Here's one of my rarer, more reflective pieces. Hopefully it won't be as radical as The Necessity was, but I'd just like to point out something that's many people have casually passed off as an obvious statement, but something that might be worth it to take a second to ponder over.
And so I write.
For the most part, the reviews were fine. Judging is, in the end, based on your tastes and your tastes only - and if you don't like that type of humor, then it's fine to say that Nichijou is not as likeable as, say, Gurren Lagann. However, some posts started to make me angry. As a point, they attacked not the discrepancy between what they like and what Nichijou was, but rather the overall quality of the series and its story elements. The above link and most of the arguments against Nichijou are centered around two points:
1) The humor is juvenile and thus becomes predictable and less funny.
The link above borrows the term sophomoric, used in one of (the infamous) Roger Ebert's movie reviews to shoot down a random comedy film. The general argument is that due to the fact that it's based on mainly slapstick and cute stuff, you can tell that violence is coming from a mile away. Because they know that somewhere along the line, one of the four main girls are going to be on the ground, face firmly planted into the dirt, there's little pleasure in each mini-episode.
2) Because it almost entirely focuses on small bits of humor, Nichijou is of lower quality than other anime series with serious tones.
This is a more standard argument. Nichijou doesn't go into drama or even think about being serious/somewhat realistic. In comparison to other series with much more sweeping, profound themes, Nichijou should not be over-evaluated.
Hopefully I can show you that not every single thing that is quality cries.
And so I write.
More Nichijou pictures. Because I can.
Since I am just such a rabid fan of Nichijou (well, not that much...but I guess yeah sort of), I decided to see what other people thought of the series (fully ready to destroy any haters on the way). As much as my peers may disagree with what I think of some idea or object, it's never a bad idea to recognize different perspectives. After all, a different perspective offers a different focus on things, and the point of analysis and thought is to try and focus on everything, or at least as much as possible. So I went online and found...a very polarized batch of reviews. Some were drooling over the series and others were less than happy. Reviews in one place recommended Nichijou to everyone out there, while other summaries disparaged the comedic elements of the series.For the most part, the reviews were fine. Judging is, in the end, based on your tastes and your tastes only - and if you don't like that type of humor, then it's fine to say that Nichijou is not as likeable as, say, Gurren Lagann. However, some posts started to make me angry. As a point, they attacked not the discrepancy between what they like and what Nichijou was, but rather the overall quality of the series and its story elements. The above link and most of the arguments against Nichijou are centered around two points:
1) The humor is juvenile and thus becomes predictable and less funny.
The link above borrows the term sophomoric, used in one of (the infamous) Roger Ebert's movie reviews to shoot down a random comedy film. The general argument is that due to the fact that it's based on mainly slapstick and cute stuff, you can tell that violence is coming from a mile away. Because they know that somewhere along the line, one of the four main girls are going to be on the ground, face firmly planted into the dirt, there's little pleasure in each mini-episode.
2) Because it almost entirely focuses on small bits of humor, Nichijou is of lower quality than other anime series with serious tones.
This is a more standard argument. Nichijou doesn't go into drama or even think about being serious/somewhat realistic. In comparison to other series with much more sweeping, profound themes, Nichijou should not be over-evaluated.
Hopefully I can show you that not every single thing that is quality cries.
Q_________Q
Let's address the first point. Is Nichijou hopelessly predictable? And if it is, does it decrease the quality of its humor?
When addressing this, I'd really like to point out that I hate how the argument is structured. In essence, these arguments do not preclude specific comedic routes - like one specific joke or one specific topic for a joke. No, these arguments encompass the entirety of a genre of comedy - that is, the critic claims that slapstick is predictable and thus shallow. I would definitely disagree with this argument and instead propose that humor is not affected by "predictability" unless you know exactly how the routine will go. Furthermore, only humor that is based on the fact that it is unique (e.g.: a one-time story) is really affected by repetition. Arguments as to the decrease in humor due to the fact that one has watched a particular scene too many times will NOT be considered, since that's simply not unique across any medium - after all, how many tears can you really jerk from watching Ushio lose her toy over and over again?
To see the differences between the predictable types of humor and Nichijou, let's quickly pull up a familiar face - Baka to Test to Shoukanjuu Ni!. Almost every other episode of Baka to Test Ni uses an intro scene that we've all gone through before - that is, Shouko & the girls punishing Yuuji I would say that this is a clear example of how predictable humor can become stale. Maybe the first time Yuuji was taken down by a taser and tortured was funny. Perhaps the second time too. But when you know almost exactly the weapon that they're going to use, when it'll trigger, and the cast's reactions, the violent scenes get boring quickly. I definitely think that this was one significant reason as to why Baka to Test Ni was worse than its predecessor.
To see the differences between the predictable types of humor and Nichijou, let's quickly pull up a familiar face - Baka to Test to Shoukanjuu Ni!. Almost every other episode of Baka to Test Ni uses an intro scene that we've all gone through before - that is, Shouko & the girls punishing Yuuji I would say that this is a clear example of how predictable humor can become stale. Maybe the first time Yuuji was taken down by a taser and tortured was funny. Perhaps the second time too. But when you know almost exactly the weapon that they're going to use, when it'll trigger, and the cast's reactions, the violent scenes get boring quickly. I definitely think that this was one significant reason as to why Baka to Test Ni was worse than its predecessor.
Now that we've more clearly defined the point as to when things become truly "predictable", let's take a look at Nichijou and its critical reception. Yes, the block will probably hit someone. Yes, something surreal will happen. Yes, absurd deadpans will occur. The point is, it's not at a stage where the predictability takes away from the humor. Just because someone guessed that a block will fly off and hit someone doesn't mean that they completely guessed that it would hit Mio with the force of a thousand fists - and she would reply by throwing it back in kind. Even if it was completely predicted, the humor isn't unique; we've seen people getting hit by toys/grapefruit juice/pillows all the time in shows. However, the timing, context, and method are all different, and taking "you've seen it once, you've seen it all" disallows most comedic ventures out there.
As an analogy, I'd just like to bring up people like Russell Peters or Robin Williams. You know that these people are going to make fun of funny accents, cultures, Indians, and French people. What you don't know is the next punchline that's going to hit you - and that's what keeps these comedians going. If you think these comedians aren't very good, well, a lot of people would like to disagree with you.
As for the seemingly just random nature of Nichijou, I simply think that that's a matter of taste - some comedies are based more on references (Seitokai no Ichizon and Lucky Star); others are much more crazy (Azumangah Daioh and Nichijou). It's hard to say which one is "better", even in a relative fashion - which leads directly into my next segment...
As an analogy, I'd just like to bring up people like Russell Peters or Robin Williams. You know that these people are going to make fun of funny accents, cultures, Indians, and French people. What you don't know is the next punchline that's going to hit you - and that's what keeps these comedians going. If you think these comedians aren't very good, well, a lot of people would like to disagree with you.
"These ads always show manly men doing manly things! I just killed a small animal and now it's time for a light beer."
As for the seemingly just random nature of Nichijou, I simply think that that's a matter of taste - some comedies are based more on references (Seitokai no Ichizon and Lucky Star); others are much more crazy (Azumangah Daioh and Nichijou). It's hard to say which one is "better", even in a relative fashion - which leads directly into my next segment...
This cat glows later on. That last sentence is not a mistype.
The second point hits across a much broader spectrum than just what Nichijou seems to represent. It argues that a focus on simple comedy reduces Nichijou's quality to less than that of a "deeper", more cathartic series such as CLANNAD. This is definitely one of the arguments that I have the most frustrations with when dealing with many people (and sometimes with myself) - this idea that different series that appeal well to different areas simply cannot be coherently compared with each other on a non-technical level (the things other than sound and graphics).
Yes, deep, "soul-searching" series are good because they make you think "harder" about something. But by trying to devalue humor relative to more "profound" series, we not only contradict ourselves, but we also limit our capabilities to fully enjoy all series. Take a group of adults just joking around. Say they see a cat playing the keyboard and then start trading political jokes afterwards. Nobody in their right minds would say, "Oh, I'm so glad that we moved away from that stupid cat and onto this high level of humor. That was barbaric." Why not? Simply because it isn't. Both represent different areas on the spectrum of humor and thus are appreciated fully in their different areas. Why should an individual work to devalue one type just because he/she likes one kind of humor over the other?
And so I contend that Nichijou is a really good series, just like Gurren Lagann was a really good series. However, while I appreciate TTGL for its flamboyant showdowns and manly tears, I also highly respect Nichijou for its masterful work in absurd humor. I like both series and it pains me to see people saying phrases like "TTGL is way better than Shinryaku! Ika Musume [as an example]", because...well...how do you know? Is the squid-girl humor in TTGL better than the squid-girl humor in Ika Musume? Do mechas explode in a much less flashier fashion in Ika Musume than in TTGL? It doesn't make sense.
In conclusion, I still think Nichijou is a masterful (perhaps not yet a masterpiece) series that deserves all the praise it can get - whether it jerks tears or otherwise. And I fully hope that there are more series like this in the future, because we need all the laughter we can get in our busy lives.
Yes, deep, "soul-searching" series are good because they make you think "harder" about something. But by trying to devalue humor relative to more "profound" series, we not only contradict ourselves, but we also limit our capabilities to fully enjoy all series. Take a group of adults just joking around. Say they see a cat playing the keyboard and then start trading political jokes afterwards. Nobody in their right minds would say, "Oh, I'm so glad that we moved away from that stupid cat and onto this high level of humor. That was barbaric." Why not? Simply because it isn't. Both represent different areas on the spectrum of humor and thus are appreciated fully in their different areas. Why should an individual work to devalue one type just because he/she likes one kind of humor over the other?
And so I contend that Nichijou is a really good series, just like Gurren Lagann was a really good series. However, while I appreciate TTGL for its flamboyant showdowns and manly tears, I also highly respect Nichijou for its masterful work in absurd humor. I like both series and it pains me to see people saying phrases like "TTGL is way better than Shinryaku! Ika Musume [as an example]", because...well...how do you know? Is the squid-girl humor in TTGL better than the squid-girl humor in Ika Musume? Do mechas explode in a much less flashier fashion in Ika Musume than in TTGL? It doesn't make sense.
Pictured: Squid Girl episode 2
In conclusion, I still think Nichijou is a masterful (perhaps not yet a masterpiece) series that deserves all the praise it can get - whether it jerks tears or otherwise. And I fully hope that there are more series like this in the future, because we need all the laughter we can get in our busy lives.
-----
In other news, Ad-Lib Anime Kenkyuusho has finally been subbed! Too bad the animation isn't as high quality as I thought it would be...ah well, guess you can't ask for too much on the fly.I don't get this series. Oh and it's bad.
No comments:
Post a Comment