If we're judging by that metric, I might as well discard ~95% of the content of any given medium because some element of it has been worsened by the creator(s) trying to appeal to one group or another. If you look hard enough you can find that sort of influence in damned near everything, including much of the Capital-L Literature that a certain arrogant class of academic enjoys vigorously analyzing.
Don't get me wrong -- HSotD and similar shows are terrible, mindless shit in a myriad of ways, but I prefer to look for the good in things rather than tossing them over my shoulder. Granted, I'll spend a hell of a lot less time with things that are 10% interesting concepts and 90% terrible, view-driven drivel, but if you dismiss everything that doesn't meet your arbitrarily high standard (At what point does something change from being good design to pandering, when the appeal stops scratching your particular hangups?), you'll quickly find that you're spending more time sneering than enjoying, at least in my experience.
Key phrase being "if you look hard enough." I tend to draw the line between pandering and appeal based on how mindless and instinctual the substance is- the same place as between pornography and art, roughly, or between ingredients and raw food. If there's something actually constructed there, with effort taken to turn it into a meaningful whole, it's likely not pandering. If it's just a tank of X, which it is hoped you're in need of because X is interesting on an animal level, it's likely pandering.
You're right that it's a continuum, not a hard line, but I'd say it's a worthwhile distinction. I'd also point out/agree that a work can certainly be appealing in some parts and pandering in others, but that doesn't help my issues with HSotD because every component I'm aware of looks like pandering. That might not be totally fair, but damned if it's not working for it.
Maybe this is just my old grudge against academic snobbery flaring up again, so it might be best to disregard.
Nah, it's a valid point. I wouldn't argue that HSotD "isn't art" for similar reasons, yet I'm doing the same thing for "not pandering." That can certainly be dangerous.
Anyhow, in case I was not sufficiently clear before: I am not saying not to judge things for being shitty. I'm say to judge them for the right reasons: because they're shitty, rather than because they incidentally were made shitty in the process of trying to hit target demographics.
I don't know. I'd agree that moving from disliking something to disliking that other people like it, or even disliking the people who like it, is generally unhealthy. But it seems like it should be fair to point out the
reason for something being shitty, in those instances where said pandering seems like the culprit.
Author
Topic: I like anime, do you like anime? (Read 3136288 times)