Forum - View topicAnswerman - Theatrical Shenanegans
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
configspace
Posts: 3717 |
|
|||||||||||||
Really? that's the message you get when you see all the promotional items for these shows? That they're trying to trick you into thinking they're some clean, family oriented shows? 
I can guarantee you all your ecchi loving friends are fueling their dirty thoughts. Nothing wrong with that either. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
VORTIA
 SubscriberPosts: 942 |
|
|||||||||||||
Folks who watch Naruto & Bleach aren't what they'd call "Type B" fans. That'd be folks watching Clannad, Little Busters and the like... |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
relyat08
 Posts: 4125 Location: Northern Virginia |
|
|||||||||||||
I guess it depends on how you define "Type B". I kind of broadly define it as anyone who watches primarily shonen or comedy driven shows like Ouran High School Host Club or Fruits Basket. It just seems like they tend to attract a more casual audience. I do know a few avid fans from those categories as well, but in general that doesn't seem to be the case. Honestly, as another person mentioned though, the definitions for what defines each varies pretty widely from person to person, so its hard to nail it down. I also think that a lot of people would attempt to associate themselves as "Type A" just because it seems more cool even though they might actually be more similar to what most people would consider "Type B"... anyway, I'm just rambling now. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Fencedude5609
 Posts: 5088 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
The Type A/Type B labels are dumb. Stop using them.
[Mod Edit: Care to actually add to the discussion? Didn't think so. You are not in the position to give orders and tell people what they can or can't do, particularly when you completely fail to add to the discussion or support your statement in any way. - Keonyn] |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
VORTIA
Subscriber Posts: 942 |
|
|||||||||||||
There was a set definition for the terms given when they who idea was created, and TaskForceAnubis posted them. Type B does not mean "casual".
The definitions were obviously posed by someone who felt themselves a Type A otaku, so many elements of the Type B definition are a bit backhanded, but the major thrust of the definitions is that Type A fans prefer story and Type B fans prefer characters. "Casual" anime fans don't even fall into this discussion, because they are not otaku. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
relyat08
Posts: 4125 Location: Northern Virginia |
|
|||||||||||||
I saw that several hours ago and largely ignored it because it seemed based on the singular viewpoint of a few individuals. I do agree with most of it though. And it does largely infer that Type B otaku are more likely to be casual[and watch shonen like Naruto and Bleach(not sure how you are missing that)], so take that as you will. Anyway, my point still stands. Type B otaku aren't any more likely to be fully immersed in the medium than Type A. In my experience, it seems to be quite the opposite. The people watching the moe, less-complex, character driven shows(i.e. Type B) tend to be less involved in the industry and medium as a whole. That is all I'm trying to say here. I don't really know what you are taking issue with... because it seems like we should be agreeing... The person my comment was originally intended for was someone who claimed that Type A were less involved in the industry. It seems like you should be taking an issue with their position more so than my own. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
VORTIA
Subscriber Posts: 942 |
|
|||||||||||||
Certainly, but as it is a translation of a direct quote from the folks who proposed the idea of Type A/B otaku, it's about as relevent as it gets.
Nowhere in the definition does it define Type B as more casual. Less knowledgeable, but I consider that part of the base attack on Type B fans inherent in the definition. Nowhere in the definition is shonen anime discussed. The thrust of examples and definitions focus on the behaviors and interests of moe fans.
Agreed.
I strongly disagree, but I suspect the main reason for that is because you misunderstand what a Type B otaku is, and perhaps may have never met one in real life. How many fans of Clannad and Little Busters do you know?
The issue I suppose is that while my tastes cut both directions (as most people's tend to) I consider myself to be more of a fan of character driven entertainment (Type B) and object to the idea that Type B is inherently casual. In the many years I've been involved in anime, I've rarely encountered individuals more passionate about the medium than myself. I'm also somewhat confounded with how you can infer shonen action series fans are Type B from the definitions given. Do you consider Naruto to be a moe series? |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
relyat08
Posts: 4125 Location: Northern Virginia |
|
|||||||||||||
I never said that it was directly stated that they are typically casual and enjoy shonen. It was implied. If you don't like complex anime you are typically going to steer toward either shonen or shojo. If you prioritize characters over story, you will likely be more interested in a shonen or a shojo. If you don't know much about anime, you are likely casual. Like I said before, I don't necessarily agree with their definition, particularly the last sentence, but that doesn't change the fact that it is heavily implied by them that "Type B" have less knowledge and coincidentally are most likely casual. Do I know any? The majority of my anime watching friends would identify themselves as somewhere closer to "Type B" honestly. They prefer characters over story, some of them like moe(including Clannad, Haruhi and Angel Beats), most of them watch Naruto, Bleach and One Piece and every single one of them is more casual than my 2 close friends and myself who all watch primarily seinen. That doesn't mean there aren't exceptions. There always are. Clearly you yourself being one. But, that information does make it a lot easier for me to see "Type B" otaku as typically more casual as a whole. If the definition is restricted to simply those who prefer characters over stories, that completely changes everything. And could in no way determine ones level of immersion in the medium. But that wasn't the definition they gave, or the definition that I broadly associated with "Type B". And this is where the communication disconnect happened between us, I think. Given a simplified definition of: Type A = Story-driven Type B = Character-driven You are going to see a complete overhaul of what fits into each category and it seems that this is most likely the definition that you are adhering to. In this case it becomes very subjective. You might enjoy a seinen because it has likable characters, I might enjoy a shojo because it has a brilliant story. I have no problem with this definition personally, I just didn't see it as the one intended by the majority of people here, nor the original post. In any event, given the first definition I think most people would identify as Type A due to its obvious partiality toward them, however, given the simplified definition, you are most likely going to see a more even split with neither demographic being any more active in the medium than the other. I think we can both agree on that. 
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Touma
 Posts: 2651 Location: Colorado, USA |
|
|||||||||||||
I second the motion. It seems to me that these labels are just a creation of the "why what I like is better than what you like" mentality and have no practical application. They obviously are biased in favor of the Type A. And I have forgotten why they were even mentioned in this thread. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
VORTIA
Subscriber Posts: 942 |
|
|||||||||||||
Okay, I think I get where this disconnect is coming from. I'm looking at this as a whole definition where to fall into the category, you have to meet the majority of the criteria. You're looking at this from the perspective of any one or two criteria being enough.
Well, considering the original definition comes from 2chan, and taking into account all the elements of each definition, it actually pretty clearly defines the delineation between "old-school" Otaking-type otaku of the 80's and early 90's and modern moe/visual novel otaku, from the perspective of the former. Since all Type A/Type B does as written is spell out two distinct parts of Japanese anime fandom that already are well-established, it seems inherently obvious to me that those were the two fandoms being discussed. Generally speaking, I don't think Japanese wouldn't define following typical shonen anime like Naruto or One Piece as particularly otaku behavior of any stripe. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
VORTIA
Subscriber Posts: 942 |
|
|||||||||||||
I think a while back, I may have agreed with you, but thinking introspectively about my viewing preferences, I came to the realization that I really do have a preference for character-driven entertainment. Repeatedly I've encountered myself saying about a show "Man, this plot is interesting, but I just don't care about anyone in this story." No matter how clever I find the narrative, when I find the characters unlikeable, I typically find completing the story a chore, not a joy. I've always struggled to find a genre of entertainment I really like. I find a lot of Western novels to be an absolute bore, American film and entertainment largely unengaging, and Western Comics to be fun but largely a hollow experience. It wasn't until it dawned on me that my primary interest was in characters that it all clicked. I actually love a lot of movies from the golden age of Hollywood - musicals and dramas from back before special effects became the thing. The common denominator was character driven entertainment. While rejecting the pro Type A bias inherent in the language of the definitions, I think there's a solid amount of truth to the idea that some folks are more interested in characters than story, and that it lies at the core of one of the fault lines within anime fandom. Ergo, I don't think it's a concept without merit. On the contrary, I think understanding why we are different and how we experience entertainment differently is important to sharing our fandom and accepting one another. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Parse Error
 Posts: 592 |
|
|||||||||||||
To make it more clear, these correspond to the following stereotypes: Type A: Mature, sophisticated connoisseurs of Fine Art, who have impeccable tastes and only watch good anime such as Cowboy Bebop, Neon Genesis Evangelion, and Ghost in the Shell. Type B: Pathetic menchildren who only watch "moeshit," which is crappy anime about cute girls doing cute things while wearing short skirts to provide frequent pantyshots, or in other words every anime that isn't either gritty Science Fiction or a Ghibli movie. People who think of themselves as "Type A" certainly exist, but "Type B" is nothing more than a caricature. Obviously there are moe otaku, but even shows aimed squarely at them make almost constant reference to anime that supposedly only the "Type A" would be interested in. The dichotomy is utter nonsense, which is why you have nowhere to place people who are mostly interested in shonen-oriented action series except for the category reserved for people who only watch shows about cute girls drinking tea and eating cake. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
relyat08
Posts: 4125 Location: Northern Virginia |
|
|||||||||||||
This is where I start having an issue with the definitions laid out as a whole. I primarily enjoy anime that would be considered "Type A", but I also watch a good bit of character driven shows. I also have only been into anime to a large extent for the last couple of years, so I would definitely not say that I belong to some classic anime club. I just tend to enjoy psychological thrillers and seinen more often than anything else. It seems that the whole purpose of these definitions is mostly gone. They are really representing just a couple of niche groups within the industry that make up a tiny minority of the community. I think that most people exhibit traits of both types as well as additional types that haven't been mentioned here.
I think most people have an issue with that to an extent. In your case it seems to be more prominent, but it isn't abnormal or anything. I can usually watch anything as long as I find the story entertaining, but if I don't like or can't relate to the characters, I'm not going to find it nearly as enjoyable. I think that is fairly common.
I see what you are saying and I think I agree. Basically neither "Type" really has much meaning at all. There are people more interested in moe and people more interested in seinen. As well as people more interested in characters and people more interested in story. I think the vast majority of us actually fit in both categories to a large extent. Its hard for anyone to enjoy a story if they don't like the characters, similarly, it is very unlikely that someone will watch nothing outside of one specific genre. I usually bounce back and forth between several different "Types" in this regard. I just finished The Garden of Sinners and now I am watching Hajime No Ippo as well as B Gata H Kei. I think most people do that. Its just another reason that these "Types" as defined by the majority don't really hold much meaning other than very broad generalization. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
Fencedude5609
Posts: 5088 |
|
|||||||||||||
But most 'moe' shows (that originate as manga) are Seinen. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
dtm42
Posts: 14084 Location: currently stalking my waifu |
|
|||||||||||||
|
The terms "Shounen", "Shoujo", and "Seinen" are all silly anyway. They are far too broad in terms of style and target audience to really mean anything. Heck, even "Josei", the term that has kept more of its original meaning than the others, is still too vague.
That said, while narrowing all anime and manga down to four categories is useless, narrowing them down to just two is fairly logical. As relyat08 spoke about, in a simplified sense you can boil anime down to story-driven and character-driven. Neither is better than the other, and all fiction has elements of both. Using the labels "Type A" and "Type B" makes it sound like the former is better than the latter, and that just isn't true. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group