|
Narrative
|
Pepinson: Huh?
Fast Eddie: Your interrogative leaves me short of some substance to base a reply on, Pepinson.
Pepinson: Could you kindly direct me to an example entirely in Japanese?
Fast Eddie: It is a joke, Pepinson. Lighten up.
Pepinson: It's a bit... cryptic as jokes go, but okay.
Fast Eddie: Didn't really mean to be snarky. Actually, 'cryptic' is exactly the point. Imagine you are person not familiar with Anime at all, when reading a list of examples. You come to a phrase like Abenobashi Mahou Shoutengai. You figure "Okay, that has nothing to do with me." The entry tries to clear things up by saying that the series subverts shojo, while retaining some chibi. The entry may as well be in Aramaic.
Seth: I'ts spot on actually.
Dark Sasami: Clearly the author of this entry does not understand how the humor of laws and axioms works. In order for it to be funny, it needs to be more than just "kinda true" — it needs to be both dead-on exact and self-explanatory. This fails both of those tests.
It does point to a weakness some authors have in that they don't always link to the relevant entries when they use jargon. That applies as well to Troper slang as it does to Japanese.
And anyway, the first law of trope examples is Buffy Did It.
Duckluck: I am so glad we have this page. The shear volume of unintelligible (to me) anime examples has been rapidly pushing me toward the brink of despair.
Ninjacrat: I think it's a bit funny for a contributor to a TV jargon wiki to be afraid of jagon. For Christ's sake: half the trope names come from sitcoms that never aired outside America or last aired in 1979! :|
Ununnilium: You know, I was about to enquire about getting rid of this (or at least moving it to a new name), but then Fast Eddie and Susan Davis made it funny.
Jisu: This page is why certain people (I'm talking to you, Duckluck) are allowed to attack us. I think there needs to be something that says just what is and is not "gratuitous Japanese" — or at least, some people should be locked in a room with some entry-level fangirls from whom every other word is "kawaii". THAT is "gratuitous Japanese", and THAT shouldn't be allowed. Using "meganekko", "joshikousei" or "ojou-sama" to refer to these things is not a sin.
Citizen: *shakes fist at definite article* But srsly, you had me at baka hentai neko kawaii.
seth: All those poor pervert idiot, cute cats.
Seth: That second law is even more true now we have Trope Overdosed to prove we have more Star Trek references than anything else.
Mister Six: I'm going to weigh in on the side of the "speak English" crowd. Referring to specific concepts that only have Japanese names is one thing, but using Japanese terms when an English equivalent is available is just frustrating. Sure, you can link through to the relevant article if we have one, but I shouldn't have to use the Rosetta Stone to understand a three-line trope example. Recently, for example, I read an article that used the Japanese term for voice actor rather than just saying voice actor. Tch. If you want to link to, say, the meganekko article then do so, but make the actual link text English, like so.
Sikon: Yes, I never quite understood why they insist on "seyuu" when "voice actor" would do — because it's shorter? Anyway, for the examples: "Nausicaans" don't really qualify because the name Nausicaa is originally from Homer's Odyssey (so it's one of those things that are Older Than They Think).
Mister Six: I dunno, I guess there's a kind of fun elitism in knowing words that most people don't understand and being able to use them in conversation. Still, for a website like this, where anime fans with that kind of knowledge are probably in the minority, it does seem a bit rude. Not intentionally rude, mind you, just kind of thoughtless. And regarding the point up there about most trope names being obscure references to old TV shows, at least they are in some way understandable to a non-anime audience since their name usually implies the trope's meaning. And they're more memorable, too. I do find trope names like Jonas Quinn annoying for the same reason as anime ones, but at least I can half-remember what it means, while "meganekko" is just gibberish.
Ununnilium: Personally, I used to use "seiyuu" more often simply because of the difference between the Japanese and American voice acting industries (the latter suffering from the stigma of the Animation Age Ghetto and the idea that a "real" actor is obviously superior). And Jonas Quinn is just as gibberishy as Meganekko to someone who's never seen Stargate.
HeartBurn Kid: The last time I watched Stargate, it was on Showtime, and I can still remember what Jonas Quinn means after having read the page a time or two. Every time I see Meganekko, I keep thinking about giant cats.
Susan Davis: Removed The answer to the first two at least is very simple. Rick Sternbach, frequent ST contributor and quiet (very early) Otaku because explaining a joke makes it less funny.
Duckluck: Honestly, I'm fine with Jonas Quinn (although I would not have chosen that name) because it's been around a while and it's a funny and memorable name to anyone who watched that season of Stargate (which is probably comparable to the number of Americans who know what a seiyuu is). It also has the added bonus of being clearly pronounceable to English speakers and doesn't turn people off by being in a language they don't understand. I know just by seeing Jonas Quinn (although it should really be "The Jonas Quinn" that it is a character trope (although I have to click on it to know what it means, which is a problem). The same cannot be said for Meganekko.
When I first saw Meganekko, I inferred from context that it was an anime trope that probably had something to do with characters. But, without context, the name would be meaningless gibberish to me. On numerous occasions, I've had the experience of clicking on a Japanese link that I thought was a trope page only to find out that it actually the entry for a series. I've also on several occasions discovered that a Japanese-titled page I skipped over because I thought it was a series page was actually a trope, and sometimes it isn't even an anime only trope! This has always left a bad taste in my mouth because it makes me feel like I'm supposed to know more about anime to enjoy the site. I know that's petty nonsense, but that's still what it seems like, and I'm not the only one who feels that way.
When my brother discovered this site about a week ago, for instance, one of the few things he complained about is how indecipherable the anime examples are. Now, maybe we just have similar tastes, but I think that's how a lot of people feel when they first visit the site. Now, I could be wrong, but I honestly think we are scaring off new contributors with all this Japanese, which, I think we can agree, would be a "bad thing." Anyway, sorry to talk your ears off, but I wanted to explain why I kept trying get some of the names changed. If you guys disagree with my reasoning, however, I'll happily let the matter drop. The last thing we need is Wikipedia style edit drama.
Scientivore: I'm totally there with you, Duckluck. So far, my feelings about this — about how some anime fans frame trope descriptions and examples here — have gone from ignorance, to bafflement, to annoyance, to anger, to sadness, to acceptance. I'm now approaching optimism that I'll ultimately be able to subvert and exploit their work here for positive ends, as with Mind Control Eyes. I initially felt like I was actually being trolled by that entry — and I like anime, I just don't think that Japanese animation is inherently superior to every other culture's storytelling arts, so I can only imagine how a non-anime fan would feel. (Upon reflection, I expect that some other contributor(s) honestly couldn't perceive the condescension in their tone, like a cultural blind spot.) But then, I simply neutralized the entry's tone myself. Now it just needs to be added to a non-anime index (which is easy) and we'll have a nice little universal trope entry with relatively little work by non-partisans. So you see, I'm working very hard to convince myself that direct conflict would actually be counterproductive by potentially depriving us of a useful source of raw material.
Kilyle: This trope is funny, is needed, is a good thing to bear in mind as we improve the site. But I don't for a minute think it should be the First Law. Every single time I click on this link to recall what the First Law is, I'm surprised and annoyed that it's something so obviously not worthy of First Law status.
I do think the First Law should have a line about overused tropes in it, but I'm not exactly sure what it should be. If I had to vote right now I'd vote for Buffy Did It. But even though I don't know what I would put as the real First Law, I know that this doesn't belong here with this name. Please come up with a better, more transparent name for it.
(Incidentally, I do know Rule Thirty Four, and I find no problem with its name. Even though I can't see where the number came from. But then, it's not vying for top billing.)
Vulpy's Postulates on the Rising of Law Number One:
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: This and two other Laws of Trope Examples are already on the Laws And Formulas index, and have been for some time. This law could probably use an edit, but I don't believe it needs cutting, esp. if we're keeping it elsewhere. |
This wiki is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
