Forum - View topicNEWS: Tokyopop Rising Stars
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
ANN_Bamboo
ANN Contributor
 Posts: 3904 Location: CO |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Yes, but we're tackling this argument from a Western perspective, where manga has come to mean Japanese comics. The Japanese use the word anime to describe all cartoons too, but in North America, we wouldn't say that the Simpsons are anime-- because we've taken "anime" to mean cartoons originating from Japan. The problem is that manga isn't just a "style," nor is it a genre. You can list all of the traits that a stereotpyical manga has, but one would be able to come up with examples of manga that don't fit those descriptions, and also non-manga that *do*. As the word is used, manga are comics from Japan. Of course there will always be questions, like if a Chinese guy born and raised in Japan made a comic, would it be manga? But for Tokyopop to slap a label onto anything influenced by manga and call it manga is erroneous. Megatokyo isn't anymore manga than Superman. (And Simple Life Cine-manga isn't anymore a manga than... well, hell, that's just a bad usage of the word manga, period.) There are times when people take this idea of making "manga" too far. I've read published pseudo-manga written by Americans claiming to be manga, with characters with big eyes, named Jessica-chan and Gabriella-chan, using dialogue like "Jessica-chan, you look so kawaii today!" That's when it stops being just "manga-styled" to flat out copying. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Jadress
 Posts: 809 Location: Seattle. It purdy and nerdy! |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
*shudder* |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Razorlight6
 Posts: 37 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Yes. Definitely.
I agree. We began using the terms Manga and Anime, as opposed to Japanese Comics and Japanese Cartoons, and loving those mediums because we saw that they were decidedly different from their western equivalents, so much so that we needed words to distinguish them. Therefore, we took the Japanese ones. We used these terms not just to describe where they were from, but how they were different. There is a certain undertone to these two precious words that I believe most fans feel when they use them, regardless of what they ultimately want them to mean. That feeling are these differences that separate Japanese work from what most of us have grown up knowing, the looney toons and super-heroes of the west. Disregarding this misses the point of why we, as fans, became interested in Japanese comics and cartoons in the first place. The problem here is that the words Anime and Manga have been accepted in the west to refer to Japanese cartoons and comics in general while also to referring to work that is in their literary and illustrative styles. These meanings have existed and grown with fandom side-by-side, which is why some, like Ztarr, refer to their work as manga and why others would never do so, no matter how close the work resembles something out of Japan. To claim that Manga and Anime only means any comics or cartoons from Japan, and refers nothing to style, only takes one element of why we use those terms and unfairly disregards everything else as a hijacking of words. I realize style is a pretty general term and we people throw it around rather carelessly without defining it, of which I am also guilty. When used here, I am referring to the following: a) the slower pacing / quicker reading of manga (time is condensed less than in the west) b) a greater (though not necessarily better) focus on characters rather than plot c) layouts and composition similar to that used for anime I realize Japanese comics vary widely, but from what I've seen the majority use some or all of these regularly while most American comics do not. There are certainly exceptions but we are talking about what is generally the case, especially from the works that differ from domestic works. In any medium there will always be exceptions to what is common, but that doesn't mean we can't refer to what is common. As for my own personal terminology, I use "Amerimanga," rather than the half-defined "pseudo-manga," to refer to a cross-breed of American and Japanese style comics, which most "American manga" artists are producing. If someone, no matter what ethnicity and nationality, produces work mostly indistinguishable from the majority of Japanese comics then I call it manga. The same goes with anime. I have not seen many comics, and absolutely no cartoons, produced outside of Japan that I would call manga or anime. With TokyoPop's The Rising Stars of Manga... I think it's rather clear that it's not called The Rising Stars of Comics. Japanese-specific techniques, such as those Ztarr and I listed, are expected from readers, even if they aren't by TokyoPop. The entries Chibi Zombies and Magical Raft 1013 are drawn rather well, better than most of the others, but there is nothing about them that is manga-specific. Sure, there are some elements that are similar to manga, but these are common techniques in visual, serial storytelling that can also be found in many American comics. Others are certainly a hybrid, Amerimanga (my definition), while a couple manage to stay truer to manga form. (I know I singled out Chibi and Raft, but as I said not because they are bad. The artists of these comics are truly talented and have the ability to have their work published. I especially like the remarkable, Chris Bachalo inspired Magical Raft 1013. DOOM! Any comic with a character as irresistably cute as Sodi can freely have my money. ^^) I also have to agree with Ztarr's criticisms about some of the art. The lack of skill is apparent in many of the entries although I, with my low expectations, was surprised by some of them. It's easy to criticize art here as opposed to that in Japan because of the differences in the acceptance of the artforms. With manga and anime's mainstream acceptance in Japan you've got more people of artistic skill striving to work in the industries professionally, the greater ability to sell your own creations (or have them sell you), and the willingness to take the time to get better because of these things. To put it simply, there are just many more people in Japan drawing kawaii mahou shoujo, hence more people with greater skill.
I think what Ztarr is referring to here is the impression one gets from a lot of the manga being sold in the west. This is true with most industries. You judge their views by what they sell and what they push. Most manga that I've seen here include the methods listed above.
Please, don't ever use Devil's Due's G.I. Joe comics as an example for anything, except an example of poor writing and drawing. It's sad that they carry the G.I. Joe name at all, let alone being published. But seriously, to refer to a special one issue tribute-to-a-past-series-issue's-problem-turned-something-cool affair? Such a rare occurrence doesn't even qualifiy as an example of the series mentioned, let alone a common technique used regularly by a series in this country.
Okay, let's repeat that.
I'm glad you agree. This was Ztarr's point in the first place. Unfortunately, you then went on and took Ztarr's list completely out of context by disregarding the explanation directly under the list. Nowhere in any of Ztarr's posts was there an assertion that every single Japanese comic had all or even one of these elements.
So you created and defined the term manga? Just because you personally accept it to mean one thing does not define it for America, or Canada, or the non-Japanese world. After all, we're talking about a general word that doesn't even originate in this language. It's highly likely that those who first began using it meant both Japanese comics and the manga style because both were true. They were Japanese comics and there was definitely a style or styles that did not exist in the majority of American comics, which is still true today. If Ztarr accepts "manga" to mean work of particular styles common to Japanese comics, it's perfectly reasonable for Ztarr to say "I draw manga." Just because Ztarr uses the word doesn't mean Ztarr's claiming a "badge of honor." That might be true if Ztarr held your definition and still claimed this imaginary "badge," but that obviously isn't the case. And yes, there is a difference between saying "manga" and "manga-style." One is a noun and the other is an adjective. Ztarr could say I draw "manga-style comics," but that's what Ztarr means by "manga."
You need to define anime and manga for the site, which is understandable and acceptable, but why should a definition used for managerial purposes be the accepted way of thinking? And Chronicles of Riddick? That's hardly anime, or "anime-style," by anyone's definition, so it's something that should never be news, even if you put out news about American-made anime/manga(-style animation/comics -- for you ^^). I don't mean to offend, but with that and G.I. Joe #21, your examples are hardly relevant to the conversation. Whether or not you want to accept Anime and Manga to mean anything other than what you personally like, multiple definitions do exist. I accept both. I use both. I suspect a lot of fans out there do the same. It's all context. In the context of ANN news reporting at this time, your definition is acceptable. If a lot of high quality anime/manga-style products are released by western companies in the future, I imagine ANN's definitions, or at least it's news reporting guidelines, will expand as well. Like I said before, we began and continue loving this stuff because of the differences from what we see here. Is everything the same? No. Are a lot of comics within a particular region the same, whether here or in Japan? Yes. People need, or at least want, words to use to describe works with these differences. Those words are Anime and Manga. If not for those differences we may never have cared so much about Japanese comics and cartoons in the first place, and all of us here probably wouldn't be having this discussion because Anime News Network might never have existed or grown to what it is now. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Nagisa
Moderator
 Posts: 6128 Location: Atlanta-ish, Jawjuh |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
The fact that execution differs is obvious. The fact that someone outside of those regional borders can imitate those differences is also obvious. However, we never called Italian Renaissance work "Ancient Greek" even when they drew heavily from the influences of the Greek region. Similarly, I don't think these "Rising Stars" contestants, or even Ztarr herself, should call their works "manga." It's not a knock on quality, it's simply stating that they're inspired by another region's works rather than claiming they're a literal part of that region's comic industry.
So how do we define works by an intangible feeling that manifests itself differently from person to person? That's extremely impractical at best, and highly unrealistic.
No it doesn't. You can still have this feeling about works while also having a solid definition based on regional sources. Are you saying that perhaps we can't like a non-anime or non-manga title, so we have to flex the definition to include anything we might actually take a liking to?
Not necessarily. If this definition has "grown with the fandom side-by-side," when why don't we refer to Thundercats as anime today? If we were calling anything that borrowed the Japanese aesthetic anime back in the day, we'd still be clinging to that now and perhaps trying to break a habit. But we don't.
I again refer to the Ancient Greek-Renaissance example. Just because both are separated by regional (and time) differences only does not detract from the fact that one inspired the other. Using anime & manga as strictly regional definitions similarly wouldn't do the same for these Rising Stars people or people like Ztarr.
Some of this would be extremely hard to set solid definitions around. Some of it also is somewhat erroneous.
Some of what you listed however, is contrary to even what is common.
Do you also call Michelangelo's David a piece of Ancient Greek sculpture?
I don't think what TokyoPop says on the matter is really valid. They're the same people trying to tell us they have a Simple Life manga, after all. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Tempest
 I Run this place.ANN Publisher  Posts: 10472 Location: Do not message me for support. |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
 ;
Yeah, it would. Doujins are self published comics, be they original or fan-comics. It's just that the majority of doujins that we hear about happen to be fan-comics. Of course, now that MT is published by Dark Horse, it still begs the question, but if something starts off a Doujin, perhaps it's appropriate to continue calling it a Doujin even after it's been accepted by a publisher. -t |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Tempest
I Run this place. ANN Publisher Posts: 10472 Location: Do not message me for support. |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
I'm not going to quote everything Razorlight has said, but (s)he makes the best arguements for the acceptance of a wider use of the word "manga" than anyother here. I don't buy it, but to a degree, that was his/her point, that this is a somewhat subjective matter. And until the word "manga" appears in Merriam-Webster's Collegiate (the definitive English language dictionary), it will unfortunately remain subjective. And even then, mainstream dictionaries, even MW, have a habit of messing oup fringe culture and technical definitions... -t |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
hkrok76
 Posts: 118 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Definition of anime from Merriam Webster online....
: a style of animation originating in Japan that is characterized by stark colorful graphics depicting vibrant characters in action-filled plots often with fantastic or futuristic themes Sooooo...can't always trust the dictionary. It's a slippery slope we climb once we take a word and make it's definition subjective. It isn't a definition if it can be interpretted by each individual. Well, not a good definition atleast. To say one thing is anime, and one thing is not, basing it on style and look, rather than anything else, would be erroneous as well as dangerous. Teen Titans is not anime, no matter what conventions they use, no matter the style, no matter anything. Totally Spies is not anime, neither is Avatar: The last Airbender. We need a set a definition, something that can't be interpretted in too many ways. The reason it should be a word that refers to a region and not a style is because leaving it as a style would leave it to too many interpretations, and this...the one thing I fear most about people calling MIGs, manga, they take the stereotypes and make them the law. Anime is animation from Japan. It's taken from the Japanese word for animation, which is their take on the word animation. To leave it as a style would leave us with this:: a style of animation originating in Japan that is characterized by stark colorful graphics depicting vibrant characters in action-filled plots often with fantastic or futuristic themes. I can come up with many examples of anime that this definition doesn't cover. Does that mean they are not anime? You leave definitions open to interpretation, and we will forever have to fight against the stereotype that our hobby is based around sex, blood, and sci-fi. If you want that, keep doing what you're doing. I'm fighting for a better tomorrow. Tatakai wa korekara da! ::ignore that last corny bit...it's 5 am in the morning and I am in lack of sleep...actually, I think I'll just make it my signature or something to be corny =):: (note, what's happening with the term manga, is also happening to the term anime, thus making this post about the word "anime" still relevant to the conversation...) Last edited by hkrok76 on Fri Mar 18, 2005 9:50 am; edited 1 time in total |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Razorlight6
Posts: 37 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Yes, those things are obvious. So obvious that we need a term to refer to them. The problem with your analogy is the title being used by the work. The word "Manga" by itself does not denote region, style, or anything else other than comics. It's definition used outside of Japan can be, and obviously is, malleable, especially since we already have words we can use that do not require a redefining of a foreign term. They are Comics and Japanese Comics. By the words alone, "Ancient Greek" cannot be used for anything that isn't, well, ancient Greek, if for no other reason than it would just sound silly. And please keep in mind, no one is claiming to be part of the Japanese comic industry. Some of these artists might claim to be drawing "manga," but never forget that each do so with his or her personal definition of the word, not yours.
Exactly, which is why there is no one set definition for "manga" that everyone excepts. Such are the consequences for partially redefining a foreign term that itself is more general than the definitions you or I prescribe. A language disparity like this takes time. Years. Decades. Westerners may yet settle on a common definition some day (and probably create new terms to fill the void) but I wouldn't wait for it.
Since Manga is already being used in different ways, regional and stylistic, the only solid definition based on regional sources that most can agree on is Japanese Comics. I say most because this is where the debate of "what are comics" begins. As for your question, no one here, and certainly not I, is suggesting that you can't like something. What I'm suggesting is that every manga fan has his or her own definition of that word, and whatever fits, fits. If you feel you need to expand or contract that definition based on your personal feelings of what it should mean then that is your perogative and that's fine.
Thundercats? Please, we do have some standards. TC was just another western cartoon. I was arguing that people have different perceptions which will ultimately define Manga and Anime for them, if they so choose to use those terms stylistically. Personally, I am not liberal on what I call anime or manga. If Thundercats had turned out to be like Robote--uh, Macross and the others, then I have no doubt some of the few otaku who were old enough at the time to make such distinctions would be calling it anime. You and I would probably agree that someone is more likely to call their Japanese-inspired work Anime or Manga even if they wouldn't had someone else been the creator. Nothing we can do about that, or Thundercats.
I never said anything detracts from anything. I don't mind if you want to have your definition of Manga. You don't consider their works Manga? Fine. They do? Fine. Different definitions side-by-side. The reason for my post was to say as much because tempest was speaking as if there was only one definition (defined by who?) and that Ztarr was "wrong" for saying she creates manga.
Loose definitions are fine by me. Solid ones would be hipocritical to my position that there are different points of view of what Manga means, that these are changing, and that no one can claim there is only one. We can disagree but we really can't say any other person's definition is wrong (assuming they are using Manga in relation to comics.)
Why would anyone call something Greek that's not Greek? Why would someone call something Japanese that's not Japanese? The true Japanese definition of Manga does not mean Japanese comics. Your definition is restricting it to mean comics from one particular country. Others restrict it to mean certain approaches to creating comics similar to that used in a particular country. Both are adaptations we created to suit our purposes. Neither is more right nor more wrong than the other. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
hkrok76
Posts: 118 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Ambiguity kills us all...."oh, that word means whatever you want it to mean." ::edit::if anything, people should use manga-style more often when referring to approaches to creating comics. One little suffix can help sooo much::edit:: Fine, manga means oranges. Whenever I refer to the term manga, I mean oranges. (I'm just being a jackarse, ignore this ^^) Have a good day. I am done with this debate. It was fun, but I'm really tired now. Haha. Enjoy. The rest of you. Last edited by hkrok76 on Fri Mar 18, 2005 5:41 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
s_j
Posts: 162 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
I think a more proper comparison that illustrates the point better would be Hellenic vs Hellenistic...Greek classical art is hellenic, and Roman emulations of it is hellenistic. It does make practical sense to make those distinctions...and I'm glad ANN makes those distinctions here. If we were to simply accept any popular notion in the mainstream media, then we may as well start calling manga 'anime,' and vice versa...we all know that kind of mistake is constantly made in the mainstream media, and beyond the fandom for all practical purposes, the general populace makes no distinction between the two either. Some may accept that, but I refuse to, and any respectable anime/manga news source that prides itself in being accurate and knowledgeable would most rightfully reject that as well. So when it comes to manga vs ameri-manga vs manga-inspired comic/etc., my expectation is the same...a dedicated news source shouldn't have to opt for the sloppier, market-drivel definition. If everyone can define manga on their own terms, then wouldn't there be very practical benefits for news sites to use the most specific, clear, concise definition? |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group