Dumb People who make Good Things

[pheonix561 2080]

Okay, so here's an issue I've been grappling with lately. Normally when I have something on my mind I generally just talk to someone I know in person about it. Or maybe I'll talk with one of you over a facebook conversation about it. Or a text or something. I figured tonight I'd instead try making a thread in serious discussion for once, because I never actually engage in serious discussion in here and it's about time I tried.

Sometimes, somebody who leads I lifestyle I generally disapprove of makes something I generally approve of. Like, Nazis. They're responsible for BMW and space travel and whatever. Here's some good things I like. But they're also responsible for being nazis, and that's a bad thing. But that's a vague example that has no standing anymore because I'm almost certain nazis don't run BMW anymore.

I'll cut to the chase. It's no secret that Berserk (yes, I'm talking about berserk again, and yes this will contain berserk spoilers) is one of my favorite things ever. Good art, good story, even the video game and movie adaptions aren't terrible. But there's one allegation about Berserk's author, Kentaro Miura, that I've been thinking about recently; Kenny's into little girls. It's something I used to hear people say when they talked about characters who show up in later arcs, like Schierke the witch girl, or Rosine for example. They'd say something about how loli's were common in manga or anime or whatever, and how Rosine spending her entire arc running around naked in a field is probably a sign of Miura being into girls of that age. I'd hear it and I wouldn't even entertain the thought. I could sit down right now and write a few pages on why it makes perfect sense for that character, within the context of the story, the world, and her own consistency, to be running around naked in a field. At least she wasn't wearing some nonsensical unexplained loincloth or something. No, her being naked the whole time was for the best.

A few months ago, when Berserk was ending it's unannounced 16 month hiatus, Miura published a one shot comic unrelated to berserk. It was called "Gigantomachia" and was set in a world completely unrelated to Berserk. He wrote it to celebrate the 25th anniversary of whatever magazine had been faithfully publishing Berserk for as many years, I don't know. But it was 200 pages of beautiful new original Miura work that I was happy to make it through in an afternoon. While I was reading it, one part definitely stood out to me:

(this is not berserk) (no spoilers here)



(Read the above image right to left)

If you're confused by whats going on, the girl is some kind of weird magical robot goddess or whatever. And the bulky guy is her chosen champion or whatever. And they're saving the world or whatever. He gets into brawls with baddies and wrestles them to death, and then she patches him up with her magical fluid that cures all ailments. In fact, she's made of the stuff. In fact, she excretes the stuff. She's going to pee on his head. She's standing on his shoulders and she's going to pee on his head. That's how she does it.

This isn't a one-off joke, either. It's a recurring thing throughout the whole comic. He wrestles a guy, and they're evenly matched, and both pass out. Wrestler guy wakes up and can't move from all of his broken bones and injuries, so goddess girl dutifully gets right to work peeing on his face. It takes place over the course of like three or four pages, her taunting him about it and him begging her not to and then it happens and that's that. The only reason I'm not uploading that for this thread is because I'm too lazy to do it.

What I'm saying is, when I finished this short book I began to think "Wow! Miura really is into little girls after all." And I don't know how the rest of you might take that, but that fact bothers me. It's not a conclusion I wanted to draw, but here I am. Miura's into little girls, and that fact represents itself throughout Berserk. It might be well written, but it's still pedophilia.

Now, I want to make one thing clear: I don't want to start a whole discussion about "is lolicon something that should be acceptable." That's not what this thread is about, and I like to think that's a question we can all already agree on an answer to. No, this is about things you disagree with being combined with things you agree with, in a way that suggests to you the creator of said thing likes it. By which I mean, finding flaws relevant to but independent of the core of a particular work. In this example, that would mean the core of what makes berserk good would be "great drawings, great setting, great plot, great characters," and the independent variable would be "naked little girls in excess."

 

I say that too because I also want to exclude examples like the "A Song of Ice and Fire" series. I'm pretty sure George R. R. Martin doesn't personally condone half the things that go on in his books, but he's writing a world with consistent characters who might feel otherwise. Berserk's occasional child nudity doesn't come off as character development, so much as "it's totally what the author is into." Okay, maybe it does come across as character development, but he certainly character develops little girls into nudity a bit more often than anyone else normally migh stumble into. I doubt it's something unique to his idiom.

I'm just trying to decide for myself if I can be okay with myself liking a body of work and disliking an author, is what I'm saying. Here is someone with traits I don't approve of who is doing a thing I mostly approve of. Whats the responsible thing to do here? Praise Berserk but also condemn the child nudity bits? That sounds like I'm saying "I don't like this thing that's happening, because ignoring it could cause bad things to happen. But instead of trying to dissuade it, I just want it to not be in my face. In other words, I want whatever this thing is catered perfectly to me. I don't want to have to worry about whats going on. I want to go to sleep comfortable at night because I successfully lied to myself until I was convinced there was no problem."

 

But then lets say I were to say "No! This is bad work, because it involves pedophilia!" Man, I don't think I could really live with myself if I actually tried to support censoring things like that. I'm definitely against censorship, and instead promote people learning to think freely and independently with the information they have. I would rather offer my point of view or what information I have gathered for the review of whoever is interested in it than try to force it on someone. It would be better to review this work and say "here's what I like about it and here's what I don't." But of course, that seems like I'm ignoring the problem.

But those both might be weird bastardizations and stretches of what somebody might normally conclude from one stance or another. Which is why I'm making a thread about it this time, instead of just googling and talking to friends and stuff. I figure I might as well give open internet conversation a chance for once. So uh. Get to it.

[SilverAlchemic 355]

I usually separate my opinion of a work entirely from my opinion on a person involved with it. Hell, I often ignore the people involved entirely, except just to say "this person is a good singer/writer/artist/actor/what have you". I value more the art than the artists, I guess.

[Teto 2609]

I might be of fickle morality, but I'm usually in the way of not really discriminating against others in how I choose to socialise. By that I mean people with really questionable or downright bad opinions. It tends to be the thing with me that I'll just avoid the subject and try and find a vein of conversation that we can both engage in with no problem. Shows how much of a hive mind this place is that I feel I can safely assume that you're the same, to a degree at least (although I feel like this is another thing that might split people). I take a non-personal standpoint with most people most of the time, so I've talked to plenty of cool weirdos with loli fetishes without feeling too involved in it.

 

But that's talking to the people, which isn't what you're talking about. I can sympathise with your conflict in reading something made by someone who's into little girls. People take photos of things to reflect how they see the world, and people create fictional worlds based on their world view. A universe and population of characters based on how the person sees the world and the people in it, and what they think is important. Like people who are deluded into thinking that young children have total autonomy and accountability, as if they have a developed enough world view to make informed and mature decisions about themselves. I can understand feeling ill at ease reading something that feels like it's based on flawed thinking. Watching little girls running around naked and in the back of your mind thinking "this guy has no awareness of real children". I would be weirded out by that as well. I wouldn't want to be that involved in this person's view of the world.

 

As ever though, I'm indecisive. I don't know if it's wrong to condone it and carry on, or if it matters that you care at all. Keeping the issue at the forefront of your mind will ensure it continues to bother you. I'm not sure that letting it bother you is virtuous or not, but if it makes any difference I think we can safely say that there's nothing you can do about what's going on in the manga. Being virtuous at every turn isn't important. Reading a comic isn't going to ruin anybody's life. A bit of willed ignorance in this case isn't going to perpetuate any kind of abuse anywhere in the world. In my mind I think it's totally inconsequential.

 

If nothing else I feel like the only thing you could do was just to read Berserk and not introduce any more people to it. That would feel like crap, but it seems like the only thing that you can do to stop the spread of fiction created from a damaged worldview. The less people that are exposed to it, the less people will read it, and so the less people out there who will purposefully desensitise themselves to children running around naked in a field.

 

Important thing is that you thought critically, and didn't allow yourself to be taken in by the author's point of view. I can imagine people out there reading some nonsense about "liberation of children into nakedness", or whatever it is, and instead of thinking "no, that's rubbish", they stop and think about it, and adopt the point of view. That's the one damaging thing about it actually, now I think about it. But there's nothing you can do, apart from think critically, encourage others to think critically, and discourage others from exposing themselves to ideas that they might not have the sense to fight off.

[LLmao ?✊? 1276]

This thread is one of those good things, like in the title

[pheonix561 2080]

This thread is one of those good things, like in the title

 

you shush

 

(the contents of this post)

 

In regards to your thing about trying to find common ground with people you otherwise disagree with, sure. I'm sure everybody does that all the time. I think that's generally the approach you try to take when you're watching or reading any work of fiction by anyone. Lawrence of Arabia is once of my all time favorite movies, but it does have hilariously racist undertones that I tend to glaze over, in praise of the rest of the movie. That's what it's looking like my approach to Berserk is going to be from here on out, too. Maybe Lawrence of Arabia would have been a better example of something to use because then I would at least not be talking about berserk again. At least it's an example of something else that has stuff I disagree with in a pile of stuff I agree with and love. It's not like I want to support a movie that holds a mindset of white supremacy.

In the end, I'm glad you understand it's not a matter of the subject, but rather how we treat the subject. Should we care at all that it happens? I like to think so. I think it's ignorant to assume that works of fiction have no real world consequences. But at the same time, is this small enough that it's negligible? I read all of berserk's more than twenty years of content two years ago, and it took me this long to realize that "oh, some of these bits are a bit racier than I originally interpreted." In the same way that the racist moments in Lawrence are pretty sparse too?

 

I guess I'm trying to outline for myself where the line should be drawn between "Things that are bad that I can let slide" and "Things that are bad that I cannot let slide." That's the real issue here, I suppose. Among other things. This is an issue that manifests itself as a result of many other issues being swirled together here. Like for example the earlier question I posed, "How do we respond to this issue in particular?" Maybe that's why I'm struggling so much with it.

[Necropolis 763]

I'm usually not a big fan of this, but I'll go ahead and say, Death of the Author, man. I mean, when people use this on something Evangelion, I usually think its really stupid. Like Eva can mean whatever you want it to. I usually think thats kind of a cop out, and I think you should watch something, at least with a small element of Author's intentions inherent. But if this thing is affecting your enjoyment of the manga just pretend Berserk is found monthly at the base of mount fuji, sent by an angry god. An Angry god who takes FOREVER. If that seems too outlandish, whatevs. You've been reading this long, and some of this may just be something he's doing subconsciously.

[LLmao ?✊? 1276]

If nothing else I feel like the only thing you could do was just to read Berserk and not introduce any more people to it. That would feel like crap, but it seems like the only thing that you can do to stop the spread of fiction created from a damaged worldview. The less people that are exposed to it, the less people will read it, and so the less people out there who will purposefully desensitise themselves to children running around naked in a field.

 

But there's nothing you can do, apart from think critically, encourage others to think critically, and discourage others from exposing themselves to ideas that they might not have the sense to fight off.

It's interesting to me that you think that. I don't know the author of Berserk personally, but maybe this is his outlet? I am not suggesting that drawing naked little girls is keeping him from, like, actual pedophilia. But maybe?

I feel like fiction, ESPECIALLY fiction with taboos or sins or illegal things in it are good for people. The obvious reason so because it's escape from reality. I mean, Game of Thrones is one of the most popular pop culture things going on right now. And I'd say that the amount of killing in the series is far more alarming than naked girls running around in Berserk. (If I was going to take the stance that fiction is dangerous, I mean, which I don't.) So yeah, fiction with sin and taboos is a form of escapism. Also, I feel like it's a way for readers to "test" out things in their life. In the world of the fiction or in the reader's mind, you can live through more experiences than you can actually live through. You can imagine yourself in Game of Thrones land, killing guys and stuff, without having to do anything. It satisfies your natural bloodlust.

On a more more related to Teto's quote, I think that we should never keep ideas away from people. Not that we have to go out and recommend books that we hate. I think there's still value in things that people find morally reprehensible. And maybe, the things that we find bad will one day be considered good. We have to let everyone decide for themselves. I don't think knowledge is ever a bad thing, even if you feel worse off after learning something. I think Chase quoted someone once and it was talking about how it's the mark of a wise person who can open their mind to new ideas without being changed by them.

[pheonix561 2080]

On a more more related to Teto's quote, I think that we should never keep ideas away from people. Not that we have to go out and recommend books that we hate. I think there's still value in things that people find morally reprehensible. And maybe, the things that we find bad will one day be considered good. We have to let everyone decide for themselves. I don't think knowledge is ever a bad thing, even if you feel worse off after learning something. I think Chase quoted someone once and it was talking about how it's the mark of a wise person who can open their mind to new ideas without being changed by them.

Yeah. I agree with all that stuff, too. It scares me that I'm sitting here talking about fiction having definite real world consequences in such a way that suggests I want to hamper it. I absolutely do not want to be the guy trying to start another comics code thing or propose censorship. I think if you were to read something with hints of pro pedophilia or racism or what have you in it with the mindset of someone who wanted to understand what their fellow man was trying to say, thinking critically and asking questions, then that's fantastic. Watch, read, study everything, and learn as much as you possibly can about the world around you. I don't care if you watch something that makes A Serbian Film look like My Little Pony, I think you should watch it. Not that I think I'd probably watch A Serbian Film, actually.

Maybe what I'm saying I'm afraid of is actually people who would read something bad and immediately accept it without thinking about it. Like someone who might read any fictional work that features under aged sexual abuses in a light that isn't "horrible" for any reason. I'm scared of people who read Lolita and go "Wow, all little girls are filthy misleading whores who won't have sex with me because they're entitled." Or people looking at all the lolicon that gets published in japan and thinking "oh! jacking it to children is okay, because in a place like this, it's so widely accepted that they broadcast it publicly!" When really young girls being preyed on is way more like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-J7_TKgw1To

Necro, in regards to your comment on death of the author, I'm not so sure I entirely agree with that either. Saying any and all meaning an author puts into a work is purely subjective I think takes a lot a way from a work. Granted, "I can control what I write but I can't control how you read it" is something I find really fascinating and something I write about often, but generally when I'm reviewing a work I'm thinking about what (I think) they were trying to do, and how they succeeded or how they failed. Anything about what meaning the reader is to derive from a work, I think, exists on a spectrum. Eka would be sitting largely on the side of "Practically everything that happened in this work is for your interpretation," whereas on the opposite end you might find Lord of the Rings, with strong "Good guys always win and you should never give up" messages. I think it would be hard to get anything else from LOTR. Granted I have not actually read the book but I'm sure you understand what I'm saying.

[Teto 2609]

On a more more related to Teto's quote, I think that we should never keep ideas away from people. Not that we have to go out and recommend books that we hate. I think there's still value in things that people find morally reprehensible. And maybe, the things that we find bad will one day be considered good. We have to let everyone decide for themselves. I don't think knowledge is ever a bad thing, even if you feel worse off after learning something. I think Chase quoted someone once and it was talking about how it's the mark of a wise person who can open their mind to new ideas without being changed by them.

You're right, ideas are good and we should remember them and be exposed to them. But I feel like what I was getting at was that, if you want to actively discourage this idea or point of view, then you could just start with not spreading it. Like if you want people to stop talking about Lady GaGa then you can start by not talking about Lady GaGa (not that anybody actually talks about Lady GaGa anymore). If it bothered you to such an extent that you wished to suppress an idea, silence would be a good start. Not that I think people should do that, because I don't think that Berserk is actually going to do any serious mental harm to anybody, but if you thought so then that would be the only action I think would be very effective. Unless you wanted to do a really weak protest that you couldn't back up.

[LLmao ?✊? 1276]

That makes sense.

[Necropolis 763]

Yeah, a lot of aspects of New Journalism I think are kinda poopy. They let you basically say anything about any work can mean whatever you want because you think it can, and I feel like that just cheapens it sometimes. Death of the Author is definately not something I usually subscribe to.

[LLmao ?✊? 1276]

Also, I think that literature, art or whatever should not ever be held accountable for what people do. Even if the book is called "A guide to hurting others". I like to think that the creators are like releasing their ideas into the wild and can't ever be held accountable for them again. The message, if there was one, is lost when the creator releases it. And it's completely up the reader or viewer to interpret or to not interpret the message that may or may not be there.

[pheonix561 2080]

Yeah. whether or not author's intent is a valid thing to consider when reviewing a work is an interesting question. Maybe that's part of also what I'm struggling with? I certainly know it's always a hot topic of debate for anyone who makes any kind of art.

[Chase 390]

I'm very conflicted on this.

 

On the one hand, I watch/play/read a lot of very graphic things. Murder, torture, rape, sex in general, incest, pedophilia, etc. I don't want to rush out and do any of those things (well, I do like sex), yet I still enjoy the entertainment. Game of Thrones is a great example of a work that has most, if not all, of those. I don't think Game of Thrones is a "bad" show because of it, or from the devil or anything. 

 

That said, I don't think it's very wise to dwell on anything bad, regardless. It may not be bad, per se, to reflect on what you saw/read and compare it to your real world knowledge or feelings. But I think it would be more prudent to spend your time uplifting yourself and searching for entertainment that strengthens your beliefs and values. For some strange reason, we like to be scared, shocked, etc. We like things that are taboo, or sinful. We like to push boundaries, especially in entertainment. Think how much our entertainment has changed in just 60 years. 

 

I dunno. Do I think you should stop reading Berserk if you like to read it? No. But you seem to be conflicted on this, so it may be wise to stop reading it for that reason alone. If you notice yourself being influenced negatively by a work of fiction, it may be time to let that go for a bit. 

 

Just do what you think is the right thing to do. If that's to stop reading, so be it.

 

I will say, I think it's better that the author puts his feelings for little girls in his work rather than acting on them in real life. Also, some places have a very low age of consent. Japan is 13 for sincere romances, for example. In the Middle Ages, girls married as young as 12 to old and young men alike. The U.S. is actually odd for having the age of consent at 18. Most countries place the age at around 14-16. Generally a woman is "old enough" when she has her first period, and a man when he grows pubic hair, in my opinion. But if you think it's wrong, then it would definitely be wrong for you, and since the law in the U.S. is 18, it's good to follow the law and avoid sexual relations with anyone under that age. Plus, our society as it is now doesn't lend itself well to 14 year olds getting married and having children.

 

Is the author Japanese? That could partly explain why he has less of a problem with little girl nudity than his audience would. 

[PrimaGaga 1025]

At first I was gonna say "ew gross, pedo manga" but after thinking about it, i can almost relate. Berserk is to you as One Piece is to me. Surprise, surprise! And while Oda, the author, is very skilled at making an incredibly well built, almost real functioning world with unique and interesting characters, he's gotta be at least a bit of a sexist. I'll give some examples, minor spoilers ahead which i'll try to keep brief.

 

Nami. She is the main female of the story. She is very interesting and, despite being one of the 3 weakest characters on the crew, is insanely clever and always manages to find a solution to her problems, both in general scenarios and within the context of a fight. She is honestly a very well rounded character, as is every crew member and almost every character that we spend any extended time with. But she has two major flaws IMO. The first is her appearance. Like every "pretty" girl in Oda's world, Nami suffers from unrealistically huge breasts and an impossibly small waist. For the longest time, i chalked this up to artistic style, but while the male population of this world is VASTLY unique in appearances, very few of the girls are, especially in body size/type.

 

None of these men look alike, and yet the female depicted here is just like Nami and the other females of the series. 

 

Its most certainly not that Oda cant create females outside of his standard mold, it's simply that he wont.

 

here are two great examples! except, they aren't great examples. The lady on the left is evil, and because of that, Oda intentionally made her ugly, while the woman on the right's character, important to the story she may be, is mostly a comic relief alcoholic. In fact, we find out the second lady is an older mermaid (with her tail split into feet) but, as a joke, the men of the crew later "dont count" her as the first mermaid they've met, as it contradicts their expectations. 

 

Also, while on the topic of female appearance, there is debate among the fan base concerning Oda's possible "transphobia." Because while trans* people are a thing in One Piece, and while many of them are amazing characters (I say that as my favorite character is the "queen" of trans* people), some of them are depicted not so fondly. Let me clarify, as there seem to be 2 types of trans* individuals featured in the comic. Newkamas, which are people who have been completely turned into the opposite gender (on a binary scale) by means of magic, essentially. And Okamas who appear to just be men in drag and, well, look like this-

while Oda, on the surface, appears to be very pro trans (He apparently based a character on a friend of his who cross dresses, and then that friend voiced the character in the anime for a while until he had to step down for personal reasons) it still begs to question, are the Okama's just a joke? and when does the joke go too far?

 

Anyways, thats some stuff i think about. Also, a lot of the women have tragic pasts. I mean, so do the men, but the women seem to take it next level. Slavery is a theme among at least two women, while another female is shown being kicked in the head repeatedly by her captor, and another has even been sexually assaulted by an invisible man . I unno. It's still the best story ive ever read, but it's not perfect in these regards. So yeah, Pheo, i can understand your frustrations with the story you love. while not pedophilia, Oda's depiction of women aint winning an feminist awards.