Korra Vs Aang as characters

[BlackInk]

What should one call Bulgarian Midget Animations? Those are the best ones anyways.

I feel like it is by now down right difficult for anyone remotely active on this forum not to understand the differences between anime and cartoons. Diggin' the debate guys.

[Archsage]

Wow. I originally thought the difference between Anime and cartoons was the style. Which is why I called Avatar an Anime a while back. But apparently that was wrong. But now that this issue came up, I think the real way to deal with it is to ask the big question:

What is an 'Anime'?

EDIT:

You're also talking down to us which I do not appreciate. It's patronizing and rude and you shouldn't be proud of yourself for doing it.

This actually sounds a bit hypocritical, coming from you of all the posters here. But I do agree with your point here 100%.

[Ataru]

What is an 'Anime'?

Defined by origin: Defining "anime" as animation produced in Japan allows for a fairly black and white application of the label. The only gray area occurs with co-productions that may have had a portion of their animation, and/or scripting produced outside of Japan.

Defined by style: Defining "anime" as a style of animation that originated in Japan is much more complicated, however this definition would allow animation produced outside of Japan, but conforming to the defined "style" to be called "anime." It is difficult to determine if this "style" should be determined solely on drawing style (ie: Big eyes, small mouth, pointy hair), if it should include editing techniques (Japanese animation typically makes more use of "cuts" and "camera angles" than most non Japanese animation), and whether the narrative or storytelling style should be included in the definition. Perhaps the biggest pitfall of this definition is that, due to the wide variety of Japanese animation, regardless of any style based definition, there will always be Japanese animation that would not fit the definition, creating a scenario where some Japanese animation would not be anime.

According to Anime News Network editor-in-chief, Christopher Macdonald, "On Anime News Network, we define anime based on the origin of the animation. If it is primarily produced in Japan, it is anime. It should be clear, that by adhering to a definition that defines non-Japanese animation that mimic common anime styles as 'not anime,' Anime News Network does not endorse the notion that these 'pseudo-anime' are in any way inferior to animation produced in Japan. "

Also, if you can't see a difference between how Curves argues and how QiBreezy wrote his/her post then there is something really wrong with you.

[curvedlines]

Wow. I originally thought the difference between Anime and cartoons was the style. Which is why I called Avatar an Anime a while back. But apparently that was wrong. But now that this issue came up, I think the real way to deal with it is to ask the big question:

What is an 'Anime'?

EDIT:

You're also talking down to us which I do not appreciate. It's patronizing and rude and you shouldn't be proud of yourself for doing it.

This actually sounds a bit hypocritical, coming from you of all the posters here. But I do agree with your point here 100%.

Okay, to start off. An anime is a show that is ,typically, created by Japanese people and marketed to Japanese people. We've said this. I guess we'll continue to say it. I feel like the well informed few hold our definition of anime and the uninformed masses hold yours. As I'm sure you're aware majority beliefs are not true because of the sheer number of people who believe them. There is a general consensus among the anime well informed that is inline with what Ataru and Mac and I have told you multiple times in multiple different ways. If you guys think we are close minded I think you should thoroughly investigate your own intricacies and mental states. I feel like the arguments we make are very sound, which if backed up by your lack of direct response to the points we make, but you refuse to reconsider your stances. I appreciate that you claim to have a new understanding of the use of the word anime but I do not believe that you are being honest in saying so.

And you're right, I can be patronizing and rude, but that does not mean I should not speak up when I object to unfair treatment. In fact it mostly upset me because he was being rude to a friend of mine, Sejame. I typically wouldn't say anything about it if it had been me alone. As they say two wrongs don't make a right and if you're stooping to my level, so to say, you should not feel good about that, you should be ashamed. If you consider yourselves to be the bigger men act like it. You should stand up for your friends and make sure everyone is treating you and your friends fairly. I will say that nothing in the rest of that post that you quoted was rude, or patronizing to QiBreezy.

[Archsage]

An anime is a show that is ,typically, created by Japanese people and marketed to Japanese people.

Okay. So the most accurate term would be a "Japanese Animation" (not just a show, because not all shows are drawn, you know)? An 'anime' is an animation made in Japan. If that's the definition used here, then I can fully accept that.

Now my question is, why have the ethnocentrism? What's the point of that?

EDIT: And I don't think I've ever talked down to anyone here, so no need to feel like you have to defend yourself from me. You only have to defend your ideas. I don't judge or attack people, I love them. But I do judge and attack the things that people say/believe, which I don't necessarily love.

EDIT2:

Also, if you can't see a difference between how Curves argues and how QiBreezy wrote his/her post then there is something really wrong with you.

I didn't say that Curve and Qi's arguments were exactly the same. So I don't know what you're trying to say here. What I did note is that Curve has, at times, spoken down to other people in these forums, and very rudely so as well. I mean, I don't really need to go back into the World Affairs section and pull up some old posts by him do I? Of course, even though I find that hypocritical, Curve's point is still 100% valid in my eyes. So there's no need to cause another argument here.

[Ataru]

Okay. So the most accurate term would be a "Japanese Animation" (not just a show, because not all shows are drawn, you know)? An 'anime' is an animation made in Japan. If that's the definition used here, then I can fully accept that.

Now my question is, why have the ethnocentrism? What's the point of that?

Because the term doesn't work without it. Without the clear black-and-white definition of 'animation from Japan is anime, animation not from Japan is not (unless you're Japanese yourself)' the term loses all meaning. That people have attempted to use it otherwise at all is only based on the incorrect assumption that anime is a style.

[Archsage]

Okay. So the most accurate term would be a "Japanese Animation" (not just a show, because not all shows are drawn, you know)? An 'anime' is an animation made in Japan. If that's the definition used here, then I can fully accept that.

Now my question is, why have the ethnocentrism? What's the point of that?

Because the term doesn't work without it. Without the clear black-and-white definition of 'animation from Japan is anime, animation not from Japan is not (unless you're Japanese yourself)' the term loses all meaning. That people have attempted to use it otherwise at all is only based on the incorrect assumption that anime is a style.

To be honest, I'm a bit confused. The reason why there is ethnocentrism is because there is ethnocentrism? I mean, I'm asking what's the point in having a term for the sake of ethnocentric means, and your not really explaining yourself well. And then you say the term can be used to speak of animation not from Japan, but only if you're Japanese. So what's going on here? What's so special about the Japanese?

A pizza is an Italian word, from Italy.. But when we make pizzas in the US there's no fault in saying that it's a "pizza". Or when there are militaristic takeovers of government we call it a coup d'etat. Is it erroneous to say that if we're not French? Of course not. So it's very, very peculiar as to why the term "Anime" cannot be used. It's a strange form of ethnocentrism that I honestly cannot understand. What is so special about the Japanese?

What people don't understand is that ethnocentric style of thinking (which is pretty racist, if anything, but we'll leave that out of the discussion for now) which is why they think there must be something more to the term, like it must apply to style or something. Because what is up with that? So unless someone can rationalize the ethnocentric style of thinking, that term "anime" is just plain wasteful.

Now that I know that the term is just an irrational word that extends the needless ethnocentrism of the Japanese culture, and the non-Japanese "fans" of that culture, I know that I no longer respect its meaning. But if you want to correct people, Ataru, you should also give us an explanation of the reason why this ethnocentrism even exists.

[Ataru]

A pizza is used to refer to a pizza. You would not use the word pizza to refer to something that is not, in some way shape or form, a pizza. Likewise a coup is a coup, normally we wouldn't need to argue those definitions. All I'm trying to do here is define what an anime is so that when we use the word we use it to describe something that is actually an anime. Ethnicity has very little to do with it except that the term happens to apply only to animations made in a certain country. If the definition of anime was 'animations that involve a duck' then I'd be defending that definition just as adamantly. It's not -about- where it was made, that's just how it should be defined. Where the thing was made is inconsequential to this discussion as what we're talking about here is the proper use of the word.

Now if the fact that the proper definition of anime happens to deal exclusively with where it was made offends you then please feel free to not use it as a term anymore. That's the whole -point- of using the word anime, to define that something is an animation made in Japan. We needed a term due to the proliferation of these kinds of shows and their popularity. And because 'Japanimation' is slightly offensive. If that rubs you the wrong way, and you're free to feel that way, that's absolutely fine. Even if you don't respect the definition itself at least respect the fact that it is the -correct- definition.

[Archsage]

Hold on. I don't think I'm getting your point at all. If, for a Japanese person, an 'Anime' really is just a Easternized version of the word "Animation" and they use it as such to refer to all Animation, even non-Japanese ones, then it's certainly not the Japanese who would say "Korra is not an Anime".

So who in the world is saying that Korra is not an Anime? Or rather, why are you telling me that Korra is not an Anime? Because the definition you are giving me is not a definition of the term, but a description of how the term has been used. As far as I'm concerned, if Japanese have made that term, and have used to to refer to "Animation". So again, since when is ANY term's use contingent upon what race uses the term? What's the point of having a term that endorses this sort of racism?

Which is to say, if the term means "A Japanese Animation", then a Japanese person who calls a cartoon an "anime" would be wrong.

[Ataru]

So the same words can't be used differently in different languages? That's an interesting way to look at things. In Japanese it's essentially a short form of the whole form 'anime-shion' which is their way of rendering the word animation. So when a Japanese person says 'anime' in Japanese they're just giving the short form of animation, whereas when someone who isn't Japanese uses it they use it based on the Japanese usage to refer to Japanese animations.

Now that you mention it that doesn't make much sense does it? I guess essentially it has split into two terms. The 'anime' that is the slang in Japanese and the 'anime' that is used by the rest of the world that originated with the original Japanese slang. So when I say 'only a Japanese person can use the term 'anime' in this way' I mean because that is the way it is used in Japanese. So if you are speaking Japanese you would use 'anime' to refer to any animation. Not just a Japanese person, -anyone- speaking Japanese. So when I'm speaking Japanese to a Japanese friend I don't differentiate between western animations and eastern ones (except to say 'America no anime' or 'nihon anime' if I'm trying to be specific), but when I'm speaking English and use the word 'anime' I'm using it for the meaning I've been listing in my arguments.

So allow me to fix this: it's not -just- Japanese people who can call Korra an anime. However to use it in that sense you should probably be speaking Japanese since the current English meaning isn't the same as the current Japanese meaning.

It's the same as all those terms that are different in American English and British English. Same word, completely different meaning depending on the audience. Neither use is wrong, but it's also not racist or whatever to say that you should refrain from using the British meaning for something in America or vice versa. That's there to prevent confusion, not to breed xenophobic ethnocentricity.