Talk:Anime/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

1 Article citation
2 Moving Industry, others
3 What belongs in Notable works and how it should be limited
4 Tear or Droplet
5 Changes to Genres under Types of Anime
6 Critically acclaimed?
7 Notable Anime
8 WHAT THE HELL IS THIS!?
9 Is 'Anime' Japanese or not?
10 State of Japanese Animation in Japan?
11 Race of anime characters
12 Other Links
13 Characteristics

Article citation

Cited as a source in "A short history of anime." sidebar to Slafkosky, Jenny. "Anime: Popular Japanese animation easy to find." The Oakland Tribune (CA). January 13, 2005. Petersam 01:16, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Moving Industry, others

I propose moving the whole "industry" section to its own page at Anime/Industry. The main reasons:

It is not part of a description or definition of anime and what it is
The Anime page really is too large.
It could be expanded into more than just the industry outside Japan without making the main article too large

I also think the "Characteristics" section may be large enough to warrant its own page, but I'm not 100% sure it should be moved to its own page. Please share your thoughts on both of these proposals. --nihon 18:46, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

I'd agree with moving "industry" for your reasons above, though I'd prefer Anime industry. "Characteristics" should stay in this article - it's important to understanding what anime is, in a way that the industry section is not. DenisMoskowitz 19:28, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Regarding "Characteristics": That's why I wasn't completely sure on that one. I can see why it would be good to have, but I also want to make the article more manageable.

Regarding "Industry": I think it would work better as a sub-article of Anime rather than a completely separate article, mainly because it is related to Anime, but not to a specific discussion of what anime is. --nihon 21:28, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Well, it's not like some other article is going to need that namespace. And we have History of Japan - Japan/History is a redirect to it. Maybe we can do the same, pointing Anime/Industry at Anime industry? DenisMoskowitz 14:13, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

That would probably work. Anyone object if I go and set that up? --nihon 15:37, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Okay, the industry section has been moved to Anime industry. --nihon 06:44, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

What belongs in Notable works and how it should be limited

This section has been moved over to the Talk:Notable anime page because the section was moved to its own article. nihon 16:27, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Tear or Droplet

I posted this already on Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities#Anime_Tear_or_Droplet, but I figured I might get a faster response here.

I'm looking for a description of a common Anime/Manga convention. When a character is embarassed or shocked, sometimes a "tear" shape will appear next to their head (similar in placement to a speech bubble). What is the correct name for this symbology? Where did it originate? --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 14:40, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

That's a sweat-drop or sweat-droplet, indicating surprise or exasperation (it's a common response to bad puns). In some very silly anime, the sweat-dropping character may grab the drop as if it's a physical object and whap the offender with it. DenisMoskowitz 17:57, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Ohhh, I always wondered what that was. Is there a proper term for it, either in English or Japanese? --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 19:23, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

What about the pulsing vein for anger? or the nose-bleed? --Maru (talk) 19:27, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

In english, it's usually just "sweat drop". I don't know enough Japanese to tell you the native terms. Maru, I don't know of a term for the pulsing vein, and the nose-bleed is just called that. DenisMoskowitz 20:56, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

I don't know if you still care, but I can answer the pulsing vein and the nose bleed thing... The pulsing vein is to show anger. You will also see it if someone is annoyed. Basicilly, negetive feelings. The nose bleed is to show sexual... something... can't think of a word to end that sentance...

Arousal. --Maru (talk) 03:29, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, anonymous, but we know what they mean - it was more a question of what the Japanese term for it was. DenisMoskowitz 22:45, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

One of the external links given at the bottom of the article is good for this kinda thing. --zippedmartin 13:35, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

The "tear" or "sweat drop" is called "ase" (sweat). Still working on finding a name for the bulging veins. --nihon 15:35, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Changes to Genres under Types of Anime

I noticed some possible flaws in the Genres section that might warrant discussion. Some I have already edited (how is Neon Genesis Evangelion 'controversial'? Source for this claim or maybe change in word choice seems necessary), but in mentioning the Evas it shows though they are really biological living beings. Is this really pertinent to the larger point, that specific works can often be very hard to categorize? It seems like the discussion of the example Neon Genesis Evangelion as a genre-bending show becomes more an opportunity to talk about the show itself. The last line of the paragraph, This was simply offered as an example of how a series (especially, because of its length, compared to a movie) can encompass many genres, and can be very difficult to classify under any one specific one, I think should be deleted entirely as it is largely redundant. Would others agree that this paragraph could use a bit more streamlining to remain on-topic? NatalieS 00:58, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

It's certainly a controversial anime, I'll cite this that I mentioned a bit further up if I may (as it's still hilarious), however, feel free to edit the section however you see fit, don't remember when it was added and I agree it seems redundant. --zippedmartin 01:25, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Critically acclaimed?

I'm not sure it's worthwhile to have a "critically acclaimed" section - probably just about everything out there has been acclaimed by some critic or another. DenisMoskowitz 14:32, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Notable Anime

The notable anime section is getting, for lack of a better word, invaded by titles that seemingly have no business being listed, such as Naruto, Crest of the Stars, and The Big O. I suggest a rationale and/or specific criterion to be established before adding to the notable works section. I also recommend an audit the section to try and remove the nonessentials. Ereinion 01:46, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

I listed some criteria I thought might be good in the earlier conversation "What belongs in Notable works and how it should be limited." That said, I believe the best way to figure out which titles belong and which don't, is debate and final consensus reached on the discussion page (in addition to following the simple rules of waiting three years & etc, my reasons for which I listed earlier). This way, people can get a chance to justify series that they feel belong, and then the community can decide or perhaps even vote on inclusion. --Xaliqen 03:46, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

The Notable anime section has been moved to its own article. Work has begun on explanations as to why the works are notable, in order to flesh-out the article and make it more of an article instead of just a list. nihon 17:32, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

WHAT THE HELL IS THIS!?

why is it... i checked the Anime article it was good and ok, but now ALL CHANGE!

|First lets start with the "Genres, there should be a list and a short note/ meaning of what it means, and wish to link to a subpage of the full meaning and types
"Notable names in anime" that just looks like a waste, it needs to be deleted, just a Header and a little small info, and their an't any list of the names
"Production of anime" does that link to Notable names in anime? if it does, please put in in bold, not another header, and why is that there? who wants to know about people making it, for god sake put it in a subpage, becuase if people see a article with too much info they won't bother to read it
"Manga artists" WHY IS THAT THERE, it is about anime not artist, the list and names should go at the subpages just like how Production Of Anime should go
"Giant Robot (Mecha) anime" Big O wasn't a anime? or was it?

Anyway you people are suppose to move "Groundbreaking anime" into a sub page, it suppose to list the catagory of it like Sci Fi, when someone clicks it will list all Sci fi ground breaking anime, or to consum pages, it should be list of Groundbreaking anime

now lets do some clean up and move some data/information into a subpage and make this anime easy to read ><ino 03:35, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Please, no need to shout. If there's something that needs to be changed, please be bold and do so. Everyone's been proposing possibilities, but we'll never find out for sure unless it happens. So be bold. — Ambush Commander^(Talk) 02:11, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

ok, but lets do some clean up first, by moving some data that doesn't suppose to be there into a subpage,. thank you:D><ino 13:35, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Is 'Anime' Japanese or not?

Hi, I noticed that one user I've been keeping an eye on (due to a large amount of silly, arrogant or POV edits) has changed the definition of "Anime" in the anime category from Japanese to "Worldwide" animation.

If Anime refers specifically to Japanese animation, it should be changed back; if it refers to a style of animation originating in Japan, it should be changed to that. Or maybe neither; but "worldwide animation" is meaningless and possibly inaccurate (it doesn't refer to a universal animation style).

I'm not an anime fiend, and I don't intend starting a flame war; I want advice on what to replace this with.

Fourohfour 12:11, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

"Anime" is the Japanese word for animation. In English, it generally refers to Japanese animation, though a small minority use it to refer to non-Japanese animation in the "anime style" - that is, sharing characteristics with the mainstream of Japanese animation. Someone who did not understand the "passport word" nature of the term might think that, because it simply means "animation" in Japanese, it should mean "general animation" in English as well. But if they have a history of bad edits, it's more likely they're just being a jerk. DenisMoskowitz 15:03, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

I personally use it the term 'anime' in two ways: (1) to refer to the distinctive art style used in most "anime" cartoons and "manga" comics (since it removes the Japanese designation from the word, considering that such a style could theoretically be produced by any trained person in any culture), and (2) to refer to cartoons/animation draw in this style. One of the main reasons why (and examples in which) I use 'anime' to refer to the art style is when describing The Boondocks comic series. ~GMH talk to me 20:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Okay, for one, the word "anime" is not a Japanese word. It's a shortening of the word "animeeshon," or animation, using Japanese syllables. My source? Just experience with the language and formal teaching. Gibson Cowboy 09:12, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

You are right and also wrong! Anime is a tradition and culture of Japanese. It is called Anime in japanse because it is different from "American" Cartoon. You can notice from the eyes, storyline and plot. Those are the things that makes it different from other cartoons >x<ino 04:01, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Tradition and culture of Japan have nothing to do with Japanese animation being called "anime." As it says in the main article, it's just a shortened version of the Japanese pronunciation of the word "animation." Simple as that. --nihon 06:33, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

It's just been adopted to refer as anime to be generally Japanese styled/influenced animation rather than American styled/influenced animation. --AllyUnion (talk) 09:12, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

State of Japanese Animation in Japan?

Can someone comment to give an idea of the state of anime in Japan (how popular is it compared to conventional films and manga?) --Genjix

what do you mean? me listing animes that are popular?, a statement of how popular it is or comparison between them

And the films, do you mean, Anime turned into films? or just normal films? >x<ino 02:02, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

I mean how popular is anime compared to just normal films (for instance what percentage of cinema and tv programmes are anime?) and how popular are they (e.g last year Spirited Away, Samurai Champloo earned XXX amount of net earnings compared to films Y and Z which earned B). I am wondering because I have no clue as to how popular anime is in Japan (apparently manga is huge - does this imply anime being big there as well?) --Genjix

Thanks for feeding back with big details, unforunatly me don't know. But think about it,

Japans love Anime so much, Anime is made by them and anime came from Japan, because they do lots of anime in America, doens't me it's big, beleive me, in Japan, those people are Anime freaks.

They dress like Anime,
walking across the street dressed liked that,
there are tons I MEAN TONS of anime.

Anime like Spirited Away, are not actually thorughly anime, because the storyline and plot is kinda different, for example, their eyes are normal, no fantasy stuff, no robots

I don't know the ratio for Manga, but i do know it is really huge, infact it is bigger than Anime, because manga its the first thing that started it all, then Akira (anime) came along, now tons of anime are now being broadcasting.

Can some one back me up!? >x<ino 15:30, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Hmm...it's very apparent that you've never been to Japan. The chances of you meeting someone "dress[ed] like Anime" are pretty small unless you go to someplace like Akihabara or go inside Comiket or another convention like that. In the three years I lived there, I very rarely saw anyone dressed up "like anime." As for Spirited Away not being anime, you are mistaken. Even by the extremely narrow definition used by Americans, it qualifies as anime: it's animated and made in Japan. While Akira was certainly a milestone in anime history, it didn't "start" anything as animation had beenproduced in Japan for 30+ years before Akira came out. Akira made more of an impact outside of Japan than inside. Sorry, I can't back up any of your statements because they are all incorrect. --nihon 16:52, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

I take that last statement back. Manga is indeed a much larger industry than anime, and many anime began as manga. However, there are also many original anime out there (such as Escaflowne) which only became manga after being made as anime. --nihon 16:54, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes i havn't been to Japan. I don't exactly know the place but, if you watch documents and other programmes, you will get some info on them. And some games show, some girl went to japan saying how mad Anime is there, how they dress, even showed us on video. I didn't say Spirited Away wasn't anime, i meant it wasn't fully! Because it is 70% different from different animes. Yes Akira didn't start anything, but it did gave people confidence to do all stort of differnt anime, and look at them now! Thousands of anime! >x<ino 08:42, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Spirited Away is 100% anime, regardless of your personal opinion on it. It fits every accepted definition of anime. And I don't see how it is "70% different." Also, there were thousands of anime shows before Akira came out. Akira didn't create any sort of boom in the anime industry. The only thing it did was to showcase just how detailed you could get using animation. Other than that, it wasn't even groundbreaking. --nihon 16:35, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

So as an example how much do the japanese prefer anime over conventional (filmed) movies and programmes? --Genjix

I don't really know, Americans (people that beg Japanese anime) prefer Anime. Japanese prefer Anime turned into movies and manga turned into anime. >x<ino 08:42, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Your statements make no sense, and they are too broad to be valid. There's no study anywhere that shows that Japanese prefer anime turned into movies, or over what they prefer it. And saying they prefer manga turned into anime...that makes no sense, either. They prefer it over what? Original anime not based on manga? Anime based on novels or games? --nihon 16:35, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

OH WOW THE MYSTICAL NIHONJOE, because you have lived in Japan AKA Asia for 3 years, you think you know better. Where you live they do different things, for example in Japan city, people DO dress has anime characters, they do make up they are anime freaks. IN your area no one dresses up has any anime character

Hey, there's no need to be an ass just because someone disagrees with you. If you can't be civil when discussing something, I recommend going somewhere else. As for people dressing up as anime characters, this generally only happens at conventions or at stores. Only very, very, very rarely will you see someone walking down the street dressed as an anime character, and almost every time it will have something to do with a store opening or a movie premiere. And those who dress up as the characters (unless it's part of their job) will only very rarely let anyone at work know that they do that. An adult who likes anime is somewhat looked down upon in society. I have many Japanese friends (living in Japan) who will not even let on that they like anime when they are at work because of how it might negatively impact them in the workplace. Liking anime as an adult, especially if it's general knowledge, is considered a bit of an eccentricity. --nihon 17:04, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes most japanese do prefer anime turned into movie, there was an anime/manga i think called Storm Riders, it was turned into a movie and bought to Japan cinema, did you know how people went mad for that?. Even Tetsuio, not Akira, some guy i am not sure, but wears some metal thing on his face.

Yes some do perfer anime turned into manga, because some people are used to manga, and they loved it, because they say Anime turns into childesh like in an anime, when a character does something stupid the others fall down

manga is more mature, anime is a it kiddy

Runrio Kenshin (samurai x) the anime show, people do perfer the OVA series which is Samurai x. there is a differences between them, the tv show is more action and kids(male) style. And OVA is more like adult, no childesh stuff, they act mature. >x<ino 10:42, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Nihon, how popular would you say Anime is in respect to the other forms of Japanese media entertainment (i.e. TV programming, movies, comics)? Ereinion 07:38, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

I would say it's about equally popular when compared to dramas, variety shows, and so forth. It would probably fall into the same category (as far as popularity) as sitcoms do in the States, especially since you can find anime playing at almost anytime of the day (and there are at least 2-3 all-anime channels on cable/satellite in Japan). --nihon 17:04, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

I know that based on anecdotal evidence, and some research on the matter, it appears that anime viewership (on TV) is not particularly high, especially among the adult population. What seems more popular are the dorama, variety shows, and game shows. It's also apparent that very few anime series actually spawn animated movies that reach theaters. -Fadeblue 08:04, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes you are right, adult are not really interested in anime because it is cartoon, in japan life is a bit hard, escpecailly if you are an adult because the work you will be doing is pretty hard and you won't have time to be watching anime.

Even in USA, where kids are begging anime not even adults watch em.

What do you mean anime spawn animated movies? >x<ino 10:42, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

It's not so much that they don't have time to watch anything, but rather the reasons I explained above. It can negatively impact them if their coworkers (especially their bosses) know about their "dirty little secret." As for the "spawn animated movies," I think Fadeblue is saying that the percentage is pretty small of anime TV series that have movies created based on the series. Only a small number of the TV series ever have movies created for them. --nihon 17:04, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Dirtysecret? that is a lame comeback, that has nothing to do with anything.

They don't watch it because they don't have time for it!

They are not interested in them

it is cartoon, they stoped watching cartoon

anyway do you mean Spawn, i though you were just saying like cartoon/ series spawned

anyway i read it, and your point is? >x<ino 18:18, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

(-_-;;; Okay, you can't seem to grasp even the most simple concepts. You can believe what you want about Japan, but that won't make it true. As for the meaning of the word "spawn":

Look up spawn in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

--nihon 18:34, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

yes yes, lets all believe what we want to believe about Japan

and what concepts is that?

spawn? there are differen meaning and articles for it

if you mean spawn, like respawning, because that is what i assume you where talking about or you mean Spawn

>x<ino 21:45, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Xino, I have no idea where you're getting you're information about Japan from. It appears to be mostly conjecture based on the anime you've seen, without any actual evidence taken from reality. First of all, adults still watch TV in large numbers (just look at the ratings for some of the most popular dorama and other shows). It's not a question of time; it's the simple fact that the society somewhat frowns upon adults who watch anime, similar to the way Americans believe that cartoons are just for children.

There are many indicators that anime is not as popular in Japan as some people believe. It's more likely for a manga or TV anime to be turned into a live-action movie than it is to be turned into an animated movie. If you look at cultural references among Japanese people, adults are much more likely to be familiar with non-animated shows/characters than with animated shows/characters. The way society is structured, cartooning is viewed as a much less legitimate career than becoming, say, a traditional salaryman. These are just a few examples.

Ereinion, I hope you don't take Xino's statements as being true. About the only thing Xino's said that is accurate is that manga is more popular than anime. -Fadeblue 20:30, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

and the information i got has nothing to do with anime, beside i havn't seen that much

Yes adult still and do watch tv, but if you mean adult in America or Japan, please make your points clear, so someone can give out there own point

And yes Adults do watch anime, but still population shows younger viewers watches anime more than anime, and mostly anime are aimed at younger viewers

Yes Anime an't popular in Japan, in most places, during there culture and what they do there, and depends on the place, if it is a city, ofcourse there will be anime!

Anime turned into movie, manga turend into movie, what's the point, all the same, people in japan all want different things, not just manga/tv turned into a movie.

Yes i do know, adult jap people are not familar with anime, they read manga books instead

:"I hope you don't take Xino's statements as being true. About the only thing Xino's said that is accurate is that manga is more popular than anime" is that so...

Because it depends

In America Anime is popular, and in Japan Manga is popular

In the olding days Manga was popular, now are days Anime is popular

anyway, what is the point of all this!? >x<ino 21:45, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

ok so we know anime is not mainstream media (less so being popular). How about manga? I remember seeing on TV once that it said manga is hugely popular in Japan and can be found anywhere (with people reading it on the trains compared to novelists in west). Genjix

Yes, anime isn't big/popular in japan, but it is in USA

and manga is

and i think i know what programme you are talking about:D

>x<ino 14:25, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

found this [1], seems to explain it pretty well :), maybe I will add some of these statistics to this article. What programme? it was on UK television about 4 years ago :p Genjix

thanks for the link,

but it's 12 years old,

which means things will and would have changed

also Has changed:D

>x<ino 01:49, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Wow, is this a discussion on the state of anime in Japan or the sociological impact of anime on the average Japanese citizen? Because anime is just another facet of entertainment in Japan. It's like network television in the US, there's a lot of viewers, there's hardcore fans, people with mild interest, etc. I think people's misconception of Japan really starts to show when seeing the assumptions that are being thrown around here. Nihon's pretty right on about his subject matter. But assuming everyone in Japan loves anime and owns a Pokemon collection is akin to saying every American watches reality TV and reads Stephen King. They just don't.

And nihon, your cosplayers can be seen in Shinjuku and your goths in Shibuya. Or during the particularly lovely spring months Hibiya Park is a good place. Especially when the fashion shows are going on. Gibson Cowboy 09:40, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Slow reply, but at least I noticed it. ^_^ I know they can be found, but Shinjuku and Shibuya are exceptions, and the vast majority of people found in them are not going to be cosplaying. The ones that are cosplaying are generally going to be trying to attract attention for a particular store or business as a part of their job, not just dressing up for the sake of dressing up. That is the point I was trying to make: just like here in the States, you generally don't see costumed people wandering around (outside of conventions or other similar events or activities unless they are doing it for their job). --nihon 08:28, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Race of anime characters

Although the article in some ways seems to lean toward the idea that characters in anime are not neccessarily European, a Chinese/Japanese friend of mine says that they are indeed supposed to be European. I think there is evidence for both conclusions, but I also think that if the article says that most Japanese do not see the characters as being European, the support for this view should come from a source representative of the Japanese public, and not from a cultural anthropologist with inherent multicultarist bias. Theshibboleth 06:00, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Which characters are you speaking of? Do you mean characters in general? Because I would find it hard to believe that characters in general are supposed to be European given that most are culturally Japanese and have Japanese names. -Fadeblue 06:32, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

same here, and no, the characters are not meant to be European, they are suppose to be japanese, with the eyes, stuff they do. But some anime are different, some of them are european >x<ino 07:49, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

It depends on the show in question, obviously. Most of the characters in Neon Genesis Evangelion, for instance, are Japanese; they live and work in Tokyo, have Japanese names, interact with the Japanese government; and so forth. Most of the characters in Rose of Versailles are French, live in France, and so on. Most of the characters in Gunsmith Cats are American; live and work in Chicago in the U.S., and most have English names. The characters in Mobile Suit Gundam or Macross are of various backgrounds and live in space, anyhow. --FOo 08:42, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

No doubt. I agree it is misleading to make generalizations about the race of anime characters as a whole. What part of the article makes these generalizations? Dforest 09:44, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Here's the text:

The "large eyes" style

Large, saucer-like eyes are a striking and common feature of anime characters. This is mainly due to the influence of Osamu Tezuka, who was inspired by the exaggerated features of Western cartoon characters such as Betty Boop and Mickey Mouse and from Disney's Bambi. Tezuka found that large eyes allowed his characters to better express their emotions. Some Western audiences have interpreted such stylized eyes as more Caucasian, but cultural anthropologist Matt Thorn argues that Japanese animators and audiences do not perceive them as inherently more or less foreign.

There aren't exactly any overly general statments here, but there needs to be more than one source. Here's the URL of the source cited in that section by the way: http://www.matt-thorn.com/mangagaku/faceoftheother.html. I think that I was responding in large part to that source and I see now that I hadn't been specific enough in my earlier comment. In any event, I don't think anyone who has posted so far would completely agree with what the anthropologists says. Also, the source actually makes no reference to the use of the large eyes as being used to be more expressive.

Further, the paragraph might be a little inaccurate. I should reread the source first, but I'm pretty sure he says Japanese audiences see the features of characters as actually being less foreign. He also states that animators tend to represent the protagonist and those on the protagonist's side as having nonforegn-looking features no matter what race they are supposed to be and that they represent those more unrelated to the protagonist with more foreign characteristics.

Theshibboleth 10:14, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

I think the main point of Thorn's article is that in any culture, when presented with characters who are not overtly of another race, there will be an assumption that they are of the same race, especially given the decades of variation in artistic styles. Unless stereotypical features are exaggerated and emphasized, there appears to be no particular reason for a Japanese person to assume that a character is foreign based simply on appearance; hence, there are other immediate indicators that a character is foreign, such as name, lack of cultural knowledge, speech, etc.

Note, however, that some artists do use stereotypical features for indicating foreigners, and when that is the case, the paradigm is set that all "foreign-looking" characters are actually foreign, while all others are Japanese. For example, in Hikaru no Go, the various international players are all drawn with racial features, yet the main characters in the story obviously do not resemble Japanese people. -Fadeblue 19:23, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Taking Excel Saga as an example, the whole anime is set in F City, Japan yet 'most' of the character's bear little strikingly Japanese characteristics - the main character has blonde hair and blue eyes. Pedro the foreign worker also doesn't have that many 'foreign' defining features (except looking slightly spanish by having darker skin). I think there is little thought about this from the artists (as they do have a tendency to edit backstory .etc). Again taking RahXephon (a realistic setting anime), we see Tokyo as having what seems european characters to me (mixes of blonde, brown and black hair), but this doesn't mean they are european, and that Japanese percieve them as so.

Anime is a form of entertainment, not a concrete exercise in anthropology. You see a female anime character with large breasts and and pink hair, that's a dictation of the show's style and premise, not of racial or political direction. That's one nice thing about anime, that if the character in question is foreign, it's always pointed out immediately. Be it by name, indicated place of birth, or just being an extraterrestrial, it's always pretty obvious. Besides, if you're basing that argument off Excell Saga, Hyatt-chan's name was ripped from a hotel chain of the same name. That in mind, you really can't take the series *that* seriously.

Gibson Cowboy 10:00, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Characteristics

The characteristics section is fairly long. I have added some subcatagories and move some things around so that it flows properly when reading it. (It keep straying back to the subject of style). The Big Eyes part of the article doesn't seem to fit where it is. I don't really know where to move it - Squilibob 10:05, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

In trying to clean this part of the aricle up, I've moved the genres section higher up in the article as it is quite a good reference list. The example using NGE was too long and the already existing sentences

Most anime includes a variety of thematic elements. For example, it is not uncommon for strongly action-themed anime to involve humor, romance, and even poignant social commentary, and romance-themed anime may involve a strong action element.

is more consise as opposed to

For instance, Take for example the television series Neon Genesis Evangelion. Some people place this under the category of mecha because it features mecha-like constructs. But at the same time the focus on the Evas - the "mechas" in the show, though they are really biological living beings - is relatively minor compared to the exploration of the main characters' thought processes and personal circumstances. Thus it could also be classified as progressive, as a more philosophical/literary anime. Even then, it contains some amounts of fan service of the prominent female protagonists, Ayanami Rei and Asuka Langley Soryu, and a few romance and comedic sections (as is often the case of Hideaki Anno's works) and thus could be "classified" under any of those genres as well.

Also took out some bias:

Many true fans of Japanese Animation widely prefer past Generations of Anime do to the current lack of quality in general. Anime created post year 2000 is generally seen as being of a lower standard. Many people today who are newcomers to Japanese Animation are referred to as 'Poffals', which is the equivelent of 'Ignorant Newbie' or 'Ignorant Trend Follower'. Nobody can say quite where the term Poffal originated.

Squilibob 07:51, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/n/i/Talk%7EAnime_Archive_3_ed1a.html"

Category: Talk archives