First  Prev  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  Next  Last

Glasslip Anticipation and Discussion

15958 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
49 / M / Tampa, FL
Offline
Posted 9/26/14 , edited 9/26/14

domvina wrote:


I agree -- without the whole fragments bit, this would have been a really nice and simple slice-of-life romance. Touko and Kakeru would have actually had a normal teen summer romance instead of a mixed bag of sweet and WTF moments =P Maybe they just decided it was too "normal" of a storyline to grab attention without something like the future fragments =(
5352 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
59 / F / New York
Offline
Posted 9/26/14 , edited 9/26/14

I came to this thread to see if I was the only one... Nope. This show was an incredible letdown after the brilliance of "Nagi no asukara". There were maybe 2 or 3 episodes that gave me hope that something good was around the corner but it never delivered. The best scene was the snow in the art room but the significance was unclear... Hmm I think Jonathan the chicken was the best character. He was like Touko's wing-man... Lol.


Thank you! I just watched the ending and feel like a fool for the hope I kept hoping throughout. ARGH!

So much was incomprehensibly vague. Everything I liked had next to nothing to do with the story. As a glassmaker, I wanted to see more of the glass making. I loved the moments between the two sets of partents-- how incredibly loving and understanding they were of each other's differences and how supportive they were of their kids. It was nice to see some decent grownups vs absent grownups.

And every time the Onee-chan teased her brother about "the tragic glasses girl." I laughed.

But for kids, they really acted like a bunch of old fuddy-duddies, meeting for coffee or tea and then oppressing each other. What did they ever talk about?

Without the future bits otherwise what would David have to talk to Hina about? Thing is she's the most creative -- make beads and drawing.... though I guess there's what's-her-name's dancing -- which rescues the character from total insipidness.

Nagi No Asukara left me longing for more and I kept watching, hoping to relive some vestige of the feeling that I had for that anime, in this one.

I thought the mother's words were to moderate Touko's reaction.... I didn't believe that her experiences were meaningless, but that she said this to help Touko manage hers... it was weighty enough that this was a gift/skill/extrasensory perception that the Mother shared.

And it was annoying that T did not tell D this -- because part of D's decision to leave seemed to be that his presence was hurting the girl he loved......

And yet was was the tease about hearing him call her name? Another wished for future in which they reunite?
This was a most annoying end to a series that endlessly teased with totally unmet promises... hmmm just like the futures that never came to be, a lost glass bead.
16128 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
56 / M / Florida, USA
Offline
Posted 9/26/14 , edited 9/26/14
I'm going to refer to this series from now on as "Glassjaw" - it can't hold up to any criticism, and crumples to the canvas under the least bit of scrutiny.

Just a total disappointment from start to finish, although I still love the look of the animation and backgrounds. Just lovely.

Overall Rating: 3/10
41205 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 9/27/14 , edited 9/28/14
Hello friends i came accross this explination on reddit enjoy :)

here is the original link

http://www.reddit.com/r/anime/comments/2hfo2a/spoilers_glasslip_episode_13_final_discussion/

"""""""""[–]H8Blood 80 points 1 day ago*
Answering to the top comment so people can see it. These two quotes sum up the show and the ending very nicely in my opinion. Props to these two from the MAL forum
Quote by soulelle
My goodness, people, I don't understand what is so complicated about this show that everyone has troubles comprehending. Everything's very, VERY simple.
There are two main characters in this show, around who evolves the main theme of the show: feeling oneself at home.
Jonathan is not a mere chicken! Learn your director already! Nishimura Junji uses chickens all the time in his shows! This is his freaking trope! Go watch True Tears if you don't believe me. It also has snow and chickens. As for Glasslip, most of the times Jonathan represents Kakeru himself. To be more precise it represents the problems that Kakeru struggles with.
Remember the 1st episode? The scene where Kakeru meets Touko at school for the first time? The dialogue about free-range Jonathan vs living in a cell? Have you all forgotten about it? If yes, it's now the best time to recall it! Kakeru, having no particular place where he feels at home, is the one who DOESN'T like the concept of free-range animals. Kakeru shows Touko how dangerous a life for Jonathan is if it's up to go around wherever it wants. Kakeru is the one who says that he'd rather live in a cell - he's tired to change his place of living all the time. He wants his home to be set in stone like a cell for an animal.
Why the heck do you think Kakeru lives in the tent? Have you ever even tried to think about it? It's so freaking simple - because he changes houses all the time, because his family always moves from one city to another! So the only CONSTANT place for him where he can sleep and feel himself home is his freaking tent! This IS his cell that always stay the same, regardless where he is located geographically.
Do you understand why there's always such an accent on the sea birds crying in the show? They DO as well represent Kakeru - they keep changing their home from season to season. They spend winter in one area and then move back to another area for summer. This is what brings Kakeru troubles and loneliness. This is what Touko felt and got scared of - Kakeru will "fly away to another place once the season changes", e.g. when it gets too cold.
So Kakeru now faces a challenge. He has two options. Option 1 - he keeps "flying" with his mum, losing Touko, experiencing the loneliness he's so tired of. Option 2 - he settles down to stay with Touko who makes him feel home here. But option 2 is also scary, because then he's losing connection to his mother and has to actually start living his own life. Kakeru is obviously scared of this heavy responsibility - once he decides to stay, he won't be able to quit if something goes wrong by moving to another place. So he's frustrated in choosing between the two options.
And believe it or not, Touko is no less scared. Having lived in this one city for so long, she's scared that her friends will leave and they will no longer meet to watch the fireworks together. Again, THIS is what the show has started with in the first episode! She wants the people dear to her to remain close and connected to each other. And what's more, she's now even more scared to lose the one who she fell in love with. Because unlike the chicken Jonathan, who can't fly despite being a bird, Kakeru can actually fly away if he decides to go with his mother.
Because of their love, because of their fears, and because of their sensitive nature, Touko and Kakeru experience and share their emotions through imagination, otherwise known as "fragments of the future". It has nothing to do with alternate worlds, fates, other dimensiona, timelines, or other bullshit - it's just their vivid imagination. They learn about each other and about each other's feelings and emotions this way. And THIS is what this show is about. Everything that happens around them is just a romantic slice of life setting that drives this dramatic world. People meet, fall in love, some have their feelings unrequited, some have to fight for and win their love, etc. The actual drama is however between the two main characters - will they stay together or not, will Kakeru find his home with Touko or will he leave till better times, will Touko find the way to see the fireworks all together or not? These are the questions raised by the anime.
And quote by rodac
So in the end the only clear resolution that is shown is Hiro and Sachi, who are definitely shown as a couple (I'm not going to count Hiro's sister and her off-screen boyfriend). It's strongly hinted that Yuki and Yanagi are together, based on the reaction of the swim club as they run past and Hina's knowing smile--but it's not shown. As for Kakeru, the patch on the lawn where his tent used to stand suggests that he is off on tour with his mother although it is implied that he'll be back to watch the winter fireworks with Touko. I can tolerate ambiguous endings, but even for me there was just too much left hanging to be totally satisfied. It was pretty, the OST was marvelous, and if you worked really hard at it the ideas behind it were pretty engaging--but I wanted more closure damn it. (Later Edit: I didn't want to have to spend an hour going over it in my head to finally process and understand it--is probably what I meant.)
I think one of the keys to this episode were the conversations between Touko's parents, and also between Touko and her mother. We have the exchange about how her father proposed during the meteor shower, and soon after we're shown all three couples watching the meteor shower in separate locations. Touko's mother also talks about the "fragments of the future" and acknowledges that Touko is an adult (as does Kakeru's father to him in another conversation). The way her family left Touko in the care of Kakeru's also looked pretty much like a symbolic acknowledgement of their relationship ("Please take care of our daughter..." although not directly said was pretty much implied).
Back in the first episode we were given the foreshadowing that this would be the last summer that the original five friends would be together. That was true, as by the end of the summer things have changed forever--Hiro and Sachi go back to school as a couple, Yuki goes back alone as Yanagi rides the train to her modeling career, and Touko too is alone with her thoughts of Kakeru--the stranger who played a pivotal role in disrupting the comfortable world of childhood and moving them forward into adult relationships. This really was a slice of life, not in the sense we usually think of--cute girls doing cute things in a meaningless club after school--but in the sense of showing fragments of an important transition between two stages of their lives. It wasn't an easy show and it required a lot more effort than we normally have to expend to understand, but I think it was rewarding in the end."""""""""""
9083 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
26 / M / MI
Offline
Posted 9/27/14 , edited 11/3/14

xMrFacex wrote:

Hello friends i came accross this explination on reddit enjoy :)

here is the original link

http://www.reddit.com/r/anime/comments/2hfo2a/spoilers_glasslip_episode_13_final_discussion/

"


*doesnt understand why everyone says the show is complicated*
*proceeds to write wall of text explaining super complicated interpretations of scenes wherein he admits it's complicated*

Wow this show is even worse than i thought it was.
80782 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
30 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 9/27/14 , edited 9/28/14
I liked this well enough. I don't think it's great but I'm almost viciously pleased at its lack of bullshit melodrama.

I just wish the metaphors and references made more sense and that the story was more unified as a whole.
22855 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
26 / M / Canada
Offline
Posted 9/27/14 , edited 9/28/14
So in the end the only clear resolution that is shown is Hiro and Sachi, who are definitely shown as a couple (I'm not going to count Hiro's sister and her off-screen boyfriend). It's strongly hinted that Yuki and Yanagi are together, based on the reaction of the swim club as they run past and Hina's knowing smile--but it's not shown. As for Kakeru, the patch on the lawn where his tent used to stand suggests that he is off on tour with his mother although it is implied that he'll be back to watch the winter fireworks with Touko. I can tolerate ambiguous endings, but even for me there was just too much left hanging to be totally satisfied. It was pretty, the OST was marvelous, and if you worked really hard at it the ideas behind it were pretty engaging--but I wanted more closure damn it. (Later Edit: I didn't want to have to spend an hour going over it in my head to finally process and understand it--is probably what I meant.)

I think one of the keys to this episode were the conversations between Touko's parents, and also between Touko and her mother. We have the exchange about how her father proposed during the meteor shower, and soon after we're shown all three couples watching the meteor shower in separate locations. Touko's mother also talks about the "fragments of the future" and acknowledges that Touko is an adult (as does Kakeru's father to him in another conversation). The way her family left Touko in the care of Kakeru's also looked pretty much like a symbolic acknowledgement of their relationship ("Please take care of our daughter..." although not directly said was pretty much implied).

Back in the first episode we were given the foreshadowing that this would be the last summer that the original five friends would be together. That was true, as by the end of the summer things have changed forever--Hiro and Sachi go back to school as a couple, Yuki goes back alone as Yanagi rides the train to her modeling career, and Touko too is alone with her thoughts of Kakeru--the stranger who played a pivotal role in disrupting the comfortable world of childhood and moving them forward into adult relationships. This really was a slice of life, not in the sense we usually think of--cute girls doing cute things in a meaningless club after school--but in the sense of showing fragments of an important transition between two stages of their lives. It wasn't an easy show and it required a lot more effort than we normally have to expend to understand, but I think it was rewarding in the end.

Source:
5072 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
20 / M
Offline
Posted 9/27/14 , edited 11/3/14

xMrFacex wrote:

Hello friends i came accross this explination on reddit enjoy :)

here is the original link

http://www.reddit.com/r/anime/comments/2hfo2a/spoilers_glasslip_episode_13_final_discussion/

"""""""""[–]H8Blood 80 points 1 day ago*
Answering to the top comment so people can see it. These two quotes sum up the show and the ending very nicely in my opinion. Props to these two from the MAL forum
Quote by soulelle
My goodness, people, I don't understand what is so complicated about this show that everyone has troubles comprehending. Everything's very, VERY simple.
There are two main characters in this show....."""""""""""


Wow it all makes sense now. Thanks for posting this!
I just wish that some of these symbols and connections were more obvious to me during the show (I understood the chickens and coup thing relating to Kakeru, and a couple other things, but overall I was just downright confused...)
15958 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
49 / M / Tampa, FL
Offline
Posted 9/27/14 , edited 9/28/14
While something more involved than "Plots for Dummies" is always appreciated, a show really shouldn't need viewers to have a PhD in English Literature and spend a few days breaking down every scene in each episode for analysis and interpretation in order for it to make sense. =(
12204 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
55 / M
Offline
Posted 9/28/14 , edited 9/28/14

Spirithunter123456 wrote:

Back in the first episode we were given the foreshadowing that this would be the last summer that the original five friends would be together. That was true, as by the end of the summer things have changed forever--Hiro and Sachi go back to school as a couple, Yuki goes back alone as Yanagi rides the train to her modeling career, and Touko too is alone with her thoughts of Kakeru--the stranger who played a pivotal role in disrupting the comfortable world of childhood and moving them forward into adult relationships. This really was a slice of life, not in the sense we usually think of--cute girls doing cute things in a meaningless club after school--but in the sense of showing fragments of an important transition between two stages of their lives. It wasn't an easy show and it required a lot more effort than we normally have to expend to understand, but I think it was rewarding in the end.

Source:


What he's describing isn't slice-of-life, it's coming-of-age... an entirely different genre. But that doesn't correct the show's basic flaws.... the muddled plot line, the poor characterization, the inconsistent writing, and all the rest.

46949 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
Offline
Posted 9/28/14 , edited 9/28/14

Iskandos wrote:
While something more involved than "Plots for Dummies" is always appreciated, a show really shouldn't need viewers to have a PhD in English Literature and spend a few days breaking down every scene in each episode for analysis and interpretation in order for it to make sense. =(


While it's nice to be spoon fed stories it's also nice to have stories that stop and make you think. That force you to dig deeper to understand what's going on rather than just be a passive viewer of events.

15958 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
49 / M / Tampa, FL
Offline
Posted 9/28/14 , edited 9/28/14

domvina wrote:


Iskandos wrote:
While something more involved than "Plots for Dummies" is always appreciated, a show really shouldn't need viewers to have a PhD in English Literature and spend a few days breaking down every scene in each episode for analysis and interpretation in order for it to make sense. =(


While it's nice to be spoon fed stories it's also nice to have stories that stop and make you think. That force you to dig deeper to understand what's going on rather than just be a passive viewer of events.



A deep and thought-provoking story doesn't mean it should be a story that only the best of the best can work their way through though.

If you want an example of deep and meaningful anime, Mushi-shi does a fantastic job of that! Every episode is a wonderfully crafted stand-alone story -- a single episode of Mushi-shi can (and does) convey a more meaningful message than this entire season of Glasslip did, which is just sad. =( Mushi-shi has long been the first anime I recommend to any of my friends who are interested in starting anime, or who simply think anime is only about cartoon boobies and Simpsons-level humor.

And the Monogatari series is an excellent example of how to weave symbolism and deep methaphorical meaning into a storyline in a manner that is both enjoyable and understandable. Literally everything in Monogatari has a deeper meaning or is a metaphor representing something else... the backgrounds/sets, the props, the dialogue, even the characters themselves -- but you don't need to "get" any of it to understand and enjoy the story. While some of the symbolism in Glasslip is fairly basic (most viewers caught the significance of the chickens in the first episode or two, for example), overall it is neither enjoyable nor understandable for the vast majority of its' viewers but simply distracting, vague, and obscure, as well as a barrier to a full appreciation of the series.

And those are just the two most obvious examples that immediately come to mind! o.O Neither Mushi-shi nor any of the Monogatari series spoon feed anything to anyone, yet both manage to provide a meaningful, entertaining, and impactful story without requiring either a consultation with Steven Hawking to help with the interpretation nor dumbing it down to the point where even Valvrave would seem complex. =P

I give Glasslip points for trying, and I give it points for some of its wonderful character work... but those points fail to cover for the lapses the series has overall. The series is much like asking someone what time it is and receiving an in-depth lecture on the mechanical properties of a watch and the philosophical implications of time itself... as interesting as it all may be, you still don't know what time it is. =/
80782 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
30 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 9/28/14 , edited 9/28/14
If anyone would like more ammunition for their conspiracy theories, this anime name-drops Albert Camus repeatedly. In the first episode Sachi is reading Exile and the Kingdom, and in the fifth Hiro has The Myth of Sisyphus, also from Sachi. In the second case Camus is specifically mentioned to differentiate his book from the actual Myth of Sisyphus.

While Sachi and Hiro are often seen reading, I believe Camus is the only author ever identified.


Camus published The Myth of Sisyphus in 1942 while he was a member of the French resistance during the Nazi occupation. It's a philosophical essay, the conclusion of which is tied into the original Greek myth. The question he was examining, succinctly, was: If life is meaningless, does that mean living without falling into despair is impossible?

    "There is but one truly serious philosophical problem, and that is suicide. Judging whether life is or is not worth living amounts to answering the fundamental question of philosophy. All the rest—whether or not the world has three dimensions, whether the mind has nine or twelve categories—comes afterwards" (PDF Source, page 4).

It's important to note that Camus isn't arguing that life is meaningless, he is only asking what if it is. Camus is a novelist, he does very little rigorous philosophy. He doesn't make arguments to be proved or falsified, he just postulates; in this work he's engaged with examining the potential ramifications of living while believing life itself to be meaningless.

    "It is essential to consider as a constant point of reference in this essay the regular hiatus between what we fancy we know and what we really know, practical assent and simulated ignorance which allows us to live with ideas which, if we truly put them to the test, ought to upset our whole life" (PDF Source, Page 13).

Central to this is Camus's idea of the Absurd, which is consciously coming into contact with the thought or belief that the meaning we believe our life has is not reciprocated by the world. In modern terms this is akin to nihilism in the idea that nothing actually matters and nothing can be known for certain so why do we even bother flipping these pancakes.

Camus was interested in whether it would be possible to live a fulfilling life in that mental state. Permanently.


His answer to that question is yes, and that there are three ways to do it.

If you want to know more about that though you can look it up on Wikipedia or SparkNotes since I don't think it's particularly relevant to Glasslip. In fact there are only three things I think kind of vaguely are from this work: Camus calling people like this "exiles", his metaphors of "shimmering fragments", and his writing on "absurd fiction".


Please note that I make no claims as to the veracity of Camus's statements:

    "In a sense, and as in melodrama, killing yourself amounts to confessing. It is confessing that life is too much for you or that you do not understand it. Let’s not go too far in such analogies, however, but rather return to everyday words. It is merely confessing that that “is not worth the trouble.” Living, naturally, is never easy. You continue making the gestures commanded by existence for many reasons, the first of which is habit. Dying voluntarily implies that you have recognized, even instinctively, the ridiculous character of that habit, the absence of any profound reason for living, the insane character of that daily agitation, and the uselessness of suffering.

    "What, then, is that incalculable feeling that deprives the mind of the sleep necessary to life? A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and this life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity [....] The subject of this essay is precisely this relationship between the absurd and suicide, the exact degree to which suicide is a solution to the absurd" (PDF Source, Pages 5-6).

While Kakeru is never shown as suicidal, he is an outsider; an exile. He doesn't fit in to the normal social order, as represented by the friction between him and Toko's group. He's a threat to their stability even while he's searching for something stable. His vague talk with his father about his future could also be reflective of this.

But the problem with this is the story never informs us that he's having these thoughts. We can postulate that he is, but we don't have any evidence that he thinks life is meaningless, only that he's socially aloof and occasionally splits into a triumvirate for some insane reason (possibly a Freudian reference to the id, ego, and super ego? Blah).

And if it is true this is a really bullshit way to tell your audience something that important about a character's identity.


Also did I mention that Camus references Edmund Husserl a lot? Husserl is one of the philosopher chickens.


The following are quotes where the words "shimmering" and "fragments" appear in The Myth of Sisythus:

    "Likewise, the mind that aims to understand reality can consider itself satisfied only by reducing it to terms of thought. If man realized that the universe like him can love and suffer, he would be reconciled. If thought discovered in the shimmering mirrors of phenomena eternal relations capable of summing them up and summing themselves up in a single principle, then would be seen an intellectual joy of which the myth of the blessed would be but a ridiculous imitation. That nostalgia for unity, that appetite for the absolute illustrates the essential impulse of the human drama" (PDF Source, Page 13).

    "So long as the mind keeps silent in the motionless world of its hopes, everything is reflected and arranged in the unity of its nostalgia. But with its first move this world cracks and tumbles: an infinite number of shimmering fragments is offered to the understanding. We must despair of ever reconstructing the familiar, calm surface which would give us peace of heart. After so many centuries of inquiries, so many abdications among thinkers, we are well aware that this is true for all our knowledge. With the exception of professional rationalists, today people despair of true knowledge" (PDF Source, Pages 14-15).

    "At first sight, it certainly seems that in this way nothing contradicts the absurd spirit. That apparent modesty of thought that limits itself to describing what it declines to explain [....] But if one attempts to extend and give a rational basis to that notion of truth, if one claims to discover in this way the “essence” of each object of knowledge, one restores its depth to experience. For an absurd mind that is incomprehensible. Now, it is this wavering between modesty and assurance that is noticeable in the intentional attitude, and this shimmering of phenomenological thought will illustrate the absurd reasoning better than anything else" (PDF Source, Pages 29-30).

    "For the absurd man, there was a truth as well as a bitterness in that purely psychological opinion that all aspects of the world are privileged. To say that everything is privileged is tantamount to saying that everything is equivalent [....] He is taught, in fact, that every image presupposes an equally privileged essence. In this ideal world without hierarchy, the formal army is composed solely of generals. To be sure, transcendency had been eliminated. But a sudden shift in thought brings back into the world a sort of fragmentary immanence which restores to the universe its depth" (PDF Source, Pages 30-31).

    "My reasoning wants to be faithful to the evidence that aroused it. That evidence is the absurd. It is that divorce between the mind that desires and the world that disappoints, my nostalgia for unity, this fragmented universe and the contradiction that binds them together. Kierkegaard suppresses my nostalgia and Husserl gathers together that universe. That is not what I was expecting. It was a matter of living and thinking with those dislocations, of knowing whether one had to accept or refuse. [....] It is essential to know whether one can live with it or whether, on the other hand, logic commands one to die of it" (PDF Source, Page 33).

    (A Wild Husserl Appears! Husserl uses Gathered Universe. Super Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann is unphased.)

Not all of those quotes may be relevant, if any of them are, but there's a pattern of word usage. Camus uses the words "shimmering" and "fragments" in regards to our inability to grasp certainty. The knowledge we wish to possess is beyond us. "We must despair of ever reconstructing the familiar, calm surface which would give us peace of heart."

Whether this is a metaphor made real in Glasslip is possible, arguably. Kakeru and Toko are at the door of adulthood, the certainty they're grasping at is certainty about their futures. This is something we can't know, which is possibly why nothing very clear ever comes out of those shimmering fragments. But if so what does episode 11 mean and... ugh...

And why are there three Kakerus?!


I'll quote SparkNotes here to speed things up, my brain was melting long before I got to this part:

    "The absurd man does not hope to explain life, but only to describe it: art reflects different aspects of, or perspectives on, life but cannot add anything to it. There is no meaning or transcendence to be found in art, as in life itself, but the creative act of asserting one's own perspective on the world epitomizes the revolt, freedom, and passion of the absurd man. [....] Just as the absurd man cannot hope for transcendence, absurd art cannot promise transcendence. [....] Good art accepts that it can only portray a certain perspective, a certain piece of experience, and leaves everything universal or general at an implicit level" (SparkNotes Article).

This is looking specifically at the possibility of Glasslip being "absurd art" according to Camus's definitions:

    "In his discussion of absurd art, Camus recommends that writers confine themselves to description, and not attempt to explain the world. Explanation is an attempt to impose some order on experience, to make sense of the world, and thus tries to go beyond a mere acceptance and awareness of the unreasonableness of the universe. Rather than try to explain why the world is the way it is, an absurd artist should just give as full a description of the world as he sees it. [....] Camus is not saying that art should faithfully copy the world as it is, but rather that artists should use their art to reflect their unique perspective on the world" (SparkNotes Article).

If this reflects the design philosophy for Glasslip then it may explain the show's apparent allergy to explaining shit. There's no profound insight at the end of Glasslip because the profound insight at the end of Glasslip is that there are no profound insights. Life cannot be explained, only described as we see it. If that's insightful, welcome to Paradoxville.

And how does the shimmering fragments metaphor work again exactly?

And why are there three Kakerus?!


Meh.
67069 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
31 / M / NY
Offline
Posted 9/28/14 , edited 9/28/14


LAWL, I despise Camus' work, so I suppose if GL is trying to be like his stuff it would make sense why I found no engagement with the characters.

Also, if one needs to get this in depth to appreciate an anime, the anime is a huge failure. The target audience is otaku not literary critics, and besides this is a visual medium not text...
80782 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
30 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 9/28/14 , edited 9/28/14

domvina wrote:


Iskandos wrote:

While something more involved than "Plots for Dummies" is always appreciated, a show really shouldn't need viewers to have a PhD in English Literature and spend a few days breaking down every scene in each episode for analysis and interpretation in order for it to make sense. =(

While it's nice to be spoon fed stories it's also nice to have stories that stop and make you think. That force you to dig deeper to understand what's going on rather than just be a passive viewer of events.

I just feel like a puzzle that hides its pieces outside the box is cheating.

And if you're going to tell a story the story should still function even if the themes behind it are opaque.

Besides that though, fuck yeah. If it's actually written well I'm keen on treasure hunts.


sonic720 wrote:


LAWL, I despise Camus' work, so I suppose if GL is trying to be like his stuff it would make sense why I found no engagement with the characters.

Also, if one needs to get this in depth to appreciate an anime, the anime is a huge failure. The target audience is otaku not literary critics, and besides this is a visual medium not text...

Reading The Myth of Sisyphus I couldn't figure out what he was talking about three quarters of the time.

I got to the end and felt like I'd just read through someone's blog, which was interesting.

In a manner of speaking it kind of mirrored Glasslip. Now if only Glasslip was on SparkNotes.
First  Prev  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.