cannot be argued with. |
Lain666Mar 30, 2017 1:49 PM
| "The moment one sits down to think, one becomes all nose, or all forehead, or something horrid. Look at the successful men in any of the learned professions. How perfectly hideous they are! Except, of course, in the Church. But then in the Church they don't think. A bishop keeps on saying at the age of eighty what he was told to say when he was a boy of eighteen, and as a natural consequence he always looks absolutely delightful." |
Lain666 said: TheBrainintheJar said: You're still using value judgment. Remember there is no 'high' in nature or 'big'. A whale looks big to us. To him, the concept 'big' doesn't even exist. If you are using unclear and not precise words and sentences like that than yes. However, when a whale A has 35 meters and weight of 173 tonnes and whale B has 33 meters and weight of 164 tonnes and you say that whale A is bigger than whale B by pointing this out, it is a fact that cannot be argued with. 'Bigger' remains relative to what we're comparing. It is not a stand-alone fact. Can you come up with such units of measurement for the quality of art? Solaire-Q said: TheBrainintheJar said: So, you're saying it's a matter of perspective; value is subjectiveYou're still using value judgment. Remember there is no 'high' in nature or 'big'. A whale looks big to us. To him, the concept 'big' doesn't even exist. Yes, but it doesn't mean it's not real. Just because someome hallucinates an alien abduction doesn't mean the experience of it wasn't real. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
| Enjoyment and emotions in general are exceedingly complex things that a lot of people try to incorrectly simplify. As to what most people are getting at- is it possible to not like something overall and still think it's good? I think it's rare but can happen if a person is simply not into the genre of something that is otherwise well crafted or something similar. |
ShrabsterMar 31, 2017 10:18 AM
 |
| I wouldn't say so. A good example of this for me would be Tengen Toppa Gurrenn Lagann. I didn't really enjoy that anime as much as everyone else did, mainly because of the 'over the top' nature of the show, but despite not enjoying it, you can't deny that if you combine this element with some of the other elements in the show, it just all compliments one another creating a very good show, plot/character wise. But in spite of that, if I were to just watch that show without any 'serious' mindset and just for the enjoyment, then no I would not enjoy it at all, but in spite of the fact that I went in this anime with that serious mindset, though I still did not enjoy it, I acknowledge that this anime had many strengths and good points. |
 ♔ caught in the wonder ♔ |
Solaire-Q said: TheBrainintheJar said: Somehow a certain man's words come to mind:'Bigger' remains relative to what we're comparing. It is not a stand-alone fact. Can you come up with such units of measurement for the quality of art? Yes, but it doesn't mean it's not real. Just because someome hallucinates an alien abduction doesn't mean the experience of it wasn't real. "The fake is of far greater value. In its deliberate attempt to be real, it's more real than the real thing." I don't think this is relevant, since we're having an ontological discussion, not one of authenticity. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
| If I enjoy something, then it surely has a good point. But there are things that I can consider as good, yet I didn't enjoy. I am a human with values and preferences. |
"People who don't see that anime has changed are either wearing "glasses" or watching only a certain type (and or era) of anime" "Having a low mean score doesn't necessarily mean one doesn't enjoy anime. Rating system is not a school grading system." "Elitist is people who think he is superior than others. Not necessarily ones who insulting/critisizing your favorite anime or people who enjoy a certain type of anime" "Fanboy is people who translating "your favorite anime is shit" into "you are shit". "Being a fanboy is an indication of elitism" |
| I felt that Haikyuu did pretty much everything that it needed to do near perfectly. Like seriously, get your checklist out and it pretty much gets everything. But I can't help but not care about it most of the time. I guess it just doesn't have a certain kick to it that I'd need to really enjoy it. It's a personal thing, I feel. Other folks like it just fine and that's so great! I feel like it should be received really well and I'd even recommend it to folks who want to check out some sports anime for sure... but I can't help but be bored by it since like episode one or maybe like episode five. I don't know. I guess my taste is a little more trashy than I think it is. :U Like even ACCA. I recognize its good points but can't bring myself to care about anything happening in it at all-- even saw most of the plot coming from a mile away. And I'm so happy others like it a lot but I'm just sitting there not exactly bored but just indifferent. I even kinda wish I never picked it up. That being said, sometimes what you consider 'good' is also not what you're looking for at that particular time or ever. Sometimes I'm not in the mood for Sayonara Zetsubou Sensei, and so sitting around reading when I don't feel like it is not going to be enjoyable. It's still my favorite though. |
Swiggy said: I felt that Haikyuu did pretty much everything that it needed to do near perfectly. Like seriously, get your checklist out and it pretty much gets everything. But I can't help but not care about it most of the time. I guess it just doesn't have a certain kick to it that I'd need to really enjoy it. It's a personal thing, I feel. Other folks like it just fine and that's so great! I feel like it should be received really well and I'd even recommend it to folks who want to check out some sports anime for sure... but I can't help but be bored by it since like episode one or maybe like episode five. I don't know. I guess my taste is a little more trashy than I think it is. :U Like even ACCA. I recognize its good points but can't bring myself to care about anything happening in it at all-- even saw most of the plot coming from a mile away. And I'm so happy others like it a lot but I'm just sitting there not exactly bored but just indifferent. I even kinda wish I never picked it up. That being said, sometimes what you consider 'good' is also not what you're looking for at that particular time or ever. Sometimes I'm not in the mood for Sayonara Zetsubou Sensei, and so sitting around reading when I don't feel like it is not going to be enjoyable. It's still my favorite though. But isn't all art by definition a personal thing? You can point out good traits, but if it didn't gel them into something that works then something went wrong. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
| Didn't really like Oshii's Yatsura movies nor FLCL that much but I recognise they are both objectively solid. |
 |
TheBrainintheJar said: But isn't all art by definition a personal thing? You can point out good traits, but if it didn't gel them into something that works then something went wrong. Admittedly and as per usual, I mostly approached 'good' from the viewpoint of an artist who wishes for their art to be receive positively. 'Good' then becomes not only what the artist has deemed to be effective (which is still a personal thing), but also what viewers have connected to. So in the case of Haikyuu, the artist feels the creators did everything they would have done to be received well by viewers and in that case it's 'good' to them, but there's just something about it that didn't click with them so they didn't enjoy it. So for the artist, Haikyuu is just okay or above average through a personal lens but good through an analytical lens-- or becomes an example of something good. On the other hand and with some exceptions, that same artist is not going to call art which goes against everything they would do in their own work good even if many viewers consider that art good. Sorry about the length and if any of that was typed in a confusing manner. I guess my main point is that there can legitimately be two types of 'good' simultaneously which fit the OP's definition. |
| For me, I do. As I feel like when critiquing something, personal enjoyment is sort of the number 1 thing to put it into perspective, on whether a show is good, or not. EDIT: Plus I am in the boat that I find an Objective review a bullshit concept, but my feeble mind joined that boat after watching a Digibro video, so take my opinions with a grain of salt. |
 |
| Well, I didn't enjoy Bebop, SC, NHK enough to want to continue watching them, but I could still acknowledge their qualities and see why people like them so much. So...I guess? |
| Not really. Just because you didn't enjoy an anime, doesn't mean you automatically don't have the ability to acknowledge and appreciate its good points. |
 [center]My Profile | MyAnimeList | MyMangaList | |
| Enjoyment is everything to me. That said it can be a broad term, and people can be enjoy an anime in various ways. Though, you can't just consider what you enjoy; you also have to understand why someone else might enjoy something you don't. |
 Click the banner for anime lists, discussions, reviews, and let's plays! |
| If it fails to entertain or to be engaging, it's not good in my eyes. But I'll give it points if at least the art, animation or OST was nice. |
| enjoyement is the reason why i watch anime if the anime is boring then is automatically shit in my book |
 |
| Watching anime for me is always to enjoy it. It can be either good or bad by the ratings. If I don't enjoy it after 2-3 episodes, I'm dropping it. Even if it is considered masterpiece from others. I always rate my anime 7-10, never below because I'm dropping these before I get to finish so I can rating these accordingly |
 |
Swiggy said: TheBrainintheJar said: But isn't all art by definition a personal thing? You can point out good traits, but if it didn't gel them into something that works then something went wrong. Admittedly and as per usual, I mostly approached 'good' from the viewpoint of an artist who wishes for their art to be receive positively. 'Good' then becomes not only what the artist has deemed to be effective (which is still a personal thing), but also what viewers have connected to. So in the case of Haikyuu, the artist feels the creators did everything they would have done to be received well by viewers and in that case it's 'good' to them, but there's just something about it that didn't click with them so they didn't enjoy it. So for the artist, Haikyuu is just okay or above average through a personal lens but good through an analytical lens-- or becomes an example of something good. On the other hand and with some exceptions, that same artist is not going to call art which goes against everything they would do in their own work good even if many viewers consider that art good. Sorry about the length and if any of that was typed in a confusing manner. I guess my main point is that there can legitimately be two types of 'good' simultaneously which fit the OP's definition. Art is an experience, not a tool. So I don't think it matters much what the artist thought - unless it can shed light on the meaning of the experience. The point of view that matters is that of the experiencer, the viewer. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
TheBrainintheJar said: The fellow artist is also a viewer/one who is experiencing the creators' work though. They're just experiencing the art both personally/based off enjoyment and analytically. Swiggy said: Admittedly and as per usual, I mostly approached 'good' from the viewpoint of an artist who wishes for their art to be receive positively. 'Good' then becomes not only what the artist has deemed to be effective (which is still a personal thing), but also what viewers have connected to. So in the case of Haikyuu, the artist feels the creators did everything they would have done to be received well by viewers and in that case it's 'good' to them, but there's just something about it that didn't click with them so they didn't enjoy it. So for the artist, Haikyuu is just okay or above average through a personal lens but good through an analytical lens-- or becomes an example of something good. On the other hand and with some exceptions, that same artist is not going to call art which goes against everything they would do in their own work good even if many viewers consider that art good. Sorry about the length and if any of that was typed in a confusing manner. I guess my main point is that there can legitimately be two types of 'good' simultaneously which fit the OP's definition. Art is an experience, not a tool. So I don't think it matters much what the artist thought - unless it can shed light on the meaning of the experience. The point of view that matters is that of the experiencer, the viewer. Analytically, their experience might have been good, but personally their experience might have been just okay. I do believe this is one way an individual can acknowledge that an anime is good yet still not exactly enjoy it. |
Swiggy said: TheBrainintheJar said: The fellow artist is also a viewer/one who is experiencing the creators' work though. They're just experiencing the art both personally/based off enjoyment and analytically. Art is an experience, not a tool. So I don't think it matters much what the artist thought - unless it can shed light on the meaning of the experience. The point of view that matters is that of the experiencer, the viewer. Analytically, their experience might have been good, but personally their experience might have been just okay. I do believe this is one way an individual can acknowledge that an anime is good yet still not exactly enjoy it. I do not think you can separate the analysis from experience like you do. The analysis is of the experience (Rather than the work in-itself, classic Kantiania). When I analyze a work, I analyze my experience with it and all experience of art is personal. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
More topics from this board
» Does being an anime fan make you proud or embarassed?BuddhaIsBetter - 8 hours ago |
22 |
by Leer
»»
2 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » What position do you watch anime in?Spunkert - 13 minutes ago |
2 |
by Zettaiken
»»
2 minutes ago |
|
» The nicest chest you've seen on a male or female characterIpreferEcchi - 44 minutes ago |
8 |
by mizukasa
»»
5 minutes ago |
|
» Do you drop shows?EverRealm - 4 hours ago |
23 |
by Leer
»»
6 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » Are you chronically online?Shizuna - Apr 21 |
32 |
by His0kaDevv
»»
8 minutes ago |