Yay! Chapter 4 inking is complete!! Now I either start toning chapter 3 or start inking chapter 5.

 

But first: Wirepop: Papercuts!!. It’s an anthology collection by Wirepop.com artist, including myself, which will be on sale at Anime Boston and online thereafter. I contributed a 10-page story called “Ten Years Ago Today”, which is currently on my site, but I’ll be VERY happy if you’d pay US$7 + shipping to buy the anthology. Because the other works are by very talented artists and writers, and US$7 for 96 pages is a BARGAIN.

 

Manga as a Loan Word
Last time I got bogged down in the history of the words, but this time I get to side-step the history and get straight to the point. And the point is: to explore how the word “manga” is being used in English-speaking countries. In the mainstream at least, it’s not difficult to track; the word “manga” has only very recently began to seep from the anime subculture into mainstream consciousness.

Now, “manga” in English is ofcourse a loan word. A loan word is a word borrowed from another culture to fill a conceptual gap within the “host” culture. English itself already abounds with loan words, as does Japanese – The word “anime” is loaned from French, as is the term for apartment block: “Maison”. Clearly, loan words are an important way of introducing foreign concepts, and plays a pivotal role in diffusing new ideas across cultures and continents. If a loan word is used enough in a culture and language, then you can say the once-foreign word and concept has become part of that culture, and the culture reacts to it no longer as an alien idea, but as a home-grown products. “Manga” hasn’t reached that stage yet, but there are already things in motion that will, for better or worse, integrate it into English-speaking cultures.

 

Manga as a Marketing Tool!
It’s inescapable that the first thing to happen to the word “manga” is for it to be seized upon as a marketing tool. It’s the hyper-commercialised world we live in – not only is “manga” touted around as if it were marketing gold, but the word is often used in connections with things that clearly AREN’T manga. Manga Entertainment used it to sell anime, and the stampede by publishers to release books claiming to teach you “How to Draw Manga” which DON’T tell you how to draw manga is prime example of this. Not only do ordinary consumers confuse manga with anime, but they have been led to believe that the term “manga” refers to a style or drawing, when in fact the word simply means “comics” in Japanese.

The confusion around the term “manga” created a situation where people believed “manga” referred to the “big-eyed, small-mouthed, large-chested mult-coloured hair schoolgirls” stereotype that still pervades despite the invasion of REAL manga into bookstores. That many manga didn’t have such things is somewhat lost, since the stereotype is self-perpetuated by the type of manga companies choose to release in America and much of the English-speaking world. Most of them are aimed at teenagers, who DO tend to have this stylistic look to it, which perpetuates the belief that manga = big eyes. The perception hasn’t been helped by the contrasts between the traditional superhero comics and manga – manga looks so different and stylised to the realistically-drawn superheroes that people can’t help but accentuate the differences. Luckily, more and more companies are diversifying in the titles they choose to release, so the big-eyed stereotype is diminishing and will probably be rendered moot over time, with people concentrating on genre and story-telling instead to differentiate it from “comics”.

 

Semantics Semantics
Instead, a new debate rages over the Internet over the use of the word “Manga”. The crux of the debate is this: since “manga” is a Japanese word, shouldn’t it ONLY be used to describe sequential art drawn by the Japanese, and not by any other culture? You have “manhua” by Koreans, “manwha” by the Chinese, and “comics” by the Americans – point being, since there is an equivalent word in English, we shouldn’t be borrowing words from another culture when we already have one. Therefore, an “American manga” is a non-existent concept, because “manga” is Japanese and to call something American-made “manga” is ignorant at best and sacriligious at worst. Or so the argument goes.

I’ve never paid much attention to such arguments, largely because it’s nullified by the fact that the Japanese often call their manga “comics”. Many Japanese department stores have “comikkus” signs, largely because it’s cool to use English in Japan and they could care less about linguistic purity. People in Hong Kong also sometimes call their manwha “comics” – though in this instance it seems to be because the world is getting smaller and people switching from one language to another is common. Obviously, while some people maintain that the wording must be correct, globalisation tends to just steamroll over these instances as the speed at which cultural concepts migrate from one culture to another. Clearly, the hybrid creature that is emerging from the mixing of styles globally means that you can only maintain the “manga”/”comics” battle for so long before pop culture decides for you.

What is perhaps more interesting is whether the word “comics” will impact negatively on the sales of English-language produced manga. While I may be exaggerating here, there is no denying that the word “comics”, as mentioned in my previous post, carries a certain stigma. It conjures up images of adolescent boys absorbed in testosterone-fuelled stories, and despite the best efforts of independent comics, can’t seem to shake that image. In that sense, perhaps it may be better to use an unfamiliar word to refer to this new breed of manga-ised comics, simply because “manga” has less negative connotations attached to it (however, the manga stereotype of big-eyed porn still persists amongst people who saw the Urostsukidoji anime in 1998 and is still mired in their preconceptions).

It is still too early to decide what role the word “manga” will play in the English-speaking world. Will it exist side-by-side with the word “comics”; two words to refer to the same conceptual thing, but referring to different stylistic schools? Or will it refer to a certain type of story, whereas the word “comics” will become associated ONLY with superheroes and 4-panel newspaper strips? One thing is certain: it’s a word that is here to stay, as it describes something that has no precedent in English-speaking cultures; so even if it ends up circling the fringes of mainstream culture, it is bound to remain there. Only time will tell how influential it will be.

 

Recently, Rivkah (who does Steady Beat for TokyoPop), wrote an interesting essay on what the word “manga” means, in comparison to American “comics”, and how the two differs. It was a great read, and it inspired me enough to write up my own thoughts, though on a different (but related) topic. My interest is in how the word “manga” and “comics” mean different things in their respective countries. It’s very long, but it’s because of the history segments. 😐

 

A Brief History of the Word “Manga”
Manga, as we all know, is a Japanese word that means “irresponsible pictures” when taken literally. It is composed of 2 Chinese words, the word “lax” and the word “picture”. The term was popularised, though not invented, by the famous wood block artist Hokusai to describe the Japanese tradition of comical and whimsical drawings. Exactly when it was first used to describe what is regarded as manga TODAY is unknown, since what was known as “manga” in Japan in the 18th century refers to someone quite different than what we read in the 21st Century. Nevertheless, the linkage of the word “manga” with what we are familiar with today can be traced directly back to one person.

Tezuka Osamu, known widely as the “God of Manga”, can be accredited for standardising the form of manga we are familiar with today. Up until Tezuka’s time, most “manga” consisted of two-dimensional stage plays, where a single panel will depict an event, and narration will forward the plot. What Tezuka did was introduce cinematic elements into it; he was influenced by the expressionistic French and German cinema movement, and by the early Disney and Max Fleisher cartoons. The combination had Tezuka create big-eyed, cartoony characters; framed by differing-sized panels that are strung together in a sequence to depict the passage of time. It is this manipulation of the reader’s sense of time and pacing that is Tezuka’s strong point – it made the strip appear much more cinematic and more filled with “action” than a traditional “manga” strip. Overnight, Tezuka’s breakout work “Treasure Island” sold 400,000 to a generation of post-war Japanese children.

Tezuka’s influences continued on. He began drawing more manga in different genres; experimenting with different storylines, themes and audiences. Autobiographies, horror, non-fiction, educational, adult; he expanded what the Japanese understood as “manga” and showed, above all, that it was a medium malleable to any sort of subject matter. Before Tezuka popularised Tetsuwan Atom, what was known as “manga” in Japan were single-paneled, two-dimensional stage plays depicting samurais or funny strips. After Tezuka, “manga” in Japan can be just about anything depicted in pictures and panels. In other words, the connotative meaning of the word “manga” in the Japanese language has changed.

 

Connative NS. Denotive
In any particular society, certain words have two levels of meaning to it when used. One level is the denotive meaning, which is the literal, dictionary definition of the word. The second level is the connotative meaning, which is any unspoken metaphorical baggage a word may carry when used in a certain context. While the denotive meaning of a word remains more of less fixed, the connotative meaning can be altered by time, geographic distribution, popular culture or the introduction of foreign concepts.

A prime example is the word “gay”. 60 years ago, “gay” meant happy in the dictionary, and was used as such. However, in the 70s, the word came be to associated with homosexuality, and while the denotive meaning of the word is still understood, the use of the word “gay” to refer to homosexuals has completely outstripped it’s previous meaning. Nowadays, the word “gay” is generally understood to refer to homosexuals – so much that the dictionary (aka denotive) definition of the word has changed. This is an example of popular culture coming full circle; a word being used in defiance of its original meaning, so much that it has changed the original meaning. And the word “gay” is still changing yet again – this time, to refer to matters of bad taste as well as homosexuality.

 

In the West
And thus, it has been demonstrated how a single man, through mass cultural influence, managed to alter the popular perceptions of a word in Japan. Tezuka, through his work, managed to expand what the word “manga” encompasses. It is then ironic that in the English-speaking world, the reverse took place. A single man managed to narrow what the word “comics” encompassed in English. A psychiatrist called Dr Frederick Wertham, who published a book in the 1950s called “Seduction of the Innocent”. It would be incorrect to say that Dr Wertham had the same amount of influence as Tezuka, because his legacy didn’t become apparent until decades later. However, the fallout from Dr Wertham’s work DID have profound impact on how American comics developed, and hence what the word “comics” mean to people in the 21st century.

 

A Brief History of the Word “Comics”
When the word “comics” came to be used in America is disputable, though scholars generally agree that the first true comic book was “The Yellow Kid”, in 1896. Note that this refers to the WORD “comics” in America only, and not to the art form in any other culture. Most of these were humourous, and due to the proliferation of cheap newspapers, became a staple of daily life. The family-oriented nature of the stories, as well as the talking animals, gave the medium the moniker comics. However, it wasn’t until the 1930s that the medium began to flourish – spurred by, surprisingly, the Depression.

The depression caused an explosion of cheap comic books, inspired partly by the emergence of movies as a form of entertainment. There was science-fiction in the form of “Flash Gordon”, hard-boiled detective fare ala “Dick Tracy”, adventure as in “The Phantom”, and others in their varied genres. However, the one most successful genre was the superheroes, which had Superman, Batman and Captain Marvel as their flagship sellers. The good VS evil stories struck a chord with audience anxieties during World War II, and it was during the 1940s that superheroes enjoyed their greatest success. After the war and the recovery of the economy came an expansion of genres, which at its infancy saw romance, horror, detective, sci-fi, teen comedy (Archie), children’s, adult and a plethora of different stories emerge. Some of these stories made their way to Japan and had some influence on later generations of manga artists. However, this rapidly growing industry was to have it’s ambitions cut short in the 1950s, when censorship and moral hysteria waded into the fray.

In the early 1950s, a psychiatrist called Dr Frederick Wertham observed that many juvenile delinquents read comic books. That many more ordinary people read comic books was lost on him, and he penned a book called “Seduction of the Innocent” linking delinquency to the reading of comics. His theory was that comic books were violent and sexual, and influencing the youth of the nation in a purely negative way. Suddenly, moral agitators concerned about the contents of comic books had an academic voice on their side. Mass burnings and bannings of comic books took place, and the comics industry was forced to form a self-regulatory code (Comics Code Authority) that censored “inappropriate” content in comics. The actions meant that alot of detective, horror, romance and sci-fi stories were killed off overnight; having their contents and themes reduced to a level “acceptable” to the censors. Only a few genres survived the purge: superheroes, and children’s genres.

That Dr Wertham’s book was influential was due less to the theory and more to the communist hysteria and sexual repression of the 1950s. The American 50s was in reality a censorship system waiting to happen; if not comics, then the movie industry. In any case, even though the Comics Code Authority has seen its influence reduced in the 70s, those two decades which were the dark ages of American comics profoundly changed the structure of the industry. By the time the medium reemerged in the late 1970s, it has seen catastrophic declines in sales, and publishers had all but lost interest in pushing the envelope. Superheroes and talking animals had become the dominating genre of American comics, which in the post-modern 80s, was seen not as inspiring but as moribund.

However, the decline American comics is as much due to to the 60s revolution as it is to the subject matter. In the 60s and 70s came the Vietnam War, psychedelic art, rock music, sexual freedom, women’s rights, television and the explosion of movies – things which were to have profound impact on American (and world) culture. Not only do these things compete for consumer’s spending dollars, but they intimately reflect the way the American people has changed in the mere space of 2 decades. When the comics industry reemerged into the late 1970s sunlight, it had missed the MOST important American cultural revolution in the 20th Century. The language and values of superheroes is still embedded in it’s World War II imagery of manly vigilants VS Nazi villains, and has not found much room to expand in this narrow context. If American comics were present as a cultural force in the 60s era, it would undoubtedly be as large and influential as any other element of American popular culture is today.

 

The Word “Comics” in the 21st Century
By the 90s, the word “comics” had become so attached to “superheroes” and “funny strips” that the two are used almost inexchangeably in everyday life. It has also become attached to a frightfully geeky stigma, that despite the latest “geek chic” high-tech revolution, hasn’t changed in its derogatory meaning. This is another example of the connotative meaning of a word having changed, this time to being overwhelmingly negative. All in all, the denotive meaning of the word “comics” hasn’t changed much in the 20th century, but it’s connotative associations has changed from neutral in the 1900s, to regular entertainment in the 1940s, to demonic influence in the 1950s, and to fringe fanboys in the late 90s.

Perhaps the pervasive influence of the word “comics” is most clearly seen in other English-speaking countries. Canada, Britain, Australia and New Zealand has very little of the same comics history that America has, yet the word “comics” in those countries carry the same derogatory meaning. This probably points more to the influence of American English than to American popular culture. Non-English-speaking countries like France, Italy and Spain have their own words for “comics”, and their native comic industries are very healthy (though under siege from manga). Certainly, reading “comics” in those cultures aren’t seen as embaressing – it is, however, interesting to note that the word “comics” refer overwhelming to superheroes in European countries as well.

 

End Part 1
I’ve wandered a bit in the course of this, and perhaps spent too much time talking about history. I’ve also not talked about how the word “manga” has changed in in it’s English context, which I’ll have to do in the second half of this essay. In fact, I can’t help wondering whether the word “comics” has become so stigmatised in the English-speaking world, that if you want to sell something to a wide audience you’re better off calling it anything but “comics”.

 

The Dreaming: Chapter 2 all finished. Now inking chapter 3!

 

Okay, I finally got my sorry ass together and is posting up all those academic papers I picked up at the Melbourne Monash University Manga Symposium 3 weeks ago. Unfortunately, I only have the papers from the Japanese side, as the apeakers on the Australian side didn’t have papers to hand out. Which is too bad, because there were some genuinely interesting stuff – but for that purpose I’ve decided to post up the titles of their papers and their email addresses whereever possible. My own paper’s in Session 4 – though file sizes can be huge due to the pdfs.

 

Imagining Japan: A Symposium

 

=======================================
Session 1 – Background for Understanding Popular Culture in Japan
=======================================

 
Sex and Violence in Japanese Popular Culture and War: Putting the Focus on Boy’s Culture – Prof Kimio Ito (Osaka University)
Lacks the necessary graphics as part of the presentation, but very interesting concerning the evolution of shonen manga, especially from wartime Japan to modern day manga.
The Decline of Rokyoku: ‘1960s’ as a Significant Point in the History of Popular Culture in Japan – Dr Manabe Masayoshi (Osaka University)
Not quite so manga-related, but “Rokyoku” is something you’re BOUND to have seen in manga. It’s a type of Japanese drama/singing that is kind of like Noh in its minimalism. Documents the changes and outside influences in the form.
 

=======================================
Session 2 – The Grammar of Manga
=======================================

 

Language in Contemporary Japanese Manga – Prof Kinsui Satoshi (Osaka University)
The Body in Contemporary Japanese Manga – Prof Yoshimura Kazuma (Osaka University)
A must-read if you can read Japanese, and reads Japanese manga. “Cyborg 009” seems to be some sort of benchmark for manga, especially concerning linguistic and racial stereotypes – these 2 papers document the way manga creates a language on its own; forming a separate reality that doesn’t have much to do with the reality we live in. Real popular culture crystallisation. This panel also included a “performance” by a 4th year student of Seika University; Ms Sato Maki. Too bad I don’t have a picture of her doodles – she was asked to draw faces of people of different nationalities, for example a Japanese, an American, a German, a Chinese and a Korean. Her drawings of each seemed like re-tread of every ethnic stereotype there could be in existence – which, like it or not, is actually a main staple of manga and popular culture in general. The Japanese readers of manga (should) know that these character faces are of ethnic stereotypes, so what they do is to give visual cues as to the background of a particular character. Believe me, that pig-tailed girl in the “China doresu” yattering in pidgin dialect may be considered offensive in the West, but in Japanese manga it serves a REAL purpose.

 

=======================================
Session 3 – The Global Construction and Consumption of Japan
=======================================

 

The Imagined Worlds of Australia’s Manga Fans – Dr Crag Norris (Monash University)
The Otaku Sub Culture in America – Joshua Sarcewicz (Student, East Stroudsburg University – USA)
Mobile Phones and Diversity in the Spread of Japanese “Cute Culture” in the Asia Pacific – Larissa Hjorth (RMIT University and University of Melbourne)
No papers for these 3, goshdarnit.

 

=======================================
Session 4 – Responses to Manga Culture in Australia
=======================================

 

An Introduction to the Workshop Concept – James Rampant (Monash University)
Some translated manga at http://www.lostinscanlation.com/. No, it’s not a giant freebie; it’s a university student project.
Manga in Singapore & Funky Ninja Magic – Kenneth Chan (Monash University)
Adopting Manga: From Hong Kong to America – Queenie Chan (Manga Artist)
I actually went first on this panel.

 

=======================================
Session 5 – Japan as Image
=======================================

 

Japan as Image – Installation
This is a panel that presents it’s papers as an interconnected diagram (points above). It’s not necessary to analyse the diagram to understand the papers, but it shows how the pop culture landscape of Japan is all interrelated.
Exporting (or exported) Otaku – Dr Omote Tomoyuki (Osaka University)
Centralised Pop-Japan – What the Acceptance of Japanese Popular Culture in Korea Tells Us – Dr Yamanaka Chie (Osaka University)
Exported Japan – On Japan’s Culture Policy – Mr Ito Yu(Osaka University)
Girl’s Popular Culture Going It’s Own Way – The Diffusion of Japanese Cute and Yaoi – Ms Jessica Bauwens (Osaka University)
Japanese Anime Becoming Mainstream – Or is It? – Renato Rivera (Osaka University)

 

=======================================
Session 6 – Manga Culture, Japanese Art and Cinema
=======================================

 

Imagining Gi-wafu: Gi-yofu Kenchiku, Manga and Japanese Contemporary Art – Dr Rio Otomo (Melbourne University)
The Hong Kong Connection: Wong Kar-ai’s 2046 and Japanese as the Language of Desire – Katy Stevens (La Trobe University)
Fuyu no Sonata: Japan’s New Image of Korea – Alison Tokita (Monash University)
Knowing Japan Through Image and Reality: A Reading of Peter Carey’s “Wrong About Japan” – Dr Craig Norrish and Prof Ross Mouer (Monash University)
The Impact of Cultural Policy on the Avant Garde: The End of Angura System – Dr Peter Eckersall (Melbourne University)
Again, no papers.

 

=======================================
Session 7 – Alternative Imaginings in Japanese Popular Culture
=======================================

 

A Short History of ‘Hentai’ – Dr Mark McLelland (Queensland University)
Everything you will ever need to know about hentai, and how the word has been misappropriated in English. No paper unfortunately, but the word hentai is actually misused in English; referring to anything of a sexual nature whereas in Japanese, it refers to extreme forms of perversion. It seems Hentai has a long and colourful history in the underside of Japanese Popular Culture.
Imagining ‘Asia’ in Japanee Videogames – Dr Dean Chan (Edith Cowan University)
A dream job: writing papers on video games.
Robot Culture – Kirsty Boyle (http://www.karakuri.info)
Think the Japanese obsession with robots is a 20th Century phenomenon? You’re wrong.