Bakuman's going heavy meta. Not only is it a manga about guys making manga, it seems more and more like they main character of Bakuman is going to draw Bakuman.
To whatever guy who wondered whether Scott Pilgrim was manga (I also believe Megatokyo was mentioned): Imma gonna go along with Daryl Serat (spelled that wrong) from Anime World Order and say that calling non-japanese creations manga dilutes the meaning of the word, and insults the manga-ka, who have some of the hardest jobs and longest hours in the animation/cartoon industry. I think they get like, 2 days off a month, or something ridiculous like that. Dead Piro Days don't cut it. One manga-ka, part of Clamp, I think, issued a formal apology when she was I'll and couldn't work. It's serious shit. Scott Pilgrim is awesome, but Brian Lee O'Malley hasn't made his life suck by doing it.
It makes sense to use the word "manga" for Japanese comics, because we already have to word "comics" for comics in general. However, I don't see what shitty working conditions have to do with the meanings of words.
I keep my other comic books in my "Manga" directory on my laptop, simply because I don't want to make a separate folder called "comics" and because the words are conceptually synonymous. I don't really see the necessity or even the value of drawing a big distinction. The country of origin doesn't really give any big information or draws a big line between them. It would be like say "A ford's a car, but a VW, that's not an american product, that's an auto".
If Lucky Luke (belgian), Asterix (french) and Mort & Phil (spanish) are comics just as much as Donald Duck and Spider-Man are, I don't see why Astro Boy and 20th Century Boys aren't comics as well.
I would be more interested what people whose first language is japanese call non-japanese comics.
The general idea is that manga is a proper subset of comics; i.e. all manga are comics but not all comics are manga. So Astro Boy is obviously a comic, but it is also a manga.
While there aren't lines dividing style and content between them, the average manga is quite different from the average non-Japanese comic, so it does make sense to have a separate term for them.
No. Manga is just a fancy word to say "japanese comics" and that's all there is to it. The average manga doesn't differentiate that much from the average non-japanese comic book so that it demands its own term. We can also observe a strong enough differentiation between american comic books and those from other countries, yet we don't say that those need to have a separate term. Manga is a term that makes a distinction based on the country of origin, not based on the content of the book. This is also why you yourself used "non-japanese comic" as the opposite of manga.
Did he make an american comic or did he make a manga?
He didn't "make" anything. The word "make" here implies creation of an original work. He plagiarized a manga and drew it with American stylings.
Yay, semantics... So when I create a collage, cutting and cropping images, pasting them together, I don't "make" something either, I guess, since I didn't draw the original artwork or shot the original photograph I cropped.
Let me rephrase: Is what he produced manga or an american comic?
Sorry, I just hate plagiarists and their "work." They are scum.
So when I create a collage, cutting and cropping images, pasting them together, I don't "make" something either, I guess, since I didn't draw the original artwork or shot the original photograph I cropped.
Nah, that's original, that's a mashup.
Let me rephrase: Is what he produced manga or an american comic?
Who gives a single solitary fuck? I read manga, gekiga, American comics, Indie book, comic magazines, comix (yes, the X does indeed denote something different, if Crumb and the Spielgelmans are to be believed) "graphic novels," Franco-Belgian album works; I own artbooks, sketchbooks, and albums of comics with sketches and stories mixed throughout. I could spend hours trying to categorize all the comic-like media I consume, but my tastes are so varied that it's pointless to even play such a dumb game.
Wow, WindUp, wow. Sorry, but this is simply the topic of discussion we were just in. If you don't care, don't fucking participate but don't bring up semantic bullshit and then explode with rage for no fucking reason. Jeez.
To answer Colbyblogger's original statement: Scott Pilgrim is not a manga. It's a canadian comic. This is not because there is any big difference in the meaning of the terms, or because the process and the sacrifices the creators make in order to put their stuff into existence, but simply because Scott Pilgrim was made in Canada and not in Japan. The same goes for Incarnate, Nick Simmons rip-off comic book. It's an american comic book because it was made in america. Despite ripping-off several manga titles, it is not manga because it wasn't made in Japan.
However, all of them are comics, regardless of country of origin.
This very debate is an issue of semantic bullshit. I just responded because colbyblogger was dragging emotional baggage into my semantic bullshit.
Wikipedia's definition is "Manga (kanji: 漫画; hiragana: ã¾ã‚“ãŒ; katakana: マンガ; listen (help·info); English /ˈmÉ‘ËÅ‹É¡É™/ or /ˈmæŋɡə/) consist of comics and print cartoons (sometimes also called komikku コミック), in the Japanese language and conforming to the style developed in Japan in the late 19th century." Defining it by language rather than country of origin makes more sense. It eliminates questions like "If this mangaka was on holiday outside of Japan while writing a comic, is it still manga?"
Wow, WindUp, wow. Sorry, but this is simply the topic of discussion we were just in. If you don't care, don't fucking participate but don't bring up semantic bullshit and then explode with rage for no fucking reason. Jeez.
Oh, I wasn't raging. I was moving to agree with you. The only difference in any piece of pictorial storytelling is format and origin. Everything else is, well, semantics.
Although, despite calling me out on semantic bullshit, I really don't think Nick Simmons should be given credit for the creation of anything, even a "rip-off comic." He was more or less tracing art and ripping off stories from someone else; a human photocopier, no more, no less. He wrote and illustrated that comic the same way my printer can write and illustrate Transmetropolitan.
This very debate is an issue of semantic bullshit. I just responded because colbyblogger was dragging emotional baggage into my semantic bullshit.
Wikipedia's definition is "Manga (kanji: 漫画; hiragana: ã¾んãÂÂŒ; katakana: マンガ; listen (help·info); English /ˈmɑËÂŋɡə/ or /ˈmæŋɡə/) consist of comics and print cartoons (sometimes also called komikku コミック), in the Japanese language and conforming to the style developed in Japan in the late 19th century." Defining it by language rather than country of origin makes more sense. It eliminates questions like "If this mangaka was on holiday outside of Japan while writing a comic, is it still manga?"
The seems somewhat logical, but that introduces the problem that a lot of countries speak the same language as one another, most notably the anglophone countries on the planet. Perhaps the nationality of its creator is a better guideline for this sort of categorization. Nevertheless, "manga vs. comic" is a geographic distinction, not a distinction by the content or the process of making it.
Though I still would like to know what word in japanese is used to refer to foreign comics.
Although, despite calling me out on semantic bullshit, I really don't think Nick Simmons should be given credit for the creation of anything, even a "rip-off comic." He was more or less tracing art and ripping off stories from someone else; a human photocopier, no more, no less. He wrote and illustrated that comic the same way my printer can write and illustrate Transmetropolitan.
I agree with that, but in the end, it's still something he made. Even if it was minimal effort, it was still effort he put into it. He doesn't deserve any credit for the creative elements of it, but it is still something that he made. He still made a copy of something original.
This very debate is an issue of semantic bullshit. I just responded because colbyblogger was dragging emotional baggage into my semantic bullshit.
Wikipedia's definition is "Manga (kanji: 漫画; hiragana: ã¾んãÂÂŒ; katakana: マンガ; listen (help·info); English /ˈmɑËÂŋɡə/ or /ˈmæŋɡə/) consist of comics and print cartoons (sometimes also called komikku コミック), in the Japanese language and conforming to the style developed in Japan in the late 19th century." Defining it by language rather than country of origin makes more sense. It eliminates questions like "If this mangaka was on holiday outside of Japan while writing a comic, is it still manga?"
The seems somewhat logical, but that introduces the problem that a lot of countries speak the same language as one another, most notably the anglophone countries on the planet. Perhaps the nationality of its creator is a better guideline for this sort of categorization. Nevertheless, "manga vs. comic" is a geographic distinction, not a distinction by the content or the process of making it.
This may be the case for anglophone countries, but we're talking about manga in particular.
Geography, culture, and language are all very much intertwined, and the fact is that media from different cultures often reflect upon aspects of those cultures. It would be foolish to neglect the impact of a culture on the works that come from it, and that's why the term "manga" offers a meaningful distinction. However, since "culture" is a little wishy-washy and doesn't make for a clear definition of the term, we're forced to tie the meaning of "manga" to Japan or to the Japanese language.
Nonetheless, these cultural lines are being blurred as culture becomes more and more global, with works such as the anime Panty and Stocking with Garterbelt. The more works like these come out, the less useful terms like "manga" and "anime" become.
Manga (kanji: 漫画; hiragana: ã¾んãÂÂŒ; katakana: マンガ; listen (help·info); English /ˈmɑËÂŋɡə/ or /ˈmæŋɡə/)
^o) It's never read as mæŋɡə, that makes no sense. It's always mɑËÂŋɡə - Right, never mind me, go on with your discussions.
That's really nothing compared to what DragonBall sold.
You do know that One Piece has already outdone Dragonball in total sales in Japan? Granted though, a perfect comparison is hard to make here due to their inherent difference in chapter length (20 Pages for OP, 16 for DB) and thus difference in frequency of releases. Dragonball also ran for 42 volumes while OP is already on the 60th (again, difference in Chapter length comes into play here).
Regardless, for a series to make almost 1% of its total sales in 4 days in the 13th year of it being published is tremendous. It's also kinda funny considering in Bakuman they were saying that it would be impossible to surpass DB due to lower birth rates and such.
Comments
Imma gonna go along with Daryl Serat (spelled that wrong) from Anime World Order and say that calling non-japanese creations manga dilutes the meaning of the word, and insults the manga-ka, who have some of the hardest jobs and longest hours in the animation/cartoon industry. I think they get like, 2 days off a month, or something ridiculous like that. Dead Piro Days don't cut it. One manga-ka, part of Clamp, I think, issued a formal apology when she was I'll and couldn't work. It's serious shit. Scott Pilgrim is awesome, but Brian Lee O'Malley hasn't made his life suck by doing it.
If Lucky Luke (belgian), Asterix (french) and Mort & Phil (spanish) are comics just as much as Donald Duck and Spider-Man are, I don't see why Astro Boy and 20th Century Boys aren't comics as well.
I would be more interested what people whose first language is japanese call non-japanese comics.
While there aren't lines dividing style and content between them, the average manga is quite different from the average non-Japanese comic, so it does make sense to have a separate term for them.
For example, some time ago we had that incident were Nick Simmons was caught essentially plagiarizing Bleach and Hellsing. Did he make an american comic or did he make a manga?
So when I create a collage, cutting and cropping images, pasting them together, I don't "make" something either, I guess, since I didn't draw the original artwork or shot the original photograph I cropped.
Let me rephrase: Is what he produced manga or an american comic?
To answer Colbyblogger's original statement: Scott Pilgrim is not a manga. It's a canadian comic. This is not because there is any big difference in the meaning of the terms, or because the process and the sacrifices the creators make in order to put their stuff into existence, but simply because Scott Pilgrim was made in Canada and not in Japan. The same goes for Incarnate, Nick Simmons rip-off comic book. It's an american comic book because it was made in america. Despite ripping-off several manga titles, it is not manga because it wasn't made in Japan.
However, all of them are comics, regardless of country of origin.
Wikipedia's definition is "Manga (kanji: 漫画; hiragana: ã¾ã‚“ãŒ; katakana: マンガ; listen (help·info); English /ˈmÉ‘ËÅ‹É¡É™/ or /ˈmæŋɡə/) consist of comics and print cartoons (sometimes also called komikku コミック), in the Japanese language and conforming to the style developed in Japan in the late 19th century."
Defining it by language rather than country of origin makes more sense. It eliminates questions like "If this mangaka was on holiday outside of Japan while writing a comic, is it still manga?"
Although, despite calling me out on semantic bullshit, I really don't think Nick Simmons should be given credit for the creation of anything, even a "rip-off comic." He was more or less tracing art and ripping off stories from someone else; a human photocopier, no more, no less. He wrote and illustrated that comic the same way my printer can write and illustrate Transmetropolitan.
Though I still would like to know what word in japanese is used to refer to foreign comics.
I agree with that, but in the end, it's still something he made. Even if it was minimal effort, it was still effort he put into it. He doesn't deserve any credit for the creative elements of it, but it is still something that he made. He still made a copy of something original.
Geography, culture, and language are all very much intertwined, and the fact is that media from different cultures often reflect upon aspects of those cultures. It would be foolish to neglect the impact of a culture on the works that come from it, and that's why the term "manga" offers a meaningful distinction. However, since "culture" is a little wishy-washy and doesn't make for a clear definition of the term, we're forced to tie the meaning of "manga" to Japan or to the Japanese language.
Nonetheless, these cultural lines are being blurred as culture becomes more and more global, with works such as the anime Panty and Stocking with Garterbelt. The more works like these come out, the less useful terms like "manga" and "anime" become.
-
Right, never mind me, go on with your discussions.
Wiki
They might also say something like America kara no manga.
Fred Gallagher ticks me off.
Regardless, for a series to make almost 1% of its total sales in 4 days in the 13th year of it being published is tremendous. It's also kinda funny considering in Bakuman they were saying that it would be impossible to surpass DB due to lower birth rates and such.
That gigantic drop is when Dragonball ended. Yeah, that's almost 7 million Shonen Jumps sold every week. 2 million isn't even close.