theGodde said:
this is many classical writers' biggest gripe with modern writing and honestly speaking I can see exactly what they mean.
but at the same time, Cinema is a such a big deal because it's simply a more engaging form of media. Whether you prefer books or not, you can't ignore the fact that we as humans prefer information that is delivered by multiple forms. Media utilising sound, images, and words is far more effective at communicating information than simply words, sounds, or images alone. This is why your average viewer prefers movies. It's simply more in line with how our brains are designed to absorb information, and so therefore it will remain as the unavoidable reality of media consumption. We can never go back to pre-television (without a world war or two lmao)
Nobody wants to go back to pre-television. The question is - what is it that writing can deliver that visuals cannot and how much demand there is for it.
I personally think writing can deliver a lot of what a realtime visual medium is unable to. However, doing so will require writers to shift their focus from trying to paint a picture with words towards something else.
Admittedly, at this point, i can't explain very well what that something is. I believe it exists somewhere in the gap between a visual novel and its manga/anime adaptation, but at this point i can't clarify further.
I personally don't think so. Especially now that a lot of indie films can get support through Netflix and so forth, it's going to be a lot harder for modern hollywood to keep shovelling out the same crap it usually does. The cinema experience mentality is starting to change. People will only go to cinemas now if it's a movie that absolutely must be seen in that format. Under these changes, I don't think hollywood can keep going as it is. It's already been self-destructing lately, and many other foreign film industries are starting to expand out and pose a serious threat to Hollywood's supremacy. However this is a change that will take a while to manifest. But even if execs change their minds now, it won't actually materialise until 2/3 years down the line.
as for the Anime industry, I'd agree that it's not feeling the deadweight at all. Anime is slowly expanding and becoming more accepted throughout the rest of the world. It's still growing even now. So until it sees the consequences of its current system nothing will change.
I agree that the movie industry can change significantly in 2-3 years, due to economical and technological pressures. It already did so multiple times in my own lifetime.
I do not see how that will significantly affect the writing paradigms, though :( (and i only remember a major change in these paradigms once, following the end of the Cold War). That is, i do not see how any technological or market change in the movie industry can affect the selection pressures it exerts upon the writers. A sit-at-home viewer will still respond best to what most market executives (but also, and probably more importantly, writers themselves) only seem to understand as "stereotypical wish-fulfillment" and "catering to a niche".
We need only to look at japanese industry itself as an example. When it comes to indie writing, it is more or less unrivaled int the world. And yet the commercialization of writing there is strong and is only getting stronger.
both are still characterisation.
you can have lots of good characterisation, but if it's inconsistent when combined together then it's ultimately self-defeating. This is the problem with Mahouka. It's mostly an AI-like assortment of things that hormonal teenagers tend to respond positively to. As such it honestly feels like there is no "characterisation" in the overall picture.
I am a bit lost as to what exactly is being debated in this segment.
You agreed that what i call "moments of characterization" are relevant to characterization in general, but cannot stand on their own without a larger context. You seem to agree that these moments exist in ep.2 of this Mahouka series. You also agree that they ultimately fall flat because there is no larger context in which these moments of characterization can make sense.
If i'm not missing anything, then we are in agreement here.
and the worst part is - would fixing Mahouka's problems make it more or less popular? I'm not quite sure. It's flaws have given it a critical armour of sorts. It's already considered shit so there's no point criticising it. Everyone who watches Mahouka has no illusions that it's as a "guilty pleasure". If it was markedly improved then it would then be seen as actually trying and therefore vulnerable to criticism. (kind of pisses me off because it took an awesome magical science concept and used it for a dumb power fantasy series.)
Of course it would. There is great value in having a work of art transcend from niche appeal to general appeal, and fixing problems is exactly the way to do it. The example that comes to mind most readily is not from anime, but rather from gaming: the Souls series had niche appeal in Demon Souls, but corrected its problems in Dark Souls, and the series has been a genre-defining phenomenon ever since.
The only question here is the process through which you identify the flaws and the proper ways to correct them. The critics are usually correct about the flaws, but they are usually wrong about ways to correct them (in case of Demon Souls, most critics wanted reduced difficulty, which seems hilarious in hindsight). The fans, on another hand, are usually unable to point out the flaws of the work, but if challenged on a way to improve a specific aspect can often provide good ideas on how to do so.
depends how you define story and narrative. Specifically speaking, a story is a series of events, and a narrative is a series of events with a particular viewpoint.
e.g. a story is "5 people died in shooting" and a narrative is "5 people died in a shooting. This is bad". But in terms of what we're talking about they essentially mean the same thing. You've got the main plot, and you've got sub-plots. Sure you could call each subplot a story if you separate it, but by definition the overall plot is the story, and the same with the narrative. It's just the Narrative is used way less, so when it is used, everyone tends to understand exactly what it means, whereas we use story incorrectly all the time. There is no real correct way to use "story" at this point, as long as we are all on the same page as to which story we are referring to lmao.
I mostly define "a sequence of events" as "plot", "a sequence of events from a PoV" as "story" and "the full set of stories" as "narrative".
The notion that narrative depends on PoV is interesting, but it seems to me like it adopts more of a political definition of "narrative", which would still be a "story" in my personal vernacular.
Well, at this point this particular topic seems to have devolved into struggling with semantics. We might be able to get back to it a little bit later, provided the current Mahouka series succeeds in fleshing out the whole "Miyuki is a monster" story and properly center its narrative around it. The chances are slim, but they are not completely nil just yet :D
on another note, finished Unordinary. Overall the cracks definitely began to show. It's a very heartfelt story but it certainly isn't perfect. The author seems pretty young and inexperienced, and so to me it really just feels encouraging to see someone get out there and tell the story they wanted to tell, regardless of how many different ways it could have been improved (certainly doing better than my story lmao). It was different and somewhat new, and I hope the author continues to grow and improve in both her art and writing talent. Overall I do not think it should ever be adapted to an anime.
I would love to see an adaptation of Unordinary handled by the same crew that did Mob Psycho :D
That's unlikely to ever happen, but one can dream.
And yeah, Uru-chan is doing great work and will likely get a lot better in the future. |