Of course there is an interesting property of animes, compared to other media, in that the characters amount to much more than usual. You can often say an anime is “character driven”, and I often find myself pinning not for the plot, but for character developement. So in a way there is value in studying them alone ; but still, I believe a really great anime will not use only characters as its narrative force.

All in all, I like your posts, I just wish sometimes you were less descriptive and focused more on analysis

Yes, but are all characters that complex? I was under the presumption that, for most anime, we could reduce their instrumentality into a simple dichotomy, since that is their primary and essential function.

“If you will, this difference is interesting when it stops being just a static difference and begins to grow into a motif for the show, a force that will drive it.”

Yes, I cited some examples where difference isn’t static – Kannazuki no Miko and Geass. It’s also interesting because two parallel themes – penitence – actually necessitate change. Penitence is predicated upon sin, so the viewer must first observe the antecedent ideology in order for the consequent ideology to have any sort of effect.

I think that ‘a simple dichotomy’ will always be ‘the force that drives it’, as you say. I think this becomes more complex that what we’re saying here (though I only intended to study characters, not plot! – hence the lacking). Also, this post seems lacking because, as you pointed out, conflict between the lead paradigm is not what drives the show. There can be simultaneous sites of conflict, within “the good guys”, but also conflict that originates from “the bad guys”, so there’s a complexity there. IMHO difference is usually a strong motif, even in DBZ (a relatively trite show, you can agree) remose/regret play a big part, and that is manifested in Vegeta’s pride, the ideology that generates remorse/regret, while Goku, unbound by racial ideology, doesn’t care about the past and is always merciful. Vegeta explicitly mentions this in the final fight against Kid Buu.

“That is why in my opinion your time / conflict equation is flawed”

what is the relationship between time and conflict you are stating (surely time is not divided by conflict?) – in any case, nothing happens instantaneously.

“But imagine a pacifist and a warmonger ; their conflict will appear almost without meaning unless there is a war ongoing / coming.”

I think that such conflict would definitely have meaning, but it would pointless. You’re right though, despite these posts explicitly being about characters, the environment of characters is interesting to analyze. Though I think warmongering in a peaceful setting would very interesting in itself! But, what would you think about the relationship between character and environment? Structural conditions vs. personal agency is a question I always grapple with, and usually the answer is that it is dialectical.

“She did love Himeko, though consent was not always asked,” – isn’t that precisely what adultery is? Seems like, as you said, passion was indeed the primary emotion, though non-consensual lovin’ must inextricably be adulteration. Innocence plays a big part in a lot of anime, and such innocence is emphasized by the antithetical ideology either explicitly or implicitly. That’s how a lot of meaning is constructed these days anyway. What is freedom without oppression? GAR without moe (i.e. masculinity without femininity)?

ETERNAL: LOL, sorry, I even thought I read in your about that you were a girl…oops. Yeah, your post was exactly what I needed to get this post done, after nearly a month, so I guess I have to indirectly thank Biankita for starting the long train of thought.

Also, thanks for the mention! I’m actually a guy lol (my name tends to throw people off, as does my taste in anime…though my picture collection would probably prove otherwise ^^;), but my burning passion for all things related to romance burns strongly nonetheless. I’m glad that my train of thought proved helpful to another aniblogger ^^

Besides once you add kids into the mix the couple can be happily married, but kids are something else altogether.

Lastly I don’t think Chikane represented adultery, more like passion. She did love Himeko, though consent was not always asked, but it was ultimately rightly or wrongly (rightly IMHO) obtained.

being/existing seems to necessitate relationships too. You exist only in relation to other things, insofar as the social nature of anime takes precedence.

I’m thinking the bigger mystery is when nothing happens in the binary; things just are/exist.

You’re right then, I hadn’t considered non-binary lead paradigms, though I’m not familiar with Kenshin. That is, however, hard to conceptualize…since what constitutes the lead binary is diametric ideological conflict when it is manifested in a character. If you have one half of the ideological conflict manifested, you will end up with the pro or antagonist. If the remaining half is still only in an intangible state (or relatively abstract, i.e. Big Brother, the state, etc.), then that’s when you end up with your kenshin/shishio example. Casshern Sins may be an extremely good example here (write about it?!). Also, the end of TTGL, since its humanity vs. “the spiral nemesis”, just an abstraction, though that’s not really tenable since “humanity” isn’t a character.

Could such a structure work for smaller story arcs (relative to overall series length)? In cases where the lead is pitted against a big super-bad (Kenshin vs. Shishio), the antagonist is not technically a ‘lead’ but I wonder if this framework will apply nonetheless.