2 ms·

> By fictionalized, I mean to say that certain aspects of the anime are inconsistent with historical record. I don't just mean the thinly-veiled references to P

> By fictionalized, I mean to say that certain aspects of the anime are inconsistent with historical record. I don't just mean the thinly-veiled references to Poland or the Catholic Church. For instance, one glaring anachronism is the Pear of Anguish. While the inquisitor in the show refers to his as a "prototype", no such device in any form existed until some two to three centuries later. The Pear in the show is a literary device that gruesomely establishes the stakes faced by the characters. It also operates as a visual metaphor for the Church's desire to silence dissent. But in no way or shape was it an instrument of torture in the 16th century. I can somewhat empathize with this—the torture that did exist at the time (crushing someone to death, breaking their bones on the wheel, Schwedentrunk, flaying people alive, and far too many other practices I'd like to avoid mentioning at all) I would be more than happy to never see visualized. The historical record is important, but sometimes inaccuracies are useful in conveying symbolic power and threats. Some translation and interpretation is always necessary if you want to produce a coherent narrative. Realistically, with history-as-entertainment, if you can capture some things well you're doing far better than many even try to. I love Ridley Scott but his depictions of history are far more of a discussion about how the west views itself today rather than even trying to translate something from the time to today. Which is fine! It's entertainment. And many do far better than he does.

Dracophoenix 2y ago
> The historical record is important, but sometimes inaccuracies are useful in conveying symbolic power and threats. Some translation and interpretation is always necessary if you want to produce a coherent narrative. Translation and interpretation is something I have no problem with, as these are not flaws of the work. However, I'm of the view that valuing a work of art requires being able to scrutinize it, while still being able enjoy it. It doesn't do one any favors to accept false facts. There are several works that establish "truths" compelling enough to be credible for someone without the background knowledge. To those who fail to question if something is true, art becomes artifice and fiction becomes indistinguishable from reality. > Realistically, with history-as-entertainment, if you can capture some things well you're doing far better than many even try to. > I love Ridley Scott but his depictions of history are far more of a discussion about how the west views itself today rather than even trying to translate something from the time to today. That you're able to appreciate the ideas being conveyed and the motives behind doing so is precisely the reason a sense of scrutiny is necessary. Kingdom of Heaven is definitely an example of a movie that provides a retrospective/revisionist examination of the Crusades rather than an historical one. Such an insight can't obtained from mindlessly watching it as a "realistic Lord of the Rings". While these things might be discussed in interviews, behind-the-scenes featurettes, or in the audio commentary, public exposition of these aspects of storytelling is rarely afforded to anime or manga.

Dracophoenix 2y ago

> The historical record is important, but sometimes inaccuracies are useful in conveying symbolic power and threats. Some translation and interpretation is always necessary if you want to produce a coherent narrative. Translation and interpretation is something I have no problem with, as these are not flaws of the work. However, I'm of the view that valuing a work of art requires being able to scrutinize it, while still being able enjoy it. It doesn't do one any favors to accept false facts. There are several works that establish "truths" compelling enough to be credible for someone without the background knowledge. To those who fail to question if something is true, art becomes artifice and fiction becomes indistinguishable from reality. > Realistically, with history-as-entertainment, if you can capture some things well you're doing far better than many even try to. > I love Ridley Scott but his depictions of history are far more of a discussion about how the west views itself today rather than even trying to translate something from the time to today. That you're able to appreciate the ideas being conveyed and the motives behind doing so is precisely the reason a sense of scrutiny is necessary. Kingdom of Heaven is definitely an example of a movie that provides a retrospective/revisionist examination of the Crusades rather than an historical one. Such an insight can't obtained from mindlessly watching it as a "realistic Lord of the Rings". While these things might be discussed in interviews, behind-the-scenes featurettes, or in the audio commentary, public exposition of these aspects of storytelling is rarely afforded to anime or manga.