Reply at end.
>> >> <<SPOILERS>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>

nik wrote:
>But that has nothing to do with poor storytelling.  I have no 
problem with his attempts to bring in cash for new OVAs by telling 
stories that are based in the OVA continuity.  I find absolutely 
nothing wrong with that.  At all.  What I have a problem with is 
referencing outside material as need-to-know information to 
understand the mechanical underpinnings of a plot.  All that had 
to be done was a simple insertion of information (does not have to 
be detailed or lengthy, or even costly if done creatively) that 
would leave a viewer of the animated series with even an idea of 
what was going on (again, my aim is on Misaki, but several other 
things as well)  So I ask again: Why is that so hard to understand?
<
     As I've stated, I understand your point of view, but 
decisions have to be made as to what is going to make it into the 
animation production and with over eight years of material to draw 
upon, Kajishima isn't going to be satisified and neither are 
fans.  He wanted to tell us more about Tenchi's family, Washuu's 
past, include a cute bit regarding Ryo-Oh-Ki, hint a bit 
concerning Mihoshi, etc.  Fans want to know how/why Kiyone died, 
but Kajishima has made it clear that he considers it to be an 
important secret (one that he has danced around, but hasn't 
revealed).  The connection between Naja, Kagato (I), Seto, and 
Noike, is yet another thing that hasn't been discussed in the 
anime at all (though we finally got a quick hint).  I ultimately 
have the impression that Kajishima does not consider the animated 
medium to be something that must be able to completely stand 
alone.  The viewer is expected to be somewhat familiar enough with 
the published stories to be able to make sense of a number of 
items if presented in an abbreviated manner.  The animated aspect 
of the story is told accordingly.

     Now, there were aspects that could have been sacrificed (the 
first episode flashbacks) to include more foreshadowing and 
detail, but it doesn't seem as if that's how the animated medium 
is going to be used.  We can accept that the animated story isn't 
going to completely inclusive and write it off as a wash, or we 
can simply acknowledge that it's simply the way that the story is 
going to be told and read up accordingly.  Is it conventional in 
animated storytelling?  No.  Is it considered to be best-practice 
in animated storytelling?  No.  However, because of the show's 
history and the realities of financing, it is the situation.  It's 
undoubtedly an answer that you'll like, but it's one that I've 
accepted as being a fact in TM!R.

     As for whether the sudden revelation of Misaki's nature is 
good storytelling or not, I'll have to see how it's carried.

>Which is fine.  None of that prevents the animated series from 
expressing important parts of the written story in a logical 
narrative.<

     It does mean that a lot would have to be left out of the 
animated series to be a logical narrative completely capable of 
standing alone.  I imagine that between the choice of rehashing a 
good bit of what has been written in the intervening years and 
simply using the animated series as *part* of his canvas, 
Kajishima chose the latter.

>I have no problem with other mediums.  I just don't see a 
conflict between introducing new material into the animated series 
and cogent storytelling within a single medium.<

     The conflict is time and money.  Again, the way things have 
developed, Kajishima does not appear to intend that the animated 
medium be anything more than an extension of what has already been 
published in his books.  If he did, the animated series would 
progress slower than it already is and he would need more than 26 
episodes.

>Not really.  Is ALL of the written material detrimental to the 
plot?  No.  Why can't the fans at least be treated to an animated 
sequence of the backstory or even a reference to the backstory- 
the backstory that is necessary or vital to the storytelling, as 
the Misaki sequence required.<

     (You mean essential, don't you?)  Because in order to make 
that sequence even logical in the presentation, you'd have to 
dedicate far more than small snippet of time... millions of yen in 
the budget, all just to give a hint that was included in the STM 
novels.

>I disagree.  I think that it would be entirely realistic to have 
been given a few sentences, flashes or other narrative devices 
which would have explained parts of the illogical gaps in the 
storytelling.  In fact, I believe it could be done cheaply, and 
would have added emotional weight or dramatic resonance to the 
story which otherwise smacks with a nonsensical disregard for 
dramatic conventions.<

     There's an old saying: "You can't please everyone."  The 
event with Misaki is meant to be a surprise.  Also, I can't see it 
being a minor affair given that the substantive hints were given 
by the narrator, not by simply knowing just how powerful Misaki 
was as a child.  Just how are you supposed to hint at something 
like that in a manner that will be apparent to someone who has 
only watched the animation without completely making it glaringly 
obvious to someone that has read the other material?  You see, 
I'll have to admit something... I liked being caught off-guard by 
the incident with Misaki.  It and the time-travel incident with 
Kagato was just about the only things that I hadn't considered as 
a possibility.  It was *refreshing* to have that happen.

>Honestly, I find that argument to be absurd.  Am I also supposed 
to believe that Ryoko's eyes bulge out to the size of dinner 
plates?  Is it not far more likely that the Misaki/Roko scene was 
done as a gag?  If you really wish to go through with that logic 
(and I hope not, because this thread would go on forever) you 
could be explaining a lot of things which most people would 
consider to be gags.  For instance- why would it be hard to 
beleive that Misaki is not as strong as Yosho, who took Ryoko's 
punch no problem in episode 3?  Why does Taro give Ryoko so much 
trouble, etc.  Al this begs the question of how a gag (one of many 
similar gags recurring throughout the series) is supposed to 
indicate to us in any way that Misaki is not only a super-being, 
but an EVIL high-dimensional Goddess?  Is that really a reasonable 
conclusion to make? It is not.<

     Interestingly enough, claims that what Tenchi did were gags 
or visual exaggerations were precisely the counterarguments made 
against my Tenchi-kami theory.  The heart of the matter is that 
given hints in the other mediums, I could firmly conclude that 
Tenchi's actions weren't gags or exaggeration.  The same applied 
to Misaki and Washuu tossing Ryouko around.  At the time, there 
was no clear hint in the animated medium that body reinforcement 
was SOP in the Galaxy Academy or that Misaki really was an 
incredibly strong individual, even for a Juraian.

>That has nothing to do with my complaint.  Ryoko's parentage is 
explained quite well in that very same scene.  Misaki is not 
explained in the entire episode.  Your other examples are also 
insufficient because either A.) They are foreshadowed, even if the 
entire picture is not shown (might I mention that some of the 
examples you chose were quite well foreshadowed in my opinion.), 
or B.) The lack of foreshadowing follows traditional storytelling.<

     Ryouko's parentage is introduced midway through the fifth 
episode.  There is no such luck with Misaki as she appears near 
the end of the episode when things are moving nonstop to the 
conclusion.

>And unfortunately the Misaki aspect is not one of those 
exceptions.  The very purpose behind foreshadowing is to give 
meaning later on or to create a dramatic buildup.  On both of 
those levels, the Misaki incident fails to meet the criteria.<

     You believe so, but it seems to me that it was appropriate 
that there wasn't a hint.  We're not going to see eye-to-eye on 
this.

>But to a sour dramatic effect, if any.<

     Again, I was happy with its effect... like an unexpected halt 
in a rollercoaster.  It was jarring, but in a good way.

>Not particularly.  I find it a cop out that Kajishima would not 
risk telling a possibly unfavorable pairing (for whatever 
reason).  It seems indecisive, and unrealistic (not to mention 
chauvinistic by modern standards).<

Re: "unfavorable pairing"
     Unlike Hayashi, Kajishima never had a clear favorite (though 
I suspect that he's leaned towards the Choushin).  As he's clearly 
stated, they are *all* 'ideal girls'.

Re: "indecisive"
     It seems completely clear to me that it isn't indecisive... 
Tenchi doesn't percieve the girls in 'that way' and prefers 
something like a family.  Lo' and behond, that's what it turned 
into.  That seems pretty decisive.

Re: "unrealistic"
     ...And having an alien grandfather, hyperdimensional powers, 
and a bevy of attractive female aliens living with you for about 
two years is somehow realistic?  Even the above were true and we 
simply accepted the issue of a large number of, simultaneous, long 
enduring admirers, is it unrealistic to not want what others want, 
at least not at the immediate moment?  Being a healthy male does 
not necessarily mean that you *choose* to have that kind of 
relationship when there are more important fish to fry in your 
life, even if you feel a healthy degree of attraction. 

________________________________________________________________
Sent via the EV1 webmail system at mail.ev1.net