Forum - View topicGenre / Theme label discussion.
|
Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next |
| Author | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
Tony K.
 SubscriberModerator  Posts: 11452 Location: Frisco, TX |
|
||
|
I had this thought before going to bed about characters that are anthropomorphic, as in having human characteristics. This is mostly in relation to fantasy titles, as they tend to have a lot of "beast people" and the like.
But then I got to wondering do the more "human-looking" characters like dwarves and elves count as anthropomorphic, or should they be considered demi-humans? My OCD for theme descriptors wants to know what to correctly label all these people as. My plan was: put "anthropomorphs" and/or "demi-humans" as general theme descriptors to indicate "oh hey, this has people in it that aren't human." But then I'd specify even further by adding descriptors for dwarves, (dark or regular) elves, goblins, orcs, etc. since I think most of these races have been represented enough in the history of fantasy, that most people know what those are. I feel anthropomorph would just be a general term for any kind of "beast people," though. Because not all titles have cat girls, talking bears, lizard men, or so on. EDIT: Renamed the thread to talk about all kinds of genres themes. Last edited by Tony K. on Wed May 08, 2024 11:48 am; edited 3 times in total |
|||
|
|||
Blood-
 Bargain Hunter Posts: 24230 |
|
||
|
I have a more limited definition of anthropomorphism than you do, Tony K. For me, anthropomorphism only applies to animals or objects who have human characteristics. For example, the cat from The Masterful Cat is Depressed Again Today is a classic example of an anthropomorphic character. He is a cat, but he's human sized (maybe even a bit more than human sized), he can walk on two feet, do chores and act so human that some people assume he is a human in a cat suit. But for me a cat girl is not an example of anthropomorphism. Cat girls (or cat boys for that matter) are an actual species (er, you know what I mean). They are demi-humans.
To sum up, for me: dog that can do human things = anthropomorphism (Disney's Goofy, for example) Lizardman = demi-human, a species = no anthropomorphism |
|||
|
|||
|
Tony K.
Subscriber Moderator Posts: 11452 Location: Frisco, TX |
|
||
|
Yeah, previously, I think species that looked pretty-much human, aside from maybe a tail and some ears, I used the demi-human descriptor. But then I wasn't sure what do with characters like Director Bear from Vending Machine, the Lizard people from Overlord, or various other talking-animal characters.
On a side note, what about the demons in Demon Slayer? In some lore, demons can take the form of humans. But in others, they just appear as scary monsters. Originally, I just went with demons as a Theme. I think also have monsters in there, but should I add demi-humans? Same thing with Jujutsu Kaisen. Some of the curses and spirits take human form. But are they demi-humans because they can walk and talk, or should they just be described as curses and spirits in the Themes? The tsukumogami from Mononogatari got several descriptors because of their unique situation. Technically, they're spirits that possess items, but take the form of people. So I ended up using: spirits, magical items, transformations, and demi-humans as Themes, since it's a kind of "chained" existence. I guess I'll have to adjust and take some best guesses based on a franchise and its particular lore. |
|||
|
|||
|
Blood-
Bargain Hunter Posts: 24230 |
|
||
|
Yep, I can see how it could be tricky to be as accurate and consistent as possible. Personally, I would just stick with demons as a theme for DS and not bother with monsters or demi-humans. With JJK, I would not add demi-humans. I like everything you have for Mononogatari except for demi-humans. But as you say, this kind of categorization is not a science by any means.
|
|||
|
|||
Alan45
Village Elder Posts: 10038 Location: Virginia |
|
||
|
In most fantasy setups, demi-humans can breed with humans, (ie. half elves etc). That pretty much makes them the same species as humans. I can see listing them as their own category but would not group them with either anthropomorphic types or monsters. I should note that there is apt to be a fine line between something like an anthropomorphic cat and a "cat girl" with just ears and a tail.
|
|||
|
|||
|
Tony K.
Subscriber Moderator Posts: 11452 Location: Frisco, TX |
|
||
|
Hmm, good points. I guess I'll go by a character's "base form," then. Even if the being is in human form, they were still originally categorized as a demon, curse, or spirit. Maybe I'll use the monster descriptor to just signify the presence of villainous/antagonistic creatures that are more non-specific.
|
|||
|
|||
|
Tony K.
Subscriber Moderator Posts: 11452 Location: Frisco, TX |
|
||
|
Okay, so I had a thought about another theme. Although, this might be easier to answer: if a title has characters who are part of an aristocracy, but also has characters of royal lineage, should I list both, or just use aristocracy as a general descriptor to imply class/societal divides?
And possibly more complicated: in relation to any title with a particular cultural representation, should I use some of that culture's proper nouns, words, or vernacular to be more specific? For example, since I know Rurouni Kenshin so well, I put descriptors for Bakumatsu era and Meiji era to help illustrate the periods of time it covers. Or for Undead Murder Face, I put Victorian era. But then I also started using Europe as a descriptor for titles that take place in very European feeling stories, or China, in the case of Apothecary Diaries. I don't think I need to do that for Japan, do I? Last edited by Tony K. on Mon Sep 11, 2023 6:21 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|||
|
|||
|
Blood-
Bargain Hunter Posts: 24230 |
|
||
|
I think aristocracy is enough. Aristocracy implies royalty, which of course, is at the head of the aristocracy. And given that Japan is the setting of so much of anime, I don't think you need to specify Japan the way you do with other countries/regions of the world.
|
|||
|
|||
|
Alan45
Village Elder Posts: 10038 Location: Virginia |
|
||
|
At least in most of Europe, royalty and aristocracy are separate things. Think King vs. House of Lords. Our executive branch and senate are based on this. Royalty usually has connections to the local (and international) aristocracy as that is their gene pool. How ever you are either of royal blood or not. If not you can still be an aristocrat (and maybe marry the current ruler or first prince)
|
|||
|
|||
|
Blood-
Bargain Hunter Posts: 24230 |
|
||
|
They may be separate things, but the existence of an aristocracy generally implies that territory in question is a monarchy. I can't really think of any examples from history where there was an aristocracy, but no royalty.
|
|||
|
|||
|
Alan45
Village Elder Posts: 10038 Location: Virginia |
|
||
|
They didn't always use those words, but Rome. The Empire clearly had an aristocracy but replaced the Emperor on a basis other than heredity. The Greek city states probably also qualify. The Holy Roman Empire elected the Emperor from the aristocracy instead of strictly from a royal blood line.
Technically Russia today has an aristocracy of oligarchs but a strongman ruler. Haiti today qualifies. A group of families own the country, for what its worth, but the Presidency is not always inherited. Since many anime are based on Japanese perceptions of ancient Europe, what you say is common, but it is not absolute. |
|||
|
|||
|
Tony K.
Subscriber Moderator Posts: 11452 Location: Frisco, TX |
|
||
|
I feel like I've seen some titles that have an aristocracy, but don't necessarily show royalty. I also feel if royalty somehow got involved in the story, it usually leads to higher stakes. So if I were to use the royalty descriptor, do you think it would imply, "hmm, there might be some kind of epic royal conspiracy or drama in this," to audiences?
|
|||
|
|||
|
Blood-
Bargain Hunter Posts: 24230 |
|
||
|
It’s certainly possible.
|
|||
|
|||
|
Alan45
Village Elder Posts: 10038 Location: Virginia |
|
||
|
Yeah, I think a royalty indicator should be reserved for when the king or his relatives become actively involved in the plot and not simply present.
|
|||
|
|||
|
Tony K.
Subscriber Moderator Posts: 11452 Location: Frisco, TX |
|
||
|
Question regarding sports. So I'll put sports as a theme, and then the kind of sport (boxing, volleyball, etc.) But now that we have two racing anime coming in the fall, I wanted to discuss the need to clarify possible technical details.
1. MF Ghost (sequel to Initial D) is obviously about street racing. But Overtake! is about formula racing, which is pretty different from the street variety. However, there aren't a whole lot of racing titles to begin with, so I'm thinking just the racing theme will be enough, since most people probably think of "racing" as meaning "people racing cars against one another," anyway. 2. Since racing also usually implies cars, should I bother putting a descriptor such as "automobiles," even though a good majority of races in pretty much all media are through the use of cars? The only exception to that I can think of is Porco Rosso where they raced with planes. On a side note, I listed "aviation" as a theme for both Porco and Wind Rises, and was wondering if "automobiles" would be relevant, since there also aren't a lot of titles about cars, but maybe certain anime that focus on cars might not necessarily be about racing (at some point). |
|||
|
|||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group