Forum - View topic

REVIEW: The Anime Encyclopedia Third Revised Edition

[Minuses] Not as useful in an academic setting due to tone and opinion, dividing into sections would make referencing easier.

[Minuses] A couple of small errors.

which can result in some amusing mistakes, such as the Lyrical Nanoha entry claiming that Hayate is the "boy love interest" of Nanoha and Fate in the StrikerS season ( a double error, as Hayate is a girl and Nanoha and Fate are only romantically interested in eachother ).

My main problem with this book is it still has a few factual mistakes in the plot summaries of various series, even very high-profile ones like Dragon Ball, and I imagine this can easily result in a very misleading impression or at least some confusion for the unprepared reader. I don't mind disagreeing with whether they like or dislike a given show, but I do find it distracting to come across such errors from time to time.

Rebecca Silverman wrote:

Each entry for a specific title includes the date the show was released, alternate titles it may be known by (each show is listed by its best known title, so the alternate may be the original Japanese or a different translation).

I've found the book to be very inconsistent in this regard, to be honest.

<snip>

CorneredAngel wrote:

In my mind, the two biggest question are: - What will you (a very specific you - casual reader, researcher, librarian) - use this book *for*. and - Is this book worth its price.

As a casual reader I read it for entertainment, it can be amusing in some cases.

The price? I'm waiting for the softcover before i buy the physical version, I'm not gonna pay $100 for the hardcover. For now I just have to put up the kindle edition for $10.

But reviews exist to express judgement; encyclopedias are supposed to be about factual information. This book sounds more like Leonard Maltin's film guides than the Encyclopedia Britannica.

IMO, as long as the book has MULTIPLE UNCONNECTED SERIES listed as the same entry, under a title that NONE of them have gone under, in either Japanese or English, the book is worthless.

Dessa wrote:

IMO, as long as the book has MULTIPLE UNCONNECTED SERIES listed as the same entry, under a title that NONE of them have gone under, in either Japanese or English, the book is worthless.

So one mistake as you see it = no value for an entire book. Really? Also, do you have any examples of this?

It could have been so much more if they had a more a neutral opinion on risqué anime,

I suppose this thing is insufficiently academic if the expectation is that qualifying means writing that's aggressively neutral or dressed up in superfluous denser language in the manner of journal articles. All I can say is that for me it's a book packed with information accompanied by a vested interest improving an understanding of anime and the industry that creates it for all readers. It meets that goal well, and does it no less so simply because the authors aren't above having a sense of humor.

Shippoyasha wrote:

It could have been so much more if they had a more a neutral opinion on risqué anime,

It's not just risqué anime, their article on Evangelion (guess why that pisses me off) is absolutely anti-fanboy rant (meaning they had no objectivity whatsoever, they only exaggerate the bad things of the show).

It's not just risqué anime, their article on Evangelion (guess why that pisses me off) is absolutely anti-fanboy rant (meaning they had no objectivity whatsoever, they only exaggerate the bad things of the show).

Also, plot summaries and production history of some shows occasionally will have wrong or missing information.

While I haven't read this third edition yet, I have read the second edition and after reading Rebecca's review, it sounds like many of problems that plagued the previous editions are still there. As the review mentioned, the tone of writing is very inconsistent. Entries for some shows or terms will have a formal "academic" tone while entries for other shows or terms will have a sarcastic or mocking tone. Personally, I think the variable writing style is a little jarring for the reader. Also, plot summaries and production history of some shows occasionally will have wrong or missing information. It's too bad, since I do have respect for the academic work of the authors, and it's the only print anime encyclopedia around. Anyway, I may still try to pick up this edition once the price goes down. It's still good as a reference book.

Completely agree. I don't know if they've revised the Evangelion entry in this third edition, but the Eva entry in the second edition sorta has a condescending tone to it.