Speaking of a thing to hate stuff as Jubeh pointed out it's a thing to hate Zelda. Like these are people who play Bulletstorm and Mass Effect 3 and Call of Duty and Dark Sector, and don't like TF2 or Zelda. Idk wtf is wrong with Zelda, it's fun, it's got a pretty nice lore, it always has top-notch graphics, and Link is a hero. But it happens to be kid-friendly so it's auto-shit, like wtf. I think that's related to the OP, but hey you can't argue with 26 years of Zelda and high-brow everything in the games.
That's just barely relate able to the op IMO.
I believe I'm understanding the op and thread. So why are people judging art based more on what's on the canvas rather than how it was put there right?
More like why it was put there.
I find it really bizzare how people classify 'fine art' and not fine art. I recently met a gril who paints ugly paintings based on photos that contain very little skill, and I feel sure that she could not produce the scenes photo realistically even if she wanted to. She is someone of inferior skill compared to another friend of mine, who works mostly digitally and does amazing scenes and characters. Yet she is the one considered an 'artist' simply because she is doing a bachelor of fine art and following a tradition that was created years ago. According to art snobs what she is doing is more artistic than what my friend is doing. The funny thing is my friend will come to make money from his work, while this girl will probably never earn a living souly from her painting. Perhaps the distinction people make is just that someone who makes purely commercial art such as manga is some how inferior to someone who is just an 'artist'?
First define art and well done art.
Yeah sometimes I just splatter some ink on a piece of paper and draw some red circles. Do you consider that not well done art?
Aren't those more about the execution and emotion conveyed?
I think people regard content more because it's the one that emotionally, viewers can relate to a piece of work more quickly than to the quality of the work. From laymen to fine art critics, content can be quickly assessed and evoke a response versus quality where they have to actually think about, form standards of what makes one art better than another, know what to look for in the art in regards to mistakes (if any) and so on.
I think those type of people are either a) not open-minded or b) they knew someone who was into manga and got totally rejected by said person and now they hate manga. Seriously, if you look at it, there should be no reason why someone would hate a certain art style. They may not like it as much as another style but to hate it - that makes me think that something else is going on/happened in that person's life that made them detest it so much. Like Cype, I don't really care for abstract art but I don't hate it.
There's no shame in commercial art. If you look at the history of art, all the old masters basically did commercial art though they called it "commission" back then. I think her work is classed as fine art more because of the medium she is working on (traditional - painting) versus the new digital art work that your friend is doing. Digital artwork is an accepted medium though as it is a new type of art creation, I doubt it will be considered fine art for years.
Sylux, it matters if you've ever tried to submit a portfolio to an art college. I actually had to go out of my way to create "fine art" in order to get into Cooper Union, because all I ever felt like drawing is anime. It matters if you are an artist who feels artistically fulfilled drawing one style, yet in order to even have a chance at professional success, you need to go against that. That's not what art is about.
And yeah, Taylour, as an avid gamer as well as an artist, I notice that people have just been ragging on Japanese products like crazy lately. It's probably a byproduct of the whole 'weaboo' classification and the mainstream status of manga definitely doesn't help its reception among the hipsters. When every debate I've had about the validity of manga as an art form has involved the word "generic" in multiple iterations, it's a little obvious. Not to mention America has developed a huge superiority complex over Japan in the last ~10 years, probably because it has tapped into previously Japanese-exclusive markets. XBox came out, Avatar (despite the fact that it's made by Koreans) became popular, Western devs began making console RPGs. Now that people have an American alternative to things that were once almost exclusively Japanese, they'll look for any reason to say their alternative is better. It's no surprise that soon after XBox came out, Nintendo suddenly went from the best thing ever to being billed as "immature", "kiddie", etc, etc. Oh, and this is another good one: "I really don't like anime, except Avatar...but that was made in America." If I had a nickle for every time I heard that.
I'm not a huge fan of Japanese-made games. At least not recent ones. They're still following the formula they established back with the original Final Fantasy and whatever the first visual novel was. Western games, however, aren't much less guilty, considering Call of Duty's clones. The people who take the time to call a game "generic" (who have actually thought it through) are probably looking for innovation, and unfortunately, they won't find it unless they look to the indies.
Now that I think of it, anime and manga may just be the same way. A few weeks ago, I did a little experiment I'd like to share: I watched School Days and Baccano side-by-side. During this experiment, it struck me just how similar games and anime were as art forms.
I watched Baccano first. It opened up with an interesting analysis of its own storytelling methods, showed some brutal action scenes, interesting happenings (guy gets his fingers cut off and they heal themselves), and generally interesting stuff. I'd never seen an anime like that before, and I was immediately engaged. Just before I clicked the second episode, however, I had the idea to do this experiment. So I went to School Days.
I didn't make it past the first five minutes. It opened up with a teenage guy narrating his life, like so many other animes I'd seen. He liked a girl and couldn't work up the courage to tell her. He had a supportive friend, another girl, who wanted to help him confess. At that point, I just couldn't keep watching. If I hadn't watched Baccano immediately before that, I might have sat through the whole thing. But my newly-set standards were just too high.
Baccano was new. I hadn't seen an anime like it before.
School days was not. I'd seen many, many animes just like it.
I can only see the same thing so many times before I get bored of it. That applies to anime, manga, games, books, music, etc. It's not romance stories I hate (though I'm initially opposed to them, so it takes a good one to pull me in), it's a lack of innovation. Occasionally, a specific style may not appeal to me (romance, pop music, FPS games), but an innovative title in any of those styles will probably appeal to me.
So after all that, I can conclude that not everyone who hates manga/anime (and Japanese stuff in general) is a total short-sighted jerk. There are some. Most of them, I'd say. But I'd refrain from calling them out on being short-sighted if I didn't try to understand them first.