48 replies to this topic

[KnS]

@ramenanmitsu

It's all good. You're right, I do tend to give more credit to the writer because the writer does ALL the work. They create the universe, all the characters, their histories, their feelings, their actions -- everything. It's an astounding amount of work, energy, emotion, imagination, and commitment on the part of the writer.

The simple fact is, if writers didn't create and then put their work on the line, there wouldn't be anything for people to read. There's an old saying that it's much easier to destroy than create, and that is certainly true when writing fiction. When I can I will always give a writer the benefit of the doubt.

I'm not telling you or anyone else that their opinion is wrong. I'm offering my opinion as a different point of view, that's all.

P.S. I have purchased every volume of the manga as well, to support Kishimoto and put my money where my mouth is, so to speak.

Edited by KnS, 20 July 2014 - 10:49 AM.

[ramenanmitsu]

@ramenanmitsu
It's all good. You're right, I do tend to give more credit to the writer because the writer does ALL the work. They create the universe, all the characters, their histories, their feelings, their actions -- everything. It's an astounding amount of work, energy, emotion, imagination, and commitment on the part of the writer.
The simple fact is, if writers didn't create and then put their work on the line, there wouldn't be anything for people to read. There's an old saying that it's much easier to destroy than create, and that is certainly true when writing fiction. When I can I will always give a writer the benefit of the doubt.
I'm not telling you or anyone else that their opinion is wrong. I'm offering my opinion as a different point of view, that's all.
P.S. I have purchased every volume of the manga as well, to support Kishimoto and put my money where my mouth is, so to speak.

Thanks for your comment. I understand where you're coming from. I don't necessarily agree, not because you're wrong, but because I think differently. I don't think criticism(or complaint) is something that denies or destroys everything about the author's work. To me it's not all or nothing. Criticism/complaint is a manifestation of people's expectations towards the author to improve whatever flaw it has. My boss once told me that in business it's usually the most loyal customers that issue a claim because they want the company to improve so they can keep using said company's product/service. Not so loyal customers won't even bother pointing out the flaw and go to a competitor, thus the first company loses the chance to know what's wrong about their product and they lose business. The biggest problem will be if Kishi's work have lost all criticism/complaints from fans. It means nobody expects him to even improve anymore. Destroying is definitely easier than creating, but to me, readers aren't destroyers, they are investors who have the power to make the authors creation come into reality and complete it(by buying the books and indirectly paying to the author) at the cost of an unsure return.

I do get irked when some people say Kishi sucks WITHOUT stating the reason and WITHOUT paying for the books. But then again, I don't really consider them as having rights to criticize/complain.

It's just my own opinion on the matter. And I'm not saying you're wrong, it just seems to be we have different views.

Edited by ramenanmitsu, 20 July 2014 - 12:11 PM.

[Nate River]

Ino's dream world comes to mind. What does she see in her perfect dream world? Something to do with Sasuke, of course! Ugh.

I was so disappointed in that. Aside from the romance angle, she was thinking about Sasuke. Does he have to murder Inochi while using Asuma's weapon? Would then someone, finally see that maybe, just maybe, Sasuke isn't what they think he is.

[KnS]

Criticism/complaint is a manifestation of people's expectations towards the author to improve whatever flaw it has.

 

(...)

 

Destroying is definitely easier than creating, but to me, readers aren't destroyers, they are investors who have the power to make the authors creation come into reality and complete it(by buying the books and indirectly paying to the author) at the cost of an unsure return.

 

I agree with you on all of this, at least in theory.  Readers do have the right to like or dislike, to voice their opinions, and to exercise their right as consumers by chosing whether or not to support an author's work.  Nevertheless, we disagree on what it ultimately means.

 

I have a few questions along these lines:  

 

1. Which readers' criticisms / complaints / expectations should Kishimoto be listening to?

2. Which readers' input into his flaws should influence Kishimoto's storywriting decisions and end product?

3. Whose vision of how the characters should act, how they should feel, and what they should do should Kishimoto follow?

 

Should Kishimoto listen to the opinion of fans who would prefer the girls to be written more like the boys, or the boys be written more like the girls?  Should he listen to the fans who feel they are written fine the way the are?  Should he listen to the opinions of SS fans who have a right to have their expectations met?  Should he listen to NH fans?  NS fans?  SK fans?  Open ending fans?  

 

I'm sure you get my point. The only vision Kishimoto can follow is his own (as much as he is allowed by his editors and publisher), and in doing so he will NEVER make everyone happy nor will he meet everyone's expectations as to how the story should be written.  He will never be able to improve his "flaws" in a way that will satisfy his millions of worldwide readers.  

 

It remains my opinion that most of the time what readers complain about is their unmet preferences, and that they confuse unmet preferences with "bad writing." 

 

Theme confusion, deus ex machina, plot holes, poor or confusing prose/dialogue, continuity errors -- these are examples of flaws that contribute to "bad writing."  And Kishimoto is guilty of some of these from time to time.  Pointing out such flaws and discussing how they adversely affect reader experience is criticism.  

 

The rest is personal opinion, and only as valid as any other reader's opinion -- of which there are millions that are unlikely to match up perfectly, if at all.  Kishimoto can't possibly meet your expectations without failing the expectations of someone else.  He will always be a "bad writer" in someone's opinion no matter what he does.  Does that really mean he's a bad writer, or that someone didn't get what they wanted out of his story?

 

I was so disappointed in that. Aside from the romance angle, she was thinking about Sasuke. Does he have to murder Inochi while using Asuma's weapon? Would then someone, finally see that maybe, just maybe, Sasuke isn't what they think he is.

 

I have to agree it was pretty dumb.  But to be fair, like I've said before, I think it was less about the boys who were fighting over her than it was about her desire to be popular.  I mean, even the comment by Inoichi (in the background) was that his daughter was popular.  It's still shallow, and not very flattering to Ino's character, but I don't think it was really meant to be about Sasuke, per se.

 

Tenten's dream was dumb too, and very shallow in my opinion.

Edited by KnS, 20 July 2014 - 09:34 PM.

[Win-chan]

I agree with you on every point there, KnS. Very well said! I don't think it's really a problem that so much emphasis is put onto Naruto and Sasuke's relationship and not as much on Naruto and Sakura's. However, what I DO think is poorly done and quite cliche is the women's over-involvement in love and the guy's under-involvement. It just shows sexist ideas, that all women care about is romance and men care about their goals. Honestly, if there was actually a ninja village with strong women like that, they probably wouldn't have time to be worrying about romance all the time first of all, and second of all, there are tons of different kinds of men and women. Some women aren't romantics, and some men are. So it's silly that Kishimoto makes all of his female characters obsessed with love.

 

Another point that I dislike is Naruto and Sasuke's relationship in part 1. I think it was very poorly done. Supposedly they were 'best friends' but they never seemed to like each other, ever. At best, they were rivals that respected the other's ability and would protect each other in battle. That's it. I think that if Kishimoto would've built their relationship better in the first half, that I would be more invested in their relationship in part 2. As it is, I just kind of have to suspend my disbelief and trust that Naruto really does care about Sasuke, for some reason.

 

As for plot holes and inconsistencies, I could go on for ages. The biggest thing that bothers me is the lack of consistency between different ninja ranks - I mean honestly, how could a bunch of genin beat Orochimaru's minions with the curse marks?? Don't you think he'd send really tough guys to get Sasuke if it was so important? And why the crap would the Leaf send genin after Sasuke?? And if the anbu are so tough, then why are they so easily taken out all the frickin time? And where's the rest of Naruto's generation besides the rookie nine? And it seems like everyone before them graduated at like age 10, but their generation is full of prodigies yet they all graduated at 12. How does the graduation system even work? How did Naruto fail the exam years in a row but he isn't behind the rest of his peers anyway?? But there are also things like technology. Why do they have messenger hawks if the five feudal lords essentially have skype? O.o But, I don't fault Kishimoto too much for these. He was extremely imaginative in his world building. I can't fathom how somebody could create what he did. However, he would've benefited from someone nitpicking all the details and stuff... Oh well. 

 

I didn't mean to go on that long, but that just happened, so... Anyway, Kishimoto has his flaws in his writing, but I think he does so much stuff well that it makes it easier to overlook the stuff he doesn't do well. 

[ramenanmitsu]

I agree with you on all of this, at least in theory.  Readers do have the right to like or dislike, to voice their opinions, and to exercise their right as consumers by chosing whether or not to support an author's work.  Nevertheless, we disagree on what it ultimately means.
 
I have a few questions along these lines:  
 
1. Which readers' criticisms / complaints / expectations should Kishimoto be listening to?
2. Which readers' input into his flaws should influence Kishimoto's storywriting decisions and end product?
3. Whose vision of how the characters should act, how they should feel, and what they should do should Kishimoto follow?
 
Should Kishimoto listen to the opinion of fans who would prefer the girls to be written more like the boys, or the boys be written more like the girls?  Should he listen to the fans who feel they are written fine the way the are?  Should he listen to the opinions of SS fans who have a right to have their expectations met?  Should he listen to NH fans?  NS fans?  SK fans?  Open ending fans?  
 
I'm sure you get my point. The only vision Kishimoto can follow is his own (as much as he is allowed by his editors and publisher), and in doing so he will NEVER make everyone happy nor will he meet everyone's expectations as to how the story should be written.  He will never be able to improve his "flaws" in a way that will satisfy his millions of worldwide readers.  
 
It remains my opinion that most of the time what readers complain about is their unmet preferences, and that they confuse unmet preferences with "bad writing." 
 
Theme confusion, deus ex machina, plot holes, poor or confusing prose/dialogue, continuity errors -- these are examples of flaws that contribute to "bad writing."  And Kishimoto is guilty of some of these from time to time.  Pointing out such flaws and discussing how they adversely affect reader experience is criticism.  
 
The rest is personal opinion, and only as valid as any other reader's opinion -- of which there are millions that are unlikely to match up perfectly, if at all.  Kishimoto can't possibly meet your expectations without failing the expectations of someone else.  He will always be a "bad writer" in someone's opinion no matter what he does.  Does that really mean he's a bad writer, or that someone didn't get what they wanted out of his story?

It's not a matter of 'who' but 'what' criticism he should listen. There is a difference between selfish demands and rational expectations. People wishing Kishi to write something he have never promised writing before are talking about selfish preferences. I guess my opinion that his portrayal of females are one of my selfish preferences. But I've never said he was a bad writer in regards to this, I said he's a sexist.

Rational expectations are people who wants Kishi to follow up with the rule he created or explain more on something that doesn't make sense.
Personally for me, I think the below don't make sense. But I'm sure people have others.
-The importance of hard work. Naruto became a walking contradiction the moment he gets stronger with handed out power-ups. While, other people are becoming weaker and weaker in comparison to him precisely because they have only 'hard work'. Kishi shouldn't have try to relay the message in the beginning or at least change the message to "Hard work with talent, bloodline,and destiny makes you strong". This is the biggest complaint that the Japanese readers have against Kishi and it's a major discussion going on in 2ch.

-Why didn't anybody tell Naruto about his parents? That wasn't explained.

-Sakura is a genjutsu type? That had no follow up along with her 'reaching to Naruto and Sasuke'.

These are some other examples although it isn't much of a big deal.
-Oodama Rasengan. Rasengan is a strong attack that increases the intensity of the attack by containing the chakra in a small ball. Why is Oodama Rasengan stronger?

-Madara's senjutsu cells regenerate his body, but why does it regenerate his clothes as well?

I hope this answers your question.

[sushi.]

I agree a lot with this. I'm a big fan of Sakura, and I don't give a damn whether she's a male or female. I don't like a character because of gender. So it irks me to no end when a sexist mangaka like Kishi limit my favorite character just because said character happened to be a girl. Not to mention, Kishi's thoughts of 'girls tend to be more interested in romance' is inaccurate at best and a poor excuse of his to limit the female character's capacity.

I agree with a lot of what you say. I think it would be better if Kishi had given Sakura a dream, aside from getting with Sasuke. (because that would change anyway) Right now she wants to be useful and protect her comrades, but she lacks something of her own, unrelated to the boys. She could've dreamed about becoming the best medic in the world, surpassing Tsunade etc. She could at least have her own jutsu.

 

I think I could've toleraded his romance focus a bit more if he had given the girls something else as well. If you give me something to dislike, give me something to like too.

I can see why some of it can be considered "sexist" but I mean it's a shonen manga what do you expect? I mean, Kishi obviously is making an effort to not make the girls "damsels in distress." They do have worth, and they can fight, they do have the determination needed in a character, and they are developed and focused on enough to make them interesting. Compared to a lot of shonen writers, Kishi is doing a fairly good job. Not the best, but... the girls have their own resolve and will to fight. Can't compare them to the guys, but I mean... they're okay.

When Kushina was kidnapped, she had to become the damsel in distress in order to make Minato the hero. She didn't even put up a fight. Sometimes it's natural for girls to be in distress(they can be in trouble too!), but Kishi will toss their skills aside if it means the man could shine. That is what is sexist about it.

 

also, the bolded. man..very unnecessary comment. Seriously.

Edited by sushi., 21 July 2014 - 12:01 AM.

[KnS]

However, what I DO think is poorly done and quite cliche is the women's over-involvement in love and the guy's under-involvement. It just shows sexist ideas, that all women care about is romance and men care about their goals. 

 

It may indeed be cliché.  But pronouncing it "poorly done" on those grounds is entirely subjective on the part of the reader.  A great deal of the Naruto story is cliché, especially for its genre, so why is it such a big deal that he tends to be cliché with regard to his treatment of girls and romance?  

 

Readers are certainly free to not like it, and free to express ideas on how it might have been written in a manner more appealing to them or more socially enlightened by their standards, but Kishimoto's choice to portray his characters this way does not make him a bad writer or his work poorly done.

 

Perhaps he was told to do it because it's an ingredient in a successful shonen?  Perhaps he did it because it was what he experienced when he was a teenager and first interacted with girls?  Or perhaps he has done it because he is a socially backward, knuckle-dragging Neaderthal who really thinks that all girls and women are this way?  Who knows?  Only he does.  (Although I'm sure his wife does, too.)

 

The point is, it is very difficult to use highly subjective, personal views and expectations as the scale by which to rate an author's skill.  Again, there is no way an author can meet everyone's views, wishes, and expectations, so he/she must choose what they feel is correct for what they are writing and go with it.  It's his decision how to characterize love and romance in his story, and readers will either like it or not.

 

The subjectivity issue is the same when it comes to the charges of sexism, but since the mods closed the previous thread on that subject I don't want to got any further down this path.

 

As for plot holes and inconsistencies, I could go on for ages. 

 

There is no question he has had a lot of technical issues and errors in his story.  No one could read the story carefully and not realize Kishimoto has made some fairly grievous mistakes.

 

But I've never said he was a bad writer in regards to this, I said he's a sexist.

 

I understand.  My replies attempt to address other comments that have been made on this topic as well, not just yours.  

 

Rational expectations are people who wants Kishi to follow up with the rule he created or explain more on something that doesn't make sense.
Personally for me, I think the below don't make sense. But I'm sure people have others.
-The importance of hard work. Naruto became a walking contradiction the moment he gets stronger with handed out power-ups. While, other people are becoming weaker and weaker in comparison to him precisely because they have only 'hard work'. Kishi shouldn't have try to relay the message in the beginning or at least change the message to "Hard work with talent, bloodline,and destiny makes you strong". This is the biggest complaint that the Japanese readers have against Kishi and it's a major discussion going on in 2ch.

-Why didn't anybody tell Naruto about his parents? That wasn't explained.

-Sakura is a genjutsu type? That had no follow up along with her 'reaching to Naruto and Sasuke'.

These are some other examples although it isn't much of a big deal.
-Oodama Rasengan. Rasengan is a strong attack that increases the intensity of the attack by containing the chakra in a small ball. Why is Oodama Rasengan stronger?

-Madara's senjutsu cells regenerate his body, but why does it regenerate his clothes as well?

 

I totally agree with you!  These are exactly the kinds of technical flaws I was talking about in my previous post when I mentioned "theme confusion, deus ex machina, plot holes, poor or confusing prose/dialogue, continuity errors."  

 

I agree that it is perfectly rational for readers to expect that these kinds of problems or unexplained phenomena within the story either not occur at all or be resolved for clarity.  I agree 100%.  So I don't think we're too far apart in viewpoint.

 

However....

 

The examples you have listed above are objective criticisms.  They are technical issues with the history and physical laws of the universe Kishimoto has created.  Mixing up, ignoring, redefining, or omitting facts or details like these is a reflection of sloppy or poor writing.  It's proof that Kishimoto is not doing his homework on his own story, or bothering to provide the sort of continuity that readers expect and deserve.  No argument from me on that.

 

But remember the title of this thread: Kishimoto's Portrayal of Love.  It would be difficult to raise a discussion point that is more subjective than the way characters are written with regard to relationships and love -- or in the way individual readers will react to it.  

 

Something along the lines of, "I don't like Kishimoto's portrayal of love; it's bad writing" is not equal to "Kishimoto has failed to properly explain how Senjutsu cells function."  One is subjective opinion, the other is objective criticism.

Edited by KnS, 21 July 2014 - 01:17 AM.

[xxRomanceGirlxx]

Perhaps we should accept Kishi does things the way he wants, but saying what he does is bad writing on love when you give backing for it isn't wrong. Yes, it's an opinion but it goes for the ones who like how he does things too. We shouldn't criticize either just because we don't agree.

 

But yes, I will agree talking about Kishi's portrayal of love is just an opinion rather than fact. Everyone has a right to think differently.