Quote:
Originally Posted by monir
Allow me to summarize our disagreemnet in few sentences. I consider the visual translation of the story in episode 15 to drive home the message rather a poor one. You don't. I'm willing to assign criticism at how it is written to achieve why Haru has acted the way he has. You are acknowledging a weakness which is used to flesh out Haru's development, but still willing to move on because you've got the end-message.
|
Well, to me, the most important part of any story isn't the mechanics of how it's told, but what the message is and how it connects to the characters and the on-going development of the plot. So this is why I was taken aback by the comments that suggested the development shown was a regression because, in my mind, the development only does make sense as a sequel to what came before.
Perhaps it wasn't conveyed as effectively as it should be. For example, it may have helpful for the show to place more emphasis on Haru's reliance on his wings as a source of strength so that his misplaced confidence was more clearly articulated (it was there, but perhaps not as clear as it could have been). Then, when the story removed that crutch, it would seem more like karma. That said, they used another storytelling device they often use in this story, and that is to reveal things only after they occur for the first time -- which is, again, for the sake of the plot. We had no idea that it was possible to steal someone's ability in this game, and I don't recall any foreshadowing to that effect (but I may be forgetting something now). I think this is intended to convey Haru's own sense of surprise, but in the end it is a bit transparent... though, it's not as if this element is new; it's been there from the start.
So, would I concede that the writing is a bit clumsy and... ham-fisted (
)? Sure... though this anime would hardly be anywhere near alone in such an accusation. That said, most of the comments I saw didn't seem to be pointing to this fact, but seemed to be saying more directly that the development in the episode contradicted previous development... which itself would contradict the way I understood the plot. So that's the point in particular that I had to question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by monir
That in itself is a pretty presumptuous too if I may say so. I've posted similar reaction based on the visual portrayal of a story in many threads. I was also confident most of the time that I would be able to trace back step by step as to why I felt in a certain way at the time even if I didn't write much initially. An articulated point of view carry more weight in an argument, but it doesn't mean it's okay to automatically invalidate a reaction because it comes across not as well thought out based on how it was expressed.
|
For myself, anyway, my goal wasn't to "invalidate" the reaction, but to question it. I
hope I was more-or-less clear that I didn't understand the reaction because I saw it differently, and I tried to explain the way I saw it. I think that's really all we can do. I would like people to think through their reactions; if people already have, then great: please help me understand it by providing more details; if people have not, let's talk it through. I think that's the only way that we can understand each others different points of view, even if we don't end up agreeing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by monir
Actually it kinds of explain why there is always (and will be) posts that are raging about "rage posting" or why some posts expresses surprise by certain set of views. From my point of view, those sort of take usually stems from the mixture of the unwillingness to see or unable to understand where the opposing view may be coming from, or simply don't have the patience to even consider why such view can be or should be held.
|
Well, I think there is a big difference between "raging about rage posting" and questioning (or "expressing surprise at") people's statements and reactions. I would agree with you that the former is a sort of intolerance that isn't really appropriate or constructive (because all opinions are welcome), but the latter seems to be rather essential to having a conversation. When opinions seem to be either particularly reliant on hyperbole, or contain statements that appear to contract basic tenants of your own interpretation, it can certainly be hard to understand. I think I have a reasonable allowance for varying points of view, but there are still areas where two points of view can be fundamentally incompatible. In those areas, we have to discuss so that we can at least understand each other. But this is all still fundamentally rooted in a respect for each other, and a basic assumption that both parties are reasonable people. My statement that you couldn't assume other people had thought through their reaction or arrived at the same conclusion you did was not meant to preclude this sort of basic respect (as I think you should know of me by now). Everyone's reactions are their own, and each person has their own reasons, which we sometime share.
Anyway... the story has proceeded beyond this point, and we can see how it develops from this point on. In the end, it's probably only in the context of the final destination that we can really look back on what this episode was intending to accomplish, and then make a judgement of how effectively it accomplished that end (or come up with reasonable suggestions of how it could have been accomplished otherwise and still produce the same overall outcome).
Administrator
Graphic Designer
