![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
OH NO, THEY DIDN'T--
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.
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.
no subject
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.
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*
no subject
These people. They think that they're thinking but, really, they're not. At all.
no subject
Nn, well--
No, wait, I will shut up and reserve everything else for RL meetups. XD
no subject