From: wbarnes@sura.net (Bill Barnes)
Subject: Re: Anime, and He May Not
Organization: SURAnet, College Park, MD, USA, NA, Earth, Milky Way
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 21:57:58 GMT

In article <Bu0xB4.7o1@CAM.ORG> emru@CAM.ORG (Emru Townsend) writes:
>This is the aforementioned article on Japanese animation by Marc Elias.
							     ^^^^^^^^^^
Keep this in mind people!  I've already seen one post by someone who, as
near as I can tell, didn't realize that Emru didn't write this article
himself and was flaming him rather furiously.  Save your ammo for this
Marc guy 8-).

>it'll be appearing in FPS #3, which should be out in about four weeks.

Pardon my ignorance, but what is FPS?  A fanzine, real magazine, or what?

>Any replies I get may end up printed in the magazine's lettercol, so if
>you definitely don't want your comments printed, please let me know.

If you think my comments are worthy of print, by all means do so!  I just
love getting my name in print...8-)

>Recently, I was given an assignment for this magazine, and, well,
>honest-to-God, I meant to do it. I really did. I wanted to
>produce the most even-handed, thoughtful and entertaining review
>fps had ever printed.

Isn't there something about how the way to Hell is paved with good
intentions?

[most of two paragraphs deleted]
>. . .  So, with his blessing, I have a few points to
>make--maybe a few bones to pick--about the world of Japanese
>animation. Let's run a few up the flagpole and see who jumps into
>the head of a twenty-storey robot (that they don't know how to
>drive) and righteously tries to attack them.

Marc has not done much to affirm my faith in his objectivity.  Despite his
earlier promise to be "even-handed," he spends two paragraphs talking about
"sneering" at others and "annoying people."  IMHO, anyone with that kind
of attitude cannot possibly be objective and anyone who feels they can
is either naive, lying to themselves, or just plain hypocritical.

>Japanese animation is not the seamless, perfect artifact that its
>most ardent fans make it out to be. It has infuriating problems.

Organized religions, political parties, or any other entity that
inspires fanatical devotion among its faithful "is not the seamless,
perfect artifact that its most ardent fans make it out to be."  They
all have "infuriating problems" which its fanatics turn a blind eye
to.  The faithful defend "a volume of really bad ideas on the strength
of the far fewer number of good ones."

Already, it seems, Marc has made the classic layman's blunder of
presuming that the viewpoint of a fanatic is the viewpoint of the
common fan.  If we applied this viewpoint to other areas of humanity,
we would see Jerry Falwell and Jesse Helms as the incarnations of
Christianity and Republicanism, a view I think many Christians and
Republicans would disagree with.

>In fact, to the more moderate animation enthusiast, the human
>cost of these problems is not as evident in the medium itself as
>it is in its most visible disciples, the anime fanatics.

"Human cost?"  Marc is starting to make anime sound like a war, not an
entertainment medium.

>The fanatic both helps and hinders whatever he or she is
>fanatical about. That goes for religions, or hockey teams, or
>identity politics, or forms of art.

I'm glad he understands this, at least.

>In the case of anime, slavish
>devotion to the product and what it represents means, in the
>simplest terms, that someone will keep making the stuff, which is
>good for everyone, because when anime is good, it is very good.

I'm glad he recognizes this as well.

>But what the stereotypical extremist (read: big fan) demands and
>accepts (one would like to say `condones') determines both the
>intention, the content and the ultimate effect of what is
>produced.

Did the opinions, demands, and expectations of, say, Alien/s fans have
one iota of effect on the final product of Alien^3?  How about pro-choice
Republicans on Bush's election plank?  And these are a lot of people,
wielding their opinions like a claymore and yet not denting the hide of
the Big Boys' hides.  Why then, should the dirk of the extremists make
a single scratch in the armor plates of Anime Production?  Anime, like
all other mass-market media, is motivated by profit and price, greed and
gluttony; art must wriggle its way in like a mouse through a too-small
hole.

Again, what Marc says is true of any media.  Why he singles out anime
in this regard seems odd.  He freely admits that mediocrity is inherent
in every form of expression, yet feels it is somehow easier to spot in
anime than other forms.  I don't find it very difficult to see mediocrity
in print, music, TV, movies, State of the Union addresses, etc.  Is
Marc somehow blinded to the mediocrity of these forms, or is his insight
in anime merely especially keen?

He feels that anime does not aspire towards more and thus the
mediocrity is easier to spot.  Anime, as a genre, does not reach
towards a single artistic goal any more than any other media does -
some is done for art's sake, some is done for the sheer joy of it,
most is done because someone wants to make money.  This is true of
any form of mass-market expression - big bucks are at stake, and most
expect to ream big rewards.  Again, I fail to see how anime is
unique in this.
 
I'm glad to see he recognizes just how little respect animation as an
artform receives in his country.  I understand his exasperation in
attempting to justify this hobby towards others whose opinions of
animation is indelibly - and indelicately - stamped in concrete.
 
>It is a powerful way to show people things they might never see
>otherwise. Americans like Disney, Bluth, Bakshi, Avery and Jones
>have set lofty standards for their countrymen that are
>unfortunately rarely equalled.

I personally feel that Bluth, Bakshi, and to some extent Disney are highly
overrated.  In my opinion these three men suffer much the same problems
Marc bemoans anime for having - all flash and substance - yet earn his
approval.  Marc spoke of cheap stereotypes and recycled story ideas,
something all three of these animators were guilty of, yet he turns a
blind eye so he may focus on anime's flaws.  Perhaps the fact the dialog
is in English or that these men can often afford flashier animation than
anime can has biased his view.  Perhaps.

>A uniform character
>design anthropomorphizes people into a bizarre pseudo-humanity in
>which individuality is replaced with big eyes, perky noses, long
>legs, small waists, big breasts, strong jaws and heart-shaped
>faces, depending on whether the character is man-boy or
>woman-girl. As a design trick, it was once an inspired
>stylization, but it is getting tired, very tired. As it shows no
>sign of becoming extinct, it looks like we will just have to
>accept it, and move on.

How is anime's stylized characters any better or worse than the stylized
artwork of Disney, Bluth, Avery, Jones, etc.?  Ignoring, of course, the
fact that not all anime proceeds from this stylization - there are subtle
nuances among the ones that are virtual clones, not counting those with
a very distinctive style, such as Miyazaki, Matsumoto, or other "alternative"
anime-tors.
 
>Another anime staple is the incredibly complicated machine. One
>could go on for pages about why the Japanese excel at drawing,
>almost drafting machinery, but suffice it to say here that no
>culture does it better. Regardless of whether the devices are of
>this world or of another, Japanese animators don't even flinch at
>putting them through the most amazing stunts, perspectives and
>explosions. The results are often astounding. And yet, as we have
>seen, they refuse to individualize the acting of their
>characters, and character animation by definition is nothing less
>than acting. The Japanese are no less human than North Americans,
>in some cases, probably more so; why won't they breathe life into
>the majority of their people?

Marc complains about the character animation in anime, and here I will
agree that it does posess all the nuances and subtleties that the
better American animation does, namely Disney.  However, there are
subtles nuances present in anime, nice touches that are largely forgotten
in American animation.  And this ignores the vast amount of mediocre to
substandard animation in America.  Marc is unfairly comparing the best
the US has to the mediocre and worst of anime.
 
Marc further damages his credibility with lines like:
>Linna would like to be a nightclub singer, but she can't sing.

Did he watch the same series the rest of us did?  NOWHERE in BGC did
Linna EVER express an interest in becoming a singer.  ONCE she suggested
becoming Priss' manager, and that was the closest she ever came to the
music industry.  Linna is an aerobics instructor with aspirations to
hit the the Japanese equivalent of Broadway, if the Asu e Touchdown
video is any education.  She is not a lounge singer wannabe.

If you're going to attack something under the guise of intelligent
commentary, the least you can do is know the basics of what you're
talking about.  That or admit your making dogmatic statements with
little factual support.

>Still, she remains the cheerful one. When danger strikes, they
>all put on big robot battle suits and fight like well-trained,
>bloodthirsty mercenaries. This, in the world of anime, is a
>perfectly reasonable concept.

It's pure fantasy.  So is Dumbo, Pinnochio, Fantasia, Beauty and the
Beast, The Little Mermaid, and every other Disney movie in existence
(which will use as the epitome of American animation).  They're just
fantasies of a lighter, happier kind.  The fact BGC has a science
fiction setting and exudes of air of attempting to be realistic does
not make it any more or less fanciful than the average Disney movie -
it just makes it different.  As to whether or not the fantasy "works" -
whether you can suspend your notions of reality and be entertained -
is a different matter altogether and, despite the efforts of many self-
proclaimed experts to claim otherwise, entirely subjective.
 
>Style as substance requires the hand of a master.

Actually, I feel that "style as substance" is an oxymoron, since my
definition of style is that it is a facade - a flash in the pan, a
wave of the hand, smoke and mirrors, light and shadow, flair and
show.  If there is any substance behind the style, it is independent
of the style.  A master hair stylist can not do a thing to improve the
head which sits under the hair.

>What style there is
>in BUBBLEGUM CRISIS is vastly overshadowed by cheap, exploitative
>writing. Very sad.

Unfortunately, "cheap, exploitative writing" seems to be the norm for any
mas-market entertainment.  Anime is in no way an exception to this rule.

>But what made the series this way?

No doubt Marc shall tell us.

>Stereotypes abound in every art form that relies in any way on
>storytelling. They save time and effort. If, for example, you
>want to tell a story about two brothers, rivals since birth, who
>eventually work things out, you don't want to waste the time you
>have to put into solving the problem into setting the problem up.
>A few time-honored (time-worn?) tricks, and the audience is
>ready. Use established ideas to set up your original ones. That's
>the idea. But anime has a desperate relationship to stereotypes
>that gives interested observers plenty of sources from which to
>track the growth of inexcusably bad ideas.

How is anime's use of stereotypes, cliches, recycled plots, etc. in
any different for what Hollywood - or even the hallowed executives
at Disney - does?
 
>For example, women are so poorly treated in anime that it is next
>to impossible to nail down the main stereotype. Is it the moll
>who, despite being the girlfriend of the lantern-jawed hero,
>isn't officially part of the gang, but can karate kick like
>nobody's business (once someone unties her), and whose main
>function seems to be decolletage and occasionally getting
>kidnapped? Or the teenager who takes a lot of showers with her
>blonde or redhead but otherwise identically buxom friends at the
>space boarding school, and then unleashes savage vengeance upon
>people after school? Is it the spunky tomboy fighter pilot, the
>zipper of her flight suit constantly under incredible strain from
>her massive breasts, who is otherwise just like the guys except
>she can't whip it out and stand at the urinals with them? The
>killer kid sister? The killer rock singer? The lingerie-selling
>vigilante leader?

Women are hardly better portrayed on this side of the continent.  Heroines
are, more often than not, flawlessly beautiful and yet entirely incapable
of standing on their own, at least without the hero there to support her.
The anime stereotype of females as "macho men with pronounced busoms" is
not much of an improvement, but at least they are capable of taking care
of themselves, unlike many of their American counterparts.
 
>Many other necessary story elements become stereotypes as well.
>Villains gleefully stereotype one another without asking
>permission, and then ritually embark on vast world-domination
>schemes. Entire cultures are routinely threatened by Some
>Sinister Something, forcing their best and brightest to band
>together in big machines and fight for their helpless kid
>sisters. Boyfriends and girlfriends are interrupted from the
>day-to-day business of atomic flirting by violent death from the
>skies, or maybe it's violent death on fast motorcycles. Large,
>faceless corporations stocked with limitless greedheads exert
>fierce control over people for the sake of doing so. Convenient
>Bad Guy Syndrome. If you close your eyes for too long, maybe to,
>oh, I don't know, rub them in a gesture of resignation, the
>threat might suddenly change, especially if the film has no
>subtitles, but I guarantee that in most cases you'll be able to
>get right back into it after a quick stereotype-check.

Again, stereotypically "evil villians with no redeeming characteristics"
are not limited to Japan.  Disney movies are replete with villians who
are, as the song goes, bad to the bone, for no apparent reason other than
to make sure the audience knows who to hate and who we are supposed to
cheer for when the villian plunges to his death.

The blueprints for the villians are different, but there are not any less
stereotyped or overused on this side of the Pacific.
 
>The Japanese are crazy for James Bond, an affection I am
>completely powerless to explain, but in any case, it seems like
>they've lifted a good 90% of his plots, villains, gadgets and
>spy-babes for their animated stories. Naturally, most of them
>take place in space and all that, but otherwise, it's pure 007.

An interesting theory.  Not one I agree with, but interesting nonetheless.
I feel that the Japanese do have an obsession with neato whiz-bang gadgets,
but that such interest grew up independent of James Bond.  They like James
Bond movies *because* it appeals to their fascination with gizmos; they
did not create this interest.

>In fact, it seems that the same disease that has affected the
>motion-picture industry has infected the world of anime. Bad
>writing. Artless, brainless, flashy, water-treading formula.

Unfortunate that this syndrome is not limited to this country, but it appears
to be epidemic to the human race as a whole.

>If
>we stay within the traditional genres of anime (we're not even
>going to touch anime porno. No one's been able to prove that sex
>is a bad idea yet), this is the same disease that enables one of
>the biggest movie studios in the States to take a superb body of
>imagination called ALIEN and completely rape and disrespect it to
>make a thoroughly unnecessary sequel.

Now Marc has totally discredited himself by dissing Aliens.  How far
can we believe this man?  8-]

>Or how about the screenplay fiasco called COOL WORLD?

So much for Marc's expression of admiration for Bakshi...did Ralph lose
his magic touch already?

>BATMAN RETURNS?

Considering Marc's earlier comments about stylization, I'm surprised he
does not see the stylization behind this film.  Or perhaps he does and
chooses not to acknowledge it?

>In my view, it is up to the fans, the partisans, the experts, the
>people who know and love anime, who spend their money on it so
>that it can flourish; it is up to these people to politely ask
>those with the energy and talent to produce the animation to
>please, even if it costs more and takes longer, please hire
>someone who can write coherent, imaginative meaningful ideas for
>their animators to bring to life. It is up to the fans to support
>the anime projects with genuine thought and sophistication to
>them, and to openly ignore those that persist in insulting their
>intelligence. If, instead of taking what they are offered and
>pronouncing it good simply because it is what they've been
>offered, the people who love anime ask for more, then the entire
>world would be forced to recognize and respect anime as an art
>form worth the fanatical pride of its fans.

I'm not sure whether to be touched or amused by Marc's call to arms to
anime fandom.  If he thinks that the opinions and desires of Western
anime fandom has any influence on what anime gets produced in Japan,
he has a seriously exaggerated notion of our power.  The American anime
market is miniscule compared to Japan's own.  And how much power do
the otakus there have over what is produced?

Despite some good points Marc raised, I disagree strongly with his
article as a whole.  After first claiming to be an unbiased observer,
his initial comments are disparaging and borderline contemptous.  If
he is as respectful of anime as he claims to be, why is there no
mention of all the "good" anime out there in his "even-handed"
article?  Where is Miyazaki or Tezuka, Matsumoto or Takahata, heck,
even current mainstreamers like Takahashi and Tomino?  And these are
only the names people in Western fandom recognize.  There is a
motherload of anime which outside fandom never sees because it is
intensely, personally Japanese.  And why does he never bother to mention
economic factors?  Not merely the fact that anime, like all other
mass medias, are driven by the all-consuming profit monster, but the
fact that anime productions often have much smaller budgets than their
American counterparts?  One Disney movie can finance half-a-dozen "high
budget" (for the Japanese) anime movies.  The very simple fact that with
less money to spend on the production, there will be less cels made and
thus the animation technically will be poorer than Disney either never
crossed Marc's mind or was merely ignored.

I'm glad Marc didn't make the mistake most other American reviewers of anime
make, namely focusing on the sex/porn animes like Cream Lemon, Minna Agechau,
and Wandering Kid, and triumphantly claiming that these are indicative of
the genre as a whole.  But, at the same time, Marc makes the classic blunder
of observing the actions of the fanatic and thinking he is the common fan.
Most anime fans I know are mindlessly, slavishly devoted to anime.  Many
have their favorite shows or creators, but are usually open-minded enough
to realize that they are not perfect.  Unfortunately, like all human
organizations, it is the fanatics who make the most noise, draw the most
attention, and, sadly enough, are presumed to embody fandom as a whole.

I had hoped Marc would be more open-minded that that.  I was disappointed.
But hope springs eternal, and until someone actually does do an objective
analysis, I will continue to gorge my mind on images of battlin' babes,
evil multi-national corporations, and maybe the occasional anime that
is worth of the appellation "art."

[My apologies to anyone who is bored silly by this topic.  I hope I didn't
make any of you suicidally depressed.  8-]
-- 
Bill "Whassamatter?!  Can't you take a joke?!" Barnes   wbarnes@sura.net
Disclaimer:  The author apologizes for any thought-provoking material he may
	     have accidentally included and promises not to do it again.
Datclaimer:  My employers wouldn't WANT to share some of my opinions.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.animation