What is your favourite anime....?!!!

[volyund]

/swt I liked the more realistic parts of Black Lagoon, so for me it wasn't one of the best.

[mrharvest]

Mushishi
However, I can't even really say why. It's somewhat like "My Neighbor Totoro" you simply like it on emotional level, and it's pointless to rationalize why.

I'm pretty sure I could give you a fairly extensive analysis why some viewers feel they connect with. These shows are primarily products of a craft: combining elements which are known to work and create a particular effect. Anime (like any other narrative medium) isn't magic. It's a deliberately built product made to do what it does (although in some cases better than in others).

I appreciated in Mushishi the plurality of the narrative: it didn't offer prescriptive ethics but gave the viewer the choice which she feels is ultimately better. The thin characterisation actually worked advantageously. Although you might pose questions "who is Ginko, where did he come from?" in the first episodes, because he is mostly an empty frame you tend to cast yourself into his character which would not happen so readily if he were more fully fleshed out. On scene level this is done time and again; every episode follows a formula where first we are given a question not unlike to a "whodunnit" murder mystery but here the question is more to do "what is murder?" in a world although familiar (using imagery from a shared subconscious of traditions and fairytales) is also fantastical and unexpected, again allowing for a viewer to form her own idea of the world and its circumstances. So the show puts you into the situation of a tabula rasa, a blank tablet, on which you can create your own picture – an experience very close to everyone from their childhood.
Well, maybe you get what I'm going at.

[Lucky-7]

Overanalyzing a show like mushishi only robs you of it's whimsical charms.

[mrharvest]

Overanalyzing a show like mushishi only robs you of it's whimsical charms.

Absolutely. But I'm saying it can be done. It can be taken dissected just as you can take apart a radio to see how it works. It's academic interest on my part.

[KunJinky]

Overanalyzing a show like mushishi only robs you of it's whimsical charms.

Absolutely. But I'm saying it can be done. It can be taken dissected just as you can take apart a radio to see how it works. It's academic interest on my part.

But you also run the risk of ignoring gestalt value, provided it has it.

[mrharvest]

But you also run the risk of ignoring gestalt value, provided it has it.

Can't see the forest from the trees? It's a valid risk but there's several kinds of dissecting of narrative media. One is to look at the bits its composed of, another is to look at it in context. Anime especially is a tradition, a very rigid tradition at that. It's good that we get the occasional Kemonodzume and Studio 4°C to at least in part question the what's actually in and what's out.
I believe convergence is an integrative function. You may have to follow a line pretty far until you can say for certain it's not just the arc of a bloody big circle. If I got right what you mean.

[KunJinky]

More along the lines of, the sum of the parts can create a greater whole, more so than merely the sum of it's parts. It can be more than just a radio.

Say... something formulaic made out of a handful of cliches can manage to produce it's own undeniable charm or simply be poop.

[volyund]

Anime (like any other narrative medium) isn't magic. It's a deliberately built product made to do what it does (although in some cases better than in others).

I have to disagree with you there, Miyazaki Hayao somehow seems to incorporate magic into his every creation (the ones he directed).


But other than that that was a very interesting analysis. Now I see why my stepfather identifies so well with Ginko (other than the fact that they are both heavy smokers).

If it's so well know what you need to do to make a sucesseful creation like Miyazaki's movies and Mushishi, I wonder why so few people actually get it right. I guess you just need talent for that. I know what certain things make series likable or not (such as non-black and white character development) and I felt that there was something a little wrong with Kino's Travels, but I have never analized anything that deeply.


mrharvest, it would be really interesting to read more of your analysis on other creations.

[mrharvest]

Yeah, the remark "it's not magic" was bit of a throwaway really. If I had went further into it I should have put it "it's mostly not magic"; like KunJinky says sometimes this stuff is more than a sum of it's parts and in some very rare cases it's art – not just artifice.

----boring art crap
Although I'd never offer it as a general explanation I tend to personally believe that art can contain an invisible quality, call it soul or spirit or magic, which gets rubbed onto it from the people who make it. But there's a problem with this (which I why I'd avoid giving it out as an explanation of why something is good). First; it's hard to define and varies from audience to another. Second; the more you look into the "bits it's comprised of" and the "context that contains it" of a piece of art, the more you find what you previously thought of as that "invisible quality" has actually become a reasonably atomistic particle you can then poke at and even transport to another piece.
(Though instead of atoms it's maybe more like "genes". Some genes in a particular place of the DNA ribbon will do nothing, they'll just sit there uselessly. But when placed in the right context they'll work as intended.)

The "invisible quality" I believe is still useful when we explain why for instance a tree at a museum is art but a tree in the forest is not. If an artist takes a tree and puts it on exhibit at a museum we can talk about the intertextual crosstalk of trees, culture and civilisation (without trees we wouldn't have museums, probably), we can point at the Ozymandias effect (the tree was old, now it is dead and "gone" although paradoxically more people will hear of it than if it was still in a forest), argument how the act of exhibiting a tree is a line of dialogue in the canon of art history –– endlessly and endlessly we can go on about it spinning an unholy big mess of what makes it interesting.
Yet, some audiences will appreciate it while others will not. What ultimately makes it for those who do is when they see it with the right frame of mind, having seen previous works of similar kind, and then are able to attain "enlightenment" about the aesthetic nature of the work.
----art crap ends

On the reason why we don't see more Mushishis and Miyazakis. There's plenty of reasons for that really. While on one level the professional writers, animators, directors etc. know what kinds of ingredients should be put into a soup to turn it into a Mushishi, it's often difficult to have these in the right measure so they complement each other forming a nice texture and taste. It takes quite a bit of time and money to put out an anime (especially if it's something as massive as Miyazaki's productions) so often you'll opt for the "safe" choice of a well-known combination.*
And then just like it takes one rotten piece of onion in your soup to spoil it, it doesn't take a lot of unskilled people in a big production to screw it. If you want to reach the level of polish Miyazaki puts out then you'll have to have all the elements in the right place.

On the other hand this is business: as long as a lot viewers don't want shows that are innovative and thought-provoking there isn't much sense in putting those out. So shows cater to certain demographics with particular requirements. If they sell with crappy production values by just throwing in scantily clad lolis and big guns, then that's what you do if you are in it just for the money. And some people genuinely like that stuff.

*That said, I personally think that Miyazaki these days is repeating his one successful formula. He knows how to make that one genre, that one thing, he gets paid to do it (both in money and in social pressure) and he does it.

[KunJinky]

Have you read the essay The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction by Walter Benjamin? A lot of discourse in the "invisible" rather aura stems from there. Not that I want to get into a deep discussion about it, but thought you might find it interesting if you haven't.

I see your point but the tree in the museum example I find is rather risky as it touches on the issue of the institutionalization of art in general which can a can of worms in itself.

[mrharvest]

I haven't, in fact. I'll give it a read.

[volyund]

...I tend to personally believe that art can contain an invisible quality, call it soul or spirit or magic, which gets rubbed onto it from the people who make it...

I really like your way of phrasing it.

... for instance a tree at a museum is art but a tree in the forest is not. If an artist takes a tree and puts it on exhibit at a museum we can talk about the intertextual crosstalk of trees, culture and civilisation (without trees we wouldn't have museums, probably), we can point at the Ozymandias effect (the tree was old, now it is dead and "gone" although paradoxically more people will hear of it than if it was still in a forest), ....

In my case what matters the most to me in art is when I'm exposed to it (see it, hear it, read it, watch it, etc.) whether I feel something. People can critique art as much as they want, but what really matters is what you feel. If it's a painting I like I will stand there and I can feel warmth inside, or some other feeling; if it's music I might get goose bumps or cry; and that feeling stays with me for a long time, and when I think about that particular piece of art I will re-live those feelings. That's what art is to me.

...*That said, I personally think that Miyazaki these days is repeating his one successful formula. He knows how to make that one genre, that one thing, he gets paid to do it (both in money and in social pressure) and he does it.

I agree, however, Miyazaki Hayao's works still have those little bits of magic that rubbed off of him in them, recent less than older Laputa, Totoro, or Porco Rosso (then he basically did everything from screenplay to redrawing cells); but even Howl's Moving Castle that wasn't originally Miyazaki's project, still got those bits of magic in it. At least that's how I felt but art is all about personal perception.


About anime, I just haven't felt that magic in anything other than Mushishi lately. I didn't feel it in the Gedo Senki either, although I really liked the movie. On the other hand, maybe I'm just biased towards Hayao because I have so many good childhood memories linked to his works.

[cheesecake]

Slayers. I haven't seen it for a long time though. Wonder if they have any new ones yet...

[KasugaSan]

I doubt it...

[derrio]

Slayers. I haven't seen it for a long time though. Wonder if they have any new ones yet...

Aww man you totally killed the vibe from the analysis conversation. It's like I had an erection from a gorgeous brunette walking by, and you just happened to bring in gay porn.

Damnit, woman, you suck.

[EvilSquirrel]

derrio masturbates to anime fanfics

[Singyz]

derrio masturbates to analysis of anime fanfics

Fixed

[salntz]

probably Death Note and Code Geass at the moment..

Both are on killing in a their own unique way plus using brains to se good strategy..

[DrakonX]

have to be Bleach and Code Geass

[Haolla]

Serial Experiments Lain, Samurai Champloo, Texnohlyze, Ergo Proxy, and Haruhi Suzumiya are the first that come to mind on the mention of "favorite anime".

[volyund]

I seriously wish people would start discussing what in particular they like about their favorite series.

[emetic]

it's not really necessary to do so... I don't want to hear why anyone likes Bleach or Naruto, for example.

[volyund]

Well, ok, not those two, but for other series I would.

I would like to know why someone likes Serial Experiment Lain...
It's like a review and it helps people decide whether they maybe wanna watch the show.

[dlonyaR]

SO..

[emetic]

True true I guess.

I'm still not interested simply because I judge animes mainly by the OP and the animation style.
And by who else likes it, lol.