What’s the meaning of Evangelion?

[resu]

Did any of you watch SSSS.Gridman? Despite being based on a tokusatsu series, it's especially influenced by NGE and has many allusions to it (same composer, too).

 

[Stiff]

Shinji is an iredeemable pathetic child with mommy issues...
...and that's better than being subsumed into mush.

wow... DEEP

The Leliel episode can summarize all that is good about Neon Genesis Evangelion. Do you understand Form?

if I say no will you explain what you mean by this and how it pertains to the show?

Yes, lots of confused people will project

Spoiler: (You)

The Occidental mind breaks upon contact with human expression. Decades of High English Classes as the primary introduction to art will do that ...
When watching Evangelion who is actually struck by, of all things, the occasional cross? Why would you think THAT must be the important part? ...
This isn't any kind of honest criticism. It's a white nerd struggle session. "Ah yes, I see now that the religious symbols were shallow. It's about nothing. It is not real culture. It is not worthy of my high school English class" ...

The implication when people say this is that if any deviation from social realism isn't a deliberate project to encode a hard statement about reality in symbols it must be ...

It sounds like you wanted it to solve reality for you ...
The film raises existential themes, and then doesn't resolve them enough so it's a failure ...
The Japanese can and do play around with foreign ideas and symbols on the level of tribal tattoos. "Woah, cool exotic thing I don't get", but to say this is all they have going on is ...

Yes, lots of confused people will project when talking about Evangelion and various other things and say that it's good because it's doing a certain thing they've been told good art stuff does, like characters having ARCS, SYMBOLS MEANING THINGS, and so on. This show has such a confused reputation largely because people like it, get a sense it's really good in some kind of way that must be prestigious, and then start looking for what they've been taught are prestige markers.

You know, plenty of people just don't like Evangelion. They'll watch it and say certain scenes and frames look nice but they don't really "get it", and move on.

This person you're conjuring who really likes it but then decides it's bad later because it doesn't have enough western literary tropes... this is like something a youtuber would do. It's reminiscent of the Harry Potter fan who revises their whole outlook on some beloved childhood media because it's circumstantially "problematic", and the work itself is now incomplete unless presented in tandem with this superficial analysis that has reached back in time and fused with it.

This is someone who believes that the critical viewing changes the nature of the content, and is more legitimate than the casual one. I'm not saying Evangelion is secretly bad, and I'm not trying to delegitimize Anno's feelz. I'm saying that a critical viewing of Evangelion will require someone to spend a lot of time with their HAND in their ASS looking for things that aren't there

Now as for Shinji, does he go anywhere? I think his mind moves fairly authentically in the patterns of someone who is seriously emotionally disturbed. Because of course, he is a creation of an emotionally disturbed man. I find the tv ending to Evangelion doubly compelling as an experience of this nervous messed up character breaking through to a kind of strange personal catharsis, and getting a sense that the creators, or Anno, might be to. Is it rational? Have we made some kind of tangible progress we could map to some kind of psychological theory of the mind? No. But look at everyone clapping. Look at him smiling now. Go Shinji! Go Anno! CONGRATULATIONS!

You can't just say that a breakthrough has taken place and literally draw a breakthrough happening to make yourself feel more sure about it.
(because... you just can't, ok?)

The clockwork elves give Shinji some of the worst advice he could possibly receive.
They tell him he has a self and that he can understand it by differentiating himself from others, but also that he'll lose his real self if he allows piloting the Eva to become his whole identity. If he becomes "Shinji the Pilot", then he'll stop being "Shinji". This is just wrong on its face. Rather, becoming something particular will allow Shinji to understand himself.

You literally couldn't stop being yourself if you tried, but Shinji seems convinced this is a real possibility. So instead of building an identity on something determinate, either changing or allowing him to witness himself from afar, he decides he can ONLY be himself as he is.
Shinji has no WILL, but instead of finding one, he hopes that one day he will learn to like himself in spite of it.

Shinji resigns himself to a life of insecurity because he thinks he can never BECOME too much of something other than what he is: fundamentally incomplete, incompetent, and detestable. He CHOOSES all of these things. What a horrible choice! But he does it because when he chooses to "be himself", everybody claps. Just like when he pilots the Eva, people praise him.

OMEDETOU

There was no breakthrough. We finished where we started. Anno has DOOMED Shinji. Not even instrumentality can save him now.
I wouldn't be surprised if he joined a Protestant church, since he has accepted his total depravity, and craves unconditional love the most.

 

[Gornostay]

You know, plenty of people just don't like Evangelion.

Yes. They are niggers and we will be killing all of them. Some of them before you even.

This person you're conjuring who really likes it but then decides it's bad later because it doesn't have enough western literary tropes...

God fucking damn it that's not what I'm saying. Your reflexive reaction was to not be particularly impressed. That's fine. I'm saying that when you turn to criticism you do a very unsatisfactory job. You like what you like. But I can challenge you if I find your articulation stupid and/or wrong. And I believe that many people are bad critics because we have so many bad paths of "critique" carved into our brains in school.

this is like something a youtuber would do. It's reminiscent of the Harry Potter fan who revises their whole outlook on some beloved childhood media because it's circumstantially "problematic", and the work itself is now incomplete unless presented in tandem with this superficial analysis that has reached back in time and fused with it.

This is li-ACK

This is someone who believes that the critical viewing changes the nature of the content,

I would not say this because this is extremely stupid. A "critical" viewing does changes the nature of the experience.

and is more legitimate than the casual one.

AIDS and gibberish.

I'm not saying Evangelion is secretly bad, and I'm not trying to delegitimize Anno's feelz. I'm saying that a critical viewing of Evangelion will require someone to spend a lot of time with their HAND in their ASS looking for things that aren't there

What have I pointed out that isn't there? I like it for things that are there. Your complaints revolve around things that aren't there (but should be?)

You can't just say that a breakthrough has taken place and literally draw a breakthrough happening to make yourself feel more sure about it.
(because... you just can't, ok?)

"I have pointed out what I said is retarded, now you aren't allowed to".

Actually the rules say I still can. Fuck you, retard.

The clockwork elves give Shinji some of the worst advice he could possibly receive.
They tell him he has a self and that he can understand it by differentiating himself from others, but also that he'll lose his real self if he allows piloting the Eva to become his whole identity. If he becomes "Shinji the Pilot", then he'll stop being "Shinji". This is just wrong on its face. Rather, becoming something particular will allow Shinji to understand himself.

You literally couldn't stop being yourself if you tried, but Shinji seems convinced this is a real possibility. So instead of building an identity on something determinate, either changing or allowing him to witness himself from afar, he decides he can ONLY be himself as he is.
Shinji has no WILL, but instead of finding one, he hopes that one day he will learn to like himself in spite of it.

Shinji resigns himself to a life of insecurity because he thinks he can never BECOME too much of something other than what he is: fundamentally incomplete, incompetent, and detestable. He CHOOSES all of these things. What a horrible choice! But he does it because when he chooses to "be himself", everybody claps. Just like when he pilots the Eva, people praise him.

OMEDETOU

There was no breakthrough. We finished where we started. Anno has DOOMED Shinji. Not even instrumentality can save him now.
I wouldn't be surprised if he joined a Protestant church, since he has accepted his total depravity, and craves unconditional love the most.

This isn't criticism. You are disagreeing with characters. You are criticising the work as practical psychology.

 

[Stiff]

I'm saying that when you turn to criticism you do a very unsatisfactory job. You like what you like. But I can challenge you if I find your articulation stupid and/or wrong. And I believe that many people are bad critics because we have so many bad paths of "critique" carved into our brains in school.

My criticism bangs and you have no response
Feel free to challenge the content of what I'm saying, instead of acting like any criticism is illegitimate because I'm not Japanese or whatever.

This is li-ACK

This was your initial engagement with what I've said

What have I pointed out that isn't there? I like it for things that are there. Your complaints revolve around things that aren't there (but should be?)

Wrong. Here are some examples of things that are there: characters, animation, dialogue, and music.
Here are some things that are not there: the director's emotional state, and his other work.

We are both clearly talking about both kinds of things. Pls stop pretending to be retarded.

"I have pointed out what I said is retarded, now you aren't allowed to".

Actually the rules say I still can. Fuck you, retard.

I said stop

"The planet exploded and everybody died a miserable and insignificant death......... and then, they all lived happily ever after!"
You were enthralled by this intense personal narrative of mine, just now ^
"The unambiguous on-screen action contradicts the conclusion, but that's ok, because... the author just said so!!! OK?!?!" - (You)

This isn't criticism. You are disagreeing with characters. You are criticising the work as practical psychology.

"This isn't criticism ... You are criticising"
good one

I'm criticizing the work on its own terms. Hideaki Anno is not a character in Evangelion, btw. Watch the show when you get a chance, it's pretty cool. Gets a bit contrived near the end though.

I think this question will settle it: if a homeless crackhead smears his shit on the wall as an expression of his pain and alienation, am I being too occidental and realist if I say his poop doesn't actually render emotion? (Hint: he wrote a production diary while he was squatting and said he wanted it to have a pessimistic urban setting that gave witnesses no clear reason to think things would improve, but he hoped they could find reasons to struggle on regardless, even if he couldn't).

 

[SowiesoGroyp]

i haven't been following this debate, but did you just liken NGE to someone smearing shit on a wall?

 

[muttonhead]

anime is fucking gay

 

[Stiff]

i haven't been following this debate, but did you just liken NGE to someone smearing shit on a wall?

I made a brilliant, incisive, chef's-kiss analogy that strips away all the things about the show that we agree on (it's le good).
Now he will explain how he isn't just insisting that a work is sufficient regardless of its content because whoever made it had feelings.

"It's personal. It's not supposed to be assessed like that. It just is what it is, because Anno made it like that, and Anno is good."
Oh ok, guess I'll go frick myself

 

[SowiesoGroyp]

I made a brilliant, incisive, chef's-kiss analogy that strips away all the things about the show that we agree on (it's le good).
Now he will explain how he isn't just insisting that a work is sufficient regardless of its content because whoever made it had feelings.

"It's personal. It's not supposed to be assessed like that. It just is what it is, because Anno made it like that, and Anno is good."
Oh ok, guess I'll go frick myself

do you think NGE is literally devoid of meaning, like it's the equivalent of randomly flashing colors? i don't understand what point you're trying to make unless this is a complicated way of saying "i am trolling"

 

[Gornostay]

My criticism bangs and you have no response

What? What criticism hangs?

Feel free to challenge the content of what I'm saying, instead of acting like any criticism is illegitimate because I'm not Japanese or whatever.

I'm going to kill you.

Wrong. Here are some examples of things that are there: characters, animation, dialogue, and music.
Here are some things that are not there: the director's emotional state, and his other work.

You retard. You stupid fucking bitch.

"The unambiguous on-screen action contradicts the conclusion, but that's ok, because... the author just said so!!! OK?!?!" - (You)

"The conclusion", what the fuck does that mean? This is gibberish.

"This isn't criticism ... You are criticising"
good one

You dumb motherfucker.

I'm criticizing the work on its own terms. Hideaki Anno is not a character in Evangelion, btw. Watch the show when you get a chance, it's pretty cool. Gets a bit contrived near the end though.

I think this question will settle it: if a homeless crackhead smears his shit on the wall as an expression of his pain and alienation, am I being too occidental and realist if I say his poop doesn't actually render emotion? (Hint: he wrote a production diary while he was squatting and said he wanted it to have a pessimistic urban setting that gave witnesses no clear reason to think things would improve, but he hoped they could find reasons to struggle on regardless, even if he couldn't).

At least you didn't start talking about food.

I made a brilliant, incisive, chef's-kiss analogy that strips away all the things about the show that we agree on (it's le good).
Now he will explain how he isn't just insisting that a work is sufficient regardless of its content because whoever made it had feelings.

"It's personal. It's not supposed to be assessed like that. It just is what it is, because Anno made it like that, and Anno is good."
Oh ok, guess I'll go frick myself

Okay now it's about food. Post your hand. If you don't I'm not replying to you anymore. As of now I'm assuming your skin is the colour of faeces.

 

[AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH]

ok he is motm for this lmao