|
Namtab posted:Are you really so dense as to confuse a critical analysis with a direct callout of the show as bad? See the second one I get because that's basically what's happening. The colonialism one I don't because of the leaps needed to get there. There's no subjugation, exploitation, or forced convention of one culture or society to another. Rimuru's entire schtick is that he's more about uniting pre-existing groups within a location into a framework of mutually beneficial co-operation, especially by turning temporary alliances of conveniences into something more lasting. Both on a smaller scale with the Jura-Tempest Alliance and on a larger scale with the newly formed Alliance and the nations of Dwargon and Blumund. A critique or critical analysis doesn't somehow mean it's right. It's all subject to independent opinion in how you choose to see it, but nothing in the framework of the series has shown bits of colonialism beyond the MC just wanting to recreate some things from home or sharing knowledge that he thinks might be useful. Again, Vorpal Cat's comment should have just closed this. Vorpal Cat posted:One place where the colonial interpretation of Slime falls apart is that most of the knowledge and advancements that happen to the goblin village aren't from Rimuru himself, but from the various allies he makes among the other races who live in the region, spreading existing knowledge and customs instead of introducing them in the first place. The goblins learn armor making and construction techniques from the dwarfs, silk weaving and other textile manufacturing from the ogres, and improved farming from the lizard men. Also many of these foreign experts are themselves refugees who join the increasingly multicultural society that the village, later city, is becoming. The most "imposing his culture on the natives" thing Rimuru does is introduce them to the concept of indoor plumbing and japanese style baths
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 10:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 13:44 |
|
|
doomrider7 posted:See the second one I get because that's basically what's happening. The colonialism one I don't because of the leaps needed to get there. There's no subjugation, exploitation, or forced convention of one culture or society to another. This isn't what colonialism means to everyone. This might not even be what it means to most people. There are plenty of people who view colonialism as an uplifting and this is what Slime presents, colonialism in its ideal form. You take a people with no culture (or no "worthwhile" culture) and introduce ideas from your own, changing their lives for the better. doomrider7 posted:Rimuru's entire schtick is that he's more about uniting pre-existing groups within a location into a framework of mutually beneficial co-operation, especially by turning temporary alliances of conveniences into something more lasting. Both on a smaller scale with the Jura-Tempest Alliance and on a larger scale with the newly formed Alliance and the nations of Dwargon and Blumund. How is this relevant? Like sure this is a neat part of the series, how does it change the presentation of the goblins which is the thing we are discussing? Here's a question for you, what does an intentionally pro-colonialism work look like to you? You say that this isn't colonialist because there's no subjugation or exploitation but would a pro-colonialism work portray colonialism like that? Of course not, they'd portray colonialism in the best light possible, they're helping these people. Again I'm not saying that the series is doing this intentionally or that it's the worst thing ever, just that it's a thing that exists.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 10:36
|
|
|
Did you not have to do a unit or two on different critical theories in school? Looking at the work with a colonialism critique is not saying that the work is 100% colonial in nature and that there is necessarily a 1 to 1 correlation between it and historic instances of colonialism. Just as you can look at a work through a feminist lens without sating that the work is inherently problematic. The interest in a colonial critique of the series is because of the elements present in the story. It is not an argument that the whole thing is a crass slime man's burden paean. Considering how Rimiru's society ends up working, there's probably a pretty decent Marxist deconstruction of it as well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 10:37
|
|
|
ViggyNash posted:Valvrave was a bad show, but it was overall inoffensive. Uh, was this a completely different show in your timeline? There's a reason people called the show Valverape
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 10:56
|
|
|
You make the mistake of arguing whether critical analysis is right or wrong. Critical analysis does not care whether you personally agree with it - it can only be valid or invalid depending on whether or not I can build an argument for an interpretation which I can. Nothing you have said invalidates my argument, all you’re doing is posting wordy variations on “I disagree, stop saying the thing I like is this bad thing”
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 11:12
|
|
|
Heck I like the slime show, it’s good fun. It’s ok to like a thing and still recognise potentially problematic interpretations. It’s what separates critical thought from mindless consumption
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 11:15
|
|
|
Basically everything has problematic interpretations. Do people really have to get heated over an interpretation of a fun and wholesome slimeguy isekai?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 11:20
|
|
|
Captain Invictus posted:I would be interested if you were to watch slime isekai and post your takes on aspects of it being colonialism or not tbh I don't feel highly qualified to make some serious effortposts on it but if I ever get around to watching it I'll post something! Dire Lemming posted:This isn't what colonialism means to everyone. This might not even be what it means to most people. There are plenty of people who view colonialism as an uplifting and this is what Slime presents, colonialism in its ideal form. You take a people with no culture (or no "worthwhile" culture) and introduce ideas from your own, changing their lives for the better. Yea. It's not that uncommon to see a lack of violence in colonialist works because the message being pushed is that it's for the best for everyone involved and having people getting killed/imprisoned/etc for not conforming kinda puts a damper on that (and of course in such works if they do they usually make them out to be somehow deserving of such a fate).
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 11:22
|
|
|
Sharkopath posted:Saul Williams rules, Wark knows it.  Also, the arguments about slime isekai have proven interesting, even though my own interest for the anime kinda disappeared after episode 4. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 11:29
|
|
|
my question about the colonialist reading is: how could the story have been altered to prevent such a reading? is the basic premise of the story intrinsically linked to colonialism, or could the story have been told without the pro-colonialist message?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 11:41
|
|
|
You could interpret basically all isekai in a fantasy setting as at least hinting colonialism because the characters bring modern ideas to people often literally in the middle ages. I don't think you can really avoid that unless the protag just actively ignores every problem they could fix with modern Japanese knowledge and technology.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 11:45
|
|
|
We can learn a lot about things by taking a step back or looking at it through a different lens. No, scratch that. We SHOULD learn a lot of things by taking a step back and looking at it through a different lens. Every piece of media can benefit from doing so. But if you want to do so. You gotta put some effort into it. Explain the why, what it means, what was the authors intent, can it be improved etc etc. But you can't just walk into a conversation drop the line "Slime Isekai is colonial savior-y" And then. Leave it at that. That's not being critical, that's not an analysis.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 11:46
|
|
|
The authors intent ultimately doesn’t matter
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 12:05
|
|
|
Namtab posted:The authors intent ultimately doesn’t matter Oh good, it's this discussion again. Yeah, it kinda does. Death of the Author is really good when you're a few hours away from a due paper and you gotta make up some bullshit your professor can't actively call bullshit on. But it's essentially a circle jerk when it comes to actual critical discourse because ultimately there are very few things you can't argue about anything. You can choose to twist, turn and otherwise stretch whatever you want in any way you want because authorial intent doesn't matter and no one else besides your interpretation matters to DotA. Reverting to "Authorial intent doesn't matter" is going "That's just, like, your opinion." Or pulling down your pants and making GBS threads on the floor as a response.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 13:01
|
|
|
Nonsense. If a character's wearing blue clothing it means they're depressed, 100% of the time. My highschool English teacher told me so.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 13:05
|
|
|
Let me try to explain the colonialist reading as simple as possible: someone see this text about an individual successfully uplifting a primitive world into a perfectly happy utopia, and use it to either: (a) Justify previous acts of colonialism, which I might remind you were inundated with propaganda about how the natives were being done a favor, or (b) Justify future acts of colonialism and intervention, because it will totally work this time, why, look at this happy slime and what he managed to pull off!
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 13:13
|
|
|
Onmi posted:Oh good, it's this discussion again. Yeah, it kinda does. Death of the Author is really good when you're a few hours away from a due paper and you gotta make up some bullshit your professor can't actively call bullshit on. But it's essentially a circle jerk when it comes to actual critical discourse because ultimately there are very few things you can't argue about anything. You can choose to twist, turn and otherwise stretch whatever you want in any way you want because authorial intent doesn't matter and no one else besides your interpretation matters to DotA. It doesn't mean that people can make up whatever they want it means they come to their conclusions by arguing based on what's in the text instead of what the author says outside of the text. You still gotta justify those conclusions. It's not that wild of an idea!
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 13:17
|
|
|
If Slime anime does explicitly show that each race has something to contribute and that they're stronger together than apart that would seem to directly contradict a colonialist reading.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 13:20
|
|
|
Srice posted:It doesn't mean that people can make up whatever they want it means they come to their conclusions by arguing based on what's in the text instead of what the author says outside of the text. You still gotta justify those conclusions. It's not that wild of an idea! Yes, but you can justify anything. Try it some time, it's actually quite fun, purposefully choose an outlandish or contradictory topic for the text in question and then just do it. You'll find how easy it is, just by adjusting how you think and purposefully looking for something, to justify that conclusion. And if someone tells you you're stupid or how it clearly isn't, well, that's how you read the text, and that's not arguable. Because you provided your evidence. It doesn't matter if your evidence requires an absurd level of misreading the text, so long as you justify it, it's okay. That's why I don't consider "Well, death of the author" as a valid argument. Yes, of course, naturally their are interpretations of the text not the literal text, and yes you should be critical of the text and not just listen to the author's words. This isn't an argument that it's purely about authorial intent. But that the sheer idea that the "Author doesn't matter" leads to essentially "I can say whatever I want so long as I can write it in a way that it's justified." And most of the time you'll find you can.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 13:26
|
|
|
I do truly love DotA, however it's often used as an excuse to be a dick and I understand if that puts people off.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 13:27
|
|
|
Onmi posted:Yes, but you can justify anything. Try it some time, it's actually quite fun, purposefully choose an outlandish or contradictory topic for the text in question and then just do it. You'll find how easy it is, just by adjusting how you think and purposefully looking for something, to justify that conclusion. And if someone tells you you're stupid or how it clearly isn't, well, that's how you read the text, and that's not arguable. Because you provided your evidence. It doesn't matter if your evidence requires an absurd level of misreading the text, so long as you justify it, it's okay. Why not offer a counterargument towards what's being said instead of talking about how outlandish and crazy it is that someone could go into a work with a focus on colonialism in their critique. "Writing in a way that's justified" is just making a good, solid argument, no?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 13:41
|
|
|
Onmi posted:Oh good, it's this discussion again. Yeah, it kinda does. Death of the Author is really good when you're a few hours away from a due paper and you gotta make up some bullshit your professor can't actively call bullshit on. But it's essentially a circle jerk when it comes to actual critical discourse because ultimately there are very few things you can't argue about anything. You can choose to twist, turn and otherwise stretch whatever you want in any way you want because authorial intent doesn't matter and no one else besides your interpretation matters to DotA. The type of comfort one would choose to prolong and protect, an heirloom.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 13:48
|
|
|
Such a good poem lmao.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 13:49
|
|
|
Its super cool seeing it in action.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 13:49
|
|
|
Is it really so odd to imagine that people might put clear, consistent themes into their work accidentally? Especially in the hotbed of raging, unchecked id that is LNs and WNs? I'm sure we can all think of, say, an anti-racist work that ended up being hilariously racist in a different way, for instance. Or, hell, just look at the way Woke Feninist Dude Joss Whedon writes women. You could get an entire textbook out of that alone.
Darth Walrus fucked around with this message at 13:59 on Feb 7, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 13:55
|
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:Is it really so odd to imagine that people might put clear, consistent themes into their work accidentally? Especially in the hotbed of raging, unchecked id that is LNs and WNs? I'm sure we can all think of, say, an anti-racist work that ended up being hilariously racist in a different way, for instance. The author super duper promises they arent racist so it doesnt matter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 13:56
|
|
|
Sorry to my friend bees but ill have to kill even the accepted isekai likers now, ive decided their judgement is in doubt.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 13:58
|
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:Is it really so odd to imagine that people might put clear, consistent themes into their work accidentally? Especially in the hotbed of raging, unchecked id that is LNs and WNs? I'm sure we can all think of, say, an anti-racist work that ended up being hilariously racist in a different way, for instance. Heck to use an example of something frequently mentioned in this thread I'm sure if the goblin slayer guy were to be asked if he thought his work was racist he'd say no. But it sure would be a doozy of a look to accuse anyone who said that actually it is racist to just be circlejerking.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 14:00
|
|
|
Srice posted:Heck to use an example of something frequently mentioned in this thread I'm sure if the goblin slayer guy were to be asked if he thought his work was racist he'd say no. But it sure would be a doozy of a look to accuse anyone who said that actually it is racist to just be circlejerking. All these posters you are trying to explain basic crit to already did just that lmao.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 14:02
|
|
|
Sharkopath posted:All these posters you are trying to explain basic crit to already did just that lmao. Welp!
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 14:04
|
|
|
All the words against death of the author that amount to “people may use it to make an argument I don’t agree with”.. Wildly stretching the text to make a disingenuous argument could very well be the definition of invalid critique. I’ve no doubt it happens, but that argument is probably going to be easily refuted. I can’t make a facist reading of slime valid, because there’s nothing to support that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 14:14
|
|
|
Orson Scott card can insist all he wants that Enders game isnt intended as pro facist because who would admit to that, but that doesn’t invalidate the interpretation of Enders game as apologia for facism because it’s an argument supported by the text. The authors opinion isn’t particularly relevant because at best they aren’t aware of the things that influence them and at worst they’re lying
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 14:21
|
|
|
Srice posted:Welp! For some reason crit from the minority perspective keeps getting dismissed, oh well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 14:22
|
|
|
When it comes to "death of the author", I am reminded of JK Rowling after the fact announcing that Dumbledore was gay. There's nothing really written in Harry Potter to give a string indication of this being the case, nor does it seem to inform, reinforce, reflect or motivate the character as written. It was written post-writing and unable to affect the reading of the books much, if at all. It almost comes off as pandering after the fact and we have no clue if the intent was always there, and so it is completely meaningless to the story as it is. Tying this into the topic, we have no clue about author intent, because we can't read minds and even if we could, there's a lot of cultural baggage to dig through. I don't think the author of any issekai series set out with the goal of writing pro-imperalism narratives, but it's what they know and you write what you know. They could write it with a more critical eye, buuut they are writing chuuni garbage, so chuuni garbage is what you get.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 14:43
|
|
|
Namtab posted:Remember that critique of a show is not critique of you as a fan Karen has never been powerful
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 14:45
|
|
|
If your main exposure to critical theory is from SA then you know it as an excuse to ignore the majority of the text so you can make a contrarian hot take, then use other people's lack of knowledge of critical theory as a reason to ignore their arguments. There are definitely good ways to use it but examples of that on these forums are extremely thin on the ground.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 14:53
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:If your main exposure to critical theory is from SA then you know it as an excuse to ignore the majority of the text so you can make a contrarian hot take, then use other people's lack of knowledge of critical theory as a reason to ignore their arguments. There are definitely good ways to use it but examples of that on these forums are extremely thin on the ground. Chinua Achebe changed the course of literature by showing Heart of Darkness was colonialist using critical theory It's your friend Roland Barthes is my friend
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 15:01
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:If your main exposure to critical theory is from SA then you know it as an excuse to ignore the majority of the text so you can make a contrarian hot take, then use other people's lack of knowledge of critical theory as a reason to ignore their arguments. There are definitely good ways to use it but examples of that on these forums are extremely thin on the ground. Yeah there’s a lot of goons running contrarian critique as their gimmick
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 15:04
|
|
|
Me and Roland Barthes' ghost are going to the wrestling matches this weekend
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 15:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 13:44 |
|
Onmi posted:Yes, but you can justify anything. Try it some time, it's actually quite fun, purposefully choose an outlandish or contradictory topic for the text in question and then just do it. You'll find how easy it is, just by adjusting how you think and purposefully looking for something, to justify that conclusion. And if someone tells you you're stupid or how it clearly isn't, well, that's how you read the text, and that's not arguable. Because you provided your evidence. It doesn't matter if your evidence requires an absurd level of misreading the text, so long as you justify it, it's okay. "lol this mode of critique is so dumb and easy, see how easy it is to do if you gently caress it up on every conceivable level and do everything wrong?"
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2019 15:11
|
|
