[Triple_R]

Originally Posted by Kagayaki

I wasn't a fan of this episode either, but I don't think it was lacking a message or a purpose.

But is it a good message? And is this episode's message one that flows well with the overall idea of "loving your work" that was said to be a core driving idea within this anime?

The most predictable way to show growth in Enishi's character would have been to have him succeed at something big.

This is kind of like saying "The most predictable way to satisfyingly end this shonen series is by having the main hero take out the big villain in a classic one-on-one pitched combat".

Just because it's predictable doesn't make it bad. Nor does it make the exact opposite the right or smart move. I doubt many Bleach fans, for example, would be happy with the series ending on the note of Aizen absolutely destroying Ichigo, and going on to achieve all his goals (The End!). Sure, you'd have a few people celebrating how "bold and daring" it is, but most passionate fans of the show would loath it to pieces, I'm sure.

I'd much, much, much prefer this episode if it had shown Enishi succeed at something for a change. That would have been incredibly preferable to what we did in fact get, imo. Part of the reason is...

The message there being that the ability to take charge and succeed is the barometer of personal worth and maturity.

Which, frankly, is a practical message and applies in the real world. It's one very nicely conveyed by the excellent anime character in your cool avatar and sig.

I'm going to be a bit blunt here, and I apologize if it offends anybody, but I think that it needs to be said - In a medium that frequently glorifies NEETs and Hikikomoris, having a show that takes a much more practical and realistic approach to work and adult life in the real world is something that I appreciated. It's something that I liked a lot about Hanasaku Iroha. Hanasaku's idea of "loving your work" is one that I think the anime world would benefit from seeing conveyed. I would argue that part of "loving your work" is actually becoming good at it; maybe not great, but at least generally competent.

But the message of "It's Ok if you're completely and consistently inept at your work (as long as you admit to that)" is just more of the same sort of easy acceptance of social maladjustment and/or occupational failure that I see too often in anime.

The fact is that guys like Enishi and Jiromaru would likely be close to self-destruction if in the real world. Enishi has likely cost himself the inheritance of the Inn as a price for his failure, and unlike his sister and niece, there's not many practical work options I can see for him outside of inheriting the Inn (i.e. he needs this a lot more than Satsuki or Ohana does). Jiromaru is one small step away from being homeless, even in this anime. As for Takako, I'd honestly like to know how she's earning a living (I doubt Enishi is paying her much, or she wouldn't have turned on him so easily in this episode).

Instead, the episode suggested that the way you deal with failure is more reflective of character than your ability to create success.

The way to deal with failure is to learn from your mistakes and to gradually get better at what you failed at (or to try something different and succeed at that). So if this was Enishi's first sign of failing at something, then it could be an excellent means of character growth for him. But it's not, as it's just the latest (and biggest) in a long string of failures for the guy. And the fact is, this was his character arc. If there was any time for Enishi to shine, this was it. The chances of him bouncing back from this in any concrete way is slim, imo.

It could have been better executed, but I don't think the intent behind the episode was misguided.

I respectfully disagree with you. I think the intent behind the episode is somewhat contradictory with what the anime as a whole is about (from what I recall reading on this board and elsewhere), and it clearly does nothing to improve Enishi and Takako in the eyes of many of us, whereas a different intent may very well have achieved that.

Here is a case where the predictable approach would have been the best approach, imo.

Originally Posted by Reckoner

But other than the ability to man up, what else does Enishi got going for him? He's a failure at everything he does and his sister is far better than him. They ham fisted this point really hard, plus having him act like a bumbingly fool around Takako didn't help either.

Basically, strength of character isn't worth much when you walk in foolishly into the mistake in the first place, and have a history of incompetence on these matters. You can own up to your actions when they fall through, but if your actions are always wrong... So what?

If he was owning up to his failure after being rather successful with other things, the point would've been far better IMO.

Totally agree. Couldn't have said it better myself.

Originally Posted by Kagayaki

I don't think you have to be good or even halfway decent at anything at all to be a good character in a story.

I somewhat disagree. A character that fails at everything (including things like friendship, romance, etc... not just practical skill or talent-related things like sports and careers) is not a character that I'm interested in. The key element to "lovable loser" is the "lovable" part (i.e. a charming personality, say).

A protagonist should have at least some redeeming character traits, in my opinion. What's Enishi's? That he admits to failure when he fails? I'm sorry, but that's not enough in and of itself, in my opinion.

The situation is exacerbated by the fact that while one lovable loser can usually work (I'm thinking of Sunohara in Clannad here at the moment), three or more of them (as Hanasaku aims to have) is really pushing it, imo.

Originally Posted by Archon_Wing

I agree that you can be a failure or lack redeeming qualities to be a decent character.

As far as protagonists are concerned, I disagree.

100% comedic villains is about the only character type that can get away with a complete lack of redeeming qualities, imo.

Ano Hana is a good example of having pitiful characters that work.

None of Anohana's characters are "pitiful". No, not even 'Manma'.

Yukiatsu works precisely because he appears to be highly successful and 'with it'. Hence, his major hidden weaknesses and flaws serve as a great contrast to his outward image of the successful and popular high school student.

Jinta and Poppo have some knocks against them, but both are given moments to shine, and that helps immensely for both.