6 Things I Hate About Love Hina . . .

[omorka]

As my long-term readers know, memeslayer and I have been 'round the horn a couple of times about several anime shows that he likes and that I can't stand. Love Hina is the prototypical example. Oh, I can list reams and reams of things in that particular show that I'm offended by - the stereotypical views of men and women, the casual violence, the implicit racism of the Kaolla Su character, etc., etc., etc. And I can do the same for a large number of other shows I can't stand. However, while discussing with the Spouse why I wasn't thrilled with the episode of an old (late 1980s) anime that wileras brought over tonight, I finally found a connecting thread for a large number (not all, but many) anime I can't stand.

If the main character is all of:

male

clumsy (either socially or physically, but usually both)

clueless

stupid (and I'm fairly harsh about what I consider stupid)

And the show is both:

shonen

either a romance or action with a strong romantic subplot

Then it has to have seriously badass plot, world, and character development or I'm simply not interested.

Unfortunately, this seems to link in with what Memeslayer was saying while he was here about the "audience identification character." Said AIC appears to have to be at least three of male, clumsy, clueless, and stupid.

Interestingly, if the main character is clumsy, clueless, and stupid, but female, it doesn't bother me - see also Fruits Basket and Maho Tsukai Tai!. Also, male, clumsy, and clueless are not sufficient to ruin a show for me if the character shows some intelligence; see RahXephon (although he's only socially clumsy, not so much physically). Even being a harem anime is not enough by itself - but the hero character for almost all harem shows meets the above definition.

Why? Not sure, although it has something to do with whether I can manage to root for a character (not identify with them - that doesn't happen very often - but care what the hell happens to them in the course of the show). Having characters I care about is a big issue for me for any show, anime or not. (I can't watch Azumanga Daioh because there's no plot at all, the world's not interesting, and I don't care about any of the characters, despite it not fitting the above formula.) The prototypical AIC is a character I want to flunk out of my class, not root for; in fact, on some level, I want to warn the female objects of the AIC's attention that he's likely to turn abusive later in the relationship. (That female character tend to slap the AIC a lot doesn't help - for me, it means the relationship is already violent and therefore something for both participants to run from, not something for the show to celebrate.)

So, thus my preference for shojo if the show's a romance. Note that if there's not a strong romantic plot or subplot, the above doesn't matter that much; I can watch and enjoy shonen action or drama without the above getting in the way, although having non-stupid, non-clueless characters helps.

The other thing that makes me hate a show is random visual crap. Between that and the above, my very low opinion of FLCL should surprise no one . . .

Comments

[moontyger.livejournal.com]

Here I go, disagreeing all over your journal... sorry. :(

I have incredible trouble seeing the AIC, as I've described him here, as fundamentally good-hearted. If he's still that clueless, then he's clearly not even trying; on some level, he doesn't care who he hurts, and that's a sign of sociopathy. Every single one of these characters screams "potential abuser" to me. (Often more than the "pervert" character in the same show does.)

Oh boy. You do realize that your above description describes every single geeky male I have known, as well as every man I have dated? If I avoided men like this, I'm not sure I would have had a date yet, plus I would have had to avoid all men who share my interests, as well as common experiences. And while I have had some abusive relationships, all of them were not and in fact it is deeply unfair to some of the men I have dated to characterize them this way. But from these characteristics, there is no way to tell the abusers apart from those who are not.

The fact is that many people, myself included, are deeply stupid when it comes to other people, especially when young. I think of myself when I was a teenager and shudder at how clueless I was! There really isn't malice in it, nor does it mean we don't care; we really don't understand. And when people assume there is malice and treat us that way, we are then hurt and even more confused. I will still freely admit I don't really understand most people, though I try.

Let me give an example: almost every one of these characters clearly thinks the universe owes him a girlfriend. That he might have to work at getting a girlfriend by actively doing nice things, rather than simply standing around and being male and a "nice guy," doesn't seem to occur to him; that women are people and not objects doesn't seem to occur to him.

Once again, this describes every geeky guy I have known. The problem here tends to be largely cultural rather than individual. Shy guys want a girlfriend, but the only way they can see that girlfriends are obtained is by doing things they are afraid to do and often that aren't true to who they are (being a popular extroverted jock, in general). But this is a patriarchal culture, so they still feel entitled to a woman. To really fix this attitude, we have to change the culture that spouts it. I can't entirely blame guys who have little contact with women for believing this; women get caught up in cultural BS, too.

To a certain extent, I admit that this attitude increasingly annoys me as well. However, on an individual level (as opposed to a cultural one, where I think we seriously need to work on changing it), I think it is only really something to worry about in regards to a guy's attitudes towards women when said guy has actually had a girlfriend. Most tend to learn better once they have the actual experience and the time around a woman that having a girlfriend entails teaches them that women really are people. It is those that don't learn after this that you have to watch out for. But getting back to anime, the AIC does not tend to fit this category, largely because much of the humor is supposed to derive from his lack of understanding and fear of women.

[omorka.livejournal.com]

Don't worry about disagreeing. :) It's only a problem if it descends to name-calling.

Having said that, let me somewhat unkindly measure those of your previous SOs whom I can remember offhand against my definition of the AIC. (Please understand that I realize some of these judgments are harsh, particularly on the final criterion. Please also forgive me for getting some of them out of chronological order.)

MZ - male, not clumsy, clueless, not stupid. Not an AIC; had too much of the Byronic mad-bad-and-dangerous-to-know vibe going on. Really more of the faux-bad-guy that the AIC often has to overcome to "get the girl."

NB - male, somewhat clumsy, fairly clueless, stupid. Artistic. Definitely the potential to be a specialty AIC. I would classify some of what he did to you as emotionally abusive.

SH (yeah, I know he has an LJ but I don't feel like looking for it) - male, not particularly clumsy, not clueless, stupid. Not an AIC. Abusive and an all-around serious ass.

teegarden - male, occasionally clumsy, not usually clueless, not stupid. Not an AIC.

shadowknt (I think that's him, anyway) - male, socially clumsy, abysmally clueless, stupid. Very much an AIC. I think he was clearly emotionally abusive.

briareos - male, somewhat clumsy, clueless when you found him (he grew a lot), not stupid. Has some AIC potential, but really he's too smart to be one - and he actually underwent character development, which they're not really ever allowed to do.

wileras - male, not particularly clumsy except where cats are involved, clueless only in specific areas, not stupid. Not an AIC.


Oh, and just so it doesn't look like I'm picking on you:

RTB3 - male, very clumsy, very clueless, stupid in some areas. A near-prototypical AIC. Physically and emotionally abusive, at least at the time.

[moontyger.livejournal.com]

And yet all but 3 of those you named definitely fit the profile of expecting a girlfriend to fall into their lap, without thinking they needed to do anything to bring this about (along with the basic tendency to regard women more as objects that often goes with this view). Most of them got over it, but I have had a tendency to be the first girlfriend for guys who are generally old enough to feel they should have had one by now and this attitude is very common, along with a general shallowness about women. Most do learn better once they have actually been in a relationship and it is because of this that I don't think it is a sign of an abuser.

As well, teegarden is more clueless than you realize, I think, or was at that time. And I could go on, but that's not the point, other than different people perceive others differently.

I'm not entirely clear on what you mean by stupid and how it differs from some of the other areas.

I do think some AICs do grow throughout the series; at least in the better-written series they do.