why do most people think that anime or animation in general is just for kids?!

[G.I.R]

you guys think that its totally different from japan? i mean their mindset towards anime/manga or just animation in general?

No question it's different.  And the same can be said for comic books / graphic novels as well.  And it's not just a difference between the U.S. and Japan.  There's also as many differences as similarities in the European markets as well.

[doilkosa]

you guys think that its totally different from japan? i mean their mindset towards anime/manga or just animation in general?

Absolutely. I can partially attest that tons of Anime/Manga in Japan are definitely not for children.

Any animation that makes it the states is often heavily censored to make it more acceptable to the target audience, children. I'm not sure about other dubs, but as an example, if you look at Dragonball Z and Dragonball GT (probably was the most popular Anime in America), the more emotional and mature parts of the series were removed. Ironically, the distributors thought that the violence was totally acceptable to the American audience and decided to leave it in, or at least replace it with childlike
'cartoon' violence. The series in Japan, however, are just as enjoyed by adults.
Compare the opening themes of the series; Watch the original Japanese versions, the American versions, and the Blue Water (UK and Canada) versions.

Anyway, it's just a theory I've been talking about with a friend. It could all simply be just a matter of editing when a series is imported to America.

[Jun-Watarase]

I am pretty sure you are mixing up your post-war eras... After WWII, the middle class that we know today was created, partially from the wealth that America was receiving from other countries and the GI Bill (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GI_Bill). With Western Europe's infrastructure destroyed, they needed material to rebuild, they also needed money to buy the material. America, a place where the battle was not fought on, supplied money for Europe to buy American goods. This lead to an economical boom (See: Marshall Plan.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Plan).
Also, For your knowledge, no one was drafted in WWII.

Now, I can agree.. there was a boom for entertainment. Because of the economical boom and also because of the increase of technology, but not because they were trying to keep themselves happy, but because the quality of life improved and people actually had MONEY to spend.
The baby boom also, wasn't about having sex with anyone they could, and it is really offensive to even think so.

Oh! And sorry for using all wikipedia sites.. I am a bit too lazy to pull out the actual books. . .

Now, as for actual cartoons being looked on as more childish, it could be say that it was really the baby boom that ignited this. You have younger children, the integration of the television into the family home, and just simply... the market to sell to. Since the first largest market in America was really towards children, I guess you could say it just stuck...

Despite not being completely familiar with World War II, I am absolutely certain that people DID spend their money on entertainment post-war, to keep themselves happy. Let's not talk specifically about the quality of life and economy, here. The mentality after the war was pretty much people left in despair. Americans have used this method of keeping spirits raised since the first World War (Ever watched the movie Chicago? circa 1920, 2 years after World War I. It's an extravagant play/movie, but it at least explains what I'm trying to point out.) by spending their income on shows and entertainment. There was an increase in technology, but why was the money and technology used for entertainment? To keep Americans happy.

As for the baby boom... you'd just be naive to think that Americans don't have sex for sex's sake-- to think that people at the time would defy human nature to be as conservative as history books and TV shows make them seem. Sex makes people happy. People needed to be happy. What other reason was there? Just because the quality of life for the average American would improve, doesn't mean they suddenly decide to procreate-- it just made it easier to raise children because of the improvement in economy. People don't hold back on having sex and having children because the world is a unfit place to live in. As patriotic as it may be to claim Americans were devoted to godly premarital chastity, you'd just be giving us too much credit.


Back to cartoons, though.

you guys think that its totally different from japan? i mean their mindset towards anime/manga or just animation in general?

No question it's different.  And the same can be said for comic books / graphic novels as well.  And it's not just a difference between the U.S. and Japan.  There's also as many differences as similarities in the European markets as well.

Sharysa noted a lot of interesting points in her post, like how human characters are in comparison between Japanese animation and American animation, and how successful marketing is for cartoons in America and Japan. There's just a difference in culture varying in different countries, different mentalities, different audiences, different demands. The majority of popular animation in Japan are for younger audiences, but they ALSO have more variety for different audiences. America just has the habit of associating animation with mainly just children... explanations given in previous posts.

When adults grew out of the appeal of animation that was created initially for them (like how our sense of humor develops and jokes when we were 4 aren't as funny now that we're older.) and children were the new target audience. Cartoons stayed the same because children would remain entertained, and it's easy, because at that point, they're young enough to be easily amused without too much questioning... which we develop when we're older. That'd pretty much influence the direction of newer cartoons, and became traditional. People were used to the idea, and whenever something beyond that audience would arise, the majority of the time, they'd fail. The only types of cartoons (that I can recall, so I may be mistaken) with more "mature" (and not comedy) and in-depth storylines are pretty much superhero cartoons... like Marvel and DC cartoons, and even then, they're still for children.

Any animation that makes it the states is often heavily censored to make it more acceptable to the target audience, children. I'm not sure about other dubs, but as an example, if you look at Dragonball Z and Dragonball GT (probably was the most popular Anime in America), the more emotional and mature parts of the series were removed. Ironically, the distributors thought that the violence was totally acceptable to the American audience and decided to leave it in, or at least replace it with childlike
'cartoon' violence. The series in Japan, however, are just as enjoyed by adults.
Compare the opening themes of the series; Watch the original Japanese versions, the American versions, and the Blue Water (UK and Canada) versions.

Actually, you're wrong. Some of the emotional scenes may have been considered inappropriate to an American children's audience, but the violence was NOT kept in. A lot of it was removed, censored, and edited. The series was a children's series in Japan, too. It was in AMERICA, that they found the series too mature for kids.

[PyronIkari]

   I ran this by a bunch of people just to make sure. But I knew I wasn't mistaken.

The US Draft was signed in 1940. And the US joined WWII in Dec. 1941. The draft was in affect.

The majority of soldiers in  WWI were volunteers, but that doesn't change the draft was in affect, and thousands of men were forced into the war. I will quote my 8th grade World History teacher.

"I was forced to fight in Vietnam, just like my father was forced to fight in WWII just like his father was forced to fight in WWI. I'm just glad that I don't have a kid that will be forced into a war, because I don't want to put him through that hell".

It's one of many stories I've heard about people that were forced into WWII. It wasn't the same type of draft that happened later, but it was forced service, all the same.

There very much was a draft for WWII, the biggest difference was that, compared to Viet Nam, people were in agreeance with the draft. People supported the war. In Viet Nam it was a different story, because the war wasn't supported, so the draft was criticized. But again... there very much was a draft for WWII, and 10million men were on that list.

As for the boomers and the affect on the economy. The average person was doing better than the recent depression, and the war did wonders to bring them out, but they were not all "great". The national economy was doing great, people had more consumption, etc. and because of foreign countries being screwed, a lot was done. However, the morale of the average person wasn't at it's greatest. Now, fast forward 16 years. When the affects of everything start to balance out. You know have an over abundance of population, with not enough jobs to support them. THIS is the post war affect. Yes there was more money circulating in the economy, but your average family wasn't reaping from it. The parents had things well off, but their kids came into the picture, and their kids can't get jobs. There is a huge repression.

Pensions ended at around the same time, and to tie this all back together.

Women joined the work force during WWII, pensions ended and families had to focus more on work, a huge boom of population, so despite more demand, and consumption, there were not enough jobs for the kids who were reaching their teens.

So what do we have? Parents focusing more on work, and kids and young teens with nothing to do. Television, so who becomes the target audience? The kids who are too busy working(which if what you said was to be taken literally wouldn't be the case, because everyone was doing so well).

There were a lot of different factors, but the target audience from the baby boom, was where money was.

EDITEDITEDIT XD

you guys think that its totally different from japan? i mean their mindset towards anime/manga or just animation in general?

ACTUALLY the mindset from the US and Japan is very similar. It's the standard that's different. Japan thinks cartoons/comics ARE for kids and young teens. Here's an example.

If you are a 28 yr. old businessman... and you go to work, and you open your briefcase and there's cartoon stuff, like keychains and stuff, or you turn on your laptop, and there's a cartoon wallpaper. Your co-workers will be like "... What in the hell? Why does he have a bunch of kid stuff on his desk?" And your boss will probably yell at you, and tell you to get rid of it all, because it's unprofessional and you look like a kid.

In the US, it's not much different... right?

But as I stated, things like, Dragon Ball, Death Note, Bleach... the standard in the US is that these are too bloody, and violent, and complicated for children and young teens. In Japan, these are the norm for a 12 year old. So what is "for kids" in Japan, is just seen differently in the US.

[G.I.R]

The only types of cartoons (that I can recall, so I may be mistaken) with more "mature" (and not comedy) and in-depth storylines are pretty much super-hero cartoons... like Marvel and DC cartoons, and even then, they're still for children.

Well, for reference here's some T.V. animation geared more towards adult audiences:

Duckman, The Simpsons, Dilbert, King of the Hills, Aquateen Hunger Force, Family Guy, Fish Police, Johnny Quest, The Flintsones, Harvey Birdman: Attorney at Law, and more that I care to list, but I guess you get my point.  

Not to mention many theatrical films done for a more mature audience:  Lord of the Rings (1977), Heavy Traffic (yes originally rated "X", but pretty tame by todays standards), Wizards, Fire and Ice, and so on.

But I really think it's not so much an issue of adults growing out of the appeal of animation, its more of the industry moving away (in the most part) from general and adult audiences.

Edit:  Just saw PyronIkari's post was in before mine.  Totally right the change in the workforce during / after the war.  But one thing about WWII and the draft, There were lots of people who enlisted before and right after the Pearl Harbor attack.  We were also giving support to England and China before the U.S. got involved in WWII.

[Jun-Watarase]

The only types of cartoons (that I can recall, so I may be mistaken) with more "mature" (and not comedy) and in-depth storylines are pretty much super-hero cartoons... like Marvel and DC cartoons, and even then, they're still for children.

Well, for reference here's some T.V. animation geared more towards adult audiences:

Duckman, The Simpsons, Dilbert, King of the Hills, Aquateen Hunger Force, Family Guy, Fish Police, Johnny Quest, The Flintsones, Harvey Birdman: Attorney at Law, and more that I care to list, but I guess you get my point. 

Not to mention many theatrical films done for a more mature audience:  Lord of the Rings (1977), Heavy Traffic (yes originally rated "X", but pretty tame by todays standards), Wizards, Fire and Ice, and so on.

But I really think it's not so much an issue of adults growing out of the appeal of animation, its more of the industry moving away (in the most part) from general and adult audiences.

Most of what you've listed were comedy, which typically don't have storylines, or action/superhero types like I mentioned. But what Pyron said at the end of his post does makes good sense, how standards for what is and what isn't for kids vary between countries.

[PyronIkari]

Well, for reference here's some T.V. animation geared more towards adult audiences:

Duckman, The Simpsons, Dilbert, King of the Hills, Aquateen Hunger Force, Family Guy, Fish Police, Johnny Quest, The Flintsones, Harvey Birdman: Attorney at Law, and more that I care to list, but I guess you get my point. 

Not to mention many theatrical films done for a more mature audience:  Lord of the Rings (1977), Heavy Traffic (yes originally rated "X", but pretty tame by todays standards), Wizards, Fire and Ice, and so on.

But I really think it's not so much an issue of adults growing out of the appeal of animation, its more of the industry moving away (in the most part) from general and adult audiences.

There will always be animations that gear towards adults, just like there are adult/mature comics, and what not. But that doesn't change that a genre is geared towards something. Comic books, are geared towards kids and teens, forever have, and forever will. Just because Cry for Dawn, Heavy Metal, and Faust exist though, doesn't mean that comics aren't for kids. It's just means that someone took a medium associated with kids, and made adult targetted version. It aims for a niche group. Not the majority. Again, it comes down to business and target audiences.

Edit:  Just saw PyronIkari's post was in before mine.  Totally right the change in the workforce during / after the war.  But one thing about WWII and the draft, There were lots of people who enlisted before and right after the Pearl Harbor attack.  We were also giving support to England and China before the U.S. got involved in WWII.

Oh there were a lot of people that enlisted and it's even arguable that the MAJORITY did... but it doesn't change that a whole lot didn't. And a lot that were drafted willfully went and happilly went, but again, doesn't change that it was a draft, and it was forced service.

[G.I.R]

Oh there were a lot of people that enlisted and it's even arguable that the MAJORITY did... but it doesn't change that a whole lot didn't. And a lot that were drafted willfully went and happilly went, but again, doesn't change that it was a draft, and it was forced service.

Oh yeah Totally agree.  What I meant was in comparison to the Viet-nam era.  Sorry.

(Maybe we need a world history / politics topic in /b/.   :D )

[Sunara Ishi]

I blame Saturday morning cartoons.. >.>; And all the advertisements advertising shows for kids. -.-;

A lot of people get in the mindset that cartoons/animation are for kids. Even though new series and movies are getting aimed at adults, the mindset has been around so long that its hard to change. X.x;

This is even for shows aimed at those in their teens. I must note that this mindset is that animation is for those under 13. That may even be a little high for some of the people in this kind of mindset.

I don't believe that animation was originally intended for kids. It just grew into that purpose since its creation. They used to use animation for shorts before movies. Not all those movies were kid movies.

I think the industry just found a bigger market if they marketed the shows to kids than to any other audience. And its been that way since whoever was the first person who decided that (who I suspect might have been Disney [here in the U.S.])

[ip136]

*blinks*
Oh my god...
In the course of two posts, so many social outlooks have been twisted, smooshed and sent back in time at once, I'm sure there are historians around the world, feeling this presence of inaccuracy, and literally beating themselves in the head with BRICKS to try and make it right.

I could go on, and start showing you MORE facts as to why what you are saying is half-bake and inaccurate, but I have the feeling that the factual stuff is going to get left behind and suddenly not mentioned a second time. Which really, wastes everyone's time.

Most of all.. Jun, sweety.. saying "Let's not talk specifically about the quality of life and economy, here." is like saying "let us not talk about the reason why people were spending money here on entertainment."
Also, the 'mentality' of post WWI, and WWII are entirely different. BOOKS could, and most like HAVE been written about the differences and more importantly their REASONING behind their differences.. also, the mention of Chicago as a depiction of an entire era, though it hits the idea of extravagance.. oh god.. I really hope you have more sources than a movie. Otherwise, let's all say that Godzilla destroyed Tokyo in 1954 and be done with it.
Plus.. you are actually mixing up the social acceptance of the 20s, 60s and the 90s/2000s into the 40s and the 50s. Which is completely wrong. The idea of having 'sex to be happy' or having sex to spread love was an idea birthed (haha XD) from the 60s and the introduction of hallucinatory drugs.

And.. just to say something... The draft YOU are referring to, Pyron is the peace-time draft signed by FDR.. There WAS a draft in WWI "On May 18, 1917, the Selective Service Act was passed, authorizing the President to temporarily increase the military establishment of the United States." (http://www.jewishgen.org/infofiles/wwidraft.htm). So I would really like to know who you 'spoke to' and what sort of sources you were using.

Bah. I'm done. But hopefully, you guys are not, and more importantly, you are to a point that you will sit down, pull out a reputable history book and start reading.

[Jun-Watarase]

Most of all.. Jun, sweety.. saying "Let's not talk specifically about the quality of life and economy, here." is like saying "let us not talk about the reason why people were spending money here on entertainment."
Also, the 'mentality' of post WWI, and WWII are entirely different. BOOKS could, and most like HAVE been written about the differences and more importantly their REASONING behind their differences.. also, the mention of Chicago as a depiction of an entire era, though it hits the idea of extravagance.. oh god.. I really hope you have more sources than a movie. Otherwise, let's all say that Godzilla destroyed Tokyo in 1954 and be done with it.

When I had said that, my intention was to focus on the emotional mindset and reason why people WERE spending money on entertainment... which I am absolutely certain people did. (Chicago was mentioned as a hyperbole of people spending money on shows and entertainment that people'd be familiar with, at the same time acknowledging that isn't how exactly things were.) But if I was incorrect on the mentalities between WWI and WWII, I'll stand down. I'll admit to be wrong if I didn't have my facts straight, but I addressed the things that I did without completely deviating from initial reasoning why the War was brought up in the first place.

Plus.. you are actually mixing up the social acceptance of the 20s, 60s and the 90s/2000s into the 40s and the 50s. Which is completely wrong. The idea of having 'sex to be happy' or having sex to spread love was an idea birthed (haha XD) from the 60s and the introduction of hallucinatory drugs.

I think you might've misinterpretted "Sex to be happy" for something more than I intended to mention. I meant, simple... casual sex. Though, I acknowledge one of the reasons was economical improvement, I have trouble believing people didn't have the idea of sex for pleasure and leisure. It may have been more conservative at the time, and because of the supposed better quality of life, plenty of couples probably saw it was a good opportunity to have children. But to tell me that the idea of sex for sex's sake didn't exist, is completely beyond me... but that might be because I'm young.

[PyronIkari]

*blinks*
Oh my god...
In the course of two posts, so many social outlooks have been twisted, smooshed and sent back in time at once, I'm sure there are historians around the world, feeling this presence of inaccuracy, and literally beating themselves in the head with BRICKS to try and make it right.

Wow... you were doing so well up until your last post. Everything you said, was true and factual up to the point where you said "There was no draft for WWII". The issue was that, your facts weren't even on the basis of what I was speaking about as to why people were spending money, how, and the after affects of it. YOU are speaking about facts as to what happened. I am speaking about social and economic changes based on those facts and why they happened.

Most of all.. Jun, sweety.. saying "Let's not talk specifically about the quality of life and economy, here." is like saying "let us not talk about the reason why people were spending money here on entertainment."

How condescending ^^. The exact quality of life isn't why people were spending money on entertainment, it was more about post-war kick back. It was both a time for celebration, and of overwhelming grief for the people that got back, and for the families that didn't get their kids back.

Also, the 'mentality' of post WWI, and WWII are entirely different. BOOKS could, and most like HAVE been written about the differences and more importantly their REASONING behind their differences.. also, the mention of Chicago as a depiction of an entire era, though it hits the idea of extravagance.. oh god.. I really hope you have more sources than a movie. Otherwise, let's all say that Godzilla destroyed Tokyo in 1954 and be done with it.

... Chicago wasn't just a movie... and it was a reflection of the times. That's what good writing does you know... reflect the times. It's not the only example, but it was a good reflection. If you NEGATE IT just because it's "one movie" then let's negate Schindler's List, and the Diary of Anne Frank... THEY'RE JUST ONE BOOK, and JUST ONE MOVIE.

Plus.. you are actually mixing up the social acceptance of the 20s, 60s and the 90s/2000s into the 40s and the 50s. Which is completely wrong. The idea of having 'sex to be happy' or having sex to spread love was an idea birthed (haha XD) from the 60s and the introduction of hallucinatory drugs.

OH PLEASE. WHat a load of crap. The idea of having sex to feel pleasure and be happy has been around for ever. Do you realize the majority of poems from the 1600's were about trying to sex up some girl? Not necessarilly about love, but casual sex. Casanova? An entire story about a man who goes around just sleeping with woman for pleasure? Here's what I think is happening. You're caring too much about facts, that you're losing sight of the things that happened without a physical fact to put there. People associate the 60's with free love, and drugs, and people having sex all over the place... that is a fact. Therefore to you, that is when casual sex and the such started happening?

Social Acceptance, doesn't always mean "it didn't happen". I know very well the different social acceptances of the times, but people still slept around, people still cheated on their wives, people were still homosexuals.

Here's some interesting facts. During the WWII, you realize that most of the teenage males went to war, whether it was through choice or through forced service right? The ones that didn't were those that didn't qualify due to health reasonings. During these times, the girls wouldn't date/go out with these boys because they were "inferior". If the army didn't want them to serve, they had to be dirty right?

But for a lot of these cases, these girls WANTED to do something because their boyfriends, fiancees, EVERY OTHER BOY was gone, but they didn't because they felt they were dirty. The girls were lonely though.

But casual sex and the such didn't exist? So when those boys came back, you're saying none of the girls had sex with any of those boys just because they wanted to have sex, and just for the pleasure of it right? All of them were in legitimate relationships, planning to get married, and none of the single girls just hooked up for sex right?

And.. just to say something... The draft YOU are referring to, Pyron is the peace-time draft signed by FDR.. There WAS a draft in WWI "On May 18, 1917, the Selective Service Act was passed, authorizing the President to temporarily increase the military establishment of the United States." (http://www.jewishgen.org/infofiles/wwidraft.htm). So I would really like to know who you 'spoke to' and what sort of sources you were using.

Yes... there were multiple cases of draft all throughout history, FDR signed a "peace-time draft" not that it was a "Peace-time Draft", but it was called a peace-time draft because the draft was signed while the US was not in war. It was officially established before the US entered WWII. In that it was being used DURING WWII. You don't show me any evidence that there was not a draft during WWII. I can just use logic for evidence. The large majority of the male population in the US was sent off to war. Although it is easilly explained that a large amount of them willingly volunteered and wanted to fight, in any time and in any age, there will always be many that DO NOT want to. How do you explain that basically all males outside of those that did not fit physical requirements, were sent off?

Bah. I'm done. But hopefully, you guys are not, and more importantly, you are to a point that you will sit down, pull out a reputable history book and start reading.

Frankly, History books can report some facts, but in the end they're biased. I like hearing the stories of the people that were there and lived through it. Who I've been talking to? WWII vets, and their kids. My elders. I've heard the POV of Japanese that were in American concentration camps. I've heard the views of Japanese that were in Japan. Americans that were forced into war, and Americans that tried everything they could to qualify to serve.

You can say "Well this history book told me that there was no draft". And it'd be technically right. There was no official draft, like there was in WWI and Viet Nam. But you'd be wrong in point that there was no forced service. Millions of young adults from America were forced to serve in that war. They had no choice in saying "I don't want to serve, I want to stay with my family". When your choice was to either serve, or get put in prison as a traitor... and the man telling you could see the emotion in the man telling you this and how he was thrown into a camp and trained to go off and kill other men, then you're deeply wrong, if you think that your book will be able to display what these men had to go through, and what they were forced to do.

America prospered after the war, because of the major comparison right before. The Great Depression. Frankly, it was a god send compared to that, and the economy was growing greatly. But due to mentallity of your average person, who just got finished with the war, entertainment was the major key point. The GI Bill etc. isn't a permanant life saving goal you realize? That ended a few years later, the funds were done, and the schooling, and free money was over. People all stormed the work force. The issue was that. Women were part of the work force now. With all the women in the work force, finding jobs was harder, despite the huge demand increase due to everyone and their mothers having kids.

There was more money, and the economy was so far beyond better than the Great Depression, but it wasn't a golden age or anything. You state a lot of facts before, and they are true, but circumstantial and comparatively, you can make anything into a fact.

What happened, and how it affected people, not on a grand scale that you can cover in a few paragraphs in a history book, but to the actual people. Or... here I'll make it even easier.

The macro-economics of the US were in the best state they've ever been. But when you look at it to a much smaller scale, to the actual families it wasn't all cake and ale.

[Tur713]

Woah woah woah! Hold on a second guys! This has nothing to do with anime or cartoons any more at this point. Either drop it or start a new thread about "the state of the country post WWII and how it affected the perception of animation and other media thereafter."

[PyronIkari]

Woah woah woah! Hold on a second guys! This has nothing to do with anime or cartoons any more at this point. Either drop it or start a new thread about "the state of the country post WWII and how it affected the perception of animation and other media thereafter."

Actually... it does have a lot to do with cartoons still. You have to understand the culture, the state of living, and the populace to understand why the animation studios shifted their audience from adults to children, and I believe at this point, most people agree that the change was made around the 50's/60's. The question is to as... why. The baby boom, created the audience, and women joining the work force, along with men scavenging for jobs due to pensions ending gave way for television to be the new parents.

It all comes around, you just have to see how each factor plays in.

EDIT:

I guess I shold mention that, the reason why animation was aimed towards adults prior was because... kids don't have money to go and see a movie. Kids couldn't afford things, so why bother marketing something to them, when they can't afford to see it?

A lot of cartoons/art etc. were very adult themed, and based. You could make a very convincing arguement that cartoon porn is a return to roots of what cartoons were in their early stages. All of them were very adult themed, lacing with sex, and pornography(but without the actual pornography... in... MOST... cases). But after the change, the target changed, so the themes changed to an extent.

Animation in today's time, is still made and marketed for kids, though there are a lot of adult targetted animations. But according to place and region... you'll get different standards and opinions as to what is based for what audience.

[zoupzuop2]

A lot of cartoons/art etc. were very adult themed, and based. You could make a very convincing arguement that cartoon porn is a return to roots of what cartoons were in their early stages. All of them were very adult themed, lacing with sex, and pornography(but without the actual pornography... in... MOST... cases). But after the change, the target changed, so the themes changed to an extent.

Actually, he's right. In fact, MICKEY MOUSE HIMSELF can, arguably, be accredited for being the first cartoon character to try to force himself (on some levels) onto another character. My source.

[Tur713]

Woah woah woah! Hold on a second guys! This has nothing to do with anime or cartoons any more at this point. Either drop it or start a new thread about "the state of the country post WWII and how it affected the perception of animation and other media thereafter."

Actually... it does have a lot to do with cartoons still. You have to understand the culture, the state of living, and the populace to understand why the animation studios shifted their audience from adults to children, and I believe at this point, most people agree that the change was made around the 50's/60's. The question is to as... why. The baby boom, created the audience, and women joining the work force, along with men scavenging for jobs due to pensions ending gave way for television to be the new parents.

It all comes around, you just have to see how each factor plays in.

EDIT:

I guess I shold mention that, the reason why animation was aimed towards adults prior was because... kids don't have money to go and see a movie. Kids couldn't afford things, so why bother marketing something to them, when they can't afford to see it?

A lot of cartoons/art etc. were very adult themed, and based. You could make a very convincing arguement that cartoon porn is a return to roots of what cartoons were in their early stages. All of them were very adult themed, lacing with sex, and pornography(but without the actual pornography... in... MOST... cases). But after the change, the target changed, so the themes changed to an extent.

Animation in today's time, is still made and marketed for kids, though there are a lot of adult targetted animations. But according to place and region... you'll get different standards and opinions as to what is based for what audience.

Okay, I admit that I may have been exaggerating slightly by claiming that it had nothing to do with the topic because, inevitably, everything happening in the world at during a certain time will have affect the things which are created during that period in time. However, I still stand by my claim that you (and by you I mean all participating in debate, not just you specifically) moved rather far from the topic at hand here. Though interesting at points, I doubt this is the what the poster had in mind as a response when originally asking a simple question.

[Jun-Watarase]

Okay, I admit that I may have been exaggerating slightly by claiming that it had nothing to do with the topic because, inevitably, everything happening in the world at during a certain time will have affect the things which are created during that period in time. However, I still stand by my claim that you (and by you I mean all participating in debate, not just you specifically) moved rather far from the topic at hand here. Though interesting at points, I doubt this is the what the poster had in mind as a response when originally asking a simple question.

I'm glad you know enough to say exactly what the OP wanted from us. Frankly, his question got answered in my first post, then this thread evolved into a more in depth answer as to why the shift happened in the first place. If you don't want us to evolve a post into a more in depth discussion of the topic at hand, then fine... but you're not exactly someone to tell us what or what not to do in a thread.

-Pyron, Jun logged me out and I didn't notice.

[red_thestrals]

Okay, I admit that I may have been exaggerating slightly by claiming that it had nothing to do with the topic because, inevitably, everything happening in the world at during a certain time will have affect the things which are created during that period in time. However, I still stand by my claim that you (and by you I mean all participating in debate, not just you specifically) moved rather far from the topic at hand here. Though interesting at points, I doubt this is the what the poster had in mind as a response when originally asking a simple question.

I'm glad you know enough to say exactly what the OP wanted from us. Frankly, his question got answered in my first post, then this thread evolved into a more in depth answer as to why the shift happened in the first place. If you don't want us to evolve a post into a more in depth discussion of the topic at hand, then fine... but you're not exactly someone to tell us what or what not to do in a thread.

-Pyron, Jun logged me out and I didn't notice.

i know... i looked at this thread and i was like "what the...?!"  but im glad "somehow" we're in the same page with my original question... we're pretty open-minded here... ;D ;D

but if u guys wanna talk about history and all... by all means do it... ;D ;D ;D

[Tur713]

Okay, I admit that I may have been exaggerating slightly by claiming that it had nothing to do with the topic because, inevitably, everything happening in the world at during a certain time will have affect the things which are created during that period in time. However, I still stand by my claim that you (and by you I mean all participating in debate, not just you specifically) moved rather far from the topic at hand here. Though interesting at points, I doubt this is the what the poster had in mind as a response when originally asking a simple question.

I'm glad you know enough to say exactly what the OP wanted from us. Frankly, his question got answered in my first post, then this thread evolved into a more in depth answer as to why the shift happened in the first place. If you don't want us to evolve a post into a more in depth discussion of the topic at hand, then fine... but you're not exactly someone to tell us what or what not to do in a thread.

-Pyron, Jun logged me out and I didn't notice.

i know... i looked at this thread and i was like "what the...?!"  but im glad "somehow" we're in the same page with my original question... we're pretty open-minded here... ;D ;D

but if u guys wanna talk about history and all... by all means do it... ;D ;D ;D

Yeah, I wasn't exactly trying to shut you guys down. It just seemed it was getting a little heated and someone needed to step in to calm things down a bit. That's all. No worries! :)