I don't think that's necessarily the case, but most of the time I'd argue a commercialized product is much worse off than one created by passion, like Disney vs Ghibli. In a way, with most LNs being from teenaged otaku, I'd say anime has a better standing with having more free-form creativity than other media, since the ones writing the scripts most likely aren't cynical marketers or suit executives. The only thing I'd really say is that the line between marketized art and creative art is whether a committee thought up the idea or if it's a lazy adaptation made for the sole purpose of getting people to buy the source material.
Nearly every piece of art ever was created on commission
Artists need to eat too, I know. I thought about mentioning the difference between games produced by massive studios vs indie developers, but I felt the OP was getting a little long if I threw that in too.
The two aren't mutually exclusive. I'd say what matters most is how much say the artists have. Anime is usually meant to promote a product, but it's also very artist driven.
You can recognize it's a classic for it being ahead of its time.
I think most great art has been commissioned or done for money, artists need to eat and such. These days "modern art" is just a money laundering and tax evasion scheme, but people with passion and skill are paid for it by media companies. This also allows them to draw their own free-spirited stuff on the side.
Most animes are based on managa and most managa are made out of personal desire. I would disagree that they are made for consumption.
>>75171>Most animes are based on managa
That was sort of my point in saying, "particularly adaptations." Very rarely are anime not based on something, largely because it's safe to adapt an existing piece of work which will presumably have an existing fanbase both to watch and purchase merchandise, compared to starting a new IP with none of that.
>>75170>These days "modern art" is just a money laundering and tax evasion scheme
I've heard people say this before and it's nonsense. The specific type of art you're talking about is made because it's easy to make, and sells because it's a status symbol. That's it really. Life sucks in boring, simple ways, not exciting and complex ones.
>people with passion and skill are paid for it by media companies
The latter, yes, the former, depends. If the corporations have too much control, you end up with the situation we have in the US, where projects are lead by non-artist executives who force the actually talented people to make complete garbage.
Yes, and those manga are made by artists that make it because they want to, not for money(many are quite poor).
I don't particularly see a huge difference in making a manga to sell or making an anime to sell.
In an ideal world everyone would follow their passion, but concessions are made so you can put food on the table. Doujin stuff can be different, yeah, since it's from people with primary income from somewhere else, though I don't think many artists would object to popularity explosions like ZUN.
Since the Fate gacha prints money Nasu can throw money around at passion products that really have no chance to approach money-making potential, like the (partial) Tsukihime remake. Although, it does make me wonder why he's doing it on console...
And some of the greatest artists of all time lived from the scanty money from their families and friends, for their ouevres later to allure students who take part-time jobs to sustain their studying fees.
And actually, as the value of art is entirely in the eyes of the beholder(the consumer) then all, 'great' art could be said to have been made for the consumer or at least made popular because of the consumer.
That's not what that phrase means.
I don't care what the phrase means... I was using it literally.
That's... no that's not how that works.
But it's not. That's not what literally means either.
'in a literal manner or sense; exactly.'
im kinda confused
what are some example series of what you'd consider "marketized art" and "creative art" op?
>>75205>"marketized art"[email protected]
and gacha like Azur Lane. "Corporate art & music".
Kino, Jin-Rog, Ping Pong, Planetes. I also don't think it needs saying, but check Pixiv... There's probably hundreds of thousands of artists pumping out quality work and yet without a Fanbox.
I'd prefer the thread not go in the direction of "look how ugly this thing that everyone hates is!" "I agree, this ugly thing looks bad! What were they thinking!?!?". When you've seen one thread like that you've seen them all.
Odd to think of Precure as marketized but I guess it makes sense given it's a brand that Toei keeps pumping out new material for. Though, it's hard to accept given the negative connotation I usually attach to those words...
>>75357>it's hard to accept given the negative connotation I usually attach to those words...
That's sort of what I meant to evoke in creating this thread.
So what about series that never end, or ones that exist purely to advertise some other work such as a VN or manga? This seems like a pretty big downside to art being marketized.