Ernest Schaal wrote:

> in article 4216DC8F.11B04B2D@yahoo.co.jp, Eric Takabayashi at
> etakajp@yahoo.co.jp wrote on 2/19/05 3:28 PM:
>
> > Ernest Schaal wrote:
> >
> >> Having a limited knowledge of Japanese arts in its various forms is not
> >> something to normally condemn a person, but you (despite that limited
> >> knowledge) enter a tread about Kurosawa with a vile attack on the idea of
> >> liking the masters of Japanese cinema without first becoming completely
> >> fluent in Japanese. You claim to be fluent, and yet it hasn't helped you in
> >> that area, has it?
> >
> > Where did I attack "the masters", liking the masters, or claiming that people
> > must be fluent in the language to understand their work? Where did I claim to
> > be fluent? Who cares if I do not use my ability in Japanese to enjoy or
> > understand more Japanese cinema? Are you sure you are not the one ranting,
> > Ernest?
>
> No, you were the one ranting about how only the 100% fluent in the language
> before one could dare comment on Japanese cinema.

When? Where?

> I would take the word of
> someone who had never been to Japan and knew no Japanese, but had seen the
> Japanese masters than rely on someone like you, who claims to be fluent but
> admits a general lack of knowledge about those masters, or Japanese cinema
> in general.

A simple visit to the domestic section of the video store will tell one that the
mere handful of directors or works you mention do not represent what Japanese
cinema are in general, and I do not know why you cannot admit it. Hey, did you know
that the live action genre also includes kiddy fare, work which treats girls and
women as objects, and a hell of a lot of porn? Even you will tell us that "good"
only "occasionally" comes from Japanese cinema.

> >> I don't know what your personal problems are, and I don't want to know, but
> >> it sure appears that your rants can border on the Kaz-like extreme.
> >
> > Despite all your education and achievements during your career, I believe you
> > feel somehow inadequate due to things such as needing to start Japanese
> > lessons. Therefore, you must (at least recently) start bashing people over the
> > head and crowing about your own greater? knowledge in other aspects of
> > Japanese culture such as classic movies, when you feel threatened by people
> > who for example (perhaps) understand Japanese language better than yourself.
> > You must also trash anime for some reason, as if it were not also a legitimate
> > form of entertainment or embodiment of culture when deriding it as porn or
> > kiddy shows.
>
> No, I am modest about my skills.

Right. So you getting humbled by the doctor was what?

> The idea of feeling inadequate to you is ridiculous.

It was I telling you that the concept of being impressed by me or not is ridiculous
and irrelevant.

> That is like feeling to your intellectually equal Japanese speaker, Kaz.

Then why does it matter if one is impressed by me or not? What should I care if an
old lawyer is not impressed by me?

> I "trashed" anime by not accepting your absurd theory of its value, as
> compared to other genres of Japanese film.

You do more than that; you generalize it as porn and kiddy fare for children and
otaku.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anime

Strange, I do not hear it called kiddy fare, and porn is only referred to in
passing. I hear an appreciation of the creativity and techniques which have been
shown, and I hear figures like Tezuka being treated with the respect given notable
live action directors.

> Earlier you asked why I thought you were an "otaku." The answer is your
> stated opinions on the nature and value of anime. If one talks like an
> otaku, and acts like an otaku, it is not unreasonable to assume that person
> is an otaku.

Which is what, and in what way? Your given description of otaku so far do not fit
me.

> Furthermore, your previous messages show you have the personality profile of
> that class.

Which is what?

> > Which is not to say you have demonstrated a knowledge of Japanese classic
> > cinema, or any individual movie or director in any post I have read so far. I
> > can read something more informative in the average one third of a page
> > newspaper movie review. Nor am I criticizing you for your level of Japanese.
>
> This from a self-confessed ignoramus about the subject of Japanese cinema?

That is irrelevant. What you have said about Japanese cinema in general, or about
any individual director or work, such as one liners about Kurosawa being the best
Japanese director ever, or Kitano being Japan's best living director, you could
have got off the back of a video cover, or the critic's quote off the front. Like I
said, the average newspaper review shows more knowledge than you, and unlike you,
they have shown they can acknowledge mediocre or subpar works in any genre
including animation.

> >> What is so wrong about liking the good that occasionally happens in Japanese
> >> cinema?
> >
> > Nothing. Just recall that I am telling you that there are great, classic works
> > in Japanese cinema, and that you also agree that "good" movies "occasionally"
> > appear, before you start bashing anime as porn and kids shows.
>
> Review the thread and you will discover that your comments were to diminish
> the non-anime works

I am still waiting for your estimation of how much of live action work is actually
good or great, to counter any of my assertions regarding how much can be ignored.
Yeah, Kurosawa is the master. I like Kitano's non-gangster work. I loved 80s Itami.
What of the thousands of other works on the shelf? Do you claim they are of
comparable quality?

> and to ridicule the idea that a non-fluent Japanese
> speaker could give a valid statement on the current state of the arts.

My most "derogatory" comment about your Japanese ability and its relation to how
well you can understand DIALOGUE in this thread is that you accept what is being
said if you rely on subtitles, which has nothing to do with your idolization of a
few famous Japanese directors or your smear of anime.