What To Do With Bad Images In Mangas?

[Shao Feng-Li]

You're right Etoh. It's just that, nudity and sex are only appropriate in a few places. I think putting it in media is certainly abuse and misuse.

[Etoh*the*Greato]

Depends on the media, I suppose. I'm just arguing that nudity is not in and of itself evil

[AsianBlossom]

Take a look at old works of art...filled with nudity (I should know; I took an art class last semester). But, that's because the body was regarded back then as something beautiful (and it still is). Society has taken something beautiful and perverted it into something ugly with all of the distasteful and inappropriate nudity found in many manga and anime.

[Shao Feng-Li]

No one disagrees with you there Etoh.

[CAAOutkast]

Depends on the media, I suppose. I'm just arguing that nudity is not in and of itself evil

I agree with ya 500%. Nudity does not equal Porno(or hentai).

[Debitt]

Um... I can read books about Shinto like I can read books about Atheism or Hinduism. They don't affect me at all. If you want to talk about what I said in the Nausicaa Fan Rant Thread, let's do it there, not here. I think this is a seperate issue from what we're discussing here.

If you take careful notice, my inquiry wasn't directed at you, nor concerned your personal choices in particular. However, I do feel it's relevant to the thread, as the issue of censoring elements of Shinto and Buddhism in manga has cropped up here.

Regardless, I feel Etoh hit on what I was aiming to express here:

Yeah... We may not believe in those religions, but if God is Truth then we have nothing to fear from reading about them, or seeing references to them. There is nothing innately sinful about that to my knowledge.

[Prince Asbel]

:eyebrow: If you take careful notice, my inquiry wasn't directed at you, nor concerned your personal choices in particular. However, I do feel it's relevant to the thread, as the issue of censoring elements of Shinto and Buddhism in manga has cropped up here.

Regardless, I feel Etoh hit on what I was aiming to express here:

Okay.

[mysngoeshere56]

While I'm not going to sit here and play spot the Shinto in manga, I'll just say that chances are, you're going to have very black manga pages by the time the day is through.

My question is: what is so innately offensive about Shinto (or any other world religion, for that matter) that one can't even let their holy eyes look upon it?

Well, yes I do realize that there would be very black mangas if I edited out that part. The main thing I'm saying is that it is unfortunate that it's there, because it's a different spirituality other than Christianity. It's not like I'm going to believe in it, it's just that I find it unfortunate that it plays such a strong role in the plot a lot of the time.

(Sorry if this doesn't make any sense.... I just don't exactly see how to respond to that.)

[ich1990]

What about the other side of the page? For example, one page has few girly posters on the wall (because we don't know what the red-light district is...) and the other side of the page is fine.

The manga moves so slowly that missing a couple of frames harldy destroys the plot.

[quote="Christisright"]I agree with ya 500%]

True, but it can still be damaging, both as a stumbling block and as contributing to the devaluation of nudity in general.

How can something be special if it is something you are constantly being exposed to? What if, for instance, diamonds were as common as stones? Would they be as revered? Would they be used on valuable jewelry? I believe the same concept applies to nudity.

True appreciation for nudity comes from admiring it within the constrains of of God's plan for it. If it is encountered all of the time, like it is today, it loses its value and becomes nothing more than a cheap sales gimmick. If, however, it is kept until marriage, like sex, it strengthens the bond between the married couple. With divorce as rampant as it is today, marriage needs all the help it can get.

At least, that is my own take on the subject.

Also, you should see the shock on my fellow college students' faces when I give them this speech in response as to why I don't watch certain movies, it is priceless.

[ShiroiHikari]

I actually haven't seen that many manga/anime in which Shinto is integral to the plot. o_o

[Tsukuyomi]

I'm sorry if this comes out wrong, but if it truly bothers you that much.. Do you really think you should be reading it in the first place? There are many things out there that we don't understand, and we won't if we censor those things out. Like most things in books, they're there to inform ^ ^ If there's really no want in wanting to run into material as those, then there is no reason to read such things, right? Are you forgetting where the manga came from?

I know that was a bit off topic, so please feel free to delete this post if necessary

[mysngoeshere56]

I actually haven't seen that many manga/anime in which Shinto is integral to the plot. o_o

Haha, well... So far it's really only been a major theme in one volume I've read.

Yes, I'm perfectly aware of where it came from. Again, I'm saying that I find it unforutanate (not sounding mean, I'm just giving her a friendly response to what she said... Please don't think I'm trying to sound defensive, internet text communication can be confusing after all ). I am aware that there are other things like this that have been used in classics, such as The Iliad, The Oddesy, Julius Caesar, etc. (none of those are shinto but you know what I mean). Again, I mean it's unfourtante that people put those in there, like they put swearing and porn in them too.

(By the way.... mods, admins, feel free to delete this too (or edit it so that only the last part shows) if you feel the need. I agree that it is slightly of off topic and I apologize for that. I would just send PM's, but I would want other readers that came later to know what I was talking about. Again, I apologize and will try to make the rest of my post on topic).

But anyway, after reading through this a little, I find some pretty valid points on here. I've always wondered what I should think of nudity if I ever were to come across it in an anime/a manga (ex: Should I view it like I would view art, or view it as porn?). If I could, I would give ich1990 kudos for that last part on his last post. I completely agree.

[Shao Feng-Li]

Well, the religion just depends on the country it's from. "Viewing" a different religion is quite the same at all as viewing lewdness.

[Wind]

I have a question are you.. isn't editing your manga destroying the right of freedom fo content

[mysngoeshere56]

I have a question are you.. isn't editing your manga destroying the right of freedom fo content

I don't see how it would be. It's not keeping the author or artist from putting whatever (s)he wants to put into his/her writings and illustrations, it's just keeping you from seeing things you don't want to see.

[Tsukuyomi]

Yes, I'm perfectly aware of where it came from. Again, I'm saying that I find it unforutanate (not sounding mean, I'm just giving her a friendly response to what she said... Please don't think I'm trying to sound defensive, internet text communication can be confusing after all ). I am aware that there are other things like this that have been used in classics, such as The Iliad, The Oddesy, Julius Caesar, etc. (none of those are shinto but you know what I mean). Again, I mean it's unfourtante that people put those in there, like they put swearing and porn in them too.

Pssh, whatever u_u

Just Kidding That wasn't defensive at all I just take things on the internet all as the opinions of others. Well, for boards like Caa I mean.. or something like that Internet text communications can be very confusing O_O That's why I use emotes such as these.. ^_^

It is unfortunate, but there are others out there one can read It may be hard at times, but I'm sure there are some out there with no swearing and porn in them ^ ^ I haven't read to many manga, so I guess can't really say huh XD

[Shao Feng-Li]

I have a question are you.. isn't editing your manga destroying the right of freedom fo content

You can do whatever you want with your own personal possessions.

[Maledicte]

[quote="AsianBlossom (post: 1223603)"]Take a look at old works of art...filled with nudity (I should know]

Very well said.

There's often the question of the intent behind an image. A nude portrait and a pornographic image are depicting different things--a nude portrait showcases the natural beauty of the person, and what the person making it finds special, hence making the nude a "subject"; pornography, on the other hand, is made with the intent of inspiring lust, making the person in the picture an object.

But like AsianBlossom said, since we've been bombarded with pornographic or near-pornographic images these days, it's harder for people to make the distinction.

[Prince Asbel]

Well, the religion just depends on the country it's from. "Viewing" a different religion is quite the same at all as viewing lewdness.

Did you mean to say -"Viewing" a different religion isN'T quite the same at all as viewing lewdness.-?

[Shao Feng-Li]

Isn't

Oops...

[Prince Asbel]

Isn't

Oops...

Okay, just wondering.

[Radical Dreamer]

Yeah, I would. See, for me, it doesn't matter if it's not drawn in an alluring manner. I can't help it if it's drawn that way or not. They were wrong for drawing those things. Drawing nudity is no better than being nude yourself. The problems they cause are the same, so there's no excuse for that.

I wouldn't be so quick to assume that, really. Artworks of Michaelangelo's time were funded by the church itself. Michaelangelo and the other Renaissance artists were by no means wrong for creating their masterpieces, and I consider no other artist "wrong" to draw a non-seductive, artistic nude. My point is, if someone actually finds Renaissance art to be a stumbling block in our times, it's not the fault of age-old Michaelangelo, but more, as Shao mentioned earlier, the fault of today's sexually charged culture.

I also want to thank everyone for keeping this discussion civil thus far]I have a question are you.. isn't editing your manga destroying the right of freedom fo content[/QUOTE]

No, actually. That's kind of like saying "isn't bleeping out curse words on prime time television taking away rights to free speech?" If you don't wish to be (constantly) exposed to certain material, once you own it, there's nothing inherently wrong with editing it for your own personal benefit. If you began selling edited copies, or if the company censored something from the author's original intent without the author's permission, that might be different, but as your personal property, you can do as you wish with it.

[Prince Asbel]

I wouldn't be so quick to assume that, really. Artworks of Michaelangelo's time were funded by the church itself. Michaelangelo and the other Renaissance artists were by no means wrong for creating their masterpieces, and I consider no other artist "wrong" to draw a non-seductive, artistic nude. My point is, if someone actually finds Renaissance art to be a stumbling block in our times, it's not the fault of age-old Michaelangelo, but more, as Shao mentioned earlier, the fault of today's sexually charged culture.

The fault is always with the sexually charged individuals. I'd argue that's the case for nudity in all cases, whether it is or isn't intended for sexual appeal. If nobody ever lusted, there'd never be a problem. So I understand that it may be drawn with different intentions, but people often do things that are wrong without intending to.

[chibiphonebooth]

The fault is always with the sexually charged individuals. I'd argue that's the case for nudity in all cases, whether it is or isn't intended for sexual appeal. If nobody ever lusted, there'd never be a problem. So I understand that it may be drawn with different intentions, but people often do things that are wrong with intending to.

um, i'm going to have to stroonngly disagree here.

i can find a difference between artistic nudity and sexual nudity. Our bodies were created by God and therefore beautiful.

There is a huge difference between the two. Artistic nudity is just supposed to be viewed at pretty or beautiful. In certain ways, like in Michaelangelo art and stuff, the nakedness almost shows how we are mere people. it brings us back to a sort of venerability that is slightly implied. at least to me. But they are not doing anything sexual or appealing.

Sexual nudity, however... is pretty obvious. It displays a person doing things to make you attracted or 'turned on.' i don't see how a classic art piece from the Renaissance should 'turn someone on.' ...Most of them aren't really doing anything but standing there.

[Prince Asbel]

Maybe you didn't understand me or something. My point in a nutshell is that for a lot of people including myself, nudity is nudity, pornographic or not. The effects are the same.

EDIT: I spelled without in my last post wrong. I spelled 'WITH intending to' instead of 'WITHOUT intending to'. Maybe that misled you. Sorry.

[minakichan]

Sexual nudity, however... is pretty obvious. It displays a person doing things to make you attracted or 'turned on.' i don't see how a classic art piece from the Renaissance should 'turn someone on.' ...Most of them aren't really doing anything but standing there.

........ It happens. Uh, let's just say you probably don't want to know, and you don't want to know how I know. But it happens, it totally happens.

I've also heard critical opinion that state that Michelangelo's David was meant to be viewed from below, placing David on a pedestal, and that his That Thing was supposed to be similarly strong and manly and even erotic. Granted, I take critics with a grain of salt because they interpret EVERYTHING ON EARTH as sexual, but the possibility exists. Religious art is not ALWAYS mutually exclusive from sexuality *points to Bernini, my main man*.

[Radical Dreamer]

Maybe you didn't understand me or something. My point in a nutshell is that for a lot of people including myself, nudity is nudity, pornographic or not. The effects are the same.

EDIT: I spelled without in my last post wrong. I spelled 'WITH intending to' instead of 'WITHOUT intending to'. Maybe that misled you. Sorry.

My main point here is that the effect does not define the cause. What I mean is, just because you and others have a problem with nudity doesn't mean artistic nudity is evil or that Renaissance artists were "wrong" for drawing it, as you seemed to imply. To use an example, just because people use computers to look at pornography doesn't mean computers are evil, and it doesn't mean the people who made the computers were wrong to do so. It's a bit of a stretch of an analogy, but I hope you can see the point I'm trying to make.

[Fish and Chips]

Granted, I take critics with a grain of salt because they interpret EVERYTHING ON EARTH as sexual, but the possibility exists. Religious art is not ALWAYS mutually exclusive from sexuality *points to Bernini, my main man*.

[Shao Feng-Li]

I don't get it.

[chibiphonebooth]

I don't get it.

'turned on'? XD