Forum

It is not my intention to make this "OEL manga jumping the shark" Part 2. There will be no further discussion on this matter, at least not here, and not for a long while anyways. I feel like we--the anti OEL camp--have consistently provided a sufficient argument for our side, with logic and reason and evidence, and have put up a firm and invariable definition of what "manga" is.

As the OEL camp have yet to provide such a definition for the so-called "manga style"--the central and most important piece of their argument--I'd like to see it. We were promised such a definition, and I feel a bit cheated that they never provided one, and the thread was finally locked.

So, nothing fishy here, just a thread where they can post that definition if they ever come up with one. Therefore, in the meantime, let's discuss matters more enjoyable, or at least more benign.

I have a serious problem, and that problem is that I currently have the first three volumes of FMA bought at different times, so the logos on the spine are different. Volume one has the old VIZ action label and logo; volume two has the new V label and the new VIZ Media logo; volume three has the old action label and the new VIZ Media logo.

Does something like that bother anybody else? Should I just suck it up?

SharinganEye wrote:

put up a firm and invariable definition of what "manga" is.

A word.

Specifically, an improper noun five letters long in English, adapted from a Japanese noun which I am not knowledgeable enough to talk about- but I'm sure many people here could regale you with stories of the kanji that form it, the meaning and origin of the word, and from what previous existing terms and roots it was parented.

I mock, yes. But frankly, the whole argument has seemed to me like a case of trivialities, prejudice, and pride. Here's the thing: manga are comics. A sequence of images telling a story, with dialog and sometimes narration working in concert with it. The structure is identical. Why, then, do we have the term "manga" in the first place? It means the same thing as an existing word, so what's the problem with calling them comics? It's simple really: pride. Buried in the argument over what can be called manga is the idea that manga is a superior form of art to comics, and that is fallacious. Most people would say, for example, that Bleach- defined as manga with a fair degree of certainty- is superior to most american superhero monthlies- which are defined as comics with equal certainty. But put Bleach next to Watchmen, which is clearly a comic, and you have a much harder time making the argument that manga is a superior form of art.

If I had the time and the inclination, I could dig real deep into this idea, but I get the feeling that it wouldn't really matter. The people involved in the debate are, quite frankly, chasing phantoms. Not because they think those phantoms are significant, but because... ah, this is going to expose me as an incurable internet cynic, but hell, it's a fair cop- they argue about it to glorify themselves. Their not interested in the definition of manga, or even in the future of an art form. Their interest is in being the alpha male. Proving themselves the most knowledgeable fan, the smart mark, the guy who doesn't believe the hype. They want to be better then the other fanboys. It's such a bunch of B.S., honestly. To paraphrase Strong Bad: "Gee, I suppose you think you're smarter than everyone here. Well, guess what? YOU'RE ALSO HERE! AT THE ANIME CONVENTION!"

I'm getting cantankerous, so I'll just leave it at this: A while ago I was in a bookstore with a fellow manga fan. I picked up the latest volume of PhD: Phantasy Degree, which I had been collecting on and off. She looks at me and says "Um, you know that's not really Japanese, don't you?" I say, "Yeah, but it's a pretty good story." She says, again, "But it's not Japanese." I say "Yes, but it's a good story."

I think that's pretty much my stand on the issue. What is manga? A word. A word that is, frankly, a distraction. Whether or not the book is manga doesn't matter. What matters is whether or not it's a good story. If it is, it's worth reading. If not, it's not. Nothing else is important.

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

BellosTheMighty wrote:

I mock, yes. But frankly, the whole argument has seemed to me like a case of trivialities, prejudice, and pride. Here's the thing: manga are comics. A sequence of images telling a story, with dialog and sometimes narration working in concert with it. The structure is identical. Why, then, do we have the term "manga" in the first place? It means the same thing as an existing word, so what's the problem with calling them comics? It's simple really: pride. Buried in the argument over what can be called manga is the idea that manga is a superior form of art to comics, and that is fallacious. Most people would say, for example, that Bleach- defined as manga with a fair degree of certainty- is superior to most american superhero monthlies- which are defined as comics with equal certainty. But put Bleach next to Watchmen, which is clearly a comic, and you have a much harder time making the argument that manga is a superior form of art.

Are you putting words in my mouth or is this your general supposition? Either way, it's rather presumptuous on your part to assume intentions for other people, especially when what you've said contradicts everything I've written and the principle I've stood for. I'm rather offended. In fact, it seems like you've gone ahead and made a judgment call on what our argument is without actually reading it, but rather glossed over and designated as blind arrogance of Japanophile fanboyism. Never has the question of superiority ever come into the equation. There is no problem calling them comics, never was. Manga was and is just a neat little loanword to specify Japanese comics.

Quote:

I'm getting cantankerous, so I'll just leave it at this: A while ago I was in a bookstore with a fellow manga fan. I picked up the latest volume of PhD: Phantasy Degree, which I had been collecting on and off. She looks at me and says "Um, you know that's not really Japanese, don't you?" I say, "Yeah, but it's a pretty good story." She says, again, "But it's not Japanese." I say "Yes, but it's a good story."

I think that's pretty much my stand on the issue. What is manga? A word. A word that is, frankly, a distraction. Whether or not the book is manga doesn't matter. What matters is whether or not it's a good story. If it is, it's worth reading. If not, it's not. Nothing else is important.

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

I speak for myself and the others when I say we've never disagreed with that in principle or with our words. In fact, we've been supporting that principle since the beginning, that quality has nothing to do with classification. Again, you stand presumptuous.

But let's not turn this into another quagmire, it doesn't need to turn into anything worse.

Last edited by The Xenos on Wed Aug 27, 2008 8:46 pm; edited 1 time in total

What is manga style? Manga style is whatever the suckers buy with the word manga on it. We'll make a mint I tells ya!

This.. is.. MANGA style! Plus, look, the Spanish basketball team is emulating Chinese basketball style!

BellosTheMighty wrote:

I'm getting cantankerous, so I'll just leave it at this: A while ago I was in a bookstore with a fellow manga fan. I picked up the latest volume of PhD: Phantasy Degree, which I had been collecting on and off. She looks at me and says "Um, you know that's not really Japanese, don't you?" I say, "Yeah, but it's a pretty good story." She says, again, "But it's not Japanese." I say "Yes, but it's a good story."

I totally agree with you on this problem. Fans of good manga (aka comics) should not care if something is Japanese. I think using the word manga on non-Japanese books adds to this bad mentality. Fanatics who draw lines at manga = good are a problem. Transposing manga onto American works to appeal to these fans is not a solution, it's a quick fix and I really doubt it works. We need to teach these fans that it's alright to read books that aren't from Japan. Insisting on a Japanese word is not the answer.

Now, now...

Let's all sip from our cup of Teavana white tea and wait...

Patiently...

SharanganEye wrote:

It is not my intention to make this "OEL manga jumping the shark" Part 2.

Unfortunately that seems to be exactly what's happening. A few posts in and we're already just picking up where it was left off. Manga is a word, and a word with a loose definition that can be interpreted differently between different people. Heck, it doesn't even mean the same to those in the US that it means to the Japanese, where the word originated.

This seems like little more than calling someone out, which never ends well. And since the word is open to interpretation, it's unlikely his provided definition will do anything more than spur more of the endless debate that prevailed in the last thread. That thread was locked for a reason, and that reason wasn't to simply open it up again in a fresh thread unfortunately.

If you want to pursue this definition issue with the user in question, then do so through private channels. We really don't need to revive threads that were locked for a good reason just to call someone out and wait for their response.