Forum - View topicUnderstanding Sword Art Online
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Tuor_of_Gondolin
 Posts: 3524 Location: Bellevue, WA |
|
|||||||
|
I think the main issue I have with SAO is one of disappointment. It has a really good concept: the stuck in a (VR)MMO concept, which it seemed to have really put a lot of thought and effort into establishing. Even the main character, Kirito, was a pretty good concept, IMO. The problem was in execution, as others have noted. In, say, Log Horizon, the MC was OP in certain respects, but he had some serious flaws which had real effects on how he handled matters and how issues in general were resolved. He had to learn to grow past those issues, and the same was true for many characters in that series. Kirito rarely shows any character development, and his personal problems rarely cause him any problems in dealing with the issues that come along.
I mean, on the surface, Kirito and Shiro seem to be pretty similar: both are the best at what they do, both have self-image issues, both seem to attract more than their fair share of interested females, both prefer to be loners. But Shiro comes across as much more believable and his problems not as tacked on as they do with Kirito, where they seem to be more of a blunt instrument than a deep-seated personal flaw. SAO's writer just wasn't able to sell Kirito's emotional issues in a way I found believable. Anyway, I wanted very much to like SAO. I really liked the first episode, and IIRC, even the 2nd or 3rd episode. But soon it started to look like wish-fulfillment rather than its own world: a place where the author could fantasize about rather than an actual place where these things happened. There's a big difference between the two, but I'm not sure if I'm getting the idea across very well. Log Horizon did a much better job appearing as a place in its own right, whereas SAO seemed more like a stage prop, and that extended to the characters and the plot. This improved later on (mainly in the last season of the show), but during the early going, SAO seemed somewhat hollow to me, which was a shame because it had some beautiful backgrounds and other scenes. As for Asuna... she seemed like character object whose content was changed to fit the needs of the plot or, rather, the needs of the main character (which was mostly the same thing as the plot). Also, I'm not a fan of harems, so that also works against my liking of the show. I don't think it's a terrible show, but it did disappoint me. It had the potential to be something a lot better than what it ended up being. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
Actar
 Posts: 1074 Location: Singapore |
|
|||||||
Let me get this straight. You're saying that it's toxic for me to think it's sad that people don't get along and aren't accepting of each other's tastes? Because, honestly, I do not think that what I said can be construed as being remotely offensive nor do I think I deserve to be labeled "pretentious". |
||||||||
|
||||||||
Chiibi
 Posts: 4828 |
|
|||||||
But......he did have some? o_o
Wait.....no...I misunderstood you, I think. Oh boy.....this is embarrassing. I'm just going to delete my post....alright....>_> And offer my sincerest apology. Para Chomp shouldn't say others are "wrong" for thinking SAO is good, though. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Akane the Catgirl
Posts: 1091 Location: LA, Baby! |
|
|||||||
The thing that bothers me about Actar's statements is the implication that any sort of criticism- positive or negative- is useless and that we shouldn't think about what we consume. I'm sorry, but as someone whose bread and butter is analysis and interpretation, that's complete and utter malarkey. The thing about art is that it is made by people with flaws and hopes and dreams and goals. I choose to judge each piece by what it's trying to accomplish, adjusting my standards based on what the work in question demands of me. The goal of the critic is to guide their readers towards media they think the reader would enjoy. You're allowed to enjoy your media however you want, but I'd rather you not dismiss the hard work of the people who are trying to help you have a good time. As for Chiibi...look, I don't know how to put this. I'm only saying this because I love you and you're one of my best friends and I really care about you. But...I think you're obsessing way too hard over Kirito to the point where it feels like you aren't willing to listen to any negative criticism about him and taking said criticisms way too personally. You say you "love" him, but love means accepting something warts and all. To me and everyone else, it looks like you're refusing to consider what the other side has to say. That's not cool, Chiibi. That's just not cool. I get where you're coming from, so all I ask is that you understand where we're coming from too. Okay? |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Chiibi
Posts: 4828 |
|
|||||||
If people don't like him, I can live with this. That is fine. But to say he "had little development" feels like we didn't even watch the same series. I just can't agree with that....since in the show I watched, he did have some? Learning that it's okay to get close to people and rely on them is one example. He was not like that in the first episode.
Eh, I don't think Actar meant that it's "useless"; just that people should accept that others have different opinions on anime. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Akane the Catgirl
Posts: 1091 Location: LA, Baby! |
|
|||||||
Whether or not he had development isn't really my big issue with Kirito. In fact, most of my issues with Kirito aren't even that with his character writing, but more with the plot surrounding him. I don't even actively dislike Kirito most of the time. It's just that I can't feel anything about him. And that's my problem. I don't care what happens to him because there's not enough there for me to care about. "Learning to get close to people" is a valid message, but if that was what the show was trying to do, I don't think it was portrayed well. Yuri on Ice, in my opinion, did that theme a lot better with Yurio's "agape" arc. It helps that Yurio is an angry little slice of pie and I love him so much. As for Actar, I can agree with that sentiment. It's just that I found issue with the "you're not allowed to criticize other anime" mood of it all. As long as you're not getting too personal about it, I don't care what anime you enjoy. I recommend you watch Lindsay Ellis's video essay titled "Hercules: Disney's Beautiful Hot Mess", because a lot of her issues with the title character are the same issues I had with Kirito. Also, most of Lindsay's videos are really good. Last edited by Akane the Catgirl on Thu Mar 02, 2017 12:11 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Chiibi
Posts: 4828 |
|
|||||||
I've seen them all during her "Nostalgic Chick" era and I'm disappoint she has stopped doing them. 
(Meg and the music were my favorite parts of that movie. I liked Herc as a kid because he was more interesting. He got boring when he grew up :/ ) I was going to say something else on criticism....let's see, ah right. Constructive criticism definitely is not useless. It helps us judge whether or not something would appeal to us, for one thing. I'm glad you mentioned Lindsay because I've been a long-time fan of those from Channel Awesome. I tend to agree with Doug Walker a lot (not always) but his critique on things provides me with information on whether or not I would enjoy or hate a thing.  I stick with critics whom I mostly agree with and more or less avoid the ones I don't.
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Akane the Catgirl
Posts: 1091 Location: LA, Baby! |
|
|||||||
She still does videos, but not as the Nostalgia Chick. You can find the video in question on the Chez Lindsay channel on Youtube. She's also done videos on RENT and the Phantom of the Opera movie. She also started a new series called "Loose Canon", where she talks about various iterations of fictional characters, so there you go. To put it bluntly, I think Kirito was a character who was written entirely on eggshells. It's like the writers wanted him to be generally appealing, but were also terrified of offending the viewers. The thing about being a writer, though, is that you need to accept that you're going to p*ss someone off without meaning to, and there needs to be risk. Kirito is a character with no risk or stakes invested into him, and as a result, I don't care about what he goes through. There's no unique reason why I should want him to succeed in escaping because I don't even know what he really wants for himself. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Chiibi
Posts: 4828 |
|
|||||||
|
Oh, that's good. Thanks for the info. I wonder why she left the channel though. Even her old video links totally disappeared. D:
I didn't get that impression of Kirito. By episode 2, I was totally invested in his character. I've made my peace with us not agreeing about him; like, yeah, that's going to happen in life so I don't think further discussion will change anything. :'D Although cracking open the novels made me like him a whole lot more (since it puts you inside his head and you feel what he feels) and now I find it hard to separate the two versions of him. I'll just leave it at that. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Akane the Catgirl
Posts: 1091 Location: LA, Baby! |
|
|||||||
|
@ Chiibi
Well, I guess Kirito does have an appealing character design and a good performance from Bryce Papenbrook. (I wouldn't know about Yoshitsugu Matsuoka, so I'm going to have to take your word.) I also do like the general idea of him. I just personally prefer my protagonists to have a bit more meat to them, and I didn't find much there with Kirito. Especially compared to the awesomeness that is Klein. I'm still waiting for that Klein spin-off. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Chiibi
Posts: 4828 |
|
|||||||
I find it's impossible for me to be bored when Matsukoka talks. He could be reading the ingredients of a Pocky box and have me listening intently.
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Actar
Posts: 1074 Location: Singapore |
|
|||||||
On the contrary. I'm not sure you get what I was trying to say, but my point of view validates all criticism and isn't mutually exclusive to critical thinking. Under my paradigm, you are free to like or dislike a show however much you want for any reason under the sun. The important thing to remember, however, is that they are all subjective and are not markers of an objectively good or bad anime.
I'm not too sure how this relates to your argument.
...and how is that not subjective?
That is indeed a valiant and noble intention and I do not see how it contradicts my stand. If you ask my personal opinion, reviews should be subjective. But the trick is to embrace that subjectivity. Only then can we then get closer to the ideal of objectivity. Confused? Well, to use an analogy, a review is basically how the reviewer sees a show with a colored lens. If the reviewer makes it clear what color that lens is, you can subtract that lens or compare it with your own to get a clearer picture of what the reviewer is talking about. By doing so, the reader can then make an informed decision as to whether or not the show will appeal to them. This is what I mean by embracing subjectivity in order to get closer to the ideal of objectivity. Still, there are some things that just cannot be conveyed in words. “There was too much fanservice.” Just what do you mean by “too much”? How much is too much? More than I can handle? Less? Ideally, everyone should watch the show and form their own opinions. But of course, we just don’t have the time for that. Some things I can't stand in reviews? Stating one’s opinion as objective fact and attacking the audience. What in the world does the latter achieve? This is something that I’ve seen reviewers do so many times and it just goes to reaffirm my belief that they are trying to feel better about themselves. I mean, do you really need to enlighten others by telling them how they should be correctly emotionally manipulated? Do you need to belittle others for enjoying something that doesn’t pander to you? Do you need to lecture others on why they shouldn’t like characters that you can’t relate to? I don’t think so. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Akane the Catgirl
Posts: 1091 Location: LA, Baby! |
|
|||||||
|
@Actar
I don't think you quite understand. Entertainment is subjective. Quality is not. I do agree on some level with your sentiments, but that doesn't change the fact that there are such things as terrible products. I too tend to find issues with criticisms that are too vague. For example, instead of saying "this is boring", I prefer to use phrases such as "the story is rote and predictable" or "these characters are uninteresting cardboard cutouts". Or in the case of "too much fanservice", "I felt that many of these cheesecake shots are gratuitous and shoved in to the brink of annoyance". Some questions I like to keep in mind are "what is this piece trying to accomplish", or "who is the best audience for this piece", or something as simple as "is there anything interesting or new going on"? Stuff like that. For the record, I also write as a hobby and do hope to have something published one day. I've been honing my craft for years now. I can smell a sh*tty story when I see it. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
relyat08
 Posts: 4125 Location: Northern Virginia |
|
|||||||
Like Akane, I'm inclined to generally agree with you on the subjectivity of art. However, also like she has stated, there is such a thing as good and bad writing, and good and bad animation, from a technical standpoint. Many aspects of those things are subjective, but they are not inherently so. Otherwise Writing classes would be irrelevant, and teaching people to animate would be pointless. Objectivity exists in some capacity. Though many people use it improperly, it's wrong to totally discredit any criticism as simply being one person's interpretation and subjective impression of a work. That's honestly what it is the vast majority of the time, but not always. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Actar
Posts: 1074 Location: Singapore |
|
|||||||
You do realize that you're falling into the trap of using a subjective standard to determine quality, right? The qualifier "terrible" is your own. It might be one that is shared by other people, but not all, and therefore it cannot be objective. To put it to you simply, this is an objective statement: "The animation has a low frame rate." This is, however, a subjective statement: "The animation is shitty." Is animation with a low frame rate a bad thing? Only if you choose to assign that value to it. Let me just borrow the phrases you've provided and show you how I can easily reinterpret them without changing the premise: "the story is rote and predictable" - The story had a traditional happy ending that is sure to please fans of the genre. "these characters are uninteresting cardboard cutouts" - The characters are endearing in their simplicity. "I felt that many of these cheesecake shots are gratuitous and shoved in to the brink of annoyance" - The titillating panty shots might offer some male (and even female) viewers an added incentive to watch the show.
You see, that's what I don't get. On one hand, you're all for altering your judging criteria to suit the work (which is what I do as well) and finding the right audience for a work. But you believe that quality is objective... So, are you trying to say that some audiences like shit but it's okay that they like shit, with you being the arbiter of what is shit and what is not? By honing your craft, you are still catering to a specific group of people who share your judging criteria on what makes a "good" story. Essentially, you're pandering to your audience. Just like how moe anime panders to otaku and Oscar-bait movies pander to Oscar judges. The beautiful thing is that there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. Like the individual, there are many different communities and fanbases from different social backgrounds and cultural contexts that might have a different idea of what is good and what is bad.
If I'm not mistaken, one of the reasons the idea that literature is objective came about was so that schools could teach it. This might sound horrendously cynical, but the academic community was trying to promote the idea of objectivity in literature to push their own agenda. I can't remember my sources off the top of my head, but I did study the development of the field of literary studies some time ago. Also, I don't think I'm "totally discrediting" anything by saying that criticism is entirely subjective. (Your opinions might be based on or influenced by other people's but your opinion is still your own.) Unless, of course, the criticism can't convince others or stand up to scrutiny without needing to appeal to authority. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
Don't look down on others and call them "sad" just because they disagree with you. Just don't. That's a really toxic attitude and it helps no one. 
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group