![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I'm supposed to have a nice, hopefully entertaining post regarding RL stuff here, but that can wait. See, on most days, fandom stupidity doesn't do much of anything to me beyond making me want to point and laugh, and, barring that, make a semi-snarky post about it on Plurk. This one, however, is a special case.
Fandom rant, AHOY! Srsly, what is with some people bringing their close-minded views into their reading of a series?
Just a few minutes earlier, a good friend of mine linked me to an entry (LINK HERE) on IJ, written by a fanfic writer who apparently has a habit for over-analyzing the characters and plot lines in particular anime and manga series. To save you the trouble of reading through her tasteless vtriol, let me summarize what she's basically trying to say:
1. KHR (that is, Reborn!) is a bad series because it underrates their girl characters. All they do are domestic, boring things that basically affirm chauvinism over feminism and female empowerment.
2. What is with shonen series and their degrading, narrow-minded portrayal of women? It's so tasteless.
3. Fanon is the only thing that can save the female characters in Reborn.
I will not tackle the point on fanon since there really isn't any argument there. In response to her first and second points, however, I have three basic arguments, listed here so that we're all on the same page before I go off and plug some really, really big holes through her arguments: contextualizing Japanese anime and manga within its proper space, the concept of an original audience and its relations to how one should read a work from another country and lastly, the difference between reader responses and reader-oriented criticism.
Contextualizing Japanese anime and manga within its proper space.
Remember all that crap that your teachers you throughout grade school and all the way until high school taught you about the universality of literature and how we can always bring a bit of ourselves into our reading of a work, regardless of where it came from and who it was written for?
Well, throw it out the window. The hard truth of the matter is that we need to understand that all works of literature arise from a particular socio-cultural CONTEXT, written at a particular time for a particular AUDIENCE. The cultural values of a whole country are embodied, to some degree and in some fashion, within the work of an author from that country - see, writers cannot help but bring where they come from into their work, and their writing either affirms or deconstructs these values that they have embodied. Then and ONLY THEN, in the intersection between where the work is coming from and we're we're coming from, can we glean some sort of common experience. Similarity in difference, difference in similarity. That sort of thing.
What does this mean to us? This means that all literary works are agents in the transmission of their home culture. They reflect what their country values or does not value in terms of social practices and other things.
What does this mean for us as readers? This means that we must be AWARE of cultural differences BEFORE we have any violent reactions or misinterpretations of what a text is trying to tell us about certain things. Hence, BEFORE any reader worth her salt applies her so-called criticism or gives her supposedly valued opinion on a work of literature, she must be aware that her values may not be THEIR values, and the people from the country in which the work originated from will read what she sees VERY DIFFERENTLY.
Let's use her original argument as an example. She basically made the hasty generalization that shonen anime and manga tend to underrate female characters. Although she may not have said it directly, her tone seems to imply that this treatment is tasteless and anti-feminist.
Now let me point out that her idea of feminism is very WESTERN and thus very different from the type of feminism that may be espoused or applied to Japanese culture, and to Japanese shonen manga, in particular. It is wrong and totally unfair of her to judge a piece using her own cultural standards.
If I wanted to be a colossal bitch about it, we can boil all of this nice stuff down to a very simple equation:
JAPANESE =/= AMERICAN. GTFO FOR THINKING THEY'RE THE SAME.
On another note, I would go into the exact differences behind the idea of the feminine in American culture and the idea of the feminine in Japanese culture, but that's better off getting its own paper or post in the future. Now, let's move on to my second point.
The concept of an original audience and its relations to how one should read a work.
I've already stressed the point on the un-universality of literature, and how an enriched and, if I may be so bold, "proper' reading of a text would take a work's cultural context into mind. This includes considering the fact that more often than not, foreign works are not written for you. They were written for the people that the author expected to have bought their story.
Katekyo Hitman Reborn! is serialized in Shounen Jump, which is a weekly boys' comic magazine. Now let's stress one word there: BOYS.
Not men.
BOYS.
This comic was directed at pre-pubescent adolescents who probably don't think very high of girls in general. They are not looking for a stellar, commendable portrayal of the opposite sex. They are looking for exploding things, blood, gore, kick-ass fight scenes and plot twists from the "hey, that really don't make that much sense but it leaves room for more fighting so who the heck's complaining right?" school of thought. They probably completely ignore the women portrayed in Reborn! unless they're wearing school uniforms or skirts, in which case it would allow them to stare at their legs. Or if they're getting pseudo-raped by illusory tentacles.Chrome, I'm looking at you.
Let's zoom out to Shounen Jump in general. Beyond everything, a weekly comic is a money-making venture, with carefully calculated demands on their mangaka based whatever their target audience happens to be. Basically, if the mangaka in question does not curb his or her ideal storyline to suit what her readers want, he or she will quickly find themselves out of a job.
Don't you think it's unfair for us to look for things that shouldn't even be in a work and judge it for the absence of these factors? That's like expecting an action movie to have a real plot or a children's show to come up with the cure for cancer. You can't really expect complete, all-encompassing intelligence in a manga meant for little boys (or dirty fangirls in it for the gay, but that's a whole new matter altogether). If you wanted something like that, then you're obviously looking in the wrong place for it.
There is also, once again, the issue of cultural differences to consider. I think I've effectively explained that point in my previous paragraphs.
The difference between reader responses and reader-oriented criticism.
If there is one thing that upsets me the most about people who make these rant posts, it's the fact that they try and inject some sort of critical backbone into what is, at the end of the day, nothing but a personal opinion on their part. There is a WORLD of difference between honestly criticizing a work while keeping all of the above factors (and then some) in mind and just mindlessly lashing out or imposing your own opinions or pseudo-intellectualism upon your evaluation of a story.
Reader response may be the most honest and up front reaction that anyone can get when it comes to literature, but it is also guided by nothing but one's gut reactions to the text. Reader-oriented criticism, on the other hand, attempts to take a more academic approach when evaluating a work.
Readers and reviewers, PLEASE BE CLEAR ABOUT WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM. Don't delude yourselves into thinking that you're being critical when you're just being plain-out bitchy, close-minded or mean about something. Combining snark with actual brain power takes a lot more effort beyond opening up your web browser and keyboard smashing whatever you feel like. A lack of clarity tends to bring on a whole lot of wank.
Oh, and while we're on the same page: DO NOT WHINE OR INSULT PEOPLE WHEN THEY DO NOT AGREE WITH YOU. Doing that just puts you on so many levels of WRONG! and PATHETIC!. I can't even begin to describe each one of them. Backing off gracefully and agreeing to disagree is always an option, as is simply closing your damned net browser.
The lessons at the end of the day is breathtakingly simple, kids:
Don't force your cultural ideals down another country's throat. Heck, on a smaller scale, don't force it down another person's FANDOM. Find a point of intersection between where you're coming from and where the work's coming from. Trust me: the results are bound to fun and interesting.
Read more, and please, read CAREFULLY before you judge anything. It's one thing to sound smart. It's quite another to BE smart.
I have heard from a few reliable sources that the person who made the post that I just deconstructed is a pretty good fanfic writer. I haven't read her fiction, but I'll have to say that now, I really don't want to. If she brings this narrow-mindedness into her craft, then I sure as hell don't want to touch any of that with a foot-long pole. It's probably as pretentious and as misguided as her fanfics are. The fact that I'm VERY SENSITIVE to authorial tone probably isn't going to help either.
Am I being unfair? I don't think so. You really, honestly can't separate one's fiction from the rest of what they are as a person, especially when it comes to matters of taste and intellect. You know what they say about empty cans and coins. Having such a close-minded approach stunts your growth as a writer.
Of course, that's just MY opinion of things.
EDIT:![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
khursten has posted her own take on the matter over here. Go read it?
EDIT #2: Okay, so now that people are popping up and certain personal attacks ARE being made of which I do not have any control of, I'm disabling further comments. I'm doing this because there are people in my circle who are becoming uncomfortable with the sort of exchanges going on here, and I want to stimmy the damage, if only for their sake. I am not, however, going to lock this entry. I believe that vitriol aside, my position is clear and is well-informed from another viewpoint on the issue. As such, it deserves to be read.
Fandom rant, AHOY! Srsly, what is with some people bringing their close-minded views into their reading of a series?
Just a few minutes earlier, a good friend of mine linked me to an entry (LINK HERE) on IJ, written by a fanfic writer who apparently has a habit for over-analyzing the characters and plot lines in particular anime and manga series. To save you the trouble of reading through her tasteless vtriol, let me summarize what she's basically trying to say:
1. KHR (that is, Reborn!) is a bad series because it underrates their girl characters. All they do are domestic, boring things that basically affirm chauvinism over feminism and female empowerment.
2. What is with shonen series and their degrading, narrow-minded portrayal of women? It's so tasteless.
3. Fanon is the only thing that can save the female characters in Reborn.
I will not tackle the point on fanon since there really isn't any argument there. In response to her first and second points, however, I have three basic arguments, listed here so that we're all on the same page before I go off and plug some really, really big holes through her arguments: contextualizing Japanese anime and manga within its proper space, the concept of an original audience and its relations to how one should read a work from another country and lastly, the difference between reader responses and reader-oriented criticism.
Contextualizing Japanese anime and manga within its proper space.
Remember all that crap that your teachers you throughout grade school and all the way until high school taught you about the universality of literature and how we can always bring a bit of ourselves into our reading of a work, regardless of where it came from and who it was written for?
Well, throw it out the window. The hard truth of the matter is that we need to understand that all works of literature arise from a particular socio-cultural CONTEXT, written at a particular time for a particular AUDIENCE. The cultural values of a whole country are embodied, to some degree and in some fashion, within the work of an author from that country - see, writers cannot help but bring where they come from into their work, and their writing either affirms or deconstructs these values that they have embodied. Then and ONLY THEN, in the intersection between where the work is coming from and we're we're coming from, can we glean some sort of common experience. Similarity in difference, difference in similarity. That sort of thing.
What does this mean to us? This means that all literary works are agents in the transmission of their home culture. They reflect what their country values or does not value in terms of social practices and other things.
What does this mean for us as readers? This means that we must be AWARE of cultural differences BEFORE we have any violent reactions or misinterpretations of what a text is trying to tell us about certain things. Hence, BEFORE any reader worth her salt applies her so-called criticism or gives her supposedly valued opinion on a work of literature, she must be aware that her values may not be THEIR values, and the people from the country in which the work originated from will read what she sees VERY DIFFERENTLY.
Let's use her original argument as an example. She basically made the hasty generalization that shonen anime and manga tend to underrate female characters. Although she may not have said it directly, her tone seems to imply that this treatment is tasteless and anti-feminist.
Now let me point out that her idea of feminism is very WESTERN and thus very different from the type of feminism that may be espoused or applied to Japanese culture, and to Japanese shonen manga, in particular. It is wrong and totally unfair of her to judge a piece using her own cultural standards.
If I wanted to be a colossal bitch about it, we can boil all of this nice stuff down to a very simple equation:
On another note, I would go into the exact differences behind the idea of the feminine in American culture and the idea of the feminine in Japanese culture, but that's better off getting its own paper or post in the future. Now, let's move on to my second point.
The concept of an original audience and its relations to how one should read a work.
I've already stressed the point on the un-universality of literature, and how an enriched and, if I may be so bold, "proper' reading of a text would take a work's cultural context into mind. This includes considering the fact that more often than not, foreign works are not written for you. They were written for the people that the author expected to have bought their story.
Katekyo Hitman Reborn! is serialized in Shounen Jump, which is a weekly boys' comic magazine. Now let's stress one word there: BOYS.
Not men.
BOYS.
This comic was directed at pre-pubescent adolescents who probably don't think very high of girls in general. They are not looking for a stellar, commendable portrayal of the opposite sex. They are looking for exploding things, blood, gore, kick-ass fight scenes and plot twists from the "hey, that really don't make that much sense but it leaves room for more fighting so who the heck's complaining right?" school of thought. They probably completely ignore the women portrayed in Reborn! unless they're wearing school uniforms or skirts, in which case it would allow them to stare at their legs. Or if they're getting pseudo-raped by illusory tentacles.
Let's zoom out to Shounen Jump in general. Beyond everything, a weekly comic is a money-making venture, with carefully calculated demands on their mangaka based whatever their target audience happens to be. Basically, if the mangaka in question does not curb his or her ideal storyline to suit what her readers want, he or she will quickly find themselves out of a job.
Don't you think it's unfair for us to look for things that shouldn't even be in a work and judge it for the absence of these factors? That's like expecting an action movie to have a real plot or a children's show to come up with the cure for cancer. You can't really expect complete, all-encompassing intelligence in a manga meant for little boys (or dirty fangirls in it for the gay, but that's a whole new matter altogether). If you wanted something like that, then you're obviously looking in the wrong place for it.
There is also, once again, the issue of cultural differences to consider. I think I've effectively explained that point in my previous paragraphs.
The difference between reader responses and reader-oriented criticism.
If there is one thing that upsets me the most about people who make these rant posts, it's the fact that they try and inject some sort of critical backbone into what is, at the end of the day, nothing but a personal opinion on their part. There is a WORLD of difference between honestly criticizing a work while keeping all of the above factors (and then some) in mind and just mindlessly lashing out or imposing your own opinions or pseudo-intellectualism upon your evaluation of a story.
Reader response may be the most honest and up front reaction that anyone can get when it comes to literature, but it is also guided by nothing but one's gut reactions to the text. Reader-oriented criticism, on the other hand, attempts to take a more academic approach when evaluating a work.
Readers and reviewers, PLEASE BE CLEAR ABOUT WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM. Don't delude yourselves into thinking that you're being critical when you're just being plain-out bitchy, close-minded or mean about something. Combining snark with actual brain power takes a lot more effort beyond opening up your web browser and keyboard smashing whatever you feel like. A lack of clarity tends to bring on a whole lot of wank.
Oh, and while we're on the same page: DO NOT WHINE OR INSULT PEOPLE WHEN THEY DO NOT AGREE WITH YOU. Doing that just puts you on so many levels of WRONG! and PATHETIC!. I can't even begin to describe each one of them. Backing off gracefully and agreeing to disagree is always an option, as is simply closing your damned net browser.
The lessons at the end of the day is breathtakingly simple, kids:
Don't force your cultural ideals down another country's throat. Heck, on a smaller scale, don't force it down another person's FANDOM. Find a point of intersection between where you're coming from and where the work's coming from. Trust me: the results are bound to fun and interesting.
Read more, and please, read CAREFULLY before you judge anything. It's one thing to sound smart. It's quite another to BE smart.
I have heard from a few reliable sources that the person who made the post that I just deconstructed is a pretty good fanfic writer. I haven't read her fiction, but I'll have to say that now, I really don't want to. If she brings this narrow-mindedness into her craft, then I sure as hell don't want to touch any of that with a foot-long pole. It's probably as pretentious and as misguided as her fanfics are. The fact that I'm VERY SENSITIVE to authorial tone probably isn't going to help either.
Am I being unfair? I don't think so. You really, honestly can't separate one's fiction from the rest of what they are as a person, especially when it comes to matters of taste and intellect. You know what they say about empty cans and coins. Having such a close-minded approach stunts your growth as a writer.
Of course, that's just MY opinion of things.
EDIT:
khursten has posted her own take on the matter over here. Go read it?EDIT #2: Okay, so now that people are popping up and certain personal attacks ARE being made of which I do not have any control of, I'm disabling further comments. I'm doing this because there are people in my circle who are becoming uncomfortable with the sort of exchanges going on here, and I want to stimmy the damage, if only for their sake. I am not, however, going to lock this entry. I believe that vitriol aside, my position is clear and is well-informed from another viewpoint on the issue. As such, it deserves to be read.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
I agree with you on almost all your points but I think the chick's original statement was more than enough to prove her narrow-minded, simple nature.
& to actually insult KHR....I'd beat her up with if could but serious, who the hell speaks or types like that. -___-
I have such an issue with people that write/type like that & for some reason, that bothered me the most.
But power to you! ♥ ♥ ♥ Now, there is one author I will avoiding like the plague in the future.
From:
no subject
*runs back to studying*
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
Thanks for taking time out to read this. It was... pretty much automatic for me to bitch out on an issue this close to my heart. AND GOOD LUCK WITH STUDYING!
From:
no subject
(I fully admit that she's a friend of mine and I'm fond of her and she's always been a role model for me in how to act gracefully in fandom, and I am really upset to see her being spoken of in this manner. So I probably am not addressing the issue of women at all right now, or speaking in a very calm manner. Possibly a reply to this post in a slightly more academic manner when I am less upset.)
ETA: On second thought, she writes better KHR fanfic than 99% too *amends her statement to avoid being insulting to
From:
no subject
I am, however, obligated to point out that a degree does not necessarily make one a good critic. I am also pointing at myself here when I say this. See, as someone who has graduated with a degree in English Literature and is working towards a masteral degree in Literary and Cultural Studies, one of the most important things that I've been taught is the idea of context.
According to what I have been taught, there are certain frameworks that need to be applied with more caution than others. My reading of the situation is that your friend is applying a framework that is not exactly appropriate to the text at hand, and therefore, unfair to the text that she is analyzing.
That is what I am mainly reacting to. As to the rest, that is my personal take on the matter. If it offends you, I apologize, but I do not intend to retract it.
As to your point on fanfic writers in the fandom... well, it's hard to generalize and point fingers there. New talent always crops up. ^_^
From:
no subject
fffff haha, if only just to take a look at it. I guess this is pretty much the reason I love reading but hate analysing- because in schools, so many times, it's always about how you see the text rather than just, well, liking it. Or disliking it. (Gerald Manley Hopkins, I'm looking at you.)
And this is also why I love reading Shakespeare, but that's a totally different point.
From:
no subject
That is so true though, about it being on how us readers see the text and stuff.
From:
no subject
Oh oh oh hey so- where's that post, though? It sounds like fun.
From:
no subject
And here you go (http://branchandroot.insanejournal.com/287878.html). XD
From:
no subject
oh dear god though
your rant- did not even come close to noting how utterly self justified this thing is. I'm pretty- blown away. I mean, I thought I knew self justified or just plain cocky, but this is like
so
...so unbelievably stuck up aaafajdsklfajdf SLFKJAFL it's such a blatantly 'ENTERTAIN ME NOW' kind of view alskdjf it just- I just think 'American' ahahahfdksadf ahaha oh WHOA I did not expect it to be that. Uh. Whoa.
From:
no subject
I love it how some self-righteous whites think that they know everything and that we Asian kids can't think for ourselves.
From:
no subject
Re: blog, Thing is, manga and anime are filled with stereotypical female characters. Why pick on that ONE series? There are loads of other series that offer a more balanced representation of women, so what if KHR isn't one of them? They're not even strongly insinuating what a woman's role SHOULD be - any careful critical reading should prove that.
Ok, I'll get her beef with the KHR women, but there's just shallow character development, and then there's *teh gasp* social implications! Assuming that she's from a fairly good school that gives her the high horse to do this critique, any responsible critic CAN MAKE the difference when they study the text carefully. I'm not seeing that applied to that blog entry. If anything she's just speaking very generally and from a very loose framework. What makes this irksome is that she tries to sound oh-so-smart about it when her argument can barely hold water in a debate, let alone an argumentative paper.
Pseudo-intellect, there for smarter people to pick on, hoo-hah!
From:
no subject
OH GOD YES. THANK YOU FOR SAYING THIS FOR ME.
Srsly, it PISSES ME OFF when people do that. *stares at a certain bespectacled wraith making the rounds on the intarwebz* PLEASE. YOUR BRAINS. BUT THEM TO BETTER USE THAN THIS.
...And you know what's worse? Coming from someone who has read the entirety of KHR at present, there are some pretty strong-willed female characters in the series. I dunno what the heck she's trying to prove here.
From:
no subject
I cannot imagine how this has somehow escaped that girl's attention, but KHR is shounen and you really shouldn't go into feminist critiques of a shounen manga if all you're going to do is attempt to advance your narrow-minded agenda while excluding everything else. It's not only self-defeatist, not only does it make you look appallingly stupid, but you end up misleading all sorts of people who, though they may wish for stronger girl characters in KHR, have nothing to do with your agenda and don't deserve to be somehow dragged along with it just because they are gullible and *cough* easily dazzled (brainwashed?) by your words.
Also, what the hell, "this is why I wish there weren't women in that series at all" -- very logical jump there! You hate the portrayal so-- you'd rather there be no portrayal at all? Doesn't make sense.
But I guess what I really, really hate is the underlying assumption that strength = fighting strength, as if there were such a thing as a single standard against which a character can be measured. No. I liked how Haru and Kyoko appeared in the Varia arc of the anime because even though the girls weren't part of the action at all there were (very cute) scenes showing them waiting and hoping and supporting, and... in particular, there was this hospital scene that wrenched at my heart, because they were there watching over... Lambo, I think, and does whatshername even have any idea how much strength it takes to stand vigil by a hospital bed? I know people who would rather get beaten up by a gang of inebriated boys than watch a loved one on the verge of death and be totally unable to do anything to help. (I'd be one of them if I weren't so fragile; as it is, the former would probably kill me.)
So uh-- where was I: cooking and cleaning and waiting for people to come home? Is not necessarily weak. What the hell. One of these days I am going to explode all over people who think that the housewife is automatically the weakest and most boring character in any series/novel/whatever.
And her statement that KHR explicitly positions women as inferior is just insane. While it is true that I would not have done certain things Amano did -- things I feel weakened the... characterization? of some characters there -- Amano doesn't degrade women. Sure, it might be frustrating not to see some things I wish would happen, but one does not traverse the logical divide between frustration and outright condemnation with a statement like "No, the women have to be there, they have to be present, so it can be palpably demonstrated that they are not as good as the men."
I'd froth at the mouth and bite her, too, but I am far too proper and demure (read: weak, at least according to her) to do that.
In the meantime, I'm going to go back to baking cookies.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
And personally, her feminist critique in itself is totally flawed. I pity the high school or university that she crawled out of, if she can go around, ruining an otherwise sound academic framework with her shallow-as-a-fucking-plate readings of things.
From:
no subject
IKNORITE
I don't like people who know just enough to fool other people into thinking they're smart, but don't... really... have anything to back it up. They know just that much, and that's all. PICK ONE EXTREME OR THE OTHER, DAMMIT, GRAYS ARE CONFUSING.
/spoiledchild
Reminds me of Yeats: "The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity."
*goes off to eat more pasta*
From:
no subject
These people. They think that they're thinking but, really, they're not. At all.
From:
no subject
Nn, well--
No, wait, I will shut up and reserve everything else for RL meetups. XD
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
She so reminded me of that thing that asked you about prose poetry. *shudders again*
ugh.I hate it when she cites just one example for each female character from the text and then generalizes. UGH! GIVE ME MORE TEXTUAL EVIDENCE! FROM ALL THE EXTANT VOLUMES!!!
and even with the textual evidence, I don't think one can automatically assume what she has. And how can she completely disregard the genre? stupid!
I want to take the thickest book we have in the house to her head. incidentally, that book is the Norton anthology of criticism and theory. lol.
p.s. I lose respect for people who spit in public...even if it is online.
From:
no subject
Hasty generalizations are every bit as much the enemy as stupidity is, but I guess they usually go hand-in-hand, so.
Textual evidence has got to be the most abused form of analysis in our field of study, huh? orz
From:
no subject
Harold Bloom will probably kill me for this but I do think we should also look into context. I mean, having the text is good (and studying just that is sooo used) but the text is also informed by context.
lol. Though I still aver that you can't say something about a book etc. that is not supported by the text. ^_^
From:
no subject
EXACTLY. And one of the biggest issues I have with the way criticism is done is how they completely ignore the context and apply whatever framework they feel suits them. It has always been a sticky issue with regard to applying Western models of thought to Asian works.
From:
no subject
I RESENT THAT PERVY FANGIRLS ARE GIVEN THE QUALIFIER OF BEING "DIRTY FANGIRLS" WHEN EQUALLY PERVY FANBOYS JUST GET "BOYS". OMG SO UNFEMINISTY!!!!!!!!1 (Well okay, I did find that surprising, but I get where you're going with it. Wider market, audience expectation, yadda ya.)
A very thoughtful write up! And a reiterating of certain viewing frameworks that I expect many western audiences of manga/animu tend to forget when analyzing a text. Not that it's wrong to examine it from one's own experiences as a westerner at all (really, for those who've never lived in Japan or east Asia in general, what else can you do?) but it's important to ultimately be mindful of the cultural context at work behind what's being read/observed, and to acknowledge that the conclusions you draw from it are only based within a framework that is culturally foreign to the text itself.
For instance, it's a completely valid viewpoint for me, as an American (Japanese but totally born and raised here liek whoa), to say that based on my observations and my personal taste in these matters, I don't like the way that female characters are often portrayed in shounen manga. It would be equally as valid to say that they might not mesh with the ideas on which contemporary western feminism is based (pretending for a moment that there's only one definition of that). BUT to try and interpret those characters in a manner which directly casts aspersions on the Japanese creator's intentions and say, "HE'S NOT BEING A GOOD FEMINIST," is.. yeah, not so much.
From:
no subject
For instance, it's a completely valid viewpoint for me, as an American (Japanese but totally born and raised here liek whoa), to say that based on my observations and my personal taste in these matters, I don't like the way that female characters are often portrayed in shounen manga. It would be equally as valid to say that they might not mesh with the ideas on which contemporary western feminism is based (pretending for a moment that there's only one definition of that). BUT to try and interpret those characters in a manner which directly casts aspersions on the Japanese creator's intentions and say, "HE'S NOT BEING A GOOD FEMINIST," is.. yeah, not so much.
And your sentiments on the issue are totally and completely valid -- I'd be a hypocrite if I said I was perfectly fine with the portrayal myself, but as I said, it's contextual. And srsly: people need to stop this cult of authorial intent. It's not doing anybody good. =_=
Thanks so much for reading this, and for giving your input. It assures me that I am not just talking to my wall or something. orz
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
Okay, I'm saying this as someone who has been an anime/manga fan for ages, who loves shoujo more than she loves shounen and who doesn't have a degree in anything. (I admit to that. LOL. But I love BL more. XD) Anyway, the thing is, why do you rant about women in KHR when they're not necessarily the story is about? Sure, they're there to spice up the plot but their roles are so little that we can do without them. She's criticizing a shounen manga that is targeted to young boys who want their girlfriends to follow them around because let's face it, 95% of the guys in this whole world would want a meek and sweet housewife compared to a badass dominatrix.
My dislike in her post was her disgust towards Amano-sensei for being a woman and creating such "weak" characters. I hate it when the mangaka themselves are being criticized because of what they do to their work. May I force the disclaimer on her that this is her original work and if she wants to kill all the women off this manga, she can do it. Criticizing Amano-sensei is like criticizing all women mangaka who have weak women in their mangas. -_- Does this mean they don't empower their own femininity? I don't think so.
Honestly, lucky for these women that they can cook. I can't cook even if my life ends. orz
From:
no subject
Vtriol aside (and I admit that there is a lot of it on my part), I really do agree with what you said. There is also that small issue behind the sort of brand of feminism found in Japanese literature as a whole. It's... a tricky issue, especially if you're coming from a Western viewpoint.
My friend's teacher in Japanese lit very well: if you don't understand the sort of cultural norms and values that the Japanese ascribe to the figure of the woman, then you really will feel embittered towards female characters in their works.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
This is something that I feel strongly about, though, and it's probably because of the fact that literary criticism, especially in the area of manga and anime, is what I've been learning how to do for the past six years or so. Hence, my reaction. :0
From:
no subject
^__^ You made some very valid points too, and I liked it.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
it seems the poster was expecting more of the mangaka for being female? that just brings to mind this "fandom entitlement" thing that i keep hearing about. so just because a mangaka is female, and there are too few female mangaka in the shounen genre, she has to stand as a shining beacon of hope of some sort? i can probably take this attitude in evaluating serious fiction, but uhh. in evaluating manga and anime, where context is most definitely a Big Thing, it just makes me raise my eyebrows.
also... i wasn't in tenipuri because it was a work of genius, what. i'm not in khr either because i think it's HOMG THE BEST MANGA EVER. and i know some harry potter fans think HP is crap, but the fact is, it generated awesome fanwork. we're all in it for the jollies, yeah? and when i read stuff like this, it feels a bit like the writer is just looking for an excuse to look down on a title, and to look down on its fans as well.
From:
no subject
...and when i read stuff like this, it feels a bit like the writer is just looking for an excuse to look down on a title, and to look down on its fans as well.
Now that you've pointed that out... yeah, it COULD come off that way. And if that's what she is out to do, then wao. Just. Wao.
From:
no subject
My sensei, when she talks about her parents versus her marriage, always brings up that her mother is subservient to her father and that her father never carried her mother over the doorstop.
One of the reasons I generally can't stand Shoujo is because of the Japanese FEMALE ideal for a woman. If she thinks that Shonen manga is degrading she should seriously take a good, long, hard look at Shoujo.
From:
no subject
Actually, that's really true, at least for a lot of the shoujo that's floating around. orz Some of them are actually really cool, but most of the lot is just... yeah. -_-
From:
no subject
Ethnocentricism, no matter how unintentional, can be pretty damn infuriating.
From:
no subject
Word.
Sure, I'll say it here: maybe this post as a whole looks like a bit too much of a reaction to something like a rant. I will also, however, stress the point that an unjust reading text is still an unjust reading of the text. Hasty generalizations are just as bad as ethnocentricism for me.
From:
no subject
..um, I'm trying to phrase this as politely as I can
so I cut most of my comment. I don't want to offend ^^;From:
no subject
I do acknowledge the fact that it might have been just a rant, but I believe that what I'm reacting to is the way it's being read. As I said in my post, there's the context to take into consideration. I still think it's a little bit much to say that KHR as a whole is degrading to women and such.