During this past Anime Los Angeles, one of the panels expressed that they were vehemently against series, like Inuyasha, that "kept going and going". This deprecation seemed very strange, since they were just recently discussing how manga and anime adaptations can differ, sometimes for the better.
If there are any series with such a difference in quality of the story experience, between the anime and manga, it has to be any series from Rumiko Takahashi. Even more so than Naruto, Takahashi series get slaughtered (by fillers) when translated into anime. Anyone who has read a Rumiko Takahashi manga knows that the manga series is a perfect balance of serious, plot-moving chapters and restful, fun chapters. ...Which is one of the prime prescriptions of scholastic books on storytelling for writers, but accompanied by the warning that a detour too long from the main plot will lose the audience's interest. In other words, a respite chapter is good, but "filler episodes" will kill a series. See Naruto and Bleach---No. Y'know what? See any anime based on Rumiko Takahashi's works! There is a pandemic of even "filler SCENES" in the anime adpatations of her manga! There are short and sweet stories of hers, which are padded so much with "filler scenes", that the original short story/chapter completely loses ALL its worth. (See the Ranma 1/2 episode 58 "Ryouga no Tendo doujou isourou nikki".) It also doesn't help that a lot of the anime directors do not adhere to the quick pacing of her comedy (evident in the panelling of her manga) or to some of the subtle yet extremely key points of her endearing characterization (see Kikyo). Unfortunately, it seems that most otaku have only seen Rumiko Takahashi _anime_ and not read the manga. If they had, then I'm sure that Takahashi series would receive the same distinction between the manga gold and the anime's endless filler episodes, the same as the series Naruto (with it's massive fanbase of manga-readers AND anime watchers).
When the ALA panel stated that manga and anime adaptations can differ, sometimes with one better than the other, it made the panelists seem very open-minded. Which was comforting to me, as a Rumiko Takahashi fan, who has to often put up with haters on Takahashi series (who only know the anime versions). I thought, "Finally! Here are people that understand that, although Takahashi anime can have a lot of faults, that the manga is not something to be dismissed because of it." But as soon as one of the ALA panelists mentioned the word "Inuyasha", they were all vehmently against it.
These are series in which there seemingly is no end---whether Takahashi ends the series with an implication that her characters will continue their same lives, or if she write/draws a series sporadically and doesn't get around to finishing it (for decades). But true Rumic fans are not impatient for series-ending change or conflict resolution to the story, because it is that continual, daily turmoil for the characters, which is enjoyable. The journey is much more important than the ending.
The heavily character-based and episodic nature of Takahashi series seem to emphasize that feeling. Unlike many series, where I skip to act 3 or the final episodes, for the best (intense/memorable/evokative) parts, I pick up any random volume of any Takahashi series and enjoy a full range of emotions, experiences, and intensity. This is possible because the characters are so enjoyable. They are admirably gutsy, ridiculously weak, relatably jaded, and make the time spent reading their stories, like time spent with good company. Whatever they are doing, it's enjoyable to watch. The story or episode is always entertaining, as long as they are there. That's why the stories can afford to be trifle _episodes_, yet still be successful.
With such an emphasis on transient experiences, it's no wonder that the experience of a Takahashi series itself, is what is meant to be enjoyed; not it's ending. Perhaps this is why Takahashi did not give many of her series conclusive endings. Even the one Takahashi series which was given a conclusive ending (Maision Ikkoku), still leaves doubt as to whether the main characters would ever leave Ikkoku-kan. Godai and Kyoko could very well continue their odd lives at Ikkoku, as in the series, but simply with the addition of married life. Beyond mere impliation, Takahashi series, like Ranma 1/2, were blatantly given an inconclusive series ending, clearly conveying that the antics which had occurred during the entire series, would continue on, into the future for those characters.
More than the longevity of a series which will always publish new issues, a series which gives a sense that its own world will continue on, despite the end of its publication, depends on its fans to keep that world alive in their heads. As Takahashi's afterword message in Ranma 1/2 said, "I would be so happy if the characters from Ranma 1/2 would stay in your hearts and remain your friends for life." Perhaps a series which ends, yet has no real ending, lives on, much more vividly than a series which is continually published for 60+ years. (Not that the opposite isn't effective for other people.) The ability of a series to live on in fans' hearts is most evident in the proliferation of non-cannon fandom, whose participants often have a more intense experience with the fandom, than with the actual series itself. A series which is open-ended enough to allow, individual, personal participation, has the power to generate experiences without limitation. And that is very powerful.
Perhaps it takes a certain type of person to become fond of a Rumiko Takahashi series. This pattern of endless continuation appeals to the Eastern sense of cyclical time, reincarnation, and appreciation of the present experience, rather than emphasis on the ending of things. Endless continuation can be comforting. Reincarnation has become a successful belief, because the regular continuation of death/rebirth liberates people from some fears of death. I recently viewed a lecture on Indian mythological backgrounds and business culture, explaining the open-ended nature of Eastern thought and how it contrasted with the Western emphasis on difinitive answers, black and white, binary code, and frustration with ambiguity. Some people take comfort and hope in a lack of finality to life.
Personally, when I switched from American comic books to manga, I was shocked when Magic Knight Rayearth was revealed to have a definitive ending. It felt abrupt and like a harsh close to my fandom. (I didn't yet understand how a series could live on through fanwork.) Whereas, X-men would always be there for me; whether I returned to the series in 10 years or 20. And just like there are superhero comic book fans who enjoy connecting with successive generations of fans, over the same series, during Takahashi's 30th anniversary exhibition, adults who read Takahashi in their youth, attended with their children who now read Takahashi's current series. There's something very endearing about the ability of things with longevity to connect people through time. And something very comforting about a series or fandom which will seem to always be there.
On the other hand, I did learn to enjoy manga and anime with difinitive endings. They have the power to express specific themes/experiences. Right now, Code Geass: Lelouch of the Rebellion is still one of my favorite anime. And as Crispin Freeman once said of anime wherein everyone dies at the end, what's important is what happens before that inevitable ending.
Oddly enough, this sense involves the appreciation of present time, which is the same as a series without end, like Ranma 1/2 or any other Takahashi series. Also, the fandom of anime/manga with difinitive endings, is to experience a theme which the series was trying to convey, then move on to a new series, and experience it, until it too reaches its own difinitive end. Yet, in this type of reader's habit, there too is a type of endlessness and cyclical stability. So what really differentiates an endless series from a difinitive series?
I guess when things aren't transient, some people get tired of them. For those types of people, the saying exists, "don't know what you got until it's gone". Can nothing be appreciated, without the fear of its limited existence? There are some people that say beauty is only valuable because it can fade. Personally for me, I think transience is irrelavent to enjoying something in the present time. Because like Cloud said, "There's nothing that isn't important."
But perhaps the most important thing is that both options exist, for people of each niche. It would be sad and boring if there was only one way of doing things.
If there are any series with such a difference in quality of the story experience, between the anime and manga, it has to be any series from Rumiko Takahashi. Even more so than Naruto, Takahashi series get slaughtered (by fillers) when translated into anime. Anyone who has read a Rumiko Takahashi manga knows that the manga series is a perfect balance of serious, plot-moving chapters and restful, fun chapters. ...Which is one of the prime prescriptions of scholastic books on storytelling for writers, but accompanied by the warning that a detour too long from the main plot will lose the audience's interest. In other words, a respite chapter is good, but "filler episodes" will kill a series. See Naruto and Bleach---No. Y'know what? See any anime based on Rumiko Takahashi's works! There is a pandemic of even "filler SCENES" in the anime adpatations of her manga! There are short and sweet stories of hers, which are padded so much with "filler scenes", that the original short story/chapter completely loses ALL its worth. (See the Ranma 1/2 episode 58 "Ryouga no Tendo doujou isourou nikki".) It also doesn't help that a lot of the anime directors do not adhere to the quick pacing of her comedy (evident in the panelling of her manga) or to some of the subtle yet extremely key points of her endearing characterization (see Kikyo). Unfortunately, it seems that most otaku have only seen Rumiko Takahashi _anime_ and not read the manga. If they had, then I'm sure that Takahashi series would receive the same distinction between the manga gold and the anime's endless filler episodes, the same as the series Naruto (with it's massive fanbase of manga-readers AND anime watchers).
When the ALA panel stated that manga and anime adaptations can differ, sometimes with one better than the other, it made the panelists seem very open-minded. Which was comforting to me, as a Rumiko Takahashi fan, who has to often put up with haters on Takahashi series (who only know the anime versions). I thought, "Finally! Here are people that understand that, although Takahashi anime can have a lot of faults, that the manga is not something to be dismissed because of it." But as soon as one of the ALA panelists mentioned the word "Inuyasha", they were all vehmently against it.
These are series in which there seemingly is no end---whether Takahashi ends the series with an implication that her characters will continue their same lives, or if she write/draws a series sporadically and doesn't get around to finishing it (for decades). But true Rumic fans are not impatient for series-ending change or conflict resolution to the story, because it is that continual, daily turmoil for the characters, which is enjoyable. The journey is much more important than the ending.
The heavily character-based and episodic nature of Takahashi series seem to emphasize that feeling. Unlike many series, where I skip to act 3 or the final episodes, for the best (intense/memorable/evokative) parts, I pick up any random volume of any Takahashi series and enjoy a full range of emotions, experiences, and intensity. This is possible because the characters are so enjoyable. They are admirably gutsy, ridiculously weak, relatably jaded, and make the time spent reading their stories, like time spent with good company. Whatever they are doing, it's enjoyable to watch. The story or episode is always entertaining, as long as they are there. That's why the stories can afford to be trifle _episodes_, yet still be successful.
With such an emphasis on transient experiences, it's no wonder that the experience of a Takahashi series itself, is what is meant to be enjoyed; not it's ending. Perhaps this is why Takahashi did not give many of her series conclusive endings. Even the one Takahashi series which was given a conclusive ending (Maision Ikkoku), still leaves doubt as to whether the main characters would ever leave Ikkoku-kan. Godai and Kyoko could very well continue their odd lives at Ikkoku, as in the series, but simply with the addition of married life. Beyond mere impliation, Takahashi series, like Ranma 1/2, were blatantly given an inconclusive series ending, clearly conveying that the antics which had occurred during the entire series, would continue on, into the future for those characters.
More than the longevity of a series which will always publish new issues, a series which gives a sense that its own world will continue on, despite the end of its publication, depends on its fans to keep that world alive in their heads. As Takahashi's afterword message in Ranma 1/2 said, "I would be so happy if the characters from Ranma 1/2 would stay in your hearts and remain your friends for life." Perhaps a series which ends, yet has no real ending, lives on, much more vividly than a series which is continually published for 60+ years. (Not that the opposite isn't effective for other people.) The ability of a series to live on in fans' hearts is most evident in the proliferation of non-cannon fandom, whose participants often have a more intense experience with the fandom, than with the actual series itself. A series which is open-ended enough to allow, individual, personal participation, has the power to generate experiences without limitation. And that is very powerful.
Perhaps it takes a certain type of person to become fond of a Rumiko Takahashi series. This pattern of endless continuation appeals to the Eastern sense of cyclical time, reincarnation, and appreciation of the present experience, rather than emphasis on the ending of things. Endless continuation can be comforting. Reincarnation has become a successful belief, because the regular continuation of death/rebirth liberates people from some fears of death. I recently viewed a lecture on Indian mythological backgrounds and business culture, explaining the open-ended nature of Eastern thought and how it contrasted with the Western emphasis on difinitive answers, black and white, binary code, and frustration with ambiguity. Some people take comfort and hope in a lack of finality to life.
Personally, when I switched from American comic books to manga, I was shocked when Magic Knight Rayearth was revealed to have a definitive ending. It felt abrupt and like a harsh close to my fandom. (I didn't yet understand how a series could live on through fanwork.) Whereas, X-men would always be there for me; whether I returned to the series in 10 years or 20. And just like there are superhero comic book fans who enjoy connecting with successive generations of fans, over the same series, during Takahashi's 30th anniversary exhibition, adults who read Takahashi in their youth, attended with their children who now read Takahashi's current series. There's something very endearing about the ability of things with longevity to connect people through time. And something very comforting about a series or fandom which will seem to always be there.
On the other hand, I did learn to enjoy manga and anime with difinitive endings. They have the power to express specific themes/experiences. Right now, Code Geass: Lelouch of the Rebellion is still one of my favorite anime. And as Crispin Freeman once said of anime wherein everyone dies at the end, what's important is what happens before that inevitable ending.
Oddly enough, this sense involves the appreciation of present time, which is the same as a series without end, like Ranma 1/2 or any other Takahashi series. Also, the fandom of anime/manga with difinitive endings, is to experience a theme which the series was trying to convey, then move on to a new series, and experience it, until it too reaches its own difinitive end. Yet, in this type of reader's habit, there too is a type of endlessness and cyclical stability. So what really differentiates an endless series from a difinitive series?
I guess when things aren't transient, some people get tired of them. For those types of people, the saying exists, "don't know what you got until it's gone". Can nothing be appreciated, without the fear of its limited existence? There are some people that say beauty is only valuable because it can fade. Personally for me, I think transience is irrelavent to enjoying something in the present time. Because like Cloud said, "There's nothing that isn't important."
But perhaps the most important thing is that both options exist, for people of each niche. It would be sad and boring if there was only one way of doing things.
No comments:
Post a Comment