Oi, Hayaku!

There are many ways to hold an ordered and rational debate. Only, who would want one of those?

In playing Devil’s Advocate, Oi Hayaku! authors are invited to leave replies to arguments made by their peers - on the condition that they do not agree on anything whatsoever with person they are replying to.

Let the bitching commence…

Coburn:

Kannagi is art. Clearly all the social stereotypes on offer are present so as to set the show up as an engagement with modern Japanese culture. It’s a tale of men killing their gods, then fashioning them into sexy little girls.

By moving from pathetic mystical bullshit with tacky wands to a delightful harem formula, Kannagi celebrates post-war Japanese commercialization. We must note that the West (even in its most holy forms) is symbolic of this development - the crucifix-sporting Zange is a brazen hussy. Evidently Christianity is to be grouped with the forces of seductive commerce, not the lame forest shrines of abandoned deities.

It is no accident that the cast are all breast-obsessed. By portraying the mammary as prime sexual symbol Kannagi suggests that Japanese ladies must compete with busty foreign temptresses. The need to appease the all-powerful male hero (by out-sexying Western ladies) justifies the move from Impotent Goddess to Indecent Idol.

beanbrew:

Kannagi is not art. It isn’t set up as an engagement with modern Japanese culture. Nor is it tale of men killing their gods. Rather, it is a thinly veiled attack on capitalism using a strawman idol industry. Its attemts only make it clear what Kannagi really is. A disgusting communist effort to undermine civilization.

Kannagi is not celebrating any sort of commercialization. It is a vile attack on capitalism, showing the old gods of Japan being exploited by a “capitalist machine”. It tries to show this with Zange and Christianity as an example, a god who steals (exploits) a girl’s body (prostitution) for the idol industry (capitalists). Christianity is in the same camp as Shinto, both exploited for money.

Not only is Koburn wrong about everything else, but he is also wrong about Kannagi portraying breasts as a “prime sexual symbol”. Breasts are merely used for profit. Nor does Kannagi suggest that Japanese women must compete with foreigners, there are no foreigners in Kannagi. There is no all-powerful male hero, his absence tries to show that everyone loses in capitalism.

However, Kannagi falls flat on its face when trying to deliver its message. Also, Koburn calling Kannagi art can mean only one thing, that he is a spy for the red Chinese.

otou-san:

Beanbrew, in a typically disgusting display of Neo-McCarthyist xenophobia and fanatical devotion to the so-called “free market,” unbuttons and sets free his ignorance of the true meaning of Kannagi; that is to say, he missed the firm yet supple point. Art doesn’t always have to smother you — sometimes it subtly nurses you, even if its scope is as ample as Kannagi’s.

A simple trip to the shops to purchase undergarments (a capitalist exercise, might I add, and all the more free-market given the choices in brassieres) becomes a shining example of Tsugumi’s matronly side, and a demonstration of the power of Woman to bounce back. As art can grow on us and grow with us, Nagi too grows as a character, practically bursting from the confines of her mortal container where previously we saw her as merely two-dimensional, or dare I say flat?

The spirit of competition is mirrored in that growth, and echoed in her battle with Zange, and only a conspiracy theorist could find Red ideas in competition! Or is it that people like Beanbrew prefer to suckle the teat of multinationals (Zange) at the expense of the smaller entities (Nagi) and true competition?

But to give it a reduction to mere capitalist allegory would be like trying to pour Kannagi into a too-small cup. Sure, the stuffed shirts we call “anime critics” could hardly squeeze anything from that notion, but find me one of those who’s truly abreast of the situation these days. It only proves my point that the cleavage into “Art” and “Dumb harem” camps is dangerous; The “A’s” and the “D’s,” as it were, can coexist. This discussion must be pushed up to the forefront!

Omisyth:

To go as low as to consider Kannagi art is something I would expect from the man who killed his father and married his mother; such is Coburn’s knowledge of Japan that he believes we can gain an accurate understanding of Japanese culture from a show that calls upon DFC goddesses, senpai lesbians and pink on a tree, for “entertainment”, if you could call it that. It is a tale of goddesses playing hooky from their battle to preserve their land in order to ingratiate themselves and languish in the praise of the ignorant masses.

The moment Kannagi shifted away from its sumptuously rich mythical roots was the moment I almost lost my faith in anime as a media form. Gone were the delightful tales of one goddess’ effort to redeem herself and her land, instead the series highlights how petty and irritatingly emotional those so-called higher beings are supposed to be, where they are swayed by such trivial matters as their popularity among high-school children. And to claim that this show relates to commercialization in any way is ludicrous; it’s all about the characters their attempts to rebuild an oligarchy based solely around their own needs.

Coburn is incorrect in thinking that the cast is obsessed with breasts. In fact, the true obsession is hair. Have you not noticed how much of the animation budget has been poured into making hair look beautiful, luscious and full-bodied? Mammaries are merely a temporary distraction from the true “service” of the show. And impressing the male lead? Considering Zange’s blatant molestation of her sister, I doubt that the two’s attention is focused on anyone but each other.

Maggeh:

I am appalled and horrified that there exist in this world deluded people who refuse to believe that Kanangi is art, and have nothing but pity and scorn for those poor souls. Saying that Kannagi is not art is like saying that cheeseburgers shouldn’t have cheese - it simply does not make sense and is a logical failure.

Omisyth, demonstrating a highly narrow-minded xenophobic view, seems to think that art is limited to a nation’s culture. That is not true. Simply because Kannagi’s depiction of a nation does not fit one person’s selfish view does not mean that it is not an accurate depiction. People once claimed that the world was flat, and what happened? They were wrong. Art is everywhere. Kannagi is not about a goddess foregoing her duties; it is a tale of a goddess seeking to claim the most precious things in life. Her connection with humanity. I can only think that the putting down of such a divine thing comes from having no social life at all and spending time being pent up in a room, watching reruns of Naruto on a dingy television set.

Moreover, Kannagi is an entirely corrupting existence. It calls out to grown adults and young children alike, lighting within their hearts a deep flame of lust that burns day and night. No matter your age, your nationality or your gender, Kannagi makes you want to go out and grab a nubile young girl who resembles Zange-chan or Nagi and then do unspeakable things to them. In this sense, it is the perfect embodiment of art - nothing corrupts like art. Art is power, art is beauty, art is divine and art, in the end, ultimately corrupts. Kannagi corrupts. Art corrupts. Therefore, Kannagi is art. This is logic at its work, pure and simple.

Now, I have nothing against those who disagree with me, but I’m just saying, if they don’t acknowledge that Kannagi is art, then they’re probably better off locked up in a white hospital with white white walls in straight jackets.

Sakura

One wonders if we can definitively answer the question at hand and before we can even try we must first ask ourselves, is anime art?

One definition relative to the topic at hand tells us that art is, “the class of objects subject to aesthetic criteria, works of art collectively; as paintings, sculptures or drawings…”

Certainly if we go by this definition, then anime is art. After all in its base form anime is a series of drawings that are collected together and animated. Therefore, if anime is art, then since Kannagi is an anime, we must conclude that Kannagi is art and so maggeh, otou-san and coburn are correct.

However if we further dissect that definition, zeroing in on, “subject to aesthetic criteria” the water starts to get a little murky. The dictionary lists a few criteria as “what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.”

It is here where an argument can be made for Kannagi not being art, in which case Omisyth and beanbrew would be in the right. But really nobody here is right and nobody here is wrong. The only real definitive answer is that Kannagi is art and yet it is not art.

Because art is subjective, and while one person might consider it as, “of more ordinary significance” another might view it as complete and utter shite. What one finds beautiful, others will find downright disgusting and repulsive. Aspects of Kannagi might be appealing, whereas others are just meh.

In conclusion, dear readers, we authors are all wrong. The only person who can be right is you and the answer to the question is something you can only decide for yourself. :p