Forum

Note: This is not so much about anime than the media in general.

I'm going to be honest and start off with this; I didn't like Wolf Children. Shocking, I know, but let me explain as rationally as I could. I didn't like THESE characters, the pacing was too slow for my tastes, and it just wasn't really my thing. BUT that doesn't mean I think it's bad. Oh no, I thought it was actually quite good! It just wasn't for me is all.

However, there are people I've seen online- even on this forum- who cannot do what I just did. If there is something they don't like, everything about it was bad. If they didn't cry, it's "emotionally manipulative". If they don't like a certain character (or even just the archetype), the character is badly written. These aren't criticisms, but pet peeves.

I like to call this mindset, "The Personal Preference Fallacy". It can be summed up with these two thoughts: "If I like it, it's good and people who don't say it's good are stupid and wrong."; "If I hated it, it's bad, and anyone who says otherwise is stupid and wrong." I really hate this self-centered way of thinking, because it assumes that quality and entertainment are the same thing.

You know how every season, you see the same group of people bullying the staff of ANN over how they judged the first episode of a new show? Here's the thing; you need to stop it. Not everyone is going to like what you like and vice versa. You don't have to like something that's critically acclaimed, either, but I think you should consider WHY it got the praise it did.

I felt this was important because I've seen too many people using the "Personal Preference Fallacy" to justify why something shouldn't be criticized or to bully others for liking something. I just finally had enough of this nonsense and needed to get it out of my system. So if anyone has a problem with this, I deeply apologize for causing you trouble. That's all I have to say.

Before I go, I leave only a few questions. How do you approach criticism? How has the "PPF" affected you, and how do you cope with it? Do you prefer to analyze your show of choice, or are you just here for the ride?

I am just here for the ride.
All that matters to me is how much I enjoy watching a show. I have no interest in analyzing it. Some people enjoy the process of analyzing anime, and discussing their analysis, but I do not.
There is nothing wrong with analyzing a show and I often make use of the analyses that others post. It is just not something that I want to do myself.

As far as I am concerned entertainment and quality are the same thing.

The debate about objective quality is one that we have had before. I am not going to say any more about it until I see what kind of responses this thread gets.

I tend to agree with Touma. For myself, I see no point in analyzing my entertainment. The main problem I do have with those that do analyze shows is that they seem to approach from the viewpoint that there is something wrong with the show and that they are going to find it and expose it. If that is what you like to do, fine. It doesn't sound like much fun to me.

@ Touma

If quality and entertainment are the same, then by that logic, guilty pleasures do not exist. We acknowledge that a guilty pleasure is terrible, but nevertheless, we enjoy it all the same. I don't mind if you just want to have fun. There are many anime that I feel don't need analysis. For example, Azumanga Daioh has no need to be searched for deeper meaning due to the very nature of it's genre. That's one of my favorite anime of all time, by the way.

@Alan45

Analysis does not mean "nitpick mercilessly". Contrarywise, taking an analytic approach to certain stories can make you appreciate the writing even more. I liked Madoka the first time, and with each successive viewing, I only loved it even more as I uncovered each symbolism and motif I could find. Like with Touma, I am perfectly fine if you just want to have fun. I'm not some measuring the marigolds" fun-killer.

Akane the Catgirl wrote:

If quality and entertainment are the same, then by that logic, guilty pleasures do not exist.

In my opinion guilty pleasures, as you are using the term, do not exist.
People call something a guilty pleasure simply because they do not want to admit that they think that it is good when so many others insist that it is bad.

But this is really just part of the subjective verses objective debate.

^ But what if you came to the conclusion by yourself? Say you were handed an anonymous story to beta. You haven't read it or heard of it before, by the way. The hero is a self-insert, the plot makes no sense, there's disturbing subtext related to women, and the spelling and grammar is atrocious. Yet through it all, you just laugh at how awful this story is! You love it!

Does that make the story good? Not by a long shot.

But that's just my opinion, I guess. I tend to stay far away from philosophical debates, so let's just agree to disagree. I have no intention on having the mods come down on me if I get out of control.

Quote:

For example, Azumanga Daioh has no need to be searched for deeper meaning due to the very nature of it's genre. That's one of my favorite anime of all time, by the way.

The nature of the beast is that not all content is created equal, even something that is "no brainer" like a slice of life comedy is also worth looking at with a critical eye because just as well it is easy to fail in making a comedy that catches the audience's attention.

A good chunk of posters openly dislike "moe character slice of lifes" and a good chunk of them are on the surface indistinguishable from one another when they are described in a text only format, however every once in a while one will peak above the rest and the difference can subtle be it some of the cast just clicking or the style of humor simply hits the beats at the right time.
But just as well some posters will oppose an entire genre because they have put an arbitrary "will not watch" label on said content.

@Akane the Catgirl
I agree that analysis does not mean nitpick to death. I just wish some of the people who post long reviews here understood that.

I also agree with Touma that there is really no such thing as a "guilty pleasure" or watching "ironically". I feel that if you enjoy a show you enjoy it. The fact that you enjoy it from a viewpoint not shared by the creator is beside the point.

As far as your example goes, if the writing or some other aspect of a show is so bad I see that instead of the show, it is a bad show.

Akane the Catgirl wrote:

Yet through it all, you just laugh at how awful this story is! You love it!

Does that make the story good? Not by a long shot.

But that is not a guilty pleasure. That is a "so bad that it's good" show
Those are two different things. At least they are as I understand the terms.
I doubt that many people feel guilty about laughing at something that is bad.

@Alan45

"Mindless" entertainment may be fine and dandy, but it shouldn't be the only option. Here's a quote from a reviewer named Gehayi about a certain BDSM novel:

Gehayi wrote:

I'm an oddball in that I will tell the author that X is not acceptable and that we don't want to send the message that rape and stalking are signs of love... This kind of drivel, which, fortunately, is not the only thing written in the genre but is far too common, causes damage... It is a vile, contemptible, anti-woman message and the fact that this piece of s**t, like most romance novels, was written by a woman just makes the message that much worse.

While one can argue there is no such thing as a guilty pleasure, I believe there is no such thing as mindless entertainment. The media influences us in many ways, both good and bad. Some products may appear to be wholesome, but when you look at what the story is showing you, the entire thing falls apart. Then there are shows that hide unfortunate implications that can subconsciously imprint themselves in our minds. But that's for another time.

This is why I can no longer just sit and watch something. There will always be a message. There will always be an influence. Alas, this is the curse of an intellectual.

@Touma

Tomato, Tomahto. Jokes aside, you do have a point. The line between "guilty pleasure" and "so bad, it's good" are so blurred that they may as well be the same thing.

I am 100% with Akane on this. I have often said that I regard "quality" and "entertainment value" as two different inherent aspects of a work of media. (This is influenced heavily by a book of philosophy I read in high school which delved heavily into what "quality" is and a college professor who deliberately assigned students readings that they would find objectionable but still graded on how you analyzed the work despite your personal reaction.) For me, quality is a measure of how well it's made - is the art good, is it written well, does it succeed at what it's trying to do - while entertainment value is a measure of how effectively it keeps my interest, how it works on me emotionally (and by that I'm including humor and revulsion) and generally how much I enjoy watching it.

Now, those two aren't mutually exclusive evaluation points. They definitely influence each other; it's harder to see the flaws in something you really like or the merits in something you really don't, for instance. However, I find separating the two to be a valuable intellectual exercise, to the point that I place far less merit on a review or reaction which doesn't make that distinction. And yes, I know how snobbish that sounds, but I'm not particularly concerned about it.

I also entirely agree that at least some (but definitely not all!) of the complaints in review and seasonal preview threads about the reviews boil down to a difference of philosophy on this issue.

EDIT: And I've never believed in the actual existence of a "so bad it's good" category. "So bad that it's entertaining" is a different story; that's simply a case where a title so poorly executes what it's trying to do that it generates unintended entertainment value.

@Akane the Catgirl

I don't think I used the term "mindless entertainment". That is different from picking apart what you watch. As far as the BDSM novel goes, I wouldn't touch that in any form. I dislike anything that mixes sex and violence in any form and will not watch. I have likes and dislikes but that is not the same as analyzing a show for quality. A very repulsive show can be very well made.

@Key
I certainly agree that there can be a difference between quality and entertainment. As a reviewer, you are required to look at such things. However, I don't think that is a required approach for everyone. I'm only concerned with the entertainment aspect of a show. I think it is a personality thing.

Oh, sure, you can choose to emphasize one or the the other; if all you really care about is whether or not something's entertaining, then that's fine. Hell, that's about all I consider when deciding what to rewatch, and it's often a bigger factor than expected quality in determining what movies I go to see in theaters. (I'm not looking forward to seeing Mad Max: Fury Road next month because I expect it to be good, for instance.) However, choosing to emphasize the entertainment value in a reaction is not at all the same as claiming that entertainment value and quality are inseparable, and that's where the problems get started.

I suppose it can also be turned around. Many people belief Evangelion is "objectively" good, but the show is also objectively flawed. With characters having schizophrenic personalities, inconsistent tones and poor production values, how can something like this be "objectively good" when those points I mentioned are objective, inarguable flaws with the show that hurt the show? Why did ANN give Eva a high animation score, when the show has virtually no animation? Why does the art rating so high, when the show consistently dips in terms of detail?

People always tend to think their opinion is better than anyone elses and when they critique their own ideals they also tend to think they are smart and individualistic for doing so. I think everybody on this website, including myself, is guilty of becoming too defensive about their opinion at some point.

I think it is better to recognise that this can happen to everyone, after all it is usually the result of passion for a show (or a troll) but that self control is key to stop going overboard.

Finally, to me, quality and entertainment are such loose terms that the words are designed to generate discussion rather than to have any tangible meanings for themselves. Either that or everyone on the planet has shit taste to begin with.

Forum - View topic
Quality and Entertainment: A Fine Line.

Edens Zero Manga Ends in 5 Chapters

My Oni Girl Anime Film Review

Barely Glancing Ahead: Searching for the Future in Inio Asano's Works

Gundam Voice Actor Tōru Furuya Admits to 4-Year Affair With Fan

Shun Umezawa's Darwin Incident Manga Gets TV Anime

The Unimplemented Overlords Have Joined the Party! Novel 1 Review

This Week in Anime - Darkly Deconstructing Japanese Super Heroes for Fun and Profit

Voice Actor Hideyuki Umezu Dies at 68

Bloody Sweet Volumes 1-2 Manhwa Review

The Anime Backlog - Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood

Bringing Anime to Southeast Asia: Interview with Medialink, Ani-One Co-Founder Lovinia Chiu

I Want You to Make Me Beautiful! – The Complete Manga Collection Review

	Anime News Network Forum Index -> General -> Anime	All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next
Page 1 of 6

Forum - View topicQuality and Entertainment: A Fine Line.

Forum

Forum - View topic
Quality and Entertainment: A Fine Line.