Go to this link and read this whole thread. I apologize it's VERY long, but you won't be dissapointed. It's a theory written by a psychology major about Pokemon (The TV show) and how... well honestly just go read it, I can't explain it. Prepare to have your Mind BLOWN.
So the point of this dissertation is to try and establish that the Pokemon TV series is riddled with symbolism and allegory, that nothing is as it seems, and that it's all in Ash's head. That's some unnecessary, deeply nerdy shit right there.
I read a bit and I think that the guy is taking things way too... seriously? I don't know if that's the right word to use, but there were some pretty interesting thoughts that were laid out.
NO, not at all. The author is just saying that this theory is plausible. Read it, it all makes sense. He knows this isn't what the producers intended, and he knows it's not that deep, it's just sort of one of those, "what if" scenario's. It's very interesting if you give it a chance.
" http://www.scorehero.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=96343&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0 Go to this link and read this whole thread. I apologize it's VERY long, but you won't be dissapointed. It's a theory written by a philosophy major about Pokemon (The TV show) and how... well honestly just go read it, I can't explain it. Prepare to have your Mind BLOWN. "
You Sir have made my day...that was bloody awesome Now for some alcohol.....
" http://www.scorehero.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=96343&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0 Go to this link and read this whole thread. I apologize it's VERY long, but you won't be dissapointed. It's a theory written by a philosophy major about Pokemon (The TV show) and how... well honestly just go read it, I can't explain it. Prepare to have your Mind BLOWN. "
You Sir have made my day...that was bloody awesome Now for some alcohol..... "
"Did one ever know the reason why the pacing and story development change after Ash was hit by lightning in the beginning episodes?" No, and I didn't care either. It's anime and made for kids.
@AlexB: Yeah, no. I said it (i.e. the 'report' or whatever you want to call it) blitzed through so many topics at once that it was a disorganized mess.
I don't know how you could have misunderstood what I said, just saying.
@JacobForrest: Didn't misunderstand what you said at all. I read through it just fine. There was A LOT to talk about in there (evident by it's length). How else could he have done it? In the end it all makes sense, so it's mainly your fault if you can't hold attention, not the writers. ; )
Meh. He tries to justify the wackiness with the coma after the lightning, but I watched the first episode on the tube (never did be4, was bored) and the world is just as wacky even prior to that incident. What, we can't suspend disbelief to accept the boy wandering the mostly peaceful (unlike ours) world with friends, so we'll say it's all due to a coma, but we'll believe that they let kids see a crazy professor who gives them dangerous pokemon that zap them into comas? This theory is fundamentally flawed. Also, it was a psychology major that wrote it, not philosophy.
@AlexB: Uh, you DID misunderstand what I said. You blatantly misinterpreted me as evident by your original reply. For some reason I doubt you actually read the whole report. You couldn't even read my post properly. Also, just because the report is long doesn't necessarily mean it's insightful in any way.
How else could he have done it?
Well, he could have went through it and developed it a lot more for the sake of coherency. At the moment, it's so all over the place that it's too hard to take seriously. And if the writer doesn't want to put in the effort to improve his mechanics, why should the reader tolerate his drivel?
It's his fault that it's poorly written, not mine.
@JacobForrest: My guess is he wrote each paragraph the way he did for the sake of keeping the audience interested until the end. Of course he could have gone into extreme depth with each topic, but no one would stick around to read that. Each individual paragraph makes sense and gets the job done, so it really doesn't matter that it's disorganized and not as fleshed out as it could be. But I guess if you only read "4 paragraphs" of it you won't get the desired affect of the piece anyway.
@AlexB: If he wanted to keep the readers interested until the end, he should at least interest them from the first few paragraphs.
I got the gist of it from the first 4 paragraphs anyway: a superfluous metaphysical theory about Pokemon characters that the writer didn't care enough about to present in a compelling way.
If something isn't as fleshed out as it could be, that's tolerable. But if it's a headache to read, as in this case, then there's a problem. No one should stick around to read that.
@JacobForrest: Honestly if you read the whole thing, you'd see it picks up and the ending is very well thought out. It's pure speculation, but I think he does a great job. Keep in mind, this isn't a story. It's a theory. Not only a theory, but many theories all under a topic. It's staggering how many ideas he discusses. He's not going for smooth transitions between topics, he's not trying to make it into a novel. It's a theory that is best read as a whole. By no means is it "well" written, but it's comprehensible at least (again all of it makes sense). If you need smooth transitions and perfect organization, then this most certainly is not for you, but if you can get past that it's a great read. If you can't then i just feel like you'd be missing out. But whatever it's your loss (or gain), I just wanted to share it. Advice: just take it for what it IS, and not for what it isn't.
I don't think I ever mistook it for a novel. I'm glad to know that wasn't his goal.
If somehow you enjoy it, then all the power to you. Though as a general rule, I personally keep to reading works that are thought out and don't read like eating rusty nails.
I can buy the theory. But if that's the case it's not mind-blowing. It's Wizard of Oz for card collectors.
Just about every narrative written by an intelligent person is layered with meaning. Yes, even kids shows. Almost especially so, as kids will only see the front layer, but the author still amuses his/herself with the deeper stuff. You have to want to read that deep to get to these types of conclusions. But they are almost always there to be had, certainly in anime.
Thanks for sharing though. I gotta agree with JacobForrest, in that it wasn't that compelling a read (at least not as someone who isn't a fan of the show). But ideas like that are usually worth a look.
Log in to comment