Forum - View topicAnswerman - What Will Become Of Takahata's Legacy?
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Zeino
Posts: 1098 |
|
|||
|
I think I be alot more condemning about Takahata if not for the fact that he and Miyazaki did seem to feel a clear weight of guilt to possibly driving Kondo to his death that seems to affect their work after and that they had clearly payed for any sins towards their employees with the fact that Ghibli most likely doesn't have much of a future once they are both gone.
Maybe suffering and tragedy are too high price to pay for great works of art and entertainment but it is now all we have left of both deceased parties. It's history now while that certainly doesn't make it right, we should accept now that there was a dark side to Tahahata's films along with the beauty. At least, he wasn't a fascist, sexual harasser or a pedophile like a certain mangaka caught less than year ago. Last edited by Zeino on Thu Aug 16, 2018 12:12 am; edited 7 times in total |
||||
|
||||
|
Chrono1000
|
|
|||
|
It doesn't change my opinion on the movies he directed since they were made by hundreds of people but it is sad to hear how badly he treated his employees. Takahata was a perfectionist which might help a movie win awards but apparently made him a poor boss to work under and someone who kept going over budget since he was seeking perfection. While Takahata was responsible for his own actions it sounds like Ghibli had several reasons to fire him so it was partly an issue with the owners of the company as well.
|
||||
|
Lemonchest
Posts: 1771 |
|
|||
|
I remember one of Miyazaki's essays in his Starting Point collection, where he recollects how an animation director on the series he was working on at the time (possibly Future Boy Conan?) hospitalised herself from overwork; then insisted on going back to work a week later - work he was quite happy to foist on her. The job sounds like the kind of bottleneck made to shorten peoples lifespans, with potentially just one person being tasked to inspect & correct (often by themselves due to the absurd time constraints they're under) the thousands of cuts that go into making a series/film; while also having to put up with all the tweaks, changes & other crap the director & producers might throw at them from the other end.
I can imagine Takahata being especially hard to deal with in that environment. We praise his willingness to experiment & try new things etc; but he also seems to have been very demanding about what he wanted despite being quite uninterested in the day to day doings of a production - at least in his later years - & relied entirely on other people to make what was he saw in his head reach the screen. Miyazaki, at the very least, could make his own corrections. But at the same time, blaming Takahata for Kondo's death specifically seems to me like blaming a toxic corporate culture on a bad executive - one who was given carte blanche by the rest of the board, I'd add. |
||||
|
||||
nightmaregenie
 Posts: 167 Location: Palmy, NZ - student central |
|
|||
THIS. So much this. Talent is no excuse for being an asshole, ever. Any person in another field of work would be rightfully criticised for abusive behaviour so I don't get why there's such a horrible set of double standards when it comes to artists - all it does is foster the talent/fame = entitlement to treat people like crap mentality and perhaps even more concerning, the notion that great works of art cannot be created without toxic indiosyncracies. While I'd still acknowledge an artist's talent I'd definitely have less respect for them for shitty behaviour. As for consuming their work, for me it depends on the individual case - the nature of the allegations and what has been proven true or known to be true etc. Not sure about Isao Takahata. Reserving judgement unless there's more info available. |
||||
|
||||
|
Posts Sometimes
Posts: 38 |
|
|||
That essay was about the finish inspector (staff member in charge of checking painted cels for color mistakes and damage) on Heidi, but it's definitely a must-read for anyone curious about what working for Takahata and/or Miyazaki was like. The woman lived in the office for months with only around 2 hours of sleep a night, and Miyazaki's reaction is basically "well, I guess that kind of dedication is what it takes to make great art". |
||||
|
||||
penguintruth
 Posts: 8489 Location: Penguinopolis |
|
|||
Of course it is (to an extent). Talent is rarer than niceness. Ideally, though, I suppose it would be great if people had both. |
||||
|
||||
|
nightmaregenie
Posts: 167 Location: Palmy, NZ - student central |
|
|||
That's only true though if you assume that talented people are incapable of learning how to be decent human beings. And an industry that keeps making excuses for them won't help. |
||||
|
||||
whiskeyii
 Posts: 2266 |
|
|||
Jesus effing Christ. I went through a rough patch in grad school when our team was pulling 18-hour days for three months to get a project done to admittedly arbitrary expectations. Getting only 4-5 hours a night totally wrecked me--the stress alone was enough to catapult me into mild depression. But TWO HOURS???? That is flat-out insane. In. Sane. |
||||
|
||||
|
DRosencraft
Posts: 671 |
|
|||
You are absolutely right. This was my point originally. And yes, it probably happens in a lot of studios, and not only in the Japanese art industry. Roman Polanski has evaded court on sexual abuse charges for decades, mainly on the assertion that he's a great producer. Heck, the president of the United States gets away with saying horrible things constantly with the defense "I do it to everyone. I'm reacting to others" and people choose to accept that answer. Then we hear complaints later about the devolution of civility, or poor working conditions, or regret about what terrible things happen to these people who suffer this. It doesn't matter how rare or how often it happens; there should be anger and outrage any time it happens. Let's change the facts a little. Let's say that instead of being a terrible boss, we were talking about underpaid animators? How many articles, forum discussions, has this site had in the last year about the plight of animators suffering poor wages and long hours, with almost universal decrying of the "horrible" folks at the top not paying them enough, despite all the economic data that goes into showing how complex the problem is. Yet here, where we are only asking that a boss not berate and be a total **s to their employees, that's too much to ask for the creation of the same work. The light the end product should be viewed in should definitely be weighed on by the actions of the principle creators. Should the entire work be canned? I don't think that is entirely right either, because that is no way to respect the sacrifice of those whose efforts toiled at the product. But we shouldn't just throw up our hands and say, "oh well, that movie/show/art was great, so who cares how it came about?" |
||||
|
||||
|
nightmaregenie
Posts: 167 Location: Palmy, NZ - student central |
|
|||
Yeah, that kind of thinking completely puzzles me. It's like saying "well I know this toy is made from slave labour but who cares as long as I can play with it?" which wouldn't fly with any other forms of consumer product but somehow entertainment is an exception? Changing toxic behaviours and unhealthy work environments takes time and there's no perfect, instant solution but it's definitely a matter worthy of attention and discussion, not to be shrugged off in the name of art. I thought of Polanski too when I wrote my initial response. |
||||
|
||||
Levitz9
 Posts: 1022 Location: Puerto Rico |
|
|||
|
There are a number of artists in recent years whose works have come under a lot of scrutiny because of their histories of abuse towards their fellows. The takeaway I've had is, "no work of art is so groundbreaking as to justify harm coming to other people". So I have no quarter for Polanski, Woody Allen, John K, or Watsuki. It really feels mealymouthed to me that people are in such a hurry to argue "separating art from artist" or touting how important it is that the work and artist be recognized in spite of their character failings.
And when it comes to Ghibli? Hell, I didn't need to know Miyazaki was a cantankerous old coot to dislike his work. His works already feel ostentatious, like they're screaming in my ear "Isn't this whimsical?! Isn't this lovely?! Hey, hey, are you moved yet? You should be moved right about now!"--knowing he's a demon basically makes his movies feel even less whimsical and more like I'm being shouted at by an old, out-of-touch fart to cut my hair and get a job. No thank you, I got enough of that crap from my own grandfather. So knowing Takahata was the same way? Well, maybe it's because I've no nostalgia for his movies, but I give him the same treatment. No movie of his is so groundbreaking that it'll justify the misery inflicted on anyone not named Isao Takahata. I won't expect other people to feel the same way or to tow my line OR ELSE, or anything dumb like that. His movies resonate with people in a way they don't with me. (I can't imagine how torn I'd be if it turned out Stephen King was a monstrous person.) But I frankly don't see the need to give the man any favors. |
||||
|
||||
Hiroki not Takuya
 Posts: 2610 |
|
|||
|
I've never been able to relate to the sentiment that keeps one from enjoying something done by the sort of person you don't like and I think that is reflective of idealization or a very strong bias (!). I don't think it's necessarily dismissive to separate the art from the artist and I also don't think it's possible anyway. The art can be appreciated on it's own and doesn't change quality by virtue of the behavior of the person who made it. Harder is aligning an emotionally touching story made by a person who is supposedly uncaring or insensitive.
Regarding Takahata-sensei, I believe it is true that he was the sort of quiet thoughtful sensitive man people think he was from his films, but internally. Outwardly, possibly he felt circumstances drove or required him to be the driving, demanding, etc. person Suzuki-san portrays. I don't see inconsistency in that (if true) and will continue to enjoy his films and not obsess while watching over what he did or didn't do to the production crew who willingly make them. |
||||
|
||||
relyat08
 Posts: 4125 Location: Northern Virginia |
|
|||
|
The Tale of the Princess Kaguya is my favorite film of all time, animated or otherwise. I was heartbroken(though not surprised), when Suzuki's statements on Takahata came out, but if I sat down and watched Kaguya right now, nothing would change about how much I love it. Nothing could. It's still the same film that made me break down in tears multiple times during every viewing. It's still a film rich with important themes and breathtaking animation. Regardless of how much of a monster the man ultimately responsible for it was, that doesn't, and can't, retroactively change how I felt watching the work, and what I got out of it.
|
||||
|
||||
nDroae
 Posts: 382 |
|
|||
Interesting how one coming from that can end up consistently going over budget and missing deadlines, which is the opposite of "survivalist." |
||||
|
||||
AiddonValentine
 Posts: 2298 |
|
|||
Pretty much; I have nothing but respect for artists who pour their hearts into their work and are willing to push themselves to the limits just so they can display their work for the public and make them feel excited, joyful, or moved. And that's the reason Takahata's actions enrage me. He took advantage of that. He took advantage of his privileged position in order to force others to overwork themselves because he knew they wanted to bring something to life. So best summarize: this is something the VILLAIN of a Ghibli film would do. |
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group