Gaffer Tape wrote:JulieYBM wrote:I'm finally watching the Bardock TV Special video. I have to say, I hate the phrase "shrinking the universe". That's just paying too much credence to the grand narrative or expanded universe non-sense and ignoring the greater creative expression sought by the creator behind a work.
Well, I have to say I hate the
concept of "shrinking the universe." However, I do wish you'd elaborate on the bolded section. I'm afraid I don't understand what you're getting at at all.
The '
grand narrative', as in the overruling plot, deeper meaning or universal application. The problem I have with the highlighting of the concept of 'shrinking' the universe is that it implies that there is some sort of rule to what is or should be done, rather than the author's self-expression. By trying to make the structure and techniques of a novel, comic, television or film fall within certain parameters we inadvertently step away from human feeling (specifically, those of the creator) and step closer to the sort of masturbating-to-numbers you see from battle power fans. Yes, this is what is done...but to what end were these actions taken?
If the characters are mere pieces of the creator's mind, this makes their actions not actual happenings, but expressions of the creator's beliefs. Acknowledging that reality does indeed highlight the work's fictional nature, but by highlighting the fictional nature of the work we are getting closer to the real truth that the work represents (the feelings of the author). I'm not a big fan of making vast universes for the sake of having vast universes, because while they may seem 'realistic', that is on a very surface-level scale. Gokuu's dad tries to stop the destruction of the Saiyans and is even the sole Saiyan to confront Freeza over this? It's not probable in a setting of reality, but it's realistic as an expression of the author. If we're not consuming and art to understand and connect with the author (and thus perhaps learning something new about ourselves) what is the point of consuming and creating art?
Mind you, there is something of a deeper meaning to the Bardock TV Special in how it highlights the fruitlessness (vegetablelessness?) of Bardock's actions, but even that isn't held up as anything more than a common tool for expressing the creators' wills. Rather than having characters plays subservient to the grand narrative (deeper meaning), the grand narrative is used to highlight the characters. While Episode of Bardock certainly has its problems, a lack of grand narrative is not one of them. Ooishi Naho clearly has an idea of who Bardock is. Otaku in general have developed their perception and crafting of characters over the past thirty years to the point that they could conceivable exist in any context. After all, just look at how Vegeta known for his cooking! Or how
Yotsuba to! is whatever genre it feels like being for each individual chapter. Bardock is a character defined less by the grand narrative of his establishing work and more by the perception and further fictionalization of his character as his fans have consumed him and other media across the years.
Episode of Bardock's problem, as a result, is that whatever ideas Oonishi had regarding Bardock were not properly allowed to be developed within a looser creative (editorial influence) and narrative (structure and length) form.
As a creator myself, I don't think it's necessarily fair (rather, 'worthy') of criticizing
Episode of Bardock. Not only is it the product of editorial and product influence, it is merely a doodle on a napkin. It's a collection of ideas hastily doodled on a napkin at McDonald's that shouldn't have been released in its current form ("worth of being criticized") and was only done as a result of having to push out a commercial ("fair to be criticized").
I'm a terrible writer, so the shit I'm trying to get at probably isn't going to make much sense outside of my own internal context, but I just wanted to say it.