The term 'manga' and the race issue.

[The Xenos]

I recently read Drama Con and there was an interesting bit about American 'manga' and the race issue. While I've constantly complain about calling American books 'manga' and think it should be relegated to the Japanese market, I never intended it to be a racial issue.

Yet I have to wonder what role does race play in the American and Japanese markets for comics and what is called manga. There's an interesting scene in Drama Con about it. Plus I bring up some interesting stories about ethnicity and race in Japan.

I brought this up a bit in the African Americans in anime thread, but I also talk about Japan / Korean relations and Americans in Japan too. So I figured I could start a new thread. Anyway, here's my recent blog post that I finally finished about the topic.

http://www.comics2film.com/b/index.php?blog=11&title=good_american_manga_and_the_race_issue&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

[SAMAS]

I don't see it as a matter of ethnicity, but of country. Just like when Kia Asamiya (Silent Mobius) was drawing for X-Men, it was still considered a comic. If an american or european were to move to Japan and start making a series for one of the publishers there, it would be a manga.

[Kevin M.]

I don't see it as a matter of ethnicity, but of country. Just like when Kia Asamiya (Silent Mobius) was drawing for X-Men, it was still considered a comic. If an american or european were to move to Japan and start making a series for one of the publishers there, it would be a manga.


Yep, it is the art style, not the race, that makes the product what it is.

[The Xenos]

Naw. I'd say art style is irrelevent. My internet is stinking right now otherwise I'd post this image of a bunch of manga artists with distinct style. Compare Crying Freeman to Yotsuba&! to Berserk to One Piece to Trigun to Blame!. All very different styles.

The thing that links them together as manga is that they are published in Japan, in the Japanese market by Japanese companies. Yeah, it's not ethnicity. It's country, it's nationality. Manga is comics published in Japan.

Manga has not much to do with art. Anyone can copy another person's style. (How well it's done, that's up to debate.) Manga is a business. If you publish in the Japanese market where comics are called manga? Yeah, then you're making manga. That's my two cents. Certainly there are many arguments about the definition.

Again, in this issue, I have to wonder if race and therefore racism plays a role. Are white people or other American ethnicities considered less manga than native Japanese? Are Koreans? Crap. I forgot to mention how China and Korea have their own words for comics, though I've mentioned it in other blog posts. Why does TokyoPop call Korean manhwa like Priest 'manga'?

Crap, that's another racial comment I've said before and forgot to make again. It's almost like they group all Asian artists together. Pretty much the old stereotype that 'All Asians look the same'. If you ask me, saying that all manga artists draw the same can be called prejudiced and even racist.

[Quilt]

The word "manga" is just the Japanese word for comics. It has nothing to do with ethnicity or art-style or even quality of work.

The use of the word manga in the western world is generally just used to refer to a comic which was created in Japan. Again, it has nothing to do with ethnicity or art-style or even quality of work.

Some people attach far too much meaning to the word when it actually covers an extremely broad and generalized category of comics (unless you're using the word in the sense that it means "comics", in which case the word literally refers to ALL comics, including anything from any country in the world.)

[Armless Penguin]

If you ask me, saying that all manga artists draw the same can be called prejudiced and even racist.

And I'd say that's really pushing it. The fact of the matter here is that it's a marketing decision and that it has absolutely nothing to do with race. What the word "manga" means in Japan is almost irrelevant at this point, because in America, to both the consumer base and the publishing industry, it has become a catch-all term indicative of black-and-white, Asian-produced, and similarly art-styled (and no matter what you argue, Xenos, there are similarities in the art of all of those books) comics. This isn't really a bad thing, though it can't really be called a good thing either, but to say that it borders on racism is frankly ridiculous. If we had never referred to manga by its proper name would this even be a problem?

It's the same situation as has happened with any number of foreign products over the years--adopting a foreign name and then changing or expanding on that definition. Whether or not you agree with this change is up to you, but I think there are times when people make it out to be WAY more of a problem or a conspiracy than it actually is, when all it really boils down to is the same sort of tactics imported goods have always undergone in order to find a market overseas.

[The Xenos]

Well, I ask people to rethink this catch all term, this American definition. I think it's just not very intelligent and it's not fair or equal. Excuse me if I think America can be a bit more intelligent than that. Excuse me if I think better of my country, or at least try to.

I still think we need to consider racism and stereotypes when thinking about it.

First, the very act of saying all these books are similar is blatantly a stereotype. It's not a racial stereotype, but you are saying all these artists look the same. The racial stereotype comes when people say all these Japanese artists look alike.

Then some lump Koreans into it saying that Koreans look like Japanese artists. Whoa. That's a whole controversy bomb shell right there, especially if you say something like that in Japan or Korea. TokyoPop does this. Been doing it from their first wave of graphic novel / tankobon with manwah Priest.

Then you have jerks like the character in DramaCon who say that Americans can't draw manga because they're not Japanese. They're not 'pure'. Whoa. Add to that the character he was saying this to was black and.. wow. That one scene was the spark that made me think of linking all these racial stories together along with issues of American manga vs 'pure' manga.

I don't think it's a conspiracy. I think it's almost this underlying inherent ignorance combined with some underlying racism. Really, you haven't heard of the stereotype of lumping all Asians together as one group? Saying that all Japanese people look the same? Is that not happening when people say Japanese artists look the same? C'mon. It can't be a mere coincidence. All I'm asking is for people to step back and think why they say these things. Because you can find wonderful differences if you're not too busy saying all these Japanese artists look the same.

Why is there a push for a homogeneous manga style? I would say there's a push for this in Japan. Like I said in the blog, some push for an ethnic purity and homogeneous ethnicity too. They frown upon nonconformity and interracial dating in Japan. So when I hear the same crap going on in artwork, excuse me if I take note of it.

Also, I talk about the manga stamp. It's is a business thing, not an art thing. Sure some artists argue it, like that artist who made that manga manifesto thing. Yet they can't be serious without acknowledging the money issue. You're not creating pure art in a vacuum, kids. You're making a product too. Hell, that's a big thing about manga. It's one hell of a product. They sell better than US comics, both in the US and Japan. If you argue about manga and manga style on art terms only, you really need to take your head out of your butt. It's a big business as much as it is art. Just like the product should never ignore the art, the artist should not ignore the product.

[SpydaWeb]

Carl Horn at Darkhorse Manga commented on this in an interview I did with him some months ago. I'll see if I can transcribe the relevant segment.

The gist of his comments were that it was (as mentioned above) a business decision, to help expose the public to the foreign books that were getting buried under the blanket term 'comic book'. Something like that.

[The Real Nemo]

Well, I ask people to rethink this catch all term, this American definition. I think it's just not very intelligent and it's not fair or equal. Excuse me if I think America can be a bit more intelligent than that. Excuse me if I think better of my country, or at least try to.

I still think we need to consider racism and stereotypes when thinking about it.

First, the very act of saying all these books are similar is blatantly a stereotype. It's not a racial stereotype, but you are saying all these artists look the same. The racial stereotype comes when people say all these Japanese artists look alike.

Then some lump Koreans into it saying that Koreans look like Japanese artists. Whoa. That's a whole controversy bomb shell right there, especially if you say something like that in Japan or Korea. TokyoPop does this. Been doing it from their first wave of graphic novel / tankobon with manwah Priest.

Then you have jerks like the character in DramaCon who say that Americans can't draw manga because they're not Japanese. They're not 'pure'. Whoa. Add to that the character he was saying this to was black and.. wow. That one scene was the spark that made me think of linking all these racial stories together along with issues of American manga vs 'pure' manga.

I don't think it's a conspiracy. I think it's almost this underlying inherent ignorance combined with some underlying racism. Really, you haven't heard of the stereotype of lumping all Asians together as one group? Saying that all Japanese people look the same? Is that not happening when people say Japanese artists look the same? C'mon. It can't be a mere coincidence. All I'm asking is for people to step back and think why they say these things. Because you can find wonderful differences if you're not too busy saying all these Japanese artists look the same.

Why is there a push for a homogeneous manga style? I would say there's a push for this in Japan. Like I said in the blog, some push for an ethnic purity and homogeneous ethnicity too. They frown upon nonconformity and interracial dating in Japan. So when I hear the same crap going on in artwork, excuse me if I take note of it.

Also, I talk about the manga stamp. It's is a business thing, not an art thing. Sure some artists argue it, like that artist who made that manga manifesto thing. Yet they can't be serious without acknowledging the money issue. You're not creating pure art in a vacuum, kids. You're making a product too. Hell, that's a big thing about manga. It's one hell of a product. They sell better than US comics, both in the US and Japan. If you argue about manga and manga style on art terms only, you really need to take your head out of your butt. It's a big business as much as it is art. Just like the product should never ignore the art, the artist should not ignore the product.
I don't quite get how you made the leap that saying all manga is similar is equal to saying that all manga artists look the same. It's the art that's being compared, not the artists. I'm not saying this is true either, but I don't think what the artists themselves look like is something most American manga readers really care about.

[The Xenos]

I'm just saying that the argument that the art of all Japanese artists have the same style and look alike sounds oddly familiar. It reminds me of the stereotype that "All Japanese or Asians look alike."

Of course, I disagree with that. Personally, I think it stems from that people not raised around Asian populations aren't used to looking at Asian people and therefore they are not used to distinguishing features.

Similarly, I think people saying that all manga looks like need to read more manga. They should study it more and notice the differences. I think it's wrong to just group them all together as one style instead of recognizing different artists and their styles.


I myself have noticed some ability to distinguish styles more upon further study. Heck, I've also done the same with Asian actors and Asian people. While similar, there are some differences between Chinese, Japanese, Korean and other Asian ethnicities.

Same could be said for my own gene pool, with Greeks, Portuguese, Italians, Jews, Arabs and others around the Mediterranean. It's just I'm used to recognizing them, but am not so used to recognizing Asian ethnicities.

Another example would be food. Italian, Greek, Lebanese. Chinese, Japanese, Korean. Related, but different. To an outsider it's all Mediterranean or all Asian. Yet if you're familiar with the cultures, you know better than to just stereotype them into one blanket term. Damn. Now I'm hungry.

[Josh S]

While I've constantly complain about calling American books 'manga' and think it should be relegated to the Japanese market, I never intended it to be a racial issue.

Don't worry. It's not.

Naw. I'd say art style is irrelevent. My internet is stinking right now otherwise I'd post this image of a bunch of manga artists with distinct style. Compare Crying Freeman to Yotsuba&! to Berserk to One Piece to Trigun to Blame!. All very different styles.

The thing that links them together as manga is that they are published in Japan, in the Japanese market by Japanese companies. Yeah, it's not ethnicity. It's country, it's nationality. Manga is comics published in Japan.

Manga has not much to do with art. Anyone can copy another person's style. (How well it's done, that's up to debate.) Manga is a business. If you publish in the Japanese market where comics are called manga? Yeah, then you're making manga. That's my two cents. Certainly there are many arguments about the definition.

This I agree with. The definition has, of course, expanded to include anything that has the stereotypical "manga look" (big eyes, spikey hair, etc). It's a completely harmless morphing of language, though, and nothing more.



Again, in this issue, I have to wonder if race and therefore racism plays a role. Are white people or other American ethnicities considered less manga than native Japanese? Are Koreans? Crap. I forgot to mention how China and Korea have their own words for comics, though I've mentioned it in other blog posts. Why does TokyoPop call Korean manhwa like Priest 'manga'?

They probably do it because it's easier than having three or four different "genres".



If you ask me, saying that all manga artists draw the same can be called prejudiced and even racist.

It's not, though. It is, however, ignorant.


Then you have jerks like the character in DramaCon who say that Americans can't draw manga because they're not Japanese. They're not 'pure'. Whoa. Add to that the character he was saying this to was black and.. wow.

The purity comment is fairly ridiculous. The first could be chalked up to his view of what manga is, though. The fact that the character he said it to is Black makes absolutely no difference. At all.

I'm just saying that the argument that the art of all Japanese artists have the same style and look alike sounds oddly familiar. It reminds me of the stereotype that "All Japanese or Asians look alike."

Of course, I disagree with that. Personally, I think it stems from that people not raised around Asian populations aren't used to looking at Asian people and therefore they are not used to distinguishing features.

Well, yeah. People who aren't raised around certain races tend to see those races in generalities. I'm gradually starting to identify differences among different Asian races since I started working at my current job.


Another example would be food. Italian, Greek, Lebanese. Chinese, Japanese, Korean. Related, but different. To an outsider it's all Mediterranean or all Asian. Yet if you're familiar with the cultures, you know better than to just stereotype them into one blanket term. Damn. Now I'm hungry.

Stereotyping food? That's ridiculous.

[The Xenos]

Actually, on stereotyping food, it's not too far fetched. In particular I've noticed my parents and other adults not too exposed to various Asian cultures to expect Asian food to be like take out Chinese. I've had Chinese friends who say even that's not quite authentic Chinese food, but more so Americanized Chinese food.

I had to teach my parents and sometimes others that other Asian food, like Japanese or Thai or Korean, is somewhat different than Chinese. Plus a lot of people think Japanese food = sushi or simply over hype sushi as part of Japanese cuisine.

[Quibble]

I agree it’s about country of origin, and the limits of our perceptions. "Man Ga" in Japanese are just the words for comic. (Literally, "slow drawing".) In typical English fashion, however, the English language has appropriated the word manga to refer (mostly) to a specific style of art. Ironically, the trade collection format used here in the States is also refered to by the word manga as well, but if the same drawings are put into monthly format, we now call them comics. What a conundrum.

[Black Atom]

It's odd that I never hear about Japanese manga artists becoming so defensive and protective of the term "manga". Maybe that happens all the time, but I've never encountered that.

[Shameless Fanboy]

What's in a name? It's an old argument in which only names change...

Personally, I do think that "manga" has indeed become as umbrella marketing term in the U.S. to describe any comic from Asia or inspired by it. Sure, there is authentic manga and manwha (as well as Original English Language productions), but I think knowing the difference comes after you've been immersed in it awhile. By that point, you're already hooked and then it just becomes a point of being particular or more selective...

While calling everything that even remotely resembles "manga" isn't accurate, I don't think it's that horribly wrong as a marketing term to introduce new readers. Some people actually get confused trying to determine the difference between a graphic novel and a comic book...

[Arilou]

It's odd that I never hear about Japanese manga artists becoming so defensive and protective of the term "manga". Maybe that happens all the time, but I've never encountered that.

It doesen't, because american comics are manga too.

In Japan.

[Alex L]

Is it?

Or do they call it "komik-su"?

I don't necessarily see anything wrong with labeling a comic made in, and for the people of Japan, manga.

I do see the issue with labeling something that doesn't fit that criteria as manga, though.

[Rabid Trekkie]

Yeah, for me a manga is a comic from Japan. Take Kia Asamiya for instance, he did Batman: Child of Dreams. It may be an American character and therefore a comic book, but he used all of his own cultural influences so I consider it a manga. Tokyopop's Star Trek books on the other hand, while in a manga style really have nothing to do with Japan or writers and artists from there.

And as for the art in manga, I don't think its wrong to say that there are similarities. Now my experience with manga is limited (stupid low pay job) but I'm slowly collecting Trigun Maximum, Battle Angel Alita, and Berserk and already have all of Read or Die. While there are differences that set the art in each apart, there are also many similarities. This is only natural as newer or less talented artists immitate the greats before eventually getting their own style or could be its just what's big in Japan at the moment. Many American comics also look similar, or to go back further a lot of the classical art looks similar as people became neo-classical or whatever and there are no racist undertones. I think its common for artists to borrow from each other, adding their own twists on a concept to make it their own. Same thing is done with writing, an author comes up with some style and others follow in this new direction.

[AnimeAvatar]

IMHO, it is more of a visually racial thing. Understandably it unnerves some that such a thing is even possible but it is and can be. The concept of racisim and stereotypes is applied to most everything in life, from food to artwork, to speach, and even hobbies.

If you were to scatter representions of each artists style on a table, after looking at said table long enough, certain traits (more exaggerated expressions, specific or defined clothing and hair styles, etc.) would begin to stand out. The stereotypical spiky hair found in DBZ for example. To someone not used to seeing that art style it would be easy to assume it was all the same, much in the way some first time comic readers view that type of artwork. This would be an example of visual racisim/stereotyping.

It could be said to be blind ignorance yet at times i think there are people who understand this idea and incourage it.


I believe the main reason the 'comic' industries choose to use the term manga on such a wide basis is because it is now a term that society is getting used to hearing/seeing. If they suddenly chose to use the more accurate labels of manwha, manwah, true graphic novels,as well as the difference between them and American comics i have doubt that people would embrace them with such inthusiasim as with the label of manga. It might be that society has associated manga so strongly with the Japanese and Asian culture that companies choose not to change the terms in fear of confusing their target audience.


I am not really sure. Just random thoughts..

*note - most that i know understand manga as the oppostite of anime, in the idea that you watch anime and read manga. Both originating in Japan or other overseas countries and having similar styles.

[Josh S]

Actually, on stereotyping food, it's not too far fetched. In particular I've noticed my parents and other adults not too exposed to various Asian cultures to expect Asian food to be like take out Chinese. I've had Chinese friends who say even that's not quite authentic Chinese food, but more so Americanized Chinese food.

I had to teach my parents and sometimes others that other Asian food, like Japanese or Thai or Korean, is somewhat different than Chinese. Plus a lot of people think Japanese food = sushi or simply over hype sushi as part of Japanese cuisine.

Well, yeah. I'm sure it happens. I just don't get why you feel it matters, unless you're trying to make some slippery slope argument.

[Black Atom]

Well, yeah. I'm sure it happens. I just don't get why you feel it matters, unless you're trying to make some slippery slope argument.

See? The racism is already happening!

In all seriousness, I only see Americans disparaging other Americans for not reading "pure" manga or using the term improperly. I'm not sure how it's a potential race issue.

[IamtheRock3]

I thought it had to do with the way to read

somewhat backwards

from right to left

[Tommy]

I'm just saying that the argument that the art of all Japanese artists have the same style and look alike sounds oddly familiar. It reminds me of the stereotype that "All Japanese or Asians look alike."

Of course, I disagree with that. Personally, I think it stems from that people not raised around Asian populations aren't used to looking at Asian people and therefore they are not used to distinguishing features.

I'm curious, can you tell Irish from English from Dutch from German from Russian just by looking?

Or what about the hundred or so African ethnicities?

Manga is just a transposed word that in English refers to black and white comics read backwards, as other people have said. Protesting that Korean comics should have a different name is creating an insular community (something both American comics and Manga have done) which means that the only people who can participate are the already initiated.

[Totoro Man]

I called EVERYTHING comic books regardless of national origin for a long, long time. the only reason I use the word "manga" is if I want somebody (who already knows what the term means) to understand more readily what sort of comic book I'm talking about.

for instance, with my 6 year old neice, I simply call ALL visual narratives that use pictures on paper "comics". in the same way that "literature" encompasses "short stories", "novels" or "poetry" I use "comics" to include everything from "comic books", "comic strips" to "single panel comics" or even visual instructions for assembling model airplanes, vacuum cleaners, or lawnmowers.

if we're suggesting that "manga" can ONLY be Japanese and are then going to gripe about "racism". I don't understand this at all. if you're going to bother using the word "manga" why not go through the trouble of using the corresponding Korean or Cantonese or Mandarin words as well?

so long as I'm talking about the subject to somebody in English, I always use the word "comics". OR I simply explain that "manga is a Japanese word for comics". sure, maybe I'm ignorant on the details.

but WHY are we debataing this again? is it to feel superior, or what? :confused:

this point has already been made, but "manga" should NOT be assumed to represent any one visual style. just as "comics" could include something as diverse as Gary Larsen's "the Far Side" to Herge's "Tin Tin"; or "Peanuts" by Charles Schultz all the way over to "Spiderman" by Stan Lee and Steve Ditko. even still, you have more experimental artists like Art Spiegelman, Robert Crumb, or David Mack--who simply explore what bizarre ends the medium can be taken to, just for the hell of it.

if we're talking about an American artist who creates comics who borrows from Japanese visual conventions... then, yeah, I'd say he's making "comics". unless he's trying to market them specifically to a Japanese audience AND they get published in Japan then he's making comics.

you'll find that I'm fairly free-wheeling in my usage of the word "manga". because the minute "Batman" or "Peanuts" gets translated into Japanese for general consumption I'd call that "manga"... simply because it's "comics" intended for Japanese audiences.

(this may not make any difference, but I'm the product of an inter-racial marriage--so I have this bad habit of downplaying the race issue unless it seems absolutely necessary to KEEP it there).

no doubt, people can be snobs about the term "manga". it's no secret that a lot of Japanese people are racists (but this hardly makes them unusual when compared to the rest of the world!:rolleyes: )

furthermore, as an amateur artist, composer, musician, and writer I don't accord any one medium any SPECIAL significance as ALL mediums are equally valid forms of expression for the true artist and craftsman: a brilliantly rendered coat which serves its true purpose is better than a bad symphony; and an aircraft or car which is a manifestation of genius is equal to a comparably brilliant novel.

[Tommy]

for instance, with my 6 year old neice, I simply call ALL visual narratives that use pictures on paper "comics". in the same way that "literature" encompasses "short stories", "novels" or "poetry" I use "comics" to include everything from "comic books", "comic strips" to "single panel comics" or even visual instructions for assembling model airplanes, vacuum cleaners, or lawnmowers.

Literature encompasses comics, along with essays, biographies, histories. Which is why the modern usage of "Literature" has changed to mean any work that uses words to meaning high brow, intelligent works. The real meaning is so broad that it isn't particularly useful. The same thing happened with the word "art." Lacking the context of what literature you are talking about makes it a useless word. Similarly if you are sitting in front of a table with a newspaper scattered about and you ask someone "can you hand me the comics?" it means one thing while if you are sitting with a stack of comic books in front of you it means another. Although visual instructions are by no definition "comics."

Comic strips and comic books are related but very separated in format and presentation similar to how Television and Film are. Therefore treating them interchangeably is disingenuous. The fact that we refer to comic books as comic books is simply a throw back to the fact that they originally reprinted comic strips and not unique stories. A separate word never caught on. And Manga is extremely different from both comic strips and comic books.

if you're going to bother using the word "manga" why not go through the trouble of using the corresponding Korean or Cantonese or Mandarin words as well?
A fourteen year old girl who knows she likes Sailor Moon will probably check out the rest of the manga section when she is at the bookstore. However if there is a separate section for the Korean imports she is far less likely to check that out. Which leads to lower sales for the store, lower sales for the publishers, and the shopper might miss out on something good. And as far as I can tell there is nothing very different between the Korean Imports and the Japanese Imports.

Although I think a large part of this debate stems from the fact that people believe a word adapted from another language into English retains its literal meaning from the foreign language. What actually happens is that it gets redefined for English speakers for the world English speakers live in. Once you use Manga outside of actual Japanese it becomes an English word with an English meaning.

[Arilou]

Comic strips and comic books are related but very separated in format and presentation similar to how Television and Film are. Therefore treating them interchangeably is disingenuous. The fact that we refer to comic books as comic books is simply a throw back to the fact that they originally reprinted comic strips and not unique stories. A separate word never caught on. And Manga is extremely different from both comic strips and comic books.


Maybe it's just my european upbringing, but I'm not seeing it. Although there are some publicistic difference in the way the "typical" manga, the "typical" american comic-book and the "typical" BD is produced, these differences aren't particularly pronounced.

(it should be noted that the swedish word, that applies to all of them, is "serier", that is, a series of images, denoting the sequential nature of the art)

The differences seems to be more concentrated between the various genrés than in any sharp divide between manga, american and european comics.

[Totoro Man]

Tommy: Literature encompasses comics, along with essays, biographies, histories. Which is why the modern usage of "Literature" has changed to mean any work that uses words to meaning high brow, intelligent works. The real meaning is so broad that it isn't particularly useful. The same thing happened with the word "art." Lacking the context of what literature you are talking about makes it a useless word. Similarly if you are sitting in front of a table with a newspaper scattered about and you ask someone "can you hand me the comics?" it means one thing while if you are sitting with a stack of comic books in front of you it means another. Although visual instructions are by no definition "comics."

maybe, but you didn't seem to bother reading my definition of literature.

sure, you might not consider the instructions to assemble a model airplane to be a comic book. but consider this.

1. it demonstrates, using a visual narrative, the proper way to assemble something.

2. to do the task well, you need to be able to read (at least the numbers and parts) and follow everything in sequence.

3. the only major difference is that a comic book illustrates a story that you assemble with your mind--the instructions for a model car illustrates how you would physically assemble the product you've purchased (from beginning to end). it's pretty similar, if you ask me. is actually a "comic"? no, probably not if you're going to be a "purist" but it -SERVES- an almost identical function. it uses sequential visual narrative to communicate. the only difference is that it's "instructive" rather than "entertaining". hence, why I bothered to include it.

4. "comics" are NOT "literature". they may have literary qualities but nowhere did I say that they were "literature", did I?

5. if you're whole point is, "you're definition of comics is too broad. I don't think you should include Japanese comic books" then why not say so? if you think I'm being too liberal in lumping visual instructions of considerable length (like 4-5 pages) as being related to comics. I'm fine with that.

I don't use you're definition of "literature" for anything that's "high brow". by it's definition, I consider "literature" to involve using words-- and nothing else. there may be the odd illustration--like "Alice in Wonderland", but the main process of assembling the narrative and visualizing what happens transpires ENTIRELY within a person's mind. that can't be said of comics.

"Tommy" do you actually CREATE comic strips or comic books? the process of making them is pretty damned similar. the only big difference is the size of the paper you're working with and how it gets distributed when you're done.

according to the popular modern definition comic strips and comic books use a "welding" or "marriage" of words and imagery to convey a story. however, if you have a story which has no words, does that mean it's not a comic book? like Erez Yakin's "Silent City"? if Frank Miller creates a "Sin City" narrative with virtually no dialogue, is that a comic book?

as far as I'm concerned a "comic book" is STILL a "comic" in the same manner that a "novel" is STILL a "novel" regardless of whatever cultural conventions inform it and the language it was written in.

Tommy, if I take you're argument to heart, then Franz Kafka's "the Metamorphosis" can't be a "short story" because it's not in English! to suggest that "manga" is not "comics" is to make a very similar argument.

for the record, I DO treat film and television interchangeably... on a purely artistic level. it's easier to do now that the only time I usually watch a television program is on a DVD. once you carve out the commercials it's not that hard to do. you take a visual narrative that's integrated with sound on a fixed "canvas" or "screen" that needs to be watched in real-time--of course, by that argument I would have to treat theater the same way... and I do.

all mediums are equally viable for the purposes of artistic endeavor... as expressions of human creativity. I came to that decision when I was still a small child... and I've never changed my mind. that does NOT mean that I consider all artfully done forms of human expression "literature". I've already explained that a well designed car is "art" in the broadest possible sense... but I have yet to call it "art" or "literature".

Tommy, don't carry my arguments and thoughts on this matter further than you need to. I didn't say comics were literature... you did.

the only reason I suggested that Kafka's short story wasn't a "short story" or "literature" is because you're making the specious argument that manga and comics are two profoundly different mediums... and, apart from the language and turning the pages in a different direction... they're simply NOT that different. to say so is like suggesting that nobody can write a "novel" in German because they'd use a different word... like "Bueche" ... or something like that.

there's nothing "disingenuous" about my treating comic strips and comic books as part of a larger continuous medium. I'm absolute sincere and convinced that this is an acceptable categorization of "visual literature". they use sequential, visual narrative. they usually (but not always) combine words and pictures and require the reader to assemble the narrative chronologically in their mind. those basics have to be fulfilled/taken care of whether you're talking about a comic that's in English, German, Japanese, or French. perhaps I should have been raised Swedish, after all--since the word Arilou mentioned, "serier", seems to encompass my thoughts on the matter.

Tommy, I'll be honest and say that I think you're being "insincere" and "hypocritical" in your criticisms of my definition of "comics". I find your whole line of rhetoric about "comics" vs "manga" to be "insincere and calculating".... if we're going to take the word "disingenuous" and run with it. :rolleyes:

I'm absolutely fine with us disagreeing on working definitions--but calling me "disingenous" didn't make the least bit of sense. if you find it to be a 'specious' argument--then I'm cool with that. ;)

it's still not going to make me change my mind, though. :D

[Arilou]

Manga and comics are definately not different media, what they are however, is something of different styles or forms within the same media.

Eg. Short stories and novels are both part of the same medium: The printed word. But they have different styilistic conventions and different.... For lack of a better word, "requirements". Poetry is yet another different form.

The same is true with TV-series and movies (who are pretty analogous to novles and short-stories respectively)

To some degree the same can be said between different styles of comics (serial, strip, graphic novel, etc. etc.) Arguably the japanese publishing model is distinct both from the serial form of superhero comics and the more self-contained graphic novel format, but that is debatable (I personally would argue that it is just a serial)

[The Xenos]

Totoro man makes a number of good points there.

if we're suggesting that "manga" can ONLY be Japanese and are then going to gripe about "racism". I don't understand this at all. if you're going to bother using the word "manga" why not go through the trouble of using the corresponding Korean or Cantonese or Mandarin words as well?

so long as I'm talking about the subject to somebody in English, I always use the word "comics". OR I simply explain that "manga is a Japanese word for comics". sure, maybe I'm ignorant on the details.

but WHY are we debataing this again? is it to feel superior, or what? /QUOTE]

That's what I wonder. Why is everything lumped in as 'manga'? Manga is just the Japanese word for comics.

Yet somehow you have people still with stereotypes of manga that go beyond that. Big eyes. Black and white. 'Backwards' books. That manga is a singular art style. That somehow manga is superior to American books.

I keep seeing people make these terrible assumptions.

[QUOTE=Tommy;6153670]I'm curious, can you tell Irish from English from Dutch from German from Russian just by looking?

Or what about the hundred or so African ethnicities?
That's the thing. I'd say most American culture makes a point of British vs Irish vs German vs Russian ethnicities. Europeans get definition between nation or origin, meanwhile most of this Euro-centric culture in America doesn't do the same for other continents. Most Asian people are just 'Asian'. Maybe Japanese or Chinese. And African people are often just 'black'. Hell, how many times have you heard that Tiger woods is 'black'. He's half African American and half Thai.

I know Hispanic people are sometimes just called Mexican as a blanket term. With the whole border issue getting big, it's gotten worse. Though one roommate who's Puerto Rican has gotten Indian somehow too. We joke to my half Mexican half Italian friend that he's just Mexican and should be deported.

Excuse me if I'm tried of dumbed down thinking and half assed labeling when it comes to ethnicity and country of origin. I don't like it with people and I don't like it with comics.


Manga is just a transposed word that in English refers to black and white comics read backwards, as other people have said.
Where do I start on how wrong that assumption is? I find it hilarious that you use the term backwards instead of right to left. Cause I'm sure the Japanese can say our comics are backwards. Never mind that the term 'backwards' is a loaded word.

When the manga was first published in the US, before 2002, it was flipped to read left to right. Is that manga not actually manga? Is that the correct way? Cause plenty of people say those flipped books are backwards. I'd say they are too as they were turned backwards from their original publication and language.

I've seen some idiot American companies (-cough- Seven Seas) actually publish books and web comics right to left even though they're publishing in English. They're trying to con people into thinking their Japanese. I think they even have US artists with ambitious 'Asian' pen names. A friend who's now in Japan joked that this was the next step of the manga wanna be fad. Sadly, some idiots actually went out and did it.

Black and white doesn't make something manga either. There are TONS of US books that are black and white. Tons of smaller publishers do it. Now you have tons of people trying to propagate the myth that manga = black and white. I wish you wouldn't help.


Protesting that Korean comics should have a different name is creating an insular community (something both American comics and Manga have done) which means that the only people who can participate are the already initiated.

No. We should show that Korean books are just as good and not just lump them under a Japanese name. What? Koreans don't deserve to have their language represented? Is Japan better than Korea that their word is better than the Korean one? That's a whole can or worms we open by ignoring the Korean language and just calling it 'manga'.

[the goddamn batman]

If an american or european were to move to Japan and start making a series for one of the publishers there, it would be a manga.

Paul Pope worked for one of the larger manga studios in Japan. I don't know if anyone was aware of him being a white guy or what the reaction to it was, but it certainly didn't effect what the comic was called.

Also? most Chinese food available in America is NOT real Chinese food. It is totally an AMericanized version of Chinese food. I've had real Chinese... it's not the same thing. I enjoy American Chinese food more.

[Tommy]

maybe, but you didn't seem to bother reading my definition of literature.
You didn't offer a definition. You offered examples.

sure, you might not consider the instructions to assemble a model airplane to be a comic book. but consider this.

1. it demonstrates, using a visual narrative, the proper way to assemble something.
That's not a narrative. That's instructions.

2. to do the task well, you need to be able to read (at least the numbers and parts) and follow everything in sequence.
Which is why they are instructions.

3. the only major difference is that a comic book illustrates a story that you assemble with your mind--the instructions for a model car illustrates how you would physically assemble the product you've purchased (from beginning to end). it's pretty similar, if you ask me.
Except in how it is not.
is actually a "comic"? no, probably not if you're going to be a "purist" but it -SERVES- an almost identical function. it uses sequential visual narrative to communicate. the only difference is that it's "instructive" rather than "entertaining". hence, why I bothered to include it.
Except how it is not a narrative by any definition of the Oxford English Dictionary.

4. "comics" are NOT "literature". they may have literary qualities but nowhere did I say that they were "literature", did I?
No, you didn't. I said that.

5. if you're whole point is, "you're definition of comics is too broad. I don't think you should include Japanese comic books" then why not say so? if you think I'm being too liberal in lumping visual instructions of considerable length (like 4-5 pages) as being related to comics. I'm fine with that.
My whole point is that there are separate names for separate things so that we can easily communicate what we are referencing to. If you are talking about something in too broad terms people won't understand and if you are using too much technical terminology people won't understand.

I don't use you're definition of "literature" for anything that's "high brow". by it's definition, I consider "literature" to involve using words-- and nothing else. there may be the odd illustration--like "Alice in Wonderland", but the main process of assembling the narrative and visualizing what happens transpires ENTIRELY within a person's mind. that can't be said of comics.
The definition of Literature I use is the one found in the OED. And that one most defiantly covers comics.

"Tommy" do you actually CREATE comic strips or comic books? the process of making them is pretty damned similar. the only big difference is the size of the paper you're working with and how it gets distributed when you're done.
Why would you put my name in quotation marks?

And I have written both before. And if you write something for one and transfer it into the other with out making major alterations you will wind up with a really terrible product. As I said before the process in making TV and Film is similar, but they are two entirely different art forms requiring different needs. The main difference, as I said, is in format and presentation. Which of course is the most important distinction.

according to the popular modern definition comic strips and comic books use a "welding" or "marriage" of words and imagery to convey a story. however, if you have a story which has no words, does that mean it's not a comic book? like Erez Yakin's "Silent City"? if Frank Miller creates a "Sin City" narrative with virtually no dialogue, is that a comic book?
Seeing as how even wordless comics start off as writing (check out Marvel's 'nuff said month and see how every issue has a partial script in the back) it is still defiantly a comic book. Even Marvel style comics start with an outline.

as far as I'm concerned a "comic book" is STILL a "comic" in the same manner that a "novel" is STILL a "novel" regardless of whatever cultural conventions inform it and the language it was written in.
I don't think anyone ever said a novel wasn't a novel.

Tommy, if I take you're argument to heart, then Franz Kafka's "the Metamorphosis" can't be a "short story" because it's not in English! to suggest that "manga" is not "comics" is to make a very similar argument.
A Russian novel translated into English is a translated novel. A Japanese novel translated into English is still a novel. If you look at it, the structure, format and presentation of the translated work is identical to any English novel. Manga simply can't, or possibly isn't, translated into English in such a manner. If you have to read it backwards it certainly isn't fully translated into English. Furthermore it's original form isn't kept into English the way a novel is. Manga is released in Japan is in a weekly phone book, Manga released in English is released in a TPB. It isn't a "Graphic Novel" since it isn't a complete work in and of itself and it isn't a reprinting of existing material like comic TPBs are since the translation is wholly original. It is its own thing.

for the record, I DO treat film and television interchangeably... on a purely artistic level. it's easier to do now that the only time I usually watch a television program is on a DVD. once you carve out the commercials it's not that hard to do. you take a visual narrative that's integrated with sound on a fixed "canvas" or "screen" that needs to be watched in real-time--of course, by that argument I would have to treat theater the same way... and I do.
And you're wrong to do that.

Tommy, don't carry my arguments and thoughts on this matter further than you need to. I didn't say comics were literature... you did.
All I did was point out the error in your argument.

the only reason I suggested that Kafka's short story wasn't a "short story" or "literature" is because you're making the specious argument that manga and comics are two profoundly different mediums... and, apart from the language and turning the pages in a different direction... they're simply NOT that different. to say so is like suggesting that nobody can write a "novel" in German because they'd use a different word... like "Bueche" ... or something like that.
Now you're actually combining two different arguments of mine. Both of which I've already addressed.

there's nothing "disingenuous" about my treating comic strips and comic books as part of a larger continuous medium.
The idea is disingenuous since they are separate things. And so telling others they are the same is dishonest. Saying they are related is not.
I'm absolute sincere and convinced that this is an acceptable categorization of "visual literature". they use sequential, visual narrative. they usually (but not always) combine words and pictures and require the reader to assemble the narrative chronologically in their mind. those basics have to be fulfilled/taken care of whether you're talking about a comic that's in English, German, Japanese, or French. perhaps I should have been raised Swedish, after all--since the word Arilou mentioned, "serier", seems to encompass my thoughts on the matter.
If all that matters is a sequence of pictures than that definition would include Italian Frescos that tell stories of the bible. As would almost all children's books. After all by your definition they aren't literature, which should be interesting news to all those Children's Literature classes offered across the nation.

Tommy, I'll be honest and say that I think you're being "insincere" and "hypocritical" in your criticisms of my definition of "comics". I find your whole line of rhetoric about "comics" vs "manga" to be "insincere and calculating".... if we're going to take the word "disingenuous" and run with it. :rolleyes:
And you would be wrong again. If by "calculating" you mean useing accurate deffinitions then I would be "calculating". I fail to find any way to justify the "insincer" comment or the "hypocritical" comment. If by "calculating" you mean using accurate definitions and pointing out the errors in your line of thinking then I would be "calculating". I fail to find any way to justify the "insincere" comment or the "hypocritical" comment. Everythiｎｇ I stated I belive in, and I doubt you could find examples of how my actions are in dirrect conflict with my statements.

[Tommy]

That's the thing. I'd say most American culture makes a point of British vs Irish vs German vs Russian ethnicities. Europeans get definition between nation or origin, meanwhile most of this Euro-centric culture in America doesn't do the same for other continents. Most Asian people are just 'Asian'. Maybe Japanese or Chinese. And African people are often just 'black'. Hell, how many times have you heard that Tiger woods is 'black'. He's half African American and half Thai.

I know Hispanic people are sometimes just called Mexican as a blanket term. With the whole border issue getting big, it's gotten worse. Though one roommate who's Puerto Rican has gotten Indian somehow too. We joke to my half Mexican half Italian friend that he's just Mexican and should be deported.

Excuse me if I'm tried of dumbed down thinking and half assed labeling when it comes to ethnicity and country of origin. I don't like it with people and I don't like it with comics.
Excuse me, that's just plainly wrong. People of European racial stock get lumped into "white people." On a personal level it is only until you get to know someone that they will tell you what their ethnic background is. The only time that white Americans get an ethnic background in the media is when it is predominatly important, and 90% of those cases it is Italian.

As far as Tiger Woods goes if you were upset his race is brought up unnecessarily then you might have a point. But as you seem just to be upset about not having an extensive ethnic background his own description of Caublasion is well known enough that mainstream comedians have made many jokes about it.

Although you didn't answer the question I posed.

Where do I start on how wrong that assumption is? I find it hilarious that you use the term backwards instead of right to left. Cause I'm sure the Japanese can say our comics are backwards. Never mind that the term 'backwards' is a loaded word.
Perhaps you can start with finding something wrong with it in the first place. English is read from left to right. Any work in English is going to be written with the foreknowlege of that is how the languge works. If you are reading English from right to left it will be backwards no matter how you slice it. And if our comics get translated into Japanese then guess what... it is BACKWARDS in Japanese.

When the manga was first published in the US, before 2002, it was flipped to read left to right. Is that manga not actually manga? Is that the correct way? Cause plenty of people say those flipped books are backwards. I'd say they are too as they were turned backwards from their original publication and language.
Actualy that is furthor translation. And it still would be manga for other reasons that I've already laid out.

Black and white doesn't make something manga either. There are TONS of US books that are black and white. Tons of smaller publishers do it. Now you have tons of people trying to propagate the myth that manga = black and white. I wish you wouldn't help.
When you describe what an apple is it shows many simmilarities to other types of fruit. But taking all the descriptions together and you get an apple. One of the marking attributes about Manga is that it is black and white. When in conjunction with all the other descriptions it equals manga.

No. We should show that Korean books are just as good and not just lump them under a Japanese name. What? Koreans don't deserve to have their language represented? Is Japan better than Korea that their word is better than the Korean one? That's a whole can or worms we open by ignoring the Korean language and just calling it 'manga'.
Excpet why would we? We already have an English word that covers the Korean books. That English word is "manga." The minute someone uses a forgin languge word out of the context of the languge of origion it is becomes an english word. It has nothing to do with race or nation of origon. It has to do with languge. We are actualy ignoring both Japanese and Korean as we aren't speaking either languge. Seperating a Korean work with its own name delves into jargon, jargon creates an insuler community, an insuler community drives off the casual participant, leads to no growth, which leads to the death of the community.

Actually if your argument is that Koreans deserve their own special term merely because they are Korean, that is rather racist.

[Bakasama]

Excpet why would we? We already have an English word that covers the Korean books. That English word is "manga." The minute someone uses a forgin languge word out of the context of the languge of origion it is becomes an english word. It has nothing to do with race or nation of origon. It has to do with languge. We are actualy ignoring both Japanese and Korean as we aren't speaking either languge. Seperating a Korean work with its own name delves into jargon, jargon creates an insuler community, an insuler community drives off the casual participant, leads to no growth, which leads to the death of the community.

Uh, according the S. Korean cultural booth I went to during the San Diego Comic Con. Koreans like call their comic books "manhwa" which is has the same meaning as "manga" and both come from same Chinese characters.

[Tommy]

Uh, according the S. Korean cultural booth I went to during the San Diego Comic Con. Koreans like call their comic books "manhwa" which is has the same meaning as "manga" and both come from same Chinese characters.

Either two things are going on there. One they are simply informing others about their languages's vocabulary. Or two they are attempting to propagate an Unstable Neologism a rather futile effort that if successful will only lead to an insular culture.

[Totoro Man]

Tommy

the word "disingenuous" is, from the way I see it, an insulting ad hominum attack. since I actually know what that word means--I'm curious to learn why you felt like insulting me and impugning such foul motives on me.

that's why I included all of those phrases in quotation marks--and provided the word "specious" (with a wink) because I was hoping that perhaps you considered my arguments to be ill-conceived.

for me, the word "disingenuous" has tained everything else you've written (for right or wrong). maybe I read that correctly--maybe you intended it as a condescending, personal insult. it's also why I ripped into you as much as I did. you've done nothing but criticize other people.

on the one hand you can't abide my calling manga "comics" because that's horrible... and yet, when I say that if we're going to be purists we need to call Korean comics by their proper name you accuse me of being a "racist". I think I can see where this is going. :rolleyes:

"unstable Neologism"? the fact that you use this term and don't bother to clarify what it means doesn't bode well. if it was to further the conversation you would have unpackaged that a bit--explained to people what it means.

the fact that you didn't means you're either lazy, pressed for time, or that you're an elitist snob who's far more interested in looking smarter than everybody else and upstaging them at every turn than participating in substantive conversation.

so far, all you've done is nit-pick and act holier than thou.

[Tommy]

Tommy

the word "disingenuous" is, from the way I see it, an insulting ad hominum attack. since I actually know what that word means--I'm curious to learn why you felt like insulting me and impugning such foul motives on me.

that's why I included all of those phrases in quotation marks--and provided the word "specious" (with a wink) because I was hoping that perhaps you considered my arguments to be ill-conceived.

for me, the word "disingenuous" has tained everything else you've written (for right or wrong). maybe I read that correctly--maybe you intended it as a condescending, personal insult. it's also why I ripped into you as much as I did. you've done nothing but criticize other people.
When you say something that isn't true it is disingenuous. And you've repeatedly made statements that are untrue. You've made statements in this post that are untrue, if that comes from ignorance or merely not reading what I'm saying closely it still is untrue.While you might have "ripped" on me none of those "rips" particularly matter since they were all unfounded.

on the one hand you can't abide my calling manga "comics" because that's horrible... and yet, when I say that if we're going to be purists we need to call Korean comics by their proper name you accuse me of being a "racist". I think I can see where this is going. :rolleyes:
Actually I think I've repeatedly stated how I think we shouldn't call Manga "comics" because they aren't. I do think if the only reason any one can come up with to establish a new word is because an ethnic group needs to separate its identical in form and presentation work from another ethnic group in a translated for a third ethnic group's consumption media, it is pretty racist. And I never accused you of being racist. I never accused Xenos of being racist, despite that statement taking place in response to his post. I accused the idea of being racist (or more accurately ethno-centric), which it is impossible not to be since the entire thing boils down to ethnic groups.

And you completely misrepresented the entire statement.

"unstable Neologism"? the fact that you use this term and don't bother to clarify what it means doesn't bode well. if it was to further the conversation you would have unpackaged that a bit--explained to people what it means.

the fact that you didn't means you're either lazy, pressed for time, or that you're an elitist snob who's far more interested in looking smarter than everybody else and upstaging them at every turn than participating in substantive conversation.
Actually I was in a rush, had you checked that would have been the only post I made that particular session. And as I have repeatedly mentioned transposing foreign words into English and what that means I figure most people can get the gist of what I'm talking about. If not they can ask and I'd be more than happy to explain an unstable neologism is a word being proposed for common usage.

so far, all you've done is nit-pick and act holier than thou.
If by nit-pick you mean "correct" then yes, that is what I've done. So far all you've done is a lot of hand waving and misrepresenting of statements.

[The Xenos]

Excuse me, that's just plainly wrong. People of European racial stock get lumped into "white people." On a personal level it is only until you get to know someone that they will tell you what their ethnic background is. The only time that white Americans get an ethnic background in the media is when it is predominatly important, and 90% of those cases it is Italian.

Oh yeah, that bugs the hell out of me. I hate being labeled 'white'. As if all white people are the same too. No way. Nothing against the other cultures, but they're different than mine. Germans. Greeks. Irish. Italians. Russian. They're all wonderfully different. Hell, even within the countries there are differences by areas. Not that these differences should divide us, but we shouldn't ignore them.

And what about people who are like half Italian and half Mexican? Like I said, we kid our friends who are that they're all Mexican. Same with a Puerto Rican friend. That's why I thought of Tiger Woods. One of the more famous bi-racial people out there. Hell, I'd even go so far to say the whole idea of race is problematic. At least if you label and define people too much by it.

As far as Tiger Woods goes if you were upset his race is brought up unnecessarily then you might have a point. But as you seem just to be upset about not having an extensive ethnic background his own description of Caublasion is well known enough that mainstream comedians have made many jokes about it.

Although you didn't answer the question I posed.


What question was that? About telling people apart? There are similarities and differences. I hear friends and family saying how Mediterranean ethnicities are different yet still cousins. If you zoom out, sure we're all the same. I'm more so talking about culture. If you just lump people as Asian or white you miss so many interesting details of the culture of individual countries.

Perhaps you can start with finding something wrong with it in the first place. English is read from left to right. Any work in English is going to be written with the foreknowlege of that is how the languge works. If you are reading English from right to left it will be backwards no matter how you slice it. And if our comics get translated into Japanese then guess what... it is BACKWARDS in Japanese.

True. It's left unflipped and read in English backwards out of respect to the author as it was written forward in Japanese. So unless you want to learn Japanese, where you'd be reading forward, you'll have to put up with reading English words in panels right to left. Otherwise you actually are reading it backwards.

What kills me is some American idiots, Seven Seas Press, are publishing original English books.. right to left. Now that is backwards. It's also a fairly cheap attention grab.

Actualy that is furthor translation. And it still would be manga for other reasons that I've already laid out.

Yeah, so I say right to left doesn't make a book manga either. Save that the book is originally published in Japanese for a Japanese audience. The trouble is now we have international publishing of comics more, comics and manga published around the world.

When you describe what an apple is it shows many simmilarities to other types of fruit. But taking all the descriptions together and you get an apple. One of the marking attributes about Manga is that it is black and white. When in conjunction with all the other descriptions it equals manga.

No, black and white isn't an attribute of manga. I got some full color manga. Also, a number of manga are published with color inserts. Never mind the covers are in color. Sadly, many of these are left black and white in US and collected editions. Never mind most Japanese collections have nice book jackets and a much cheaper price.

Black and white doesn't make something manga. That's just a stereotype of manga.

Excpet why would we? We already have an English word that covers the Korean books. That English word is "manga." The minute someone uses a forgin languge word out of the context of the languge of origion it is becomes an english word. It has nothing to do with race or nation of origon. It has to do with languge. We are actualy ignoring both Japanese and Korean as we aren't speaking either languge. Seperating a Korean work with its own name delves into jargon, jargon creates an insuler community, an insuler community drives off the casual participant, leads to no growth, which leads to the death of the community.

Actually if your argument is that Koreans deserve their own special term merely because they are Korean, that is rather racist.

I'd argue the opposite. Saying that all Asians should be lumped together instead of looking at their country of origin, to me, that is the racist mode.

Manga is simply not a word that covers Korean books! Manga is a Japanese word. Koreans call their comics manhwa. Actually, both terms come from Chinese I believe. Though I'm sure some in Japan and Korea would deny that. Not to feed that problem, but you shouldn't just lump them all under a blanket Asian term either.

They have their each have own term for their books. Why shouldn't we? It doesn't insulate the culture. It respects it. What's the alternative? Where do you draw the line? Again, I half joke that it's the old stereotype of saying all Asians are the same. Sure we need to admit we're all humans trying to live on this planet, but to ignore cultural differences and where someone is from is also wrong.

I can't help but think of King of the Hill. "Are you Chinese or Japanese?" "I'm Laotian." "-blank stare- -pause- Are you Chinese or Japanese?"

Either two things are going on there. One they are simply informing others about their languages's vocabulary. Or two they are attempting to propagate an Unstable Neologism a rather futile effort that if successful will only lead to an insular culture.

C'mon. You're saying that calling a Korean book by a Korean name creates an insulated community? Isn't calling it by the Japanese name the same problem? Hell, it's worse because it making Japan's term dominant. If you can't see the problem there, well, I can't help you. How is it fair for Korean books to be called by a Japanese name?

What's wrong with taking the little effort and trying to keep things intellectual enough by calling things by proper native names? If anything calling the damn thing manga propagates insulated culture in Japan.

Like I said in the blog, there are people who go around Japan complaining about foreigners and keeping Japan pure. There are people who think their race and their nationality are superior. Not that Japan is unique in that. Certainly you see it in various places in America. Certainly Korea has a problem too. Yet just calling everything 'manga' doesn't help this one bit.

[The Xenos]

When you say something that isn't true it is disingenuous. And you've repeatedly made statements that are untrue. You've made statements in this post that are untrue, if that comes from ignorance or merely not reading what I'm saying closely it still is untrue.While you might have "ripped" on me none of those "rips" particularly matter since they were all unfounded.

Actually I think I've repeatedly stated how I think we shouldn't call Manga "comics" because they aren't.

Um.. what? Now you're saying something untrue. MANGA ARE COMICS! How are manga not comics? They are comics. It's the same thing, different name. Different evolution maybe, but fu. They never had the comics code and got stuck with the superhero genre dominating publishing. We were kinda on opposite sides of the ocean, even opposite sides of a war at one point. Yet things influenced each other. Manga are Japanese comics. We call them manga because that's what Japan calls them.


In the words of Harvey Pekar, comics are words and pictures. "You can do anything with words and pictures." Why limit yourself by lame definitions of style and format. Calling manga simply as a place of publication origin is so much more healthy for the artist. Defining manga as anything more than that is a confining stereotype.


I do think if the only reason any one can come up with to establish a new word is because an ethnic group needs to separate its identical in form and presentation work from another ethnic group in a translated for a third ethnic group's consumption media, it is pretty racist. And I never accused you of being racist. I never accused Xenos of being racist, despite that statement taking place in response to his post. I accused the idea of being racist (or more accurately ethno-centric), which it is impossible not to be since the entire thing boils down to ethnic groups.

Well, we don't need a new word. We already have words. Comics. Graphic novels. Crazy idea, ya know, calling something in America by an English term.

We call it by their native term as a sign of respect. Though now people are calling American books and others by that Japanese name and confusing the hell out of things.

Actually I was in a rush, had you checked that would have been the only post I made that particular session. And as I have repeatedly mentioned transposing foreign words into English and what that means I figure most people can get the gist of what I'm talking about. If not they can ask and I'd be more than happy to explain an unstable neologism is a word being proposed for common usage.

It certainly is an unstable one. I ague that is is oft misused. Hell, just look at psychology. I can't stand when people misuse anti-social or bipolar. Plus, like I keep saying, now I know how my English teachers felt when that Alanis Morisette song Ironic came out.

Just because people keep saying a word wrong, does that make it right? No, there

Also, there are better terms for these American 'manga'. They're simply graphic novels. Hell, even the republished and translated manga collected volumes (called tankobon over there) are graphic novels. Hell, I have old ads where TokyoPop sold them listed as 'graphic novels'. We already had a perfectly good term! Why replace that with manga?

We simply do not need to call non-Japanese works manga. Anyone explain to me why an American (or Canadian or British or German) book should be called manga? I simply for the life of me am dumbfounded by this new generation of fans and publishers who think they're doing something so different. Hell, TokyoPop and others don't even sell the same as manga does. They sell their original works as novels, not as periodicals like most manga are.

Again, I simply do no understand this need to call works by a forign name. Call it by where you're originally publishing from.

Hell, let's just call everything books and be done with it. Then again there are some snobs who don't consider comics, graphic novels, or manga literature. So there's that bigger fight, as my roommate points out, looming while we quibble over this. He's said he's even heard people who turn their nose up at any fiction, nevermind comics.

[Totoro Man]

Tommy

I concede that some of my arguments were broad in the extreme. I was wrong on several points: pictorial instructions are obviously not comics. I made my argument so broadly that it was unsustainable. that's actually all I can remember off the top of my head... I'm sure there were other mistakes and over-broad generalizations as well.

and I'm obviously letting my personal frustrations influence my debating tactics... as I'm in a bit of physical pain right now.

doesn't excuse the fact that some of my arguments were wrong, obviously.

however, I'm still utterly stumped by this insistence that we call "manga" and "comics" two completely different things.

which is why I mentioned novels earlier. you're response was that a German novel translated into English is a "translated novel". my point was, it's STILL a novel. yeah, it's translated... but it's a novel. it still has the same narrative structure, characters, sub-plots, and various scenes and ideas being described and set forth in text.

(yes, I know that not everything translates perfectly--and that nuance is lost--but that doesn't alter the fact that it's a novel.)

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that if a Japanese manga is translated into English it's a comic book. particularly since many, many manga are translated and printed into a format identical to Western comics.

"Naruto" is one of the most popular manga in the world... and, once you overlook the fact that it's published inside of a large magazine with a lot of other stories--once you sit down and read the story--it looks pretty damned similar to you're average American monthly comic book.

if the big difference we're talking about is how the work is packaged, distributed, and marketed to the masses-- that's a relatively minor difference from an artistic standpoint. in fact, there's no difference at all--it's mostly on a consumer level that we can start seeing meaningful differences between the two mediums.


I'm beginning to wonder, Tommy, if I watch "South Park" on a DVD after having watched it on television--is it no longer a "television program" when I watch it on DVD? if the only thing missing is the commercial breaks does that some how change the work in a profound and unalterable way?

because that's what I'm thinking about when I see you insisting that "manga" are not "comics".

I've already clarified (in my first post) that for the sake of almost all of the English speaking people I talk with I describe manga as "comics".

if this all revolves around you believing that "comics" can ONLY be used to describe what is found in a section of the newspaper--then I'm sorry. words evolve and take on new meanings.

if we're going to say that "manga" can now cover all comics imported from Asia into the west then why can't we consider that "comics" can cover the range of art-forms from "comic books", "comic strips", or single panel "comics" regardless of nationality and language?

it seemed good enough for Scott McLoud in "Understanding Comics". am I saying you have to agree with him? no.

[although he treated it as a mere side-note because he was more interested in Western comics, and rightly so. but in his "Reinventing Comics" he put forth a list of all these things that he wanted comics to become--and ALL of them have already been done in manga--some of which have been true for decades. "Reinventing Comics" could have very nearly been titled, "why I think comics should be more like manga" but that's a tangent for elsewhere]

I asked you if you created comics because... I was going to elaborate that manga and comics are conceived, created, and distributed in a remarkably same manner. they use page layouts, scripts, pencilers, inkers, lettering, editors and the rest of the materials and personnel that are required to make comics. the similarities are so striking, the function is identical.

why not use the "form follows function" argument? if it looks like a comic book--serves the same purpose as a comic book then why not call it a comic book? "Naruto" is basically a comic book. "Ranma 1/2" is pretty much a Japanese comic book. the fact that the Japanese editors like to publish lots of individual titles inside of massive phone-book sized volumes printed on incredibly cheap paper doesn't change what each individual title really is... a monthly comic book.

which, if I'm not mistaken, is the point Xenos and I have been trying to argue for awhile now.

feel free to correct all of my bad arguments again. ;)

on a side note, as Xenos has said, a LOT of popular manga have full color 'lead-ins'. the first Japanese comic translation I collected was "Maison Ikkoku" by Rumiko Takahashi. many issues had 4-10 pages that were obviously in color when they were originally published. the fact that these color pages almost never make it into English translations doesn't mean that manga was always black-and-white. for me, that's like insisting that American comics need to be in color. are the often in color? yeah... but not always. besides, this feels like saying that television that's in black-and-white can't be compared to television that's in color. does the color pallete (or lack there of) make THAT much of a difference?

[The Xenos]

"Naruto" is one of the most popular manga in the world... and, once you overlook the fact that it's published inside of a large magazine with a lot of other stories--once you sit down and read the story--it looks pretty damned similar to you're average American monthly comic book.
Shhh! The narutards might hear you. They have metal headbands, plastic kunai and really annoying whiney voices. You don't want to piss them on.

if the big difference we're talking about is how the work is packaged, distributed, and marketed to the masses-- that's a relatively minor difference from an artistic standpoint. in fact, there's no difference at all--it's mostly on a consumer level that we can start seeing meaningful differences between the two mediums.

To me that's the only difference of terminology, how and where it's packaged. Otherwise it's pretty much the same damn thing. Though packaging does affect story and art. It's a movie vs a TV show, a graphic novel vs a monthly comic. Also something written primarily for Japan is often different than something written for America. I keep reminding people, America isn't the primary audience for manga. Japan is. We get mostly translated collected editions well after the periodical chapters in Japan.

I'm beginning to wonder, Tommy, if I watch "South Park" on a DVD after having watched it on television--is it no longer a "television program" when I watch it on DVD? if the only thing missing is the commercial breaks does that some how change the work in a profound and unalterable way?

Funny side note, while in Japan, the store down the street with stuff like South Park and Iron Giant in the anime section alphabetically along with anime.

if we're going to say that "manga" can now cover all comics imported from Asia into the west then why can't we consider that "comics" can cover the range of art-forms from "comic books", "comic strips", or single panel "comics" regardless of nationality and language?

Another side, some crazy people (TokyoPop) call American newspaper strips 'manga'. Dear crap. Anyone else get a newspaper with TokyoPop's really badly formated 'Amerimanga' posing as a newspaper strip? It's damned terrible. You can't take something formatted for two pages in a graphic novel and fit it in the ever shrinking horizontal space of a Sunday strip. It's a square peg crammed into a round hole.

I asked you if you created comics because... I was going to elaborate that manga and comics are conceived, created, and distributed in a remarkably same manner. they use page layouts, scripts, pencilers, inkers, lettering, editors and the rest of the materials and personnel that are required to make comics. the similarities are so striking, the function is identical.

why not use the "form follows function" argument? if it looks like a comic book--serves the same purpose as a comic book then why not call it a comic book? "Naruto" is basically a comic book. "Ranma 1/2" is pretty much a Japanese comic book. the fact that the Japanese editors like to publish lots of individual titles inside of massive phone-book sized volumes printed on incredibly cheap paper doesn't change what each individual title really is... a monthly comic book.

I had to explain this to someone at my anime club. I said how they're not released in full volumes, but in weeekly or monthly magazines. He asked if it was like Shonen Jump. I said yeah, as it's also a magazine in Japan.

Though I would say some of the industry standards are different. Many manga fans claim manga is more creator controlled, but I think most manga is just as editorially controlled as most US comics, ie DC and Marvel.

which, if I'm not mistaken, is the point Xenos and I have been trying to argue for awhile now.
Yes, for some time.. constantly... ranting.. all the time.. so much that everyone is sick of hearing it, especially my roommates.


on a side note, as Xenos has said, a LOT of popular manga have full color 'lead-ins'. the first Japanese comic translation I collected was "Maison Ikkoku" by Rumiko Takahashi. many issues had 4-10 pages that were obviously in color when they were originally published. the fact that these color pages almost never make it into English translations doesn't mean that manga was always black-and-white. for me, that's like insisting that American comics need to be in color. are the often in color? yeah... but not always. besides, this feels like saying that television that's in black-and-white can't be compared to television that's in color. does the color pallete (or lack there of) make THAT much of a difference?

Yeah, that ticks me off. Often times the gray scaled color pages look like crap too. It varies from title to title, some are well translated to black and white while others have contrast problems. I have seen a handful of US releases occasionally use color pages. Though I think even some Japanese collections go gray scale.

Still, the point about color or black and white being part of the definition of manga (Japanese comics) or American comics is flat out wrong.

Also, I might have been wrong about some terminology. Someone over at Anime News Network, one of the editors, said that tankobon isn't used that much for manga anymore. It's used more for text novels now for some reason.