On more than one occasion, I’ve been described as a moe fanatic. Or, in less amicable instances, accused.
Even though I don’t really agree with the characterization, I generally take it in stride. After all, I do watch a lot of shows that cater to the moe crowd. And, I’ve never been one to rail against the presence of moe in an otherwise non-moe show (you got moe in my serious business!). I suppose simply accepting and occasionally enjoying moe is enough to make one a moe fanatic in the eyes of anti-moe zealots. It can’t be helped.
However, given how moe is as common to manga and anime nowadays as dirt is to the ground, it’s kind of hard to avoid the stuff, now isn’t it? I have to respect those who show disdain for moe not for their impeccable taste, but rather their talent for extracting garbage from a landfill.
Seriously, though, with moe being such a regular part of today’s anime scene, I find that my definition of what constitutes a “moe vehicle” is constantly changing. Does the mere presence of a single moe character a moe vehicle make? And, for that matter, what is a moe character? A character who behaves in an obvious moe fashion? Any female character below the age of twenty-five? Any female character? Any non-Hokuto no Ken character? And how much moe makes a moe vehicle (if a moe vehicle could chuck wood)? Moe, as far as the eye can see? A dash of moe for taste? The color pink somewhere in the logo?
And, while we’re at it, what the hell does moe mean in the first place?
In other words, if moe is such an ill-defined concept, is there value in categorizing shows as such, this one in the “moe” column, that one in the “not moe” column? Or, for that matter, is there value in categorizing fans in much the same fashion? After all, those who would describe me as a moe fanatic no doubt subscribe to a more liberal definition of what is and isn’t moe than I do. The shows I would consider to be overwhelmingly moe, I rarely watch. And, if I examine my list of all-time favorite anime series (which you can find here), I only find four or five shows that exhibit what I would consider moe tendencies - and only one that I would consider a true moe vehicle.
But you might feel differently. In fact, I’d expect you to feel differently. That’s just the way moe is.
Kumbaya.
I still don’t understand you “gar” fans, though. That’s just weird.
Don’t be dissin’ GAR now. Not that moe isn’t important too. I have a place in my heart for both, so that I won’t get overloaded with either “So moe I’m gonna die” or “HOT BLOODED GUTS, PASSION, AND COURAGE”. Gotta balance one’s life after all. =D
With regards to the gar statement: I take it you don’t watch Darker than Black.
Honestly, I like gar as an aesthetic more than moe, because while moe is an appreciation of the 2D female form, gar is a celebration of pure masculinity. They’re not mutually exclusive, but gar wins for me due to the increasingly prevalent emasculation of male archetypes in anime, and all that pretty boy rubbish; gar is to the bishounen what retrosexuals are to metrosexuals, I guess.
Moe is in the heart of the beholder.
Cheers.
Who the hell is Moe?
I would think that when people criticize “moe”, they mean “submissive, often underage, usually female, and adorable characters”. With that definition, I would say that love for “moe” can be taken to unhealthy levels - whether it be to the extremes of fetishizing the character or preferring the negative qualities of such characters to more developed characters. I don’t see anything wrong with appreciating “moe” characters, however; they’re there to elicit a protective or sympathetic response, and they do their jobs well extremely considering the target audience. I for one love the moments where I just go “Aww, isn’t that adorable!”
There’s moe where it works and moe where it doesn’t work. (Yeah, yeah, I know, really helpful.)
With some shows, you can watch it and get the impression that the writers were working their way down a checklist. “Glasses, yup. Big boobs, yup. Lolita, yup. Maids… add more maids. Panty flashing, yup. Clumsy, yup. Twin tails, yup. Tsundere, more tsun, less dere.” Elements are added to the show with the express intent of attracting the otaku customer, who simply won’t buy a show if it doesn’t have his specific moe in it. Ultimately it’s a self-defeating strategy - the resulting mess isn’t really compelling or attractive to anyone, and it can only attract the otaku by out-moe-ing everything else on the market, so you get dozens of maids, huge breasts, swarms of lolitas, panties everywhere, yadda yadda. There’s diminishing returns on this sort of thing - you can’t reasonably get more maids than Hanayuko, you can’t get more panty flashing than Aika/Najica, you can’t get more sisters than Sister Princess, please GOD let nobody try for bigger breasts than Eiken, etc. If you’ve watched Gravion, you know what this kind of thinking can do to a show.
With other shows, they can have some of the same elements, but it -works-. It’s undeniable that Lucky Star is aimed squarely at that same otaku audience, but it’s going about things from a completely different approach - the moe elements are topical, not in-your-face, with just enough service to whet the viewer’s appetite. Or take Haruhi - plenty of conventional moe elements, clumsy costume girl, slashable guys, emotionless short-haired girl, amazing tsundere… but it manages to put them together in a way that avoids the checklist feel.
I think “gar” is just an analogous concept with a -really- silly name. As moe’s essentially a celebration about the things we prize in female characters, “gar” is that which we prize in men - resoluteness, steadfastness, an utter disregard for the odds, the desire to take opponents straight on and win, and the hope that we all find a worthy place to die. Physical attractiveness isn’t in it - it really isn’t a sexual thing, even if “moe” is inherently sexual.
Maybe it’s just a different way of looking at characters? There’s the method of making a main character with whom the audience can identify, certainly. However, when you’re marketing to, well, utter losers, that’s going to be reflected in your leads, and so we get an endless procession of Keitaro-clones, men who end up in harem situations even though they have no virtues whatsoever, aside from basic inoffensiveness. “gar” is the opposite track - characters who have the virtues to which we ourselves aspire. There’s a certain sort of cartoony feel to it, sure - everyone here is old enough to have gotten past the point where we wanted to be Superman. But it’s also an example that the virtues of masculinity haven’t been forgotten - that there’s still an essential manliness and it’s still a good thing to have a lot of it. ;p
All I know is you’re cool, Jeff.
Hokuto no Ken is pretty moe.
> Who the hell is Moe?
@Seth: This is moe.
The concept of “moe” is constantly evolving - for years it described active, bright girls prevalent in classic children’s literature and anime adaptations. Examples include Heidi, Little Princess Sarah, Candy Candy, Anne of Green Gables, Little Women, among others.
Somewhere it became all about helpless girls that embodied a number of fetishes and came with their signature poses and phrases - almost like dolls. I suppose Kanon and Air girls fit in this category, though I felt the girls in Sister Princess were more representative.
But it really comes down to what you prefer. And it can get tiresome seeing the same character archetype being shoved in your face over and over. Maybe the best solution is to search for what you enjoy, and to be open to new types of characters.
> Who the hell is Moe?
> @Seth: This is moe.
No, You are wrong. Moe isnt a character or something. Its more like a tendency or style or better yet check out –> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moe_%28slang%29 and maybe i am a Moe fanatic also… mmm… depending of the circunstances…
I believe dsong was giving a facetious answer to a facetious question. ^^;
Cheers.
@Sasa: You’re completely off base on this one, this is moe -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moe_Howard
Indeed. And I should mention that I was (sort of) joking with the gar comment. Although, if you consider its etymology, “gar” is basically a joke in itself.
> Who the hell is Moe?
@Seth and Sasa: I this is Moe.
Ok, I messed that up, I’ll try again:
> Who the hell is Moe?
I think this is moe:
http://alexanimeblog.blogspot.com/2007/02/moe-sighting-in-florida.html
It’s interesting that there is so much debate about what can be considered moe, but it seems like many people will agree on what can be considered gar.
Perhaps this is because of the tendency to attribute moe to a certain physical attribute or a minor tendency, rather than a way of life. This does not seem to be the case with gar.
GAR seems easier to define then moe, but I find that it has it’s own share of definition problems as well. And then when people can be moe and gar, which some people make sound like opposites, fun ensues. :P
“This is madness!”
“This is Akiba!”
*kick*
Avatar sort of nailed it, and yeah, it is a totality of the circumstances sort of thing. It’s like buying a car–you can buy a car with hot specs, but with a resell value of a piece of unwrapped, cold quarter-pounder and the reliability of the Hamburglar safekeeping your hamburgers.
A good balance is often what is necessary, but that is also in keeping with your overall objective. In a way, when people object to the presence of moe in the wrong context, it’s like complaining that your minivan has spinny rims–nothing wrong with spinning rims per se, and it adds to the value of your vehicle, but it causes other complications that an “extracting garbage from a landfill” figure of speech would miss. In other words, it helps that if the minivan didn’t have spinny rims, similar in a way that your typical Denno Coil didn’t have upskirt pans or your Crest of the Stars didn’t have running breast gags. In the right context upskirt pantie shots and breast gags and your slow-panning Toudou Shimako moments (one of my fav guilty moments, at least) all have great value and can be quite enjoyable, but context is important.
Speaking of Moe, how about the ‘Moe’s Southwest Grill?’ They do sell some good burritos.
If my 6 year old son likes the characters in Lucky Star, is he a lolicon?
Funny, I run moe.imouto.org, and… well, we can’t even decide consistently on what’s moe ourselves.
It’s really a personal thing, depending on your various preferences.
To be honest, moe is much like pornography, following the guideline that Potter Stewart just had to lay down: “I know it when I see it.” Now, if only someone could come up with a Miller test analogy…
…”Moe or not Moe”, that is the Moe Question;
^_^
Nothing wrong with moe, as far as I’m concerned. The whole clmsy, maid, big boobs cliche gets to be old if it isn’t used the right way, but, who cares; there’s nothing wrong with a cute character. The problem gets to be when the character is too young. Even then, there’s nothing “wrong” with it (until you go into Loli) IMO, it’s just a little… different.
Isn’t that this stuff they were looking for in Iraq?
I got no beef with moe.
I think a lot of people here have misunderstood the difference between moe and fanservice, which essentially are two entirely different things. There are no required physical traits for a character to be moe, it’s all about the characters personality. See Manabi Straight if you want to know what moe really is. Mikan and Mei are the two most moe characters in anime lately.