What rights does the viewer have?

[dwchang]

"Did the creator accomplish what he set out to do?.

But there's one fundamental flaw within your argument:

Who are we to say or even know what the original intent was? I believe Otohiko brought up the fact that the writer/creator can do whatever the hell they want and I agree.

We as viewers *choose* to view it and try and comprehend it. We can also *choose* not to like it. However, my point is that it's trivial and ridiculous to try and refute the author/creator when it's their work and you had nothing to do with it nor do you understand the motivations and intent they were going for.

Now of course, with Eva, my argument is even furthered by the fact Gainax has explicitely stated the things being said within this thread which makes it (IMO) even harder (impossible) to refute.

Don't get me wrong though, I'm not saying that you have no rights at all. You have every right to dislike something, but my point, again, is that you have no right to tell the creator (well it's a thread, but you get what I mean) that they're wrong unless well...you are them.

[dwchang]

you have no right to tell the creator (well it's a thread, but you get what I mean) that they're wrong unless well...you are them.

I forgot to mention...even though it's implied in my post, that the reason we cant' tell them they're wrong all goes back to my original sentence that we, the viewer, can't possibly KNOW what their intention was. Who's to say they wanted to say *anything* to the viewer at all? If that's the case, who's to say they succeeded or not?

The same could be extrapolated to AMVs. The reason I don't say something is "the worst" or "wrong" is b/c I don't know what the creator was thinking and more importantly, if *they* thought they did a good job with what they wanted to accomplish. For all I know, maybe they just wanted to have fun and well..had fun. So what, if I don't like it, they still had fun and like it and ultimately their goals were still accomplished yes? Who am I to say it wasn't?

[Arigatomina]

Don't get me wrong though, I'm not saying that you have no rights at all. You have every right to dislike something, but my point, again, is that you have no right to tell the creator (well it's a thread, but you get what I mean) that they're wrong unless well...you are them.

^_^

I'll hold you to that. If this is true, then every amv on this site is the best in the world, beyond criticism because only the creator can criticise the work. You can't tell the creator of an amv that he's wrong unless you're him. The same is true for every book ever written - you can't tell the writer he's wrong unless you're him. Everything in the world is beyond criticism because only the creator can judge it.

I can see the chaos ensuing if we all took this view of things. I refute this - one of those 'agree to disagree' cases. ^_^;; I don't believe anyone is beyond criticism, and only abstract art can be called 'beyond judgement' - which is the reason we have canvases slung with shit in museums - because we can't 'judge things unless we made them.' No, I don't buy that.

[Otohiko]

Pertaining to AMV's, the video description can often do a good job of clarifying set goals

As for anime itself - it doesn't have to have a clear-cut structure.

In fact, I like things that make you discover their structure for yourself rather than rely on pre-conceived conventions etc. That makes things fun. Unlike you-know-whose perfectionist mastery view

I like my art human

[dwchang]

If this is true, then every amv on this site is the best in the world, beyond criticism because only the creator can criticise the work. You can't tell the creator of an amv that he's wrong unless you're him. The same is true for every book ever written - you can't tell the writer he's wrong unless you're him. Everything in the world is beyond criticism because only the creator can judge it

Actually that's exactly what I'm saying. The main thing you're ignoring though is people's tastes. I don't at all mean to disregard that people can "like" or "dislike" something...that's in our nature.

My point is that we don't have the right to say things like they are fact (which this person seems to be implying by their tone) unless we are the person who made it and know the original intent we are trying to convey.

Actually, it's another reason why I think a scoring system on this site is a bad thing. Obviously it has it's positive things like helping people find "good" videos, but it also leads to people being angered by misinterpretations and so on.

I guess it's an optimistic view, but I think there is a fair amount of logic behind it. I mean who can truly know something 100% about someone else or their work?

And again, with respect to this particular topic (or rather off-topic part), when the creator explicitely states things...you can't really refute anything now can you?

Pertaining to AMV's, the video description can often do a good job of clarifying set goals

Good point. Unfortunately, people usually don't read them. If they did, I woudln't have as much of a problem with scoring and criticism on here...then again don't get me wrong, I still think they have a purpose and can do a good job to make distinctions. I guess I'm torn

[Arigatomina]

Actually that's exactly what I'm saying. The main thing you're ignoring though is people's tastes. I don't at all mean to disregard that people can "like" or "dislike" something...that's in our nature.

I know that was what you were saying - I actually had that typed before you added on to your first post. ^.~

But I *was* ignoring personal 'taste' - I don't see that as an issue in judging some things like storytelling. I may love a story because of the characters or plot, but if it's poorly written I'll *say* it's poorly written whether I have a taste for it or not. I may love an amv because of the message it portrays (the one *I* read from it), but if the editing is bad or it's so convoluted that only a few people will understand it I'll *say* parts of it are bad. Taste isn't included in my 'judging' - few people inlcude taste when they determine whether or not certain literary 'greats' deserve their titles. I may like Cymbeline, but it's still not the best play he ever wrote - I can find flaws whether I like it or not - because I judge things.

You really do have an optimistic outlook. ^_^ And as I said, we'll have to agree to disagree here.

I don't belive people can live in a world where everything is beyond judgement. Just think, Hitler's mantra was very well composed - just because some people find it tasteless we view him as a villain. If he were beyond judgement we'd all be reading his speaches right alongside King's speaches. We judge everything, and I think that's a good thing.

[derek_t]

So let try to get this straight.

Its up to me the viewer to figure out what is trying to be said and I have no right to disagree with it even if the point is something that may seem questionable or totally poposterous?

And in no way should bad editing/writing/characters/ etc be considered.

So Attack of the Clones is an ok movie because despite bad writing, bad characters, horrible plot explotative, (this is all my opinion of course) etc if that what Lucas wanted then I cannot judge it? Is that what your saying?

[Arigatomina]

So Attack of the Clones is an ok movie because despite bad writing, bad characters, horrible plot explotative, (this is all my opinion of course) etc if that what Lucas wanted then I cannot judge it? Is that what your saying?

^_^

I'm fairly sure that is *exactly* what he is saying. Scary version of utopia, isn't it? ^_^;;

[UncleMilo]

Uncle Milo, dwchang, and Otohiko bring up something that I find is odd with anime. How to critique the story.

If the anime were a novel, there would be nothing wrong with saying the writer failed to bring across what he intended because readers didn't catch the message. It isn't up to the reader to get the message - the reader just looks at what's there, it's the writer who molds his story into a format that a reader can understand. If only a few readers understand the story then yes, it failed to reach the majority. That is a flaw on the part of the writer, not the majority - the only case where this isn't true is if the writer *wanted* to have a story that only a few could understand.

If an anime is aimed at being undestandable for any viewer, then it shouldn't bring up complaints from a majority of viewers about how unclear certain aspects are. If the anime was done so that only a few very astute viewers would catch it, then it doesn't matter if the rest of the viewers are left frowning and wondering what the hell just happened and what the point was. It's a matter of what the creator (in the case of anime) had in mind when he made the story. You *can* say he failed if he didn't accomplish his original intention. That's how you critique 'stories' whether it's writing or animation - "Did the creator accomplish what he set out to do?"

What right does the viewer have? The same right any reader or viewer has - to find out what the creator intended and to tell whether or not that creator acheived that goal. This is based on the reader/viewer's own reaction. If the creator failed on one viewer, that leaves a possibility that the creator failed as a whole - add up the number of people he failed to achieve his goal with and you can find out if he really did fail.

My main point is that you can criticise the creator (writer) of an anime just like you'd criticise the writer of an essay or documentary. Did he achieve his goal? If not, then he failed. Maybe he only failed on one or two people, but if he failed to reach a multitude, then you can't say he's very good at what he does.

Just because anime isn't disected like novels in an educational setting, that doesn't meant the creator of that anime has any protection or rights over his viewers. He's subject to be judged the same as anyone else telling a story - storytelling is not a painting that can be called 'great' even when no one understands it. The message is as important as the delivery, and if the creator can't put his message into a format people can read, then he's a bad writer (creator).

So you're saying if a majority of idiots don't get something that is complicated, then it's the writer's fault for not writing only stuff that the masses can get? Are you saying that no writer should ever be allowed to write about complicated material because there's just going to be too many people who don't get it and therefore, the army of people who didn't get it get to decide that it is bad and therefore the writer is at fault.

In that case, writers will always fail.

And... anime can be disected like any other movie or TV series.

And what's this about paintings? A painting is just as capable of being disected as a book... true... it's a different medium and a different approach for criticism... but I find it odd that you view a movie or TV series where the majority don't get it is bad and the writer is at fault, but a painting can be great even if no one gets it.


I wish I had more time to write... but let me make a point.

In an actual anime, we are out in space. A team finds a ruined starship and they try to enter it. They look all about to find an entry point and they finally find one. Just as they are about to enter this entry point, the soundtrack plays the final crescendo of the last Aria in Madame Butterfly.

With what I have just told you, you should now know that the people entering the ship are in real trouble. Most likely they are all going to die or most of them are going to die.

I thought this was brilliant.

However, according to your argument, there will be MANY, MANY people who won't understand why I reached the conclusion that I did.

Why? Because a lot of anime fans don't happen to be into opera. I'm not a huge opera fan myself, but I know Madame Butterfly... the last aria is a famous piece of music. Madame Butterfly kills herself on this last crescendo... and since they are entering the ship on that note, we know something bad is going to happen.

I saw it and knew. (Later on in the anime, everyone is dead or as good as dead)

Of course, by your argument, the writer should not be called brilliant for his clever use of direction and music to create beautiful foreshadowing... he should be condemned because his writing was confusing to all the anime fans who have no knowledge of music, opera, directing or foreshadowing.

Your formula might be good for determining financial success... but as far as I'm concerned... if enough people get the message, then chances are, the writer found his audience and connected with them.

I have to stop here, but I seriously disagree with your views.

-Uncle Milo

[Arigatomina]

So you're saying if a majority of idiots don't get something that is complicated, then it's the writer's fault for not writing only stuff that the masses can get? Are you saying that no writer should ever be allowed to write about complicated material because there's just going to be too many people who don't get it and therefore, the army of people who didn't get it get to decide that it is bad and therefore the writer is at fault.

You missed my exception. There's nothing wrong with a book or anime or movie or painting or *anything* that can only be deciphered by those who put serious thought into it and can read references to other genres (your opera reference). That's brilliant. But in that case, the creator *wanted* to have something people would have ot think about. He didn't try to put something out where 12 yr olds will understand it at a glance. My point was that you judge the creator's 'intention' - if he meant for it to be accessible to all and it isn't accessible then he failed. If he meant for it to be something only a scholar can understand then he did great.

Dwchang called me on this point - we can't tell what a dead writer intended with 100% accuracy, so we can never know for sure if we are judging him on the right set of goals. But we can still make an educated guess and use that 'intention' as a basis for judgement.