[TinyRedLeaf]

I think we're coming to the same conclusion, albeit from different directions.

Originally Posted by Triple_R

I value them about equally.

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

These are things that cannot be done in writing but can be done with visuals. You don't have to tell the audience something is happening through words you can show them. You can also create mood & atmosphere with lighting, camera angles, close ups, and sound, etc...

However, story, characters, and theme are part of visual storytelling too. Again when you have a simple story then they might be less important but that doesn't mean when a visual medium excels in the non-visual aspect this is not important. In my book the story and how it is told are both important & are not always the same thing.

I agree with both these views. I will only point out, in closing, that we're ultimately talking about anime/animation here. I mentioned my animation producer friend. My conversations with him long ago was basically about me trying to point out why I felt anime was so much better than cartoons. (Yes, I know that the difference between anime and cartoons is just a matter of semantics, but it was a long time ago, and I had a lot yet to learn.)

I used much the same arguments as those used here today. I harped on factors such as the strength of writing in anime, the themes raised in anime that resonated more strongly with Asians like us, and so on.

"Slice-of-life" anime, in particular, provided most of my favourite examples at the time.

My friend's damning retort was: "Why animation?"

If it were the drama and the literary themes that I enjoyed in those anime examples I raised, why weren't those stories told through live-action drama instead? They sure as hell would have been easier and cheaper to produce.

Take Nodame Cantible, for example. What does the anime version of it offer that the live-action version doesn't? It's a great story with great characters, but the core of the story is about music, specifically orchestral music. There are many viewers who observed that it was a greater pleasure to watch and listen to an actual orchestral performance in live-action than in animation (which was severely limited by budget and time constraints).

So, if the point of anime-Nodame Cantible was to showcase the music, we need to ask if anime was the best medium for such an enterprise. If it were the characters and the drama that were the focus, we need to ask, why not a live-action show, which would have sufficed to bring such elements to life?

What was it exactly about Nodame Cantible that specifically required animation to bring it to full effect? Would another medium have served it better? Why not radio drama, for example, since it was sound that arguably mattered the most for this particular story?

=======

All these considerations form the context in which I claimed that "writing" must serve "animation" when it comes to anime. I'm not necessarily saying that pretty images alone would make up for poor "writing". I am saying, however, that without the sound and the images, there wouldn't even be an anime!

Which is to say that even if the writing were fantastic, if the animation/cinematography served the story poorly, you already have a failed animation project by default. We have to ask, if it were beyond the abilities of the creators to use animation to tell the story effectively, why did they bother with an anime in the first place?

If you prefer, it's much like an existential question. Why bother with an anime if you can't think of ways to use animation to tell the story in a unique way? It is in this sense that I find it silly to talk about the "writing" of anime as though it were the only thing that matters.

In all other cases, my views don't actually differ much from those who recognise that all the elements of anime matter equally when it comes to telling a good story.

=======

Originally Posted by 4Tran

Well, the lack of proper examination of how stories are presented will explain why terrible writers like Dan Brown manage to sell. Nobody should want that, so it's good to have more examination.

I once attended a workshop by an apparently successful Filipino writer (unfortunately, I forget his name) who cautioned us against dismissing the qualities of "pulp fiction". There is much that can be learnt from writers like Dan Brown when it comes to writing something that keeps you turning the pages until the end. How do you hook the reader? How do you compel him to keep reading?

In this sense, a best-selling writer like Dan Brown isn't necessarily as terrible as you think. I'd confess, though, that I've never read his books. I'm too much of a snob to do so.