The Autumn Season, a.k.a. THE ANIME APOCALYPSE

This entry is brought to by the letters A, B and C. A certain Collective of Anime Bloggers who, this time, consist of  CCYoshi,  J. Valdez,  Karura, Martin, Mike, Owen, Roxas and Xerox

The fact that we can talk about anime in seasonal blocks underlines what an oddity the medium is. I've always been inclined to regard anime as an inclusive form of television rather than a homogeneous medium due to its expansive, non-defined behaviour on Japanese TV channels. Rather than being a niche oddity within a set schedule, as it is in the West, it simply is the schedule in many cases, with its own subset of complex genres and varying, distinguishing (read: trope-ridden) characteristics.

In response we seemingly compartmentalise, compare and critique a group of shows linked merely by their airtime. The more I think about it the weirder and unfair it seems. Beyond very broad generalisations how much could you compare the worth/quality of Six Feet Under with The Sopranos? Surely those two shows stand as two separate experiences with their own set of ideologies, intentions, drama. Why isn't anime granted the same courtesy of being judged on its own individual merits rather than a mass released in a certain set of arbitrary boundaries?

Still, not to buck trends for the sake of argument (who would do such a thing) this season has been pretty underwhelming. It seems to be an annual tradition around this time for the blogging sphere to question their interest in anime, to ask 'is anime dead?' and other such dramatic things. The unifying effect of having seasonal blocks of new shows encourages this kind of thinking and in many ways neuters peoples' analytical minds, and the fallout is such that many shows are either elevated above their true worth, or waylaid in a fit of apathy and bulk judgement. And being a human being, I'm as guilty of this as anyone else. I saw it coming before the Autumn wave descended and decided to counteract any rash judgement with a certain watch-every-first-episode-I-can initiative (II, III).

The results were interesting purely because it gave insight into how my mind works in regards to anime. Having no distinct reference of quality I rationalised and excused many things about the shows I watched that I would've otherwise, with a comparative example of what I really liked, dismissed quite brutally. Had Ghost Hound came out with the majority of the new shows I almost certainly wouldn't have kept up with as many as I did, for as long as I did. This relates to something I hamfistedly tried to explain in a comment to one of Owen's posts recently - that of strong understanding of your own tastes. I explained it in opposition to elitism, stating that you can have strong perceptions of what you might like or dislike without it having the same negative intentions to exclude or judge as elitism does. And as dismissive as it may seem I've come to trust my intuition in this regard without much compromise.

Now, this kind of personal insight doesn't just amount to "don't like character art, won't watch show", though I admit I still think that way at least initially when looking over websites and promo art . . .

As a tangent, actually, I resent the criticism levelled at people who do judge a show based on the promo stuff they see. Promotional material is a form of advertising, and so has numerous intentions with its design and suchlike, so why can't we dismiss something based on it in the same way we can get excited by it? The whole don't judge a book by its cover adage is bullshit when it comes to something as aesthetically charged as anime. One of your key entry points into the experience of is how it looks. It's animation for god's sake. You'd have to be pretty well developed to not, at least slightly, judge it superficially.

But anyway: this process of consciously defining personal taste. It's basically a product of experience. Run an anime blog, any variety of blog that reviews and articulates thoughts on a defined form of human production, for a protracted amount of time, and you will quickly become attuned to what you like and don't like. Depending on your set of values, what you want from the experience, the extremity of these likes and dislikes will vary dramatically. Personally, I'm a demanding son of a bitch. Having read any amount of 'canonical' books because of education, having seen any amount of 'classic' films because of geeky friends, has made me into a very self-aware viewer and reader with a slightly bloated set of expectations. Specifically relating this to anime, I look to find visual experiences I won't find anywhere else. Partly because the Japanese are just whacky fuckers, but again partly because the medium allows a sort of liberated imagination you rarely find elsewhere. This is why I don't have time for derivative, trope-ridden crap and this is why most anime seasons are just as bad as each other. Herald the demise of anime because there's only three irritating moe harem eroge game adaptations for you to fap over this season if you want -- try only having one show per season that even approaches compelling viewing.

So yeah, I'm a misanthrope who thinks most anime is pretty weak and doesn't just whinge when one season seems worse than the other. But then, I apply the exact same method of judgement to every other kind of televised media I see. My point is that anime shouldn't be given special treatment because it seemingly operates in such a different matter; bad TV is bad TV. Why should our value system, our method of judgement, have to reconfigure because all these cartoons seem to have big-eyed transvestites who talk funny? Surely examples of universal greatness, Dennou Coil being the most recent example, prove that you can apply universal methods of appraisal? Perhaps I'm being terribly fallacious. Good thing this an anime blog and not a logic essay, eh.

Comments

[bateszi]

I understand what you're saying about not judging a book by its cover, but when it comes to anime, I find it fairly easy to pick the good from the bad on promo art (and sometimes, trailers). Lets take Kaiji for an example, the characters are intentionally designed to look as ugly as possible, so we can assume the look is a massive "f*ck you" to the generic moe blandness that's making up a large part of this season; that, for me, is an immediate hook. Dennou Coil is the same in the sense that despite being set at a Japanese school, there is no dodgy fan-service or exploitative camera angles. Basically, it's easy to spot anime with dignity because the vast majority has none.

[Martin]

The seasonal thing really does tend to lump things together, and does seem odd when judged outside of the 'anime schedules' context - well spotted! I didn't really look at it that way until now.

Anyway. The fansub season usually pans out into a lot of stuff that I enjoyed watching and discussing at the time but forget about months down the line, and truly memorable material that I'll be raving about for a long while. In the case of this season, there isn't much that falls into the latter category but it's awakened an aspect of my viewing habits that dictates: "I need something to occupy my spare time. Anything. Even if it's only fun while it lasts, as long as it's fun." That's why I'm not ashamed to say I'm enjoying Clannad or ef, even though I don't know whether I'll consider them to be important in the long run; on the other hand I'd rewatch Kaiji and Moyashimon on DVD without hesitation.

[0rion]

"Specifically relating this to anime, I look to find visual experiences I won't find anywhere else."

Yes! I'm glad someone else out there has that kind of mindset.

Anyway, great essay there. You both echoed many of my own thoughts, and helped specifically identify several ideas that I couldn't quite pin down before.

So yeah. Well done. I love your writing style. =D

[Owen S]

We can take this to another blog post if you prefer (drop me a message on IRC if you're keen, I have an idea), but I was ruminating about this before I fell asleep last night, and the results of the deconstruction are as follows:

This is the premise on which you build your personal definition/concept of "taste" (including but not limited to preferences, perception, intuition etc) , also the one thing I am having issues with -- chronological bias.

When you say you have xxx these yyy, and by those I mean read/books, seen/films, so on and so forth, this is what I mean. While it is one thing to have standards, it is another thing to juxtapose the innate individuality of one show or work onto another.

Of course, you already know how books can obviously not compare to anime in the sense that there is the sense of omniscience, that lend for further and greater empathy than anime can ever muster. So I won't go into that.

When I say "chronological bias" I mean that you obviously are biased in that you're not employing a tabula rasa state, which, in my opinion, should be the only template on which someone reviews/judges/critiques a work of art, in this case anime, and instead choose to compare and contrast with works you have seen before, even if they're of absolutely no relation whatsoever.

In your case specifically, what this means at the end of the day is that "taste" is to you not so much personal preference as it is your imposing of values and expectations on the anime that you watch, wanting it to live up to the standards of previous works. You mention in your AnimeSeen that FLCL is "The anime by which I judge all others.", and what is that if not wanting anime to conform to the framework you think it should be, rather than allowing each and every one to perform on its merits?

I advocate, and by advocate I mean "believe", in judging something through its stand-alone value, only comparing by genre in the bigger picture of things. While I believe that precedence is important to some extent and that you can truly compare by focusing on the macro for common elements, the micro, in this case what makes an anime unique, shouldn't be critiqued on the basis of not being like X anime, for that is isn't taste anymore. "Chronological bias" would sound more appropriate.

Note that this isn't a personal attack on you so much as it is my reaffirmation of my apologist stance, and "Give anime a chance" mantra. You don't think that Autumn 2007 is all that great because I think you're looking for what can obviously not be present or exist (in this case, FLCL-sque). You say that you "look to find visual experiences I won't find anywhere else", but anime isn't about visuals alone. Going into the fray with that in mind means you've cheapened anime into mere surface appearances, ignoring how most, if not all of us, usually find something greater beating beneath the heart of what might be a crappily animated/moe "rubbish" anime, or what in layman's terms is called "a damned good story".

I can turn this into a full-blown post if you're so interested. Dialogue would be appropriate.

[Hige]

Bateszi:
Likewise. Even if it's just a minor deviation from the norm you can tell the production company is making a point by not looking stereotypically 'anime'. I think that's what I was getting out by anime being so wrapped up in its aesthetics. It's not the most important thing, for obvious reasons, but perhaps key method of creating an identity for the show. Both Kaiji and Dennou Coil represent this quite well.

Martin:
Fansubbing kinda operates in the same sphere as downloading music for me. Foremost, I see it as a sort of trial run to see if whatever I'm 'acquiring' is worth spending money on. I have the same experiences as you in that some shows fill the time well but ultimately don't make much of an impact beyond transient entertainment (which in many cases is exactly the point). I understand those shows for what they are, but these days I barely watch the anime I'm actively interested in. This circumstance results in a pretty brutal filtering process whenever a new season appears. I follow blog entries on the ones that semi-interested me and often marathon something that I've obviously misconstrued entirely . . . but that rarely happens.

0rion:
Thanks for the compliments! It's a shame you weren't in on this topic; I really enjoy reading Epic Win and your input would've great. I regret the blunt lack of explanation for that comment a little, as Owen's comment explains its superficiality (which wasn't my intent), but hopefully I'll justify it better with my response to his points.

Owen:
I'm going to give you a separate reply comment so I can quote and suchlike. Please stand by~

[Hige]

Owen:
First, thanks for writing such a comprehensive comment. I appreciate the time it may've taken to write.

"When I say "chronological bias" I mean that you obviously are biased in that you're not employing a tabula rasa state, which, in my opinion, should be the only template on which someone reviews/judges/critiques a work of art, in this case anime, and instead choose to compare and contrast with works you have seen before, even if they're of absolutely no relation whatsoever".

I'm in two minds about this statement. I agree that I am biased and don't employ a tabula rasa state when I judge things, but my arguments against this approach are such: First, this is a personal blog. If the circumstances were different (as in, I was reviewing professionally and it was being read by a wider spectrum of people) then my approach would fit your ideal. In those circumstances I agree an objective stance is the most credible way of informing people, but this blog doesn't fit in with that sense of duty. One of the most appealing things about blogs for me, as a writer (forgive the pretension), is how liberated you can be with your opinion and the level of personality you can infuse in its delivery. Most of the time the way I write here is the way I verbally communicate on similar topics, too (though obviously not in such a structured way and perhaps with less show-boating). It would feel stilted and uninteresting to read if I did it any other way. This means all the warts and inconsistencies are present, too - and I'm usually well aware of them when I reread what I've written. Correcting them often means a sacrifice in what I think makes this blog worth reading, and for this reason I don't, so I prepare counter-arguments if anyone observant mentions them in a comment :x

"In your case specifically, what this means at the end of the day is that "taste" is to you not so much personal preference as it is your imposing of values and expectations on the anime that you watch, wanting it to live up to the standards of previous works. You mention in your AnimeSeen that FLCL is "The anime by which I judge all others.", and what is that if not wanting anime to conform to the framework you think it should be, rather than allowing each and every one to perform on its merits?"

There's a grain of truth in the first statement, but only a very small one. My imposition of values based on previous experience is not as grand as you suggest. I admit it's a factor, but I can detach myself enough to justify the individual merits/lack of merits of whatever I'm watching. I quite enjoy making hyperbolic statements like the many in this post and the AnimeSeen FLCL comment, but many of them are devil's advocacy or tongue-in-cheek. Specifically, regarding that FLCL statement, you're taking it too literally. With every new anime I see I don't sit there at the end and think, "well, that was no FLCL was it". The hyperbolic nature of the comment makes it easy to presume as much, but I meant it only in the sense that FLCL is an absolute favourite of mine and serves as a benchmark in /entertainment/ rather than acting a strict framework that shapes my taste on other anime. I consider it to be the pinnacle of the anime I've seen thus far, but that doesn't mean everything is inferior because it doesn't match the same level of enjoyment I got from FLCL; it just means FLCL remains my all-time favourite. That area of silly competition is quite removed from the much broader analytical processes going on in my mind, trust me.

" You say that you "look to find visual experiences I won't find anywhere else", but anime isn't about visuals alone. Going into the fray with that in mind means you've cheapened anime into mere surface appearances, ignoring how most, if not all of us, usually find something greater beating beneath the heart of what might be a crappily animated/moe "rubbish" anime, or what in layman's terms is called "a damned good story"."

I regret the use of that phrase, or at least its limited scope in articulating what I meant. I assure you I don't just consider anime on their superficial achievements; I hope my previous entries have demonstrated my preference to story over visuals as well as showing a balanced attitude towards the whole package. What I meant by 'visual experience' was much more general, specifically meaning 'experiences I have in a visual way' i.e. anything I watch. You're right to call me up on this, though; it was poorly phrased and didn't communicate what I meant. Basically, to rephrase and elaborate, I see anime as a vehicle to experience things I often don't in other forms of visual media. My expectations are altered slightly because of this, but my attention to the things that unify anything we watch (story, characterisation and so on) are still the same and still held in higher regard than the things that differentiate anime (as in, the animation).

And I'll leave it at that (I still need to read and comment on everyone else's posts!). I definitely like the idea of an official topic emerging out of this, but Roxas put it well on IRC in saying, "most people will be like "lol it's those elitist bloggers circle jerking amongst themselves again"" I think it can work without being too pretentious, but we'd need to have a real anime focus to make it interesting to everyone who isn't us. With something as broad as this it would be too easy to go off-topic and turn into a conversation on theory rather than anime. Still, worth a punt either way . . .

[Lupus]

I think the lumping of shows into seasonal groups is more out of habit and convenience than anything. Specifically for bloggers, it makes it easier to categorise and order things, and to keep things clear for themselves.

It also seems to be how things are structured in Japan, seeing that new shows start when old shows end, and there is never any overlap between seasons, it's inevitable that we divide them like that.

It doesn't preclude us from comparing them with older shows though. It's not like we never reference shows from previous seasons when writing reviews of shows this season. Shows in the same season are just more often compared because we are forced to make choices between them at the moment. For example, I would think Minami-ke is better than Ghosthound because I'm forced to download one or the other, and as such I must make a choice and (quite arbitrarily) decide which one is superior. But if taken out of their seasonal context, I would never compare the two, because they're so different it would be idiocy to try to put them on a balance.

On another point, I agree with your comment about judging anime by its art. For a medium that depends so much on its visual appeal (can you say moe?), I doubt anyone can honestly say that they can completely overlook the artwork. And if you can, why not just go read the scripts? To cite some examples of the importance of visuals in anime, the shows Mononoke and Kemonosume alienated a lot of people because of their unique looks. It's like having a terrible design for your website - if people can't stomach what they initially see, you can't expect them to endure it to get to the "good stuff", even if it is the "the best stuff EVER". Obviously having a pretty website with no content won't garner you any hits either.

So then the idea is to balance how these two factors (and others such as music) in judging a show overall. Everyone has their own preferences and tastes, so what's important to one person won't be important to another. I don't think it's fair to criticise someone even if they judge a show by its visuals alone - if they get a kick out of it, and they simply enjoy the visual art side of it without caring about the literary side, it's their right to do so. Similarly I don't think it's fair to criticise people for dismissing shows on visuals alone, and the same is true if they enjoy the story/character side without having any regards for the visuals.

But then again, I've dismissed shows on visuals alone numerous times, so I have ulterior motives for saying that :P