Poll: Is it inaccurate or offensive to call Anime "Cartoons"
- Thread starter Jonesy911
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Calling anime, cartoons is not technically wrong. But the 2 words bring to mind 2 different styles of ... should i say cartoon or animation here?
Cartoon as a term may loosely include anime but anime is so massively different as to need to be referred to specifically.
Yes, anime has the visual and technical features of other cartoon types. But there, the similarity ends.
Anime has its own set of genres that rarely if ever intermingle with Western cartoons. The only Western cartoons at all similar to anime are inspired BY anime (and usually do this job in a sub standard degree, in my subjective experience).
So while it is not "offensive" or "inaccurate" to call anime cartoons, it does generate confusion and is not a perfect use of semantics. The more general and less specific we are about what we're discussing, the more confusion creeps in. That's a rule of rhetoric: if you are to retain control of your language, you must choose the right words.
Of course, the power of terminology and semantics is identifiable in the very cultures that appeared in separation here from cartoons to anime. If we broke down the language barrier of Japanese versus English productions, would cartoons and anime be so different from each other after say 50 years? Probably not, because we'd have been referring to them, producing them and commenting on them from a universal cultural background, rather than a singular focused idea.
At the very least, we would see many fusions of the two cultures, and they may eventually become the mainstream type of "general cartoon", meaning "purer" forms of anime and cartoons would suffer a blow to popularity and eventually production. And whether we refer to anime as cartoons or not is a large part of that dynamic.
So yes, 'tis important to be mindful of one's language even in this small matter.
Yes, anime has the visual and technical features of other cartoon types. But there, the similarity ends.
Anime has its own set of genres that rarely if ever intermingle with Western cartoons. The only Western cartoons at all similar to anime are inspired BY anime (and usually do this job in a sub standard degree, in my subjective experience).
So while it is not "offensive" or "inaccurate" to call anime cartoons, it does generate confusion and is not a perfect use of semantics. The more general and less specific we are about what we're discussing, the more confusion creeps in. That's a rule of rhetoric: if you are to retain control of your language, you must choose the right words.
Of course, the power of terminology and semantics is identifiable in the very cultures that appeared in separation here from cartoons to anime. If we broke down the language barrier of Japanese versus English productions, would cartoons and anime be so different from each other after say 50 years? Probably not, because we'd have been referring to them, producing them and commenting on them from a universal cultural background, rather than a singular focused idea.
At the very least, we would see many fusions of the two cultures, and they may eventually become the mainstream type of "general cartoon", meaning "purer" forms of anime and cartoons would suffer a blow to popularity and eventually production. And whether we refer to anime as cartoons or not is a large part of that dynamic.
So yes, 'tis important to be mindful of one's language even in this small matter.
I'm sure someone would take exception to calling an Anime a cartoon, but it's just nitpicking in my opinion, and honestly, there are bigger nits to pick in this world.
I believe anime is a subset of cartoons the same as the adult comedy (ie simpsons, Family guy, etc) are another subset. Calling them cartoons is a bit like me callling you a biped, you are but it is a far too broad a definition. As for why your friends react like that, it is due to the belief that the word "cartoon" implies a lack of maturity in the medium whcih probaly offends them. They are overeacting and being needlessly precious but that's life.
It's perfectly acceptable. That's basically all they are anyway. Whenever someone asks me what anime is, I just say "Japanese Cartoons."
It seems there's a basic disagreement in the thread thus far what exactly defines a "Cartoon".
To some, a cartoon is Tom & Jerry or some other western animated short or motion picture.
To others, a cartoon is a satyical image or series of images in the preinted medium.
Animated cartoon and Anime share all but the most technical points (don't fucking split hairs with me here Otaku's, you know who you are and you know it's true even if you don't want to admit it) with each other so that calling them both the same name could only really be offensive is somebody was purposfully trying to be abrasive about the issue or the anime-watcher was being overly senssitive (again, looking at the Otaku out there. It's okay, really it is. Calm down.) or most likely, a combination of the two.
The printed satirical cartoon is similar to anime only in the most rudimentary form, like how a movie poster is similar to the movie it's advertising and should only be confused by the most dense.
As an anime watcher myself, I really don't care what people call them as long as I can communicate the basic idea behind whatever I'm watching. If all else fails I resort to calling them "Movin' Pitchures on the magic-box." [sub][sub]I shit you not I actually had to simplify it that much for somebody once.[/sub][/sub]
To some, a cartoon is Tom & Jerry or some other western animated short or motion picture.
To others, a cartoon is a satyical image or series of images in the preinted medium.
Animated cartoon and Anime share all but the most technical points (don't fucking split hairs with me here Otaku's, you know who you are and you know it's true even if you don't want to admit it) with each other so that calling them both the same name could only really be offensive is somebody was purposfully trying to be abrasive about the issue or the anime-watcher was being overly senssitive (again, looking at the Otaku out there. It's okay, really it is. Calm down.) or most likely, a combination of the two.
The printed satirical cartoon is similar to anime only in the most rudimentary form, like how a movie poster is similar to the movie it's advertising and should only be confused by the most dense.
As an anime watcher myself, I really don't care what people call them as long as I can communicate the basic idea behind whatever I'm watching. If all else fails I resort to calling them "Movin' Pitchures on the magic-box." [sub][sub]I shit you not I actually had to simplify it that much for somebody once.[/sub][/sub]
I'm gonna say no, it isn't offensive. Everyone will know what you mean by it. I do say anime, but only to distinguish between Japanese and Western cartoons. Japanese (from my experience) cartoons are far more dramatic and complex, whereas the Western animes are simple, but still good in their own right.
Both are animes in the same way that both are cartoons.
Both are animes in the same way that both are cartoons.
I don't know, a cartoon can portray the same stuff as anime. For me, anime feels exactly like cartoons, only better drawn in some ways (but also lacking the animation part in others). Comparing a book to a poem is different as the structure is different. If say cartoons were books, then poems would be something along the lines of "Who Framed Roger Rabbit". Close to the same medium, though the medium is used in a radically different way then it is supposed to. Or I am an ignoramus =)LawlessSquirrel said:
Ha, sorry, i just had to laugh at saying the "depth and complexity" of anime. Sorry, but anime, although their avid viewers claim the opposite, are not that deep or complex. They just go on for so long that there are more plot points to shake a stick at. Doesn't make it complex, it makes it convoluted and disjointed.Jonesy911 said:
I suppose it's a case of definition vs label.
Anime is a form of cartoon at its most fundamental level (ooo, moving drawings...)
However, having had roughly a hundred years of history the animated medium, that's been plenty of time for it to evolve to the extent that labels have become definitions. Thus, anime (i.e. from Japan) can be considered distinct from animation from the rest of the world thanks to the amount of time that the industry has had to develop its own identity and individuality.
However, those who consider anime different from 'cartoons' at large for stylised reasons have clearly gotten the wrong end of the stick. Within the industry itself, it is very easy to tell that there are several design styles across the studios: Production IG; Bones; manglobe; Gonzo; and Kyoto Animation (amongst others) are all clearly stylistically different, in backgrounds, character design, layouts and artistic tone.
Anyway, it's difficult as it is, since a lot of people who don't watch cartoons/anime, automatically pigeonhole e.g. anime = hentai; anime = Studio Ghibli kiddy crap (* not representative of my opinion, btw); cartoons = generic kiddy crap etc. effectively deriding the medium as a whole. So, I think your friends get offended because of the general perception of what a cartoon entails as the world at large is only really exposed to what's advertised.
So, somebody tell me the cartoon 'Animal Farm' is not deep...
Anime is a form of cartoon at its most fundamental level (ooo, moving drawings...)
However, having had roughly a hundred years of history the animated medium, that's been plenty of time for it to evolve to the extent that labels have become definitions. Thus, anime (i.e. from Japan) can be considered distinct from animation from the rest of the world thanks to the amount of time that the industry has had to develop its own identity and individuality.
However, those who consider anime different from 'cartoons' at large for stylised reasons have clearly gotten the wrong end of the stick. Within the industry itself, it is very easy to tell that there are several design styles across the studios: Production IG; Bones; manglobe; Gonzo; and Kyoto Animation (amongst others) are all clearly stylistically different, in backgrounds, character design, layouts and artistic tone.
They clearly haven't seen Aeon Flux...Jonesy911 said:
Anyway, it's difficult as it is, since a lot of people who don't watch cartoons/anime, automatically pigeonhole e.g. anime = hentai; anime = Studio Ghibli kiddy crap (* not representative of my opinion, btw); cartoons = generic kiddy crap etc. effectively deriding the medium as a whole. So, I think your friends get offended because of the general perception of what a cartoon entails as the world at large is only really exposed to what's advertised.
So, somebody tell me the cartoon 'Animal Farm' is not deep...
Heh. Warning - I'm about to actually answer your question. Proceed with caution.Jonesy911 said:
Every month or so, someone starts a new thread on this forum, posing a completely god-awful, hideous and redundant question - "what is art?". In reply, several ignoramuses always say stuff like "x is art but y can't possibly be art because it's crap". In other words, they assume the word "art" to have a qualitative value which it does not in fact have. There is both good art and bad art, but "art" on its own isn't a compliment, it's just a thing, so to say "that sucks therefore it can't be art" where someone should instead be saying "that sucks therefore it's bad art" is actually completely misunderstanding the word "art" on the most basic, linguistic level.
Your friends are doing the same thing to the word "Anime" and "cartoon". The word "anime", for better or worse, has come to mean "cartoons made in Japan containing certain stylistic features common to the region". However, it does not mean "deep and complex cartoons made in Japan containing certain stylistic features common to the region". Why not? Because there's plenty of fucking non deep/complex anime out there. For every gem there sure is a fair share of turds, I should know, I own plenty of them. There is no qualitative term to the word "anime" and that is because the stuff can be both good and bad. Obviously.
On the other hand "cartoon" just means "animated drawings". There's no qualitative aspect to that word either. An animated drawing isn't intrinsically good or bad just on the virtue of being an animated drawing alone. The context that makes such a thing good or bad is separate from the object's status as an animated drawing - unless you don't happen to like animated drawings, of course. However, Anime is also made from animated drawings.
It's not that your friends don't understand Anime or cartoons, it's actually that they don't understand language. What they should be saying instead of their current misguided linguistic muddle of a statement is something like "I think Japanese anime is an intrinsically better form of cartoons than the Western style". They'd be wrong of course, but at least they'd be expressing their opinion more clearly.