Eva, like Lain, has simple themes. But while Lain states those ideas more explicitly, Eva goes about doing so in a more complex manner.

Although it’s subjective, I think “depth” IS definable. To me, “depth” is provided by serious, philosophical/socio-political/psychological content. “Deep” anime explores this content, offers some kind of insight and/or stimulates thought about it. Deep content is usually accompanied by a darker mood or tone, but not always (see Dennou Coil ep.12 for humorous commentary on the human condition). That’s my abridged definition.

There are certainly some anime that are “deep” and I consider that a good thing. From what I see in literature, “deep” and dark stories are better at generating brainwave activity in the audience. Henry James’ “Daisy Miller” seems frivolous enough, but it is a searing social commentary culminating in death (pretty dark).

The quality of a series like Azumanga Daioh comes not from any particularly brilliant message… it’s in the artful presentation of otherwise lack-luster everyday content. The well-executed presentation of character and story is a kind of “depth” but I wouldn’t call Azumanga a “deep” anime. It’s “artfully” rendered.

So “depth” is defined by content, and “artfulness” is defined by presentation. I think Peter S is arguing against shows that are “deep” but not “artful”, meanwhile promoting anime that are “artful” without the depressing atmosphere that usually accompanies “depth”. If this is the case, I can agree in full. You can’t just chuck “deep” content into a story and call it intellectual. Also, you’ve no right to discuss GitS’s “depth” if all you care about is the Major’s physique. (Personally, I loved the episode where the Tachikomas have an existential debate over their own artificial intelligence, though it sprained my brain.)

However, I have no qualms about arguing that some anime is deep. Most non-anime-watchers have a stereotyped shallow impression of anime. I don’t think arguing for “deepness” is part of an inferiority complex at all. Rather, I believe the misunderstanding is real and that people regularly underestimate the depth as well as the artfulness of anime.

On the other hand, I don’t have any words of defense for “pantsu-anime” *Rosariocoughvampire*, and I have a moral bias against harem anime (in the most literal sense of the label). Some anime is pure entertainment… and most of it is garbage.

In general, I cherish an anime that is both “deep” and “artful” more than an anime that is just “artful”. For this reason, Dennou Coil is a sure winner. The content is truly deep, but it doesn’t get bogged down in emo-ness. It’s very sincere and well crafted.

Thanks for reading,
- DuhProductions

But I still feel that trying to find profundity in anime it order to validate it to outsiders isn’t a good idea.

I have nothing against a show that makes you think. As you point out, those instances can come from anywhere; if you watch it and go “hmmm …” that’s a fringe benefit. But while I like both Eva and GitS, they’ve never made me do that, even though they were intended to.

Maybe when you TRY to make a deep work of art, you’re probably going to fail. Your message overwhelms the artwork itself … Nah, I don’t buy that …

I guess I’ll have to include that word from now on. xD

While I view some anime as ‘deep’, it’s not intended to attach any superior value to the piece in question. As I said, the likes of Appleseed and Ninja Scroll are really fun to watch, as opposed to some of the titles that I mentioned which are, even I’ll admit, a bit heavy-going when you’re not in the mood for thematic complexity and so on.

I don’t think that ‘deep’ stuff should be intimidating, either (although some people, paticularly the creators, may want it that way!). A film doesn’t have to make you think but if it does, is that such a bad thing? If there are other aspects going in its favour, the ‘deepness’ is merely an additional option the viewer has when watching it. I am in no way implying that if a show is mere entertainment, it is inconsequential: I stated quite clearly (I hope) in my article that there is merit in both approaches to telling a story, and I don’t think some, such as your example of Azu, should be dismissed when they are just great fun to watch.

Perhaps there is an ‘inferiority complex’ among some people who define what makes a ‘deep’ movie but from my experience and perspective, it is a piece that offers something different and more complex than is the norm. It’s not better, it’s just different and my choice of examples were an attempt to reflect that.

I’ve read most of the blog posts in this circle of discussion, but I chose this site for my rant because I’ve enjoyed the posts here and have posted friendly replies once or twice, about Bokurano (a show I adore). I have nothing but respect.

I am attacking no individual, but rather the mindset that a work of art must have certain things in it to be considered important. It’s the wrong way to look at anime, and art in general.

Peter S

It’s nice to attack the person writing the piece instead of the piece itself and dismiss it as something not worth for dissection, while masquerading as “opinion”. Brilliant work I’d say.

Which is complete, utter, bull, too!

Some attributes of Deep (deepy?) works of art: It must be depressing, or at least sad. It must carry philosophical baggage on its sleeve (others have already pointed this out), or it must deal with hard-hitting social issues of our time. Finally, it “makes you think.” The implication here is that any anime that doesn’t do this is inconsequential, not as important to anime’s reputation in the larger world of art.

Which is complete, utter, bull.

Take the extremely undeepy series Azumanga Daioh. It is not depressing, has no uttered philosophical concepts (apart from the occasional Osaka line), no issues (well, maybe Kimura), and on the surface is “about” nothing whatsoever. Yet if I ever had to defend anime against a detractor this is likely the show I would choose to win them over. It doesn’t matter that I can’t explain the show’s merits in deepy terms. Great art is under no obligation to be deepy. The show stands on its own, even while using some of anime’s most common cliches.

Let’s not be sidetracked! To feel intimidated into proving anime has to have these deepy attributes means you’ve already lost the argument.

Although it’s subjective, I think “depth” IS definable. To me, “depth” is provided by serious, philosophical/socio-political/psychological content. “Deep” anime explores this content, offers some kind of insight and/or stimulates thought about it. Deep content is usually accompanied by a darker mood or tone, but not always (see Dennou Coil ep.12 for humorous commentary on the human condition). That’s my abridged definition.

There are certainly some anime that are “deep” and I consider that a good thing. From what I see in literature, “deep” and dark stories are better at generating brainwave activity in the audience. Henry James’ “Daisy Miller” seems frivolous enough, but it is a searing social commentary culminating in death (pretty dark).

The quality of a series like Azumanga Daioh comes not from any particularly brilliant message… it’s in the artful presentation of otherwise lack-luster everyday content. The well-executed presentation of character and story is a kind of “depth” but I wouldn’t call Azumanga a “deep” anime. It’s “artfully” rendered.

So “depth” is defined by content, and “artfulness” is defined by presentation. I think Peter S is arguing against shows that are “deep” but not “artful”, meanwhile promoting anime that are “artful” without the depressing atmosphere that usually accompanies “depth”. If this is the case, I can agree in full. You can’t just chuck “deep” content into a story and call it intellectual. Also, you’ve no right to discuss GitS’s “depth” if all you care about is the Major’s physique. (Personally, I loved the episode where the Tachikomas have an existential debate over their own artificial intelligence, though it sprained my brain.)

However, I have no qualms about arguing that some anime is deep. Most non-anime-watchers have a stereotyped shallow impression of anime. I don’t think arguing for “deepness” is part of an inferiority complex at all. Rather, I believe the misunderstanding is real and that people regularly underestimate the depth as well as the artfulness of anime.

On the other hand, I don’t have any words of defense for “pantsu-anime” *Rosariocoughvampire*, and I have a moral bias against harem anime (in the most literal sense of the label). Some anime is pure entertainment… and most of it is garbage.

In general, I cherish an anime that is both “deep” and “artful” more than an anime that is just “artful”. For this reason, Dennou Coil is a sure winner. The content is truly deep, but it doesn’t get bogged down in emo-ness. It’s very sincere and well crafted.

Thanks for reading,
- DuhProductions