Forum

Erin, if shelf space is that important to you then you could just throw the Initial D collection in the trash if your friend happens to not "forget" about returning it.

You got it for free anyway right? So why not? Obviously it has little value to you if you're hoping you can just dump it on one of your friends.

Megiddo wrote:

You got it for free anyway right? So why not? Obviously it has little value to you if you're hoping you can just dump it on one of your friends.

That's so cruel! I want the anime to find a good home!

I've just been giving away unwanted screeners after my panels at conventions, because even if my friends don't want to watch it, it doesn't mean someone out there doesn't want it.

That's a good idea, Erin. I hope you came to Toronto for either Anime North (usually at the end of May) or FanExpo (usually around the end of August) so I have a chance of scoring some free stuff!

erinfinnegan wrote:

I have three (major) criteria for Shelf Worthiness. A show doesn't have to meet all three, but the more the merrier. Here they are:

1. Re-watch value
2. Loan-ability
3. Super-cool extras too good to pass up

I think there are a variety of reasons why people collect anime. Some collect everything, others collect certain genres, some want everything to do with specific titles, etc. I mainly buy for #1 re-watch value. I may not watch it again for some time, but eventually I know I will.

However, #2 loan-ability is a bit problematic for me. It sort of suggests universal appeal or at least an appeal to a greater number of people. 1st I have a variety of friends. The ones who watch Toradora or Princess Jellyfish (please Funi put this one out on DVD) with me aren't going to be interested in Gantz. I also have some friends who enjoy Black Lagoon or Claymore, but might find Gantz too extreme. I also know a couple of people who would be perfectly ok with Gantz. I also know that my friends who might like Gantz would not care for Toradora. Does this mean that Toradora is then not loan-able, because some will not like it? No, I don't think so and I think the same goes for Gantz.

I don't know the loan-ability criteria makes me a bit uncomfortable. After all I wouldn't want to limit what's on my shelf to what I think others might like and not my own tastes.

I found the whole RIN discussion kind of funny, because that's a show I wouldn't be able to lend out to anyone I know whereas Gantz would be easier to some of my friends. There were things I really liked about RIN, but by the end I was kind of worn out by the sexual sadism going on and I would not consider that loan-able.

As far as Durarara goes I really enjoyed it and am putting in my order to Rightstuf as I type this. I thought it was better than Baccano and I was pretty satisfied with the ending (not the unnecessary extra episode).

What bugs me about Durarara is that over time it pays less and less attention to the matter (Celty's problem) which I most wanted to see solved and more and more to another matter which I didn't care nearly as much about. Basically, minor problems are solved while major ones remain intact. What you get in the end is a couple of arcs of a story which clearly still has a long way to go.

Blood- wrote:

@ DarkRoseFairy - yay! very happy to have my assumption proven wrong.

@ChibiKangaroo - if Erin's reviews gave numerical values instead of recommendations on what to buy, or to rent or to ignore, I would have less of an issue with using "can I lend this title to anyone?" as a criterion. As I already pointed out, such a criterion opens up the possibility of a title that has personal re-watch value, but because there is some element that doesn't make it a candidate for universal loaning, it gets downgraded from buyable to rental-able.

As it happens, Erin responded by putting that criterion in more context and - if I understand her correctly - if she did come across a title that she felt had a re-watch value for her, she would give it a shelfworthy rating even if she knew it wouldn't be an appropriate loaner for just "anyone."

Again, you are focusing too much on the "personal" value and not enough on the fact that through the column she is rating shows for a very wide and diverse group of people. Just because something has a great deal of personal value to you or any other specific person doesn't mean it should be suggested as "shelf-worthy" for anyone who reads that particular column. I get the point that there are some shows that you or I might find awesome which would not be rated shelf-worthy as a result, but I think that's how it should be really. I don't think the formula should be "shelf worthy unless it suck or has no cult following." If that were the case, shelf worthy wouldn't really be much of an achievement.

@ChibiKangaroo - no offense, but I have no idea what point you trying to make. It should be completely obvious that Erin's buy, rent or ignore recommendations are her own personal views. When she gives a title a ranking, she is not trying to "guess" what the opinions her readers may hold.

So when Erin gives a title a "Shelfworthy" rating, what she is saying, in effect, is "I, Erin Finnegan, believe this title is worth buying." Or, alternatively, "I, Erin Finnegan, believe this title is only worth renting," or "I, Erin Finnegan, believe you should skip this title." Which is exactly the sort of personal point of view you would expect from any Shelf Life reviewer.

Then Erin gives her reasons for why she believes a title deserves its specific rating. As I've said twice now, I think saying, "I, Erin Finnegan, would not be comfortable lending this title to certain individuals (i.e. it does not have universal lending potential) so therefore, I can't give it a Shelfworthy rating."

As I have already pointed out, Erinresponded to my point by saying (I think) "Hey, the whole universal lending criterion thing is not a be-all and end-all and if a title has a re-watch value for me, I'd still give it a Shelfworthy rating even if I wouldn't be comfortable lending it to Aunt Bertha."

So, as far as I'm concerned, the issue I had with her initial statement has been settled.

Blood- wrote:

@ChibiKangaroo - no offense, but I have no idea what point you trying to make. It should be completely obvious that Erin's buy, rent or ignore recommendations are her own personal views. When she gives a title a ranking, she is not trying to "guess" what the opinions her readers may hold.

So when Erin gives a title a "Shelfworthy" rating, what she is saying, in effect, is "I, Erin Finnegan, believe this title is worth buying." Or, alternatively, "I, Erin Finnegan, believe this title is only worth renting," or "I, Erin Finnegan, believe you should skip this title." Which is exactly the sort of personal point of view you would expect from any Shelf Life reviewer.

Then Erin gives her reasons for why she believes a title deserves its specific rating. As I've said twice now, I think saying, "I, Erin Finnegan, would not be comfortable lending this title to certain individuals (i.e. it does not have universal lending potential) so therefore, I can't give it a Shelfworthy rating."

As I have already pointed out, Erinresponded to my point by saying (I think) "Hey, the whole universal lending criterion thing is not a be-all and end-all and if a title has a re-watch value for me, I'd still give it a Shelfworthy rating even if I wouldn't be comfortable lending it to Aunt Bertha."

So, as far as I'm concerned, the issue I had with her initial statement has been settled.

As far as I can tell actually, she seems like she is trying to be relatively objective in how she reviews the anime. I've seen reviews before where she indicated something was not her favorite type of anime, but she still gave it a shelf-worthy rating, ostensibly because it met her criteria. Of course a reviewer is injecting their personal opinion into their reviews, otherwise a computer would do it. However I feel like you are conflating the following two things: (1) personal opinion of what meets certain pre-established criteria, and (2) personal opinion about what type of anime a person likes. It seemed to me like she was indicating in her response that she operates under (1).

I wholeheartedly disagree with your assessment that Erin makes any attempt at "objective" opinion. That is not a knock against her - quite the opposite. It simply demonstrates that she understands what is expected of a Shelf Life columnist. I'm familiar enough with her tastes and various quirks that I can pretty much guess what rating she'll give a title that I happen to be familiar with - especially if I know that said title contains some of her bugaboos.

But even if I grant you your proposition - the idea of "objectively" factoring a title's "loanability factor" into a rating is even more absurd than subjectively doing it. Are you really suggesting that Erin tries to imagine how her readers would feel about loaning a certain title and then factors that into her rating? Sorry if I'm misunderstanding your point, but that seems to be what you are suggesting.

I think loanability is a valid criteria.

Especially when it comes to people who don't watch anime. Is an anime good enough to serve as a gateway title, or do we simply forgive the cliches and bad parts because we are anime fans?

Because there are a lot of series that we personally like, but would never want to show to a non anime fan, or a very casual fan.

From my own personal views, I don't think loanability is a criteria I'd ever use. The reason is simple. I refuse to ever loan my DVDs out to anyone. I've spent a lot of money on my DVDs, more than any sane person ever should, and I take good care of them. They go from case, to player, back to case. They don't sit around getting dusty, they don't get fingerprints smudged on them, they don't get used as a coaster. The only way I can assure that said things never happen are if they never leave my sight. So, when I'm judging the worthiness of a title, asking myself if I'd ever loan it out to anyone is an invalid criteria. I kinda get what Erin means by it, I just can't use it in my own personal views of what makes a title shelfworthy.

Banken wrote:

I think loanability is a valid criteria.

Especially when it comes to people who don't watch anime. Is an anime good enough to serve as a gateway title, or do we simply forgive the cliches and bad parts because we are anime fans?

Because there are a lot of series that we personally like, but would never want to show to a non anime fan, or a very casual fan.

I don't know about you, but I don't go to an anime specific site to read anime reviews that factor in how non-anime fans, or very casual anime fans, might feel about a title. That's just stupid. And why assume that the only reasons why somebody may be reluctant to lend a title is because it is cliched or has bad parts? Serial Experiments Lain is probably not a great lend for a non-anime or casual anime fan - does that make it a potentially unshelfworthy title?

Anyway, time for me to drop out of this conversation. Nobody will ever convince me that lendability should play any meaningful role in a title's rating and I don't feel like continually repeating myself.

Blood- wrote:

Nobody will ever convince me that...

This is never a good position to take in a discussion. It indicates that your position is based entirely upon your own internal biases and not on any observations or analysis. If you want to let people know where you stand, that's cool, but there's no need to say that where other people stand is "stupid" and such. You personally don't like the fact that other anime fans find value in anime with universal appeal - ok, but that's probably why you aren't writing reviews meant for consumption by a large and diverse audience. However, I think you should recognize that there is more to anime than your own very specific preferences or my very specific preferences, or anyone else's. When you have a piece of work that transcends all of those specific preferences and makes everyone of diverse opinions stop in awe, I think there is some special value to that.

Blood- wrote:

I don't know about you, but I don't go to an anime specific site to read anime reviews that factor in how non-anime fans, or very casual anime fans, might feel about a title. That's just stupid. And why assume that the only reasons why somebody may be reluctant to lend a title is because it is cliched or has bad parts? Serial Experiments Lain is probably not a great lend for a non-anime or casual anime fan - does that make it a potentially unshelfworthy title?

I know you're bowing out of the conversation, but I want to reiterate that in my review(s) I've talked about loaning anime "to friends" or "someone I know". Nearly all of my friends are anime fans on some level. When I mentioned "coworkers" I've worked on cartoons and comic books, so my coworkers all know what anime is at least. I am not talking about loaning anime to Aunt Bertha. (Unless that anime is Tokyo Godfathers.)

I could not think of a single friend of mine, nor anyone at all that I would loan Gantz to, now or in the future. I suspect anyone interested in Gantz has seen it and owns it already or has read the manga.

It's the opposite of say, Trigun, which all of my friends have seen, but I could conceive of meeting people who would want to see it and are young enough to have missed it.

It's not like I'm evaluating Gantz based on "I could loan this to anyone"; it's the inverse. "I couldn't think of anyone I would lend this to!"

Edit: Also I think I've mentioned this in the forums in the past that I think Lain is not only Shelf Worthy but extremely loanable. I even borrowed it from my boss when I first saw it.

I have always thought Kari had great talent. I first picked her out when I was watching Please Twins. That was followed by her roles in Figure 17, Scrapped Princess, and Lucky Star (probably not the order they were made, just the order I watched them).

I will need to check out Durarara!!. It will now be on my list to watch, and will probably end up on the "buy" list soon.

Forum - View topic
Shelf Life - Gantz Gantz Revolution

This Week in Anime - Will We Ever Know Why Anime Get Cancelled?

Your Anime Rankings - Best of Spring 2024, Apr 1-28

BLUELOCK Anime's 2nd Season Premieres in October

The Spring 2024 Manga Guide

Producer Masakazu Kubo on Making an Anime for Hardcore Golf Fans

Bakemonogatari Manga Artist 'Oh! great' Launches New Manga

	Anime News Network Forum Index -> Site-related -> Talkback	All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Page 4 of 5

Forum - View topicShelf Life - Gantz Gantz Revolution

Forum

Forum - View topic
Shelf Life - Gantz Gantz Revolution