Forum - View topic

INTEREST: Mamoru Oshii: Today's Anime Is Driven by Otaku, Merchandise

Edit:

Mohawk52 wrote:

This is a double edged sword, because simply that depends on one's point of view of what is logical, a bias in other words. We are not all purely logical thinking persons.

If logic shouldn't be valued, then why don't we go to an extreme and say that Descartes' "cogito ergo sum" is the only certainty since we all are contained to our own individual viewpoints--no one is apparently more wrong or right than the other, and, well, who needs science? Or maybe I should join the church of the magical pink unicorn.

During the lecture, Oshii said that the current anime is mostly otaku-centric and made to be turned into merchandising. Oshii added that anime today is a "copy of a copy of a copy that is no longer a form of 'expression.'

The story revolves around a timid second-year high school student who finds a kindred spirit in a girl he meets via a blood donation site. The girl is actually a vampire, and the comedy follows the boy's madcap efforts to get blood donations for her.

What is the object of storytelling in the first place?
What is the object of a particular story?
What object is used to tell that story?
Was it effective?
What affect did it have on the individual hearing, or seeing that story?
Answering these questions with the experience, insight and knowlege one has can and will become the bases of one's objective decision whether, or not the storytelling was good, or bad.

Touma, you need to look at the link I quoted. That's what I was referring to.

I will not provide proof, because it A: is a red herring, designed to throw the debate off the rails rather than actually facilitate concrete discussion, B: is not on me to provide burden of proof, as I'm not the one trying to disprove something that actually exists, C: even if I did you wouldn't believe me, because that links in with D: it is so obvious that there is objective quality to storytelling that until you admit that it exists, I'm wasting my time. Oh, and E: I already have provided proof, albeit not in a concerted form and certainly not in a long and time-wasting format.

Empirical examples of good and bad storytelling abound in their thousands. But your refusal to even consider these tells me that you don't actually want to discuss matters, you just want to argue. That annoys me, because I'm here in good faith.

But I would really like to know which measurable criteria a work has to fulfill to be considered "good" or "bad" or "mediocre" or a "tour de force that pulls the viewer right into its neatly woven narrative" (I took the sting from my comment by putting this hilarious because true example of reviewer talk in it).

But I would really like to know which measurable criteria a work has to fulfill to be considered "good" or "bad" or "mediocre" or a "tour de force that pulls the viewer right into its neatly woven narrative"

Anyone else find it ironic that [Oshii] starts off with [...] and ends it with [...]

NonoAsumy wrote:

But I would really like to know which measurable criteria a work has to fulfill to be considered "good" or "bad" or "mediocre" or a "tour de force that pulls the viewer right into its neatly woven narrative"

His philosophy degree, which has soundly defeated my illogical mind.

But seriously, for an on-topic discussion:

Mr. sickVisionz wrote:

Anyone else find it ironic that [Oshii] starts off with [...] and ends it with [...]

A lot of people tend not to catch cognitive dissonance they create. Hell, didn't Oshii really like Madoka Magica? Deconstruction or otherwise, otaku seem to like it. But I guess Oshii would probably just consider it to be an exception, or something like that.

Anyone with a basic understanding of music theory can make that progression, and while mistakes can happen, it still doesn't say anything about that progression or the piece as a whole.

I also think it's odd that you emphasize how writing, music, editing, etc. are just "crafts" when plenty of arguments have been made that writing et al are also art. This point seems to just be semantics, and I honestly don't think that we really disagree that much when looking over arguments.

I would add looking for authorial intentionality to justify whether something works is not a foolproof judgment of assessing the success of any artistic choice.

It does. It says that the piece is not professionally done. And a lot of such mistakes (if recognized) will make people think worse of the work.

Did you really assume that I think that music, writing and editing cannot be creative? I never said that and since art and craft aren't mutually exclusive I don't think I implied that either.

If dtm42 hadn´t already ruled out otaku-appeal as an objective measurement of quality I would probably have to admit that Puella Magi Madoka Magica is one of the best anime ever made.

And my point has always been that there is no way of objectively evaluating the story.

But I'm really thinking of stuff like atonality used in music; someone like John Cage or Derek Bailey are not universally embraced, and some really intelligent people consider what they produced to not be music (I've certainly met people who consider Bailey's guitar to be just noise). Cage and Bailey did know the fundamentals, but they took atonality beyond using it for basic ideas like dissonance and made music that a lot of people didn't just dislike, but outright rejected as music and considered failures. They consider it to be beyond an aesthetic issue and more of a fundamental one, although I'm not sure if you feel the same.

Touma wrote:

And my point has always been that there is no way of objectively evaluating the story.

So how do you decide whether a story is good, or bad then?

I decide based on how much I enjoy watching it, or reading it if you want to include books. That's all.