This started as a heated argument in a thread over in H/A, where it really had no place, so I thought I'd pose it here as a more general question. The initial debate was whether anime is a genre or a medium so I'm curious what people have to say about that, but to step it back a bit; how about just what makes a genre?
According to dictionary.com medium is define as "the material or technique with which an artist works: the medium of watercolor."
genre is defined as "a class or category of artistic endeavor having a particular form, content, technique, or the like: the genre of epic poetry; the genre of symphonic music."
Therefore, in relevance to that thread, animation is the medium and anime is the genre.
Genre usually entails the word "conventions" whereas a medium is better defined as the means of exhibiting information.
Genres also have specific syntax. Take Westerns, for instance. You can generally tell within 10 seconds if you're watching a western. Cowboys, horses, railroad, sheriff, pistols, etc.
A medium tends to refer to structural things. Film, television, radio, animation, videogames, books.
The distinction of anime as a medium or genre might be similar to the distinction between comics, graphic novels, and manga. They sort of blur the lines because each has its own conventions. However, within those you can have sci-fi comics, sci-fi manga, and sci-fi graphic novels. And while reading one, you can definitely tell through specific conventions whether or not you're reading a comic, graphic novel, or manga. Does that make them mediums or genres?
Japanese animation has a particular dominant visual style. That's one aspect of anime.
Animation is a medium.
Japanese animation has genres, just like any other medium. Some of these are more prevalent than others, to the extent that the genre is perceived as the medium. These genres have particularly stylistic conventions.
I'd like to bring a third word into the equation: style.
Animation is the medium. Anime is the style of the medium. Then we have the genre, be it romantic comedy or sci-fi action.
This hoopy Echo is one frood who really knows where his towel is.
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Anime styles can differ hugely, though. They're not all about big eyes or pointy noses or thin bodies or whatever people associate with anime.
Not to mention that Japanese animation originally drew heavily on American animation, and the favour has since been returned.
I don't know. I just disagree when, say, Avatar the Last Airbender is described as an anime, because it's not Japanese. Plus it only resembles some anime, certainly not all. Or do people call anime that resembles a particular American animation a cartoon? I don't see that happening.
It's frustrating because there are good and bad cartoons and good and bad anime but for so many people it's as if you have to only like one or the other. Or if you like anime you are automatically a nerd whereas liking an Adult Swim cartoon is cool. Argh.
I don't know. I just disagree when, say, Avatar the Last Airbender is described as an anime, because it's not Japanese. Plus it only resembles some anime, certainly not all. Or do people call anime that resembles a particular American animation a cartoon? I don't see that happening.
Usually when I see someone describe Avatar as anime I immediately see 5-10 people respond that it's not anime.
And I would tend to agree with those describing anime as the medium (or style/subclassification of the medium). Sure they can differ, just as two watercolors done in the same style by two different artists can look very different. But they're still both watercolors.
Okay, then take off the first part of my second paragraph, and just stick with anime as being the style of the medium. I think it's a bit of a gray area, but I certainly lean towards that anyway. So as someone stated before, you have animation as the medium, and anime as a style of animation. Within anime you can certainly have very different final products that can still be classified as anime.
So what would you say, out of curiosity, defines anime as a 'style'? I mean, if you were shown a cartoon and you weren't told the country of origin, what would you use to determine whether or not it was anime?
So what would you say, out of curiosity, defines anime as a 'style'? I mean, if you were shown a cartoon and you weren't told the country of origin, what would you use to determine whether or not it was anime?
The art style and pacing of an anime is very distinct.
There are certain animation shortcuts that are very common in anime because generally anime has a much, much lower budget than American productions. But even then it's not universal.
Okay, give us some names of anime that you think would not be immediately identifiable as anime. I suspect that in truth they'll share common elements with "classical" anime.
I'm not saying all anime is identical or uses exactly the same techniques and visual characteristics, but all the anime I've seen has been identifiable as anime within the first couple minutes.
How do you define anime? To you is it strictly a term to identify the region it originated in?
A good comparison would be Film Noir. It was to start a distinctly American style(drawing on various European styles the proceeded it). It got picked up worldwide and became pretty much a global style with a few regional differences. Is any
So what would you say, out of curiosity, defines anime as a 'style'? I mean, if you were shown a cartoon and you weren't told the country of origin, what would you use to determine whether or not it was anime?
The art style and pacing of an anime is very distinct.
Except that that happens on an individual level. The art-style and pacing of Cowboy Bebop is very distinct from the art-style and pacing of Pokemon.
So what would you say, out of curiosity, defines anime as a 'style'? I mean, if you were shown a cartoon and you weren't told the country of origin, what would you use to determine whether or not it was anime?
The art style and pacing of an anime is very distinct.
I mean, shit, you can hear anime. Somebody will grunt in at least a few lines of dialogue. Some character will do that thing where they get frustrated at another character and yell monotonously and at length about something.
So what would you say, out of curiosity, defines anime as a 'style'? I mean, if you were shown a cartoon and you weren't told the country of origin, what would you use to determine whether or not it was anime?
The art style and pacing of an anime is very distinct.
I mean, shit, you can hear anime. Somebody will grunt in at least a few lines of dialogue. Some character will do that thing where they get frustrated at another character and yell monotonously and at length about something.
This also varies on an individual basis. And occurs in American cartoons.
So what would you say, out of curiosity, defines anime as a 'style'? I mean, if you were shown a cartoon and you weren't told the country of origin, what would you use to determine whether or not it was anime?
The art style and pacing of an anime is very distinct.
I mean, shit, you can hear anime. Somebody will grunt in at least a few lines of dialogue. Some character will do that thing where they get frustrated at another character and yell monotonously and at length about something.
This also varies on an individual basis. And occurs in American cartoons.
But does the grunting sound out of place to Western ears when it's used in American cartoons? Unless it's a cartoon that already borrows heavily from anime conventions, I think it'd pass by without notice.
I'm just trying to say that there are some pretty regular conventions. I agree with what Echo said, that it's just a style in a medium with many genres, but it is definitely distinct from other kinds of cartoons due to a variety of differences. It's just a different way to make a cartoon, that's all.
I don't see much point in creating a name for a group of cartoons based simply on the country that it comes from.
You're right; I'm just going to say cartoon from now on. Plus these days the animation is often out-sourced to other countries. Wait, scratch that, animation has been out-sourced to other countries for decades. Ah, 80s cartoons - Dogtanian, The Littl' Bits and Around the World with Willy Fog were all animated in Japan.
So what would you say, out of curiosity, defines anime as a 'style'? I mean, if you were shown a cartoon and you weren't told the country of origin, what would you use to determine whether or not it was anime?
The art style and pacing of an anime is very distinct.
Except that that happens on an individual level. The art-style and pacing of Cowboy Bebop is very distinct from the art-style and pacing of Pokemon.
Yet at the same time, the both share a lot in common.
Tell me you see nothing in common between the two art styles. Go ahead tell me. So I can call you a big, fat liar.
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Also, I need to remember to turn on safesearch before I start GISing "pokemon".
*shudder*
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
To be fair the bolded bit's really a problem faced by most animated media. It's just that the people who dismiss one group of cartoons because they're from Asia are being extra ridiculous.
And there are plenty of people who have whined about anime and how stupid it is and then have loved the Disney releases of Miyazaki movies.
As somebody that this describes, let me tell you why that is. Most anime, the vast, overwhelming majority of it, has absolutely no subtelty. There are a handful of exceptions, but for the most part, characters say or otherwise display exactly what they're feeling, when they're feeling it, why they're feeling it, and how long they're going to be feeling it. There is just no subtelty to it, and that drives me away. Miyazaki's films and a handful of series and other movies break this convention, and, in the case of Miyazaki, do it while taking your breath away. It doesn't hurt that you can look at one of his movies and immediately know it's him behind the scenes.
I guess I just like reading into emotion, determining motivation, etc. Anime doesn't generally offer that.
I've disliked maybe 60-70% of the anime I've seen. Doesn't mean I dismiss the other 30-40%; I'll just treat each series on an individual basis. Japan produces dozens of series a year, of which only a small fraction will see a North American release. Maybe it's the distributors who are latching onto a particular subset of anime based upon previous series' success.
I can't say that many of the series I have enjoyed have the qualities you are describing.
Sure they have their differences, but they also have a lot of shared visual style. I'm not saying they're all the same show or they're all crap. I think you have two different issues here. One is the common style elements of anime. The other is that people who are unfamiliar with it lump all anime together and say it's all the same crap.
The second issue is just people being ignorant. But I really don't see how the first issue can be denied. They're similar. And moreso than just saying two random cartoons are similar.
I've disliked maybe 60-70% of the anime I've seen. Doesn't mean I dismiss the other 30-40%; I'll just treat each series on an individual basis. Japan produces dozens of series a year, of which only a small fraction will see a North American release. Maybe it's the distributors who are latching onto a particular subset of anime based upon previous series' success.
I can't say that many of the series I have enjoyed have the qualities you are describing.
I don't know what you're watching. Seriously. And I don't dismiss all of anime. I wind up taking them each on an individual basis, but when I immediately see the same conventions that drive me away from anime consistently in almost everything I watch, I'm going to get jaded eventually.
And seriously, aside from a handful of series like Ghost in the Shell, Cowboy Beebop, and some others I can't really think of, everything I've ever seen labelled as anime had that characteristic. It's one of the defining characteristics of anime.
Actually Hippie, I'd say the issue is more that the type of anime that is often brought over to America is one specific sub-genre of anime, that being shonen. Shonen being aimed at 12-14ish japanese boys as it's primary market.
Living in a western country, and this being the type of anime that is mostly brought over, means that of course that's what you'd be exposed to most. But anime in Japan is produced for all ages and all interests, from baseball anime to DBZ to serious dramas like Tokyo Godfathers.
But, yes, it's generally easy to tell if something is an anime or is imitating the general anime style. They tend to employ certain color palettes, employ similar character archetypes, have certain character dynamics and relationships, similar humor etc. But that's all because they are all coming from the same country that has a pretty strong culture. Likewise, it's pretty darn easy to tell when a cartoon is from american creators.
Sure they have their differences, but they also have a lot of shared visual style. I'm not saying they're all the same show or they're all crap. I think you have two different issues here. One is the common style elements of anime. The other is that people who are unfamiliar with it lump all anime together and say it's all the same crap.
The second issue is just people being ignorant. But I really don't see how the first issue can be denied. They're similar. And moreso than just saying two random cartoons are similar.
Yes, those do have a shared visual style. But my reply was to Nexus_Crawler; I don't think half of the series listed there have the dramatic qualities that he listed.
Anyway; I can't say that I've watched an anime in over two years, now. I tend to watch whatever TV series comes recommended to me, be it animated or live-action, and I can't say I have any specific criteria for what I do/don't like.
Heck, I don't even like Cowboy Bebop or Ghost in the Shell. Terribly overrated.
I find that when most people talk about anime they have something very specific in mind and it's not the case for everything. 'They all have big eyes!' No. 'They all have disproportionate bodies!' Again, no. 'They all have cel-shading!', etc. etc.
Actually Hippie, I'd say the issue is more that the type of anime that is often brought over to America is one specific sub-genre of anime, that being shonen. Shonen being aimed at 12-14ish japanese boys as it's primary market.
Living in a western country, and this being the type of anime that is mostly brought over, means that of course that's what you'd be exposed to most. But anime in Japan is produced for all ages and all interests, from baseball anime to DBZ to serious dramas like Tokyo Godfathers.
But, yes, it's generally easy to tell if something is an anime or is imitating the general anime style. They tend to employ certain color palettes, employ similar character archetypes, have certain character dynamics and relationships, similar humor etc. But that's all because they are all coming from the same country that has a pretty strong culture. Likewise, it's pretty darn easy to tell when a cartoon is from american creators.
Right, this is an excellent post. I am not disagreeing with any of this and if I appear to have done so then I've just been my usual unclear self.
Posts
genre is defined as "a class or category of artistic endeavor having a particular form, content, technique, or the like: the genre of epic poetry; the genre of symphonic music."
Therefore, in relevance to that thread, animation is the medium and anime is the genre.
Animation is the medium. Anime is the style of the medium. Then we have the genre, be it romantic comedy or sci-fi action.
Genres also have specific syntax. Take Westerns, for instance. You can generally tell within 10 seconds if you're watching a western. Cowboys, horses, railroad, sheriff, pistols, etc.
A medium tends to refer to structural things. Film, television, radio, animation, videogames, books.
The distinction of anime as a medium or genre might be similar to the distinction between comics, graphic novels, and manga. They sort of blur the lines because each has its own conventions. However, within those you can have sci-fi comics, sci-fi manga, and sci-fi graphic novels. And while reading one, you can definitely tell through specific conventions whether or not you're reading a comic, graphic novel, or manga. Does that make them mediums or genres?
e: Echo wins.
Japanese animation has a particular dominant visual style. That's one aspect of anime.
Animation is a medium.
Japanese animation has genres, just like any other medium. Some of these are more prevalent than others, to the extent that the genre is perceived as the medium. These genres have particularly stylistic conventions.
This hoopy Echo is one frood who really knows where his towel is.
I sure sass him.
this makes more sense. you win, good sir. you win.
:winky:
I loves me the furrners.
Not to mention that Japanese animation originally drew heavily on American animation, and the favour has since been returned.
I don't know. I just disagree when, say, Avatar the Last Airbender is described as an anime, because it's not Japanese. Plus it only resembles some anime, certainly not all. Or do people call anime that resembles a particular American animation a cartoon? I don't see that happening.
It's frustrating because there are good and bad cartoons and good and bad anime but for so many people it's as if you have to only like one or the other. Or if you like anime you are automatically a nerd whereas liking an Adult Swim cartoon is cool. Argh.
Usually when I see someone describe Avatar as anime I immediately see 5-10 people respond that it's not anime.
And I would tend to agree with those describing anime as the medium (or style/subclassification of the medium). Sure they can differ, just as two watercolors done in the same style by two different artists can look very different. But they're still both watercolors.
The art style and pacing of an anime is very distinct.
There are certain animation shortcuts that are very common in anime because generally anime has a much, much lower budget than American productions. But even then it's not universal.
I'm not saying all anime is identical or uses exactly the same techniques and visual characteristics, but all the anime I've seen has been identifiable as anime within the first couple minutes.
How do you define anime? To you is it strictly a term to identify the region it originated in?
Except that that happens on an individual level. The art-style and pacing of Cowboy Bebop is very distinct from the art-style and pacing of Pokemon.
Quebec Foxtrot Tango
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
I mean, shit, you can hear anime. Somebody will grunt in at least a few lines of dialogue. Some character will do that thing where they get frustrated at another character and yell monotonously and at length about something.
This also varies on an individual basis. And occurs in American cartoons.
But does the grunting sound out of place to Western ears when it's used in American cartoons? Unless it's a cartoon that already borrows heavily from anime conventions, I think it'd pass by without notice.
I'm just trying to say that there are some pretty regular conventions. I agree with what Echo said, that it's just a style in a medium with many genres, but it is definitely distinct from other kinds of cartoons due to a variety of differences. It's just a different way to make a cartoon, that's all.
You're right; I'm just going to say cartoon from now on. Plus these days the animation is often out-sourced to other countries. Wait, scratch that, animation has been out-sourced to other countries for decades. Ah, 80s cartoons - Dogtanian, The Littl' Bits and Around the World with Willy Fog were all animated in Japan.
I just think it's disingenuous to lump series as varied as Gankatsuou, Berserk, Monster, Witchhunter Robin, Pokémon, Host Club and FMA, for example, under one category and then just dismiss them all. And there are plenty of people who have whined about anime and how stupid it is and then have loved the Disney releases of Miyazaki movies.
Yet at the same time, the both share a lot in common.
Tell me you see nothing in common between the two art styles. Go ahead tell me. So I can call you a big, fat liar.
*shudder*
As somebody that this describes, let me tell you why that is. Most anime, the vast, overwhelming majority of it, has absolutely no subtelty. There are a handful of exceptions, but for the most part, characters say or otherwise display exactly what they're feeling, when they're feeling it, why they're feeling it, and how long they're going to be feeling it. There is just no subtelty to it, and that drives me away. Miyazaki's films and a handful of series and other movies break this convention, and, in the case of Miyazaki, do it while taking your breath away. It doesn't hurt that you can look at one of his movies and immediately know it's him behind the scenes.
I guess I just like reading into emotion, determining motivation, etc. Anime doesn't generally offer that.
I've disliked maybe 60-70% of the anime I've seen. Doesn't mean I dismiss the other 30-40%; I'll just treat each series on an individual basis. Japan produces dozens of series a year, of which only a small fraction will see a North American release. Maybe it's the distributors who are latching onto a particular subset of anime based upon previous series' success.
I can't say that many of the series I have enjoyed have the qualities you are describing.
Are you telling me you seriously don't see similarities in the visual style of these:
http://www.madman.com.au/wallpapers/gankutsuou_the_count_of_m_163_1024.jpg
http://www.haru.tv/cover/227.jpg
http://images.stage6.com/channel_images/ianimei/4659895fc2aa6.jpg
http://fansub.guckies.com/images/WitchHunterRobin1.jpg
http://www.pokemex.com/imagenes/DP_Poster_anime.jpg
http://pajcat.files.wordpress.com/2006/04/ourgroup.JPG
http://www.mines.edu/research/k12-partnership/tech06/Meagan/more%20FMA-lighting.JPG
Sure they have their differences, but they also have a lot of shared visual style. I'm not saying they're all the same show or they're all crap. I think you have two different issues here. One is the common style elements of anime. The other is that people who are unfamiliar with it lump all anime together and say it's all the same crap.
The second issue is just people being ignorant. But I really don't see how the first issue can be denied. They're similar. And moreso than just saying two random cartoons are similar.
I don't know what you're watching. Seriously. And I don't dismiss all of anime. I wind up taking them each on an individual basis, but when I immediately see the same conventions that drive me away from anime consistently in almost everything I watch, I'm going to get jaded eventually.
And seriously, aside from a handful of series like Ghost in the Shell, Cowboy Beebop, and some others I can't really think of, everything I've ever seen labelled as anime had that characteristic. It's one of the defining characteristics of anime.
Living in a western country, and this being the type of anime that is mostly brought over, means that of course that's what you'd be exposed to most. But anime in Japan is produced for all ages and all interests, from baseball anime to DBZ to serious dramas like Tokyo Godfathers.
But, yes, it's generally easy to tell if something is an anime or is imitating the general anime style. They tend to employ certain color palettes, employ similar character archetypes, have certain character dynamics and relationships, similar humor etc. But that's all because they are all coming from the same country that has a pretty strong culture. Likewise, it's pretty darn easy to tell when a cartoon is from american creators.
Yes, those do have a shared visual style. But my reply was to Nexus_Crawler; I don't think half of the series listed there have the dramatic qualities that he listed.
Anyway; I can't say that I've watched an anime in over two years, now. I tend to watch whatever TV series comes recommended to me, be it animated or live-action, and I can't say I have any specific criteria for what I do/don't like.
Heck, I don't even like Cowboy Bebop or Ghost in the Shell. Terribly overrated.
I find that when most people talk about anime they have something very specific in mind and it's not the case for everything. 'They all have big eyes!' No. 'They all have disproportionate bodies!' Again, no. 'They all have cel-shading!', etc. etc.
Right, this is an excellent post. I am not disagreeing with any of this and if I appear to have done so then I've just been my usual unclear self.