Forum - View topicWhat makes "anime"
|
Goto page 1, 2 Next |
| Author | Message | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Meiaminkbell
 Posts: 109 |
|
|||||||
|
Ah the age-old question. Before I begin, I wish to inform the readers that this question is about curiosity of the subject and "definition" of anime and what you consider to be anime. I write it to satisfy an ego-driven hunger to study the knowledge of the human psyche and at the same time fulfill a personal request to see how well an...idea of mine would stand up in the real world.
This is a question that has never been far from my mind, what is considered anime? Of course this question is rhetorical, anime is defined as a slang term for Japanese animation, but what is considered Japanese animation? Most people of the otaku generation would not consider shows like Teen Titans, Avatar, or that GOD awful Totally Spies, anime. The more respectful anime-watchers would say they are influenced by anime, and the least respectful...well I'm sure you know what they call it. But why are they not considered anime? Because they are created by non-Japanese artists or becaus they are not made in Japan? I am not saying they are anime, although there was a time I was interested in TT because of it's anime-ish qualities I never really considered it an "anime". Nor am i saying they are poor shows, they definently have their own fanbase (Avatar is doing really well). So that's my question. What defines anime and manga for you, the readers/watchers? Is it the animation? The creators? The country of origin? Or a combination of these three plus more? I won't get into detail WHY I decided to ask this question, but instead will pose to you another question to respond to your curiosity. What if, a pure-Caucasian American (I say pure in the fact that I reflect sunlight I'm so white) learned Japanese, travled to Japan, befriended (hire) an illustrator, and created his own manga that turned out to be picked up by a manga/manga magazine? Would you read it even if an American name was printed as it's creator? I ask this because as an elitist of manga/anime, I usually don't pick up manga (or Amerimanga, however you wish to view it) because of the foreign names on the binder. Granted, a lot of the drawings are not to my preference (I mean really, it's so obvious they try too hard to make it like every other manga) but even so. I don't want to give you my whole life story. I realize the complications involved in publishing a manga, much less for me to learn Japanese and become a citizen, but first and foremost, and one final question to satisfy my ego... Would you consider a graphic novel written by an America-born writer (but not drawn) in Japan a manga? And would you read it? (Okay two questions. And this is not a thread asking "how to make anime", so please don't take it as such, that's my own private desire I have to investigate myself and have complete confidence in myself) |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Redbeard 101
Oscar the Grouch
Forums Superstar  Posts: 16974 |
|
|||||||
|
Well as you pointed out in your post Meiaminkbell, anime is a slang term for Japanimation (more slang) or more aptly known as Japanese Animaton. You then asked, running along with the concept of anime being Japanese Animation, what would qualify as Japanese Animation? While I'm pretty sure this is also rhetorical I want to add one thing, that will tie in more to another question of yours later. That one point is, while anime is simply put Japanese Animation and exclusive to Japan, that does not mean animation and/or animated shows from elsewhere, such as China, Korea, America, are inherently bad. It simply means they aren't anime. A lot of people get caught up on that and assume that when someone says show A is not anime it must suck or be horrible. That's hardly the case. Anime is a slang term used to describe animation from one specific place, Japan. That doesn't mean an animated show from Korea is bad, the show could be a huge success and be brilliant. It just simply means the show is not "anime." I'm not entirely sure if the term "manga" is supposed to be Japanese specific only just like anime is (I thought Korean "manga" was called mahnwa which might serve to show "manga is Japanese specific). Maybe someone can run with that and explain that part more.
Now on to the non-rhetorical questions heh.
At heart what defines anime as anime, and manga as manga (assuming my above speculation on the origins of the term manga are accurate) would be country of origin. The other aspects you mentioned, among others, would define the quality of the anime or manga to me, but not what anime or manga is. For me it's simply about the country of origin. Now, with that said as I mentioned above that in no way reflects the quality of shows/literature from other countries. Anime and Manga, as terms, are simply used to represent that material from Japan. That's just my opinion and perspective. I'm sure there's plenty of good shows/literature from others countries that rival any good anime or manga series. Just like I'm sure there's bad examples of animation/literature from other countries, and bad example of Anime and Manga. I'll finish my last thought with your last question.
To me no that is not a manga. Graphic novel would be the correct term for me actually, in terms of what I would classify the material as. Now what I think is the big question, would I still consider reading it anyway? Of course. Personally I could care less where a show or piece of literature is from. If the story and synopsis sound interesting to me I'd give it a try regardless of the country of origin. As I said above, there's good anime and bad anime, good manga and bad manga. The same rule applies to every other version of entertainment out there. There's some good examples, and some bad examples. If I saw a graphic novel that was manga inspired and the plot caught my eye I would give it a good reading even if it wasn't authentic "manga." I hope my answers help you some. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Meiaminkbell
Posts: 109 |
|
|||||||
|
Very much so, thank you. I had posted the exact post in a different forum with mixed results, mostly people saying that "anime is japanese animation" and "anime means animation therefore it means cartoons" when this is not the question I had posed to them. I realize what the term anime means, where it derives from, and the discrepencies that evolve from it. What I want to know is what do YOU consider anime? If there are two names on a graphic novel cover, one of them American and the other Japanese, by a company you know very well to publish manga in Japan, would you still consider that manga and classify it into the same category of fandom?
You're answer helped me very much, but there is still so much more I need to learn from the fanbase as a whole. I realize personal issue and opinions abound in this culture we call anime and otakudom and while this helps me on a personal level, it also enlightens me to see things in other viewers light. Maybe after more responses I will give my opinion on what makes "anime". |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Redbeard 101
Oscar the Grouch
Forums Superstar Posts: 16974 |
|
|||||||
Glad to help. I forgot to say but that a nice OP (opening post) you made. After more responses I'd be interested to hear what your opinions are myself. Now, with that said I'm going to answer the very clever/sneaky impromptu question of yours.
I would actually consider that manga. Here's why; I mentioned I consider anime/manga to simply be that kind of material from a specific source, Japan in this case. I didn't mention though what I though in regards to the creator/author's country of origin. As I said I feel manga is representative of Japan. If the author is living in Japan, the company producing it also in Japan, and the piece of literature is released primarily for the Japanese audience then yes it is manga. It's being made in Japan, produced and published by a Japanese manga company, and released first and primarily in Japan. Given those circumstances I would feel it should be considered manga. I mean, if you're creating this manga there yourself and it's picked up by an honest to God manga company there then they must approve of it. Granted I think instances like this are very rare, though that is just a guess so maybe I'm wrong. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Meiaminkbell
Posts: 109 |
|
|||||||
|
Lord knows I'm hoping with all my might. Just need to study more kanji...and hirigana...and katakana...and romanji...
*rushes off* |
||||||||
|
||||||||
Truered
 Posts: 515 Location: Uni |
|
|||||||
|
I consider anime or manga to refer to animated or print based comic like work drawn within Japan. I use the terms comic and cartoon for Western shows. Just as I see Manhwa being Korean (Specifically S.Korea). I see Western animation as cartoons or for a more respectable term "Animated shows" e.g. The Simpsons/South Park. I do see a number of cartoons that are being increasingly influenced by the anime style.
As for nationality- living outside of Japan I use the term Mangaka for artists who draw manga within Japan. I often considered mangaka to be Japanese. However if say an American etc was fluent in Japanese, lived in the country, worked with/was aided by an artist and then published a series within one of the Japanese magazines and was later translated I would consider it to be Manga. It would just be odd to see John Smith on the front. They live within the country, experience the culture and are part of the population. Why can't it be considered manga? Of course a scale of time would influence me- if they had been there three decades I'd be more willing to accept it as manga then a nerd who'd been there three months and got lucky 
The nationality of a mangaka doesn't influence what i read or not. A decent storyline, a drawing style I enjoy and characters I like would choose me to read/watch something. However if it was drawn outside of Japan I'd probably just see it as an Western comic/cartoon influenced by Manga/anime. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
DuelLadyS
 Posts: 1705 Location: WA state |
|
|||||||
|
I, personally, don't think country of origin has as much weight on the 'anime or not?' question as it could, seeing as a great deal of the acutal animation is outsourced to China/Korea these days, regardless of where the show is being developed.
For me, that's the key. If the character designers, key animators, scriptwriters, etc. are all in Japan, it's anime. Otherwise, it's a cartoon (as I'm unaware of any other speciality terms for animation of a specific nationality.) For manga, I expect the artists/writers to be Japanese. For works by non-Japanese in the 'manga style' (which I've come to define as "published in tankubon-sized graphic novels"), I like RTO's 'world manga' term. Otherwise, it's a comic. In the example you give- an American writer working with a Japanese artist- I hit a bit of a grey area. It goes either way here, depending on the audience the work is created for. Since in your example, the work is picked up by a Japanese company, for publication in Japanese and distribution in Japan, I'd call it manga- the target/original audience is Japanese. On the flip side, if the Japanese artist came over here, and drew for an english-language work to be published in America, that's a comic. I know, that's probably not a very fair definition (And likely to be hypocritical), but for a defining term tied so strongly to a cultural identity (anime= Japan), it's hard to place soemthing that splices that culture with another. In the end, the most important thing is- is it any good? If it's good, I don't care if it was written by Americans, drawn by Aborigines, and toned by Probiscus Monkeys. I'll read/watch it.
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Meiaminkbell
Posts: 109 |
|
|||||||
|
Humans beings live off hypocracy and contradictions, I'm sure every major religion has some hypocracy written within its tomes, the key is to just take everything with a grain of salt.
It is as you say, the most important thing is "is it good?" Of course, I wish I could say everyone viewed things the same way as you or I do, but we all know of the louder, most elitist of any community where it's either their way or the highway. The only reason I have not picked up "world manga" "amerimanga" or any other term used to describe graphic novels written/drawn by non-Kapanese creators, is because the readers usually strive to be too much like anime. They go through every cliche and stereotyped observed in every-day anime and try to make a story out of it. I believe it was a moderator on this forum who said, "If you want to make an anime, do you want it by story or by style? If you make something that cannot work in any other style than anime, you may want to work on your story. "
I couldn't agree with him/her more. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Kyuriko
Posts: 152 |
|
|||||||
I would say that it's a rather debatable definition. Why? My main reason is because although it is pronounced differently, the same characters used to write manga in Japanese are also used to write manhua in Chinese. On the other hand, there may be a subtle difference between manga and comikku, which is a loan word used in Japanese for "comic", and I wouldn't know if the two are used interchangeably to describe Japanese and foreign comics, or if it's only used to describe foreign comics.
As a student of the Japanese language, I believe that anime and manga can describe all animation and comics regardless of country of origin or heritage of the creator. To be honest, I believe it depends on the language you're speaking. I wouldn't outright state that, say, Avatar is an anime because most people would simply refer to it as a cartoon, although its art is heavily influenced by anime, even though it technically could be called an anime if you want to go with the original Japanese definition of the term. Thus, when speaking English I'm not going to call every animation and comic an anime or a manga so as not to confuse those who are accustomed to the Western slang term -- animation produced in Japan. Hm, I just noticed that although I refer to American comics influenced by the Japanese art style (such as Tokyopop and Seven Seas originals) American manga, but not the same for Japanese-influenced cartoons not produced in Japan. I guess I'm still debating what to call such comics and cartoons myself.
I don't think that nationality should be a factor in deciding what one should buy, and I would judge it just the same as I would a Japanese manga. If the art and the story interest me, then I will be all too happy to give the series a chance -- after all, there's a good amount of badly done manga published in Japan. I would be a little surprised to see the foreign name, but I would actually be more happy to see that someone had achieved such a challenging goal.
If a Japanese, Chinese, or Korean person can publish a comic in America and it would still be called a "comic" instead of "manga", "manhua", or "manhwa", then I believe that it should be the same for an American artist who wants to publish a manga in Japan. And like I stated before, I would judge it like I do for any other manga, rather than because of who drew it and where they were from. Of course, I might be biased, having the same dream. I thought at first that it was going to be yet another "definition of anime and manga" thread, but once I started writing my response it wound up being a very interesting discussion. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Fallout2man
Posts: 275 Location: San Diego, CA |
|
|||||||
|
Anime to me, is defined by one major factor combined with several minor ones.
The biggest thing being a sort of real yet surreal state of reality that evokes unusually strong emotional responses. American animation usually cannot accomplish this because it tries too hard to be simplistic and child-oriented or too jokey, bloody, etc. The right balance for a real anime is hard to exactly weigh and measure, but it's not afraid to show blood when appropriate, or even graphic violence, not afraid to show nudity or sexuality when it may also be appropriate (Elfen Lied really showcases this very very well.) And while it can be filled with cliches, the characters and individual aspects can help often overcome any hurdles offered by what can be considered cliched plots. If you get into mechanics of it though, anime also is a coherant set of styles that follow a set of principles, Cirispin Freeman outlined some of that when he talked about differences between american and japanese animation in terms of motion versus stillness. For instance I'd never consider Aqua Teen Hunger Force a real anime purely based on mechanics, it's just far too much like a string of still framed images being moved with wires to be realistically even considered a serious animation. Anime can be considered a wide variety of things, but in my own eyes it has moved beyond geographical boundaries and into something else, something higher, it just so happens people in Japan know how to tap this better than those in America. The biggest thing is this though, can it make you cry? I've only had one non-anime ever get that serious of a response from me (The Butterfly Effect), if it creates no serious emotional connection, even if it's a weak one, it's not an anime, despite who made it. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Tyrenol
Posts: 398 Location: Northern California |
|
|||||||
|
I had always thought that "anime" was an alternative to the Western cartoons, and the idealism behind the latter. But then I soon realize that the West and the East are no different in terms of what goes on behind the animation.
Japanese animation (actually, cartoons created in Asia) is more of a cultural escape, or a form of "culture shock," than anything else. That was my assumption. Then again, let's remember that Japan is probably the only nation to allow the creation of adult-oriented cartoons. Americans tried that and failed miserably. (There was Fritz The Cat, and some others. But they were exploitations.) But yeah. I have to say: Unfortunately, the East is just like the West in terms of "studio attitudes." Those on the top tend to screw things up for the viewers. If something is based on a novel/comic/manga, they will switch up the situations (at times excluding them all together) in order to "make the show more viewable." And they tend to make fun of the rules: The law over in Japan forbids offending material and atleast calls for the censoring of the. But Nagasarete Airantou featured plants that looked very offending. And I'll add to it the "viral marketing viral marketing;" the annoying idea that "entertainment should double as advertising." AND the fact that any fanbase will include people who don't wash and take care of their personal appearances. To finish off, I'll agree that "anime" is a slang term for cartoons created by the Japanese. But in time people will grow up from that as well since anime will not be as cool as people thought it was when the started to enjoy it. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
KyuuA4
 Posts: 1363 Location: America, where anime and manga can be made |
|
|||||||
|
For starters, I'm just going to sit here and laugh at this thread.
 
How true. That "culture shock" exists. Just look at all the "Wapanese", "Wasians", or "Weaboos". Though, nothing too wrong about that. Just shows that the amount of money being pooled into anime is higher today, than say... 10-20 years ago. That correlates to more being brought here. I still remember when I first "started" into anime. At that point, I felt it to be considerably different to the "local flavors" of animation here in the states. Currently, I have no expressed bias for or against the source of the animation -- as long as the animation "performs". In short, do I like it? That's my base criteria.
Yup. Sadly, Executive Decision overrides Creative Art all the time. I was talking with a good friend of mine. He was talking about the creation of video games; and how he used to have an interest in becoming a developer. However, he was turned off after reading about things such as "omitting" game features because upper management made a decision, primarily due to the budgeting. The creative aspect was basically subordinate to the "money". Business is business, I suppose. Sounds sad, when y'come to think about it. Ironically, the "best" happen to be the "most creative".
Hehe. Don't mean to brag, but I've been quite notorious for contending the "slang term". So, while the slang term exists -- I expand over to "animation". Encompassing all. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Meiaminkbell
Posts: 109 |
|
|||||||
|
I do not doubt for a second that the tops can and will make major cuts to any story to make it meet budget requirements, whatever the cost may be. However, while this may be true for all anime there are still undoubtedly decent and wholesome shows that are able to stand up to the money-grubbers on the top floor.
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Jarius
Posts: 39 |
|
|||||||
|
The term anime is very controversial and just depends on the mindset of oneself. if u want more detail info u can go here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anime
For me i will visualized anime as a japanese styled animation that usually are 13 - 26 episodes, of course there are other cases of "epic" animes. How i differentiate animes and non anime, first is through the style of animation and then the length. I also do agree that anime can invoke emotions that western animation fails to do so and in fact i find some anime even more emotional that live action drama. This make me more baised in the fact that anime is better than western animaton and cant really watch anime that are dubbed english cos it just feel weird. I'm not saying that western animation are no good just that anime lose it originality without the seiyuu voices. Usually western animations are "epic" animations that has quite a lot of episodes and do not have that "distinct" 13-26 episode that sums up the series. Western animation give me a feel that their origin is adopt from live action series or from fairytales. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Nagisa
Moderator
 Posts: 6128 Location: Atlanta-ish, Jawjuh |
|
|||||||
Animation is outsourced, as in the mindless gruntwork of drawing in-between frames to fill in between key frames #36432 and #36433, yes. But the actual stuff that determines the creative and directorial direction of a show--the direction, design work, writing, scenario, etc.--are all still done in the studio in Japan. Really, whoever's slaving away over a desk drawing Goku's hair a billion times over doesn't matter, but the person Toei hired in-house to write what he says and tell the guy at the desk how the camera pans across him do, and it's where those guys are working that determines if it's an anime or not. If the guys at the head of production are working for a studio based on Japanese soil, it's anime, regardless of which underpaid grunts they have doing menial slave labor where.
But quality is subjective. It's impossible to objectively define something on a subjective criteria that's going to differ greatly from person to person, so things like emotional impact and "style" (Lupin was based on Mad Magazine comic strips, so he's obviously not "anime style," and the more realistic style of Jin-Roh is hardly "anime style," yet I highly doubt there are very many people who'd argue that either of these was not anime).
Ane anime aren't? Dragon Ball Z and Saiyuki were based on a Japanese fable, and nukerous Japanese series incorporate various native Japanese myths. There are also several anime based on classic novels like Les Miserables and The Count of Monte Cristo, and yet more based on live-action Japanese shows, and which also inspire several live-action shows. Anime isn't some bastion of originality, and most titles are indeed based on a pre-existing manga or some other source. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group