As someone who likes both Cartoons and Anime equally, I have yet to find someone who doesn’t get offended by me saying that. They’re just animated projects at the end of the day, just made differently through cultural norms. I’ll enjoy both like I’ll enjoy a burger & ramen, both are good and tasty, don’t care which one’s better as long I’m munching down
That’s it, I’m just writing this because I’m bored
Word
Word, Japan
I find it a hairy topic because the terms mean different things for different people. A cartoon is something that’s animated to me, anime is just Japanese cartoons with a distinct style.
Anime is just a specific subset of cartoon. 🤷♂️
I think it depends on the topic being animated. It needs to be for satire, caricature, or humor.
Anime horror is not a cartoon.
“Cartoon” is a synonym for “animation.”
Incorrect.
Most animation is for humor, so people mislabel all animation as a cartoon.
Is A Scanner Darkly a cartoon? No.
A Scanner Darkly isn’t even straight animation. It’s rotoscoped. But yes, it is technically a cartoon.
The “technically a cartoon” part is what is being debated.
“Animated design” is the definition in other languages (particularly in french, by its inventor). Yes a cartoon is an animated design, but not all animated designs are cartoons.
Let’s make it simple. Is a moving technical blueprint of a car engine a cartoon?
-
Promise kids an afternoon of cartoons and show them Mazda MX5 engines and you’ll have a riot.
-
Tell an motor engineer that their CAD presentation is a cartoon and they will kick you out the meeting.
No. Not all Animated Designs are cartoons.
-
How the fuck is anime horror not a cartoon? It’s the same type of media, that being drawn animation.
Because for a cartoon the topic needs to be satire, caricature, or humor.
Finish reading that sentence:
The specific meaning has evolved, but the modern usage usually refers to either: an image or series of images intended satire, caricature, or humor; or a motion picture that relies on a sequence of illustrations for its animation
All anime is cartoon.
A scanner darkly relies on a sequence of illustrations for its animation, but it is not a cartoon.
Every frame of Loving Vincent is an oil painting and would not be considered a cartoon.
Waltz with Bashir would not be called a cartoon even though the drawn style matches popular cartoons.
A counterexample of your final claim. Grave of the Fireflies is an anime about children during World War II. It is not a cartoon.
“Cartoon” isn’t a genre, it’s a technique. All of the films you’ve listed are cartoons. Because, by definition, they’re a series of illustrations. Animation = cartoon = anime.
How you feel about the subject matter is irrelevant.
None of the films listed are cartoons, because none are satire, caricature, or created for humor.
I agree my feelings are irrelevant. I’m quoting Wikipedia
satire, caricature, or humor, and can be animated
Man you chose a weird hill to die on. This fits you. You are a cartoon! Case in point case in point 2. I think someone could have a field day with these exchanges and it’s quite meta (are we doing meta still?)
^^anime is japanese and/or korean and/or chinese cartoons^^
I would say the 2 cases presented could be categorised under satire / caricature / humor.
Lots of cartoons are anime, but not all anime are cartoons. The classic Akira is certainly not described as a cartoon.
I mean, I kinda see it as calling astronauts cosmonauts. It’s slightly less precise but still refer to the same-ish concept.
Whether you agree with it or not, there is a significant cultural stigma in the West around the word “cartoon”. As others have pointed out, for a very long time it was almost exclusively associated with comic strips in the newspaper and then animated children’s television.
It’s similar to how “comic books” was set aside in favor of “graphic novels”. “Watchmen” is not, colloquially, a comic book. Neither is “The Killing Joke”.
“Animated film” is another example of a term that was adopted to distance some content from the stigma of “cartoons”.
For a very, very long time in the west animated content was the exclusive territory of children’s entertainment.
Literal, dictionary definitions may allow the use of “cartoon” to describe any animated content, but it’s a lot like the word “sports”. Its usage has evolved to imply a specific subset (athletic competition), even if you can technically say you’re doing a variety of non-athletic activities “for sport”.
And I say all this as someone in their 40s who truly enjoys American cartoons, adult animated series, anime, and a variety of other media generally skewed towards a younger audience.
So yeah, I don’t call anime cartoons for the same reason I don’t call hunting a sport :)
Yeah. Like, cartoons are generally for kids. Bluey is a cartoon. But no one really calls The Simpsons a cartoon. The Simpsons is “animated”. Anime is a catch all (from a westerners perspective, at least) for anything animated out of Japan, regardless of the intended audience.
But no one really calls The Simpsons a cartoon.
People most definitely do.
This is a great explanation. A lot of these types of arguments seem to come down to “sure that thing is true, but it would be misleading to say it.”
Look, people will make up all sorts of bullshit to not admit that they like comics and cartoons.
Bugs Bunny? Cartoon. Disney’s Robin Hood? Cartoon Macross, Ghost in the Machine, Grave of the Fireflies? Cartoon
Same shit for comics. Far Side, Superman or Chainsaw Man? Comics
bruh, I like comics and cartoons, I said it bluntly in my post, but that doesn’t change my opinion on the vernacular.
Hunting isn’t a sport, Watchmen isn’t a comic book, and Ghost in the Shell isn’t a cartoon.
You don’t have to agree, but you also don’t have to be a dick about it and demean people for their opinions on language
The way I see it, I’ve seen a few interviews in Japan where elderly people end up calling cartoons like frozen or other disney stuff anime ( using the word anime instead of cartoon ), so I am personally not super fussed over calling anime cartoons. Especially since when I was growing up, I don’t ever really remember shows like one piece or pokemon or naruto being called anime on tv.
I get there absolutely are cultural differences, but I personally view basically any fully animated movie/show a cartoon. I may not call an anime a cartoon, but it’s all cartoon to me, in a respectful way.
Well I won’t deny someone who thinks avatar is an anime, but I am having a culture shock watching the show. And I am sure it’s the same for cartoon watchers when they get k-on recommended as a cartoon. I mean would you count a peotry slam or a comedy act as a theater play, just because they perform on a stage? Or saying you go to a concert when you visit a club with live dj?
Or going back to your example, would you appreciate someone saying “lets grab a burger” and then go to the ramen place. What I want to say: it can be misleading.
I’m just writing this because I am bored that it
If you know both words why ever use the less specific one except to evoke a negative reaction. Why use the broad category if you know the subtype. If you know precise technical language and your Interlocutor is familiar with the same language, why use the more broad term unless you specifically mean the broad term. Why use the name of a set to talk about a subset of that set. Why convey less meaning in a word rather than more.
I just don’t really get using cartoon when talking as and with people that know the concept of anime. Its not really perceived as an insult, but it does imply either yourself or your Interlocutor to not be capable or willing to distinguish the categories, which if both of you know both, will either come of as you insulting their intelligence or their preference, because if you both know both terms, the expectation is for the fastest and most precise word you’d both be expected to know to be used, with a deviation from that expectation at the very least causing friction.
I mean… yeah… sorta. That’s like saying Comic Books and Manga are the same thing. Sure, there is some overlap, but they are both on a pretty different wavelength. I think the difference is the cultural weight behind them. Cartoons in the west are entertainment mostly aimed at children. Anime has that, sure, but there is a whole slew of it aimed at adults, too. You can argue that the West has adult cartoons, but I think you’d be stretching it to say they are even remotely the same. Only in recent years have cartoons really taken a transgressive turn in the public eye.
I think one indicator of this is that I’ve never once ever heard anyone refer to something like king of the hill or South Park as a cartoon. They’re just TV shows, not cartoons. Cartoon implies “kids”. Anime does not. So to an American, calling anime a cartoon is insulting, because it would be like calling Game of Thrones a cartoon.
Never??? Not even like “Cartman is a cartoon character from South Park”??
I’ve never heard anyone refer to any adult swim type show as a cartoon.
Is that because of the cultural connotations? “Cartoons are for kids and I’m not a kid, so I don’t watch cartoons. I will not call South Park or Adult Swim a cartoon because I watch them and I don’t watch cartoons.”
That doesn’t imply the word is wrong, just that using it that way is taboo in western culture.
Well yeah, that’s what I was saying. It’s an insult because “cartoons are for kids” is the prevailing thought process.
People used to say games are for kids, now the game industry is bigger than the movie industry, with plenty ofnadults playing. Times change, so do cultural norms and word usage. I’d be unsurprised if in 10 years people think calling something a cartoon is an insult in any way.
Listen, I don’t think it’s an insult, but this post is literally an “unpopular opinion”. Not only that but we’re literally discussing how people see cartoons as being for kids.
People used to say games are for kids, now the game industry is bigger than the movie industry, with plenty ofnadults playing. Times change, so do cultural norms and word usage
People didn’t say this in the 80s and 90s. They only started calling them for kids in the 2000s when republicans had to find another boogeyman to attack. Then you can see people started to figure out that was clearly stupid.
On the other hand, I have heard both referred to as cartoons, often with some derogatory prefix like “pervert” or “Democrat”. Ditto The Simpsons. I always assumed that calling them cartoons was fairly widespread; maybe it’s a southern and/or conservative thing specifically.
It does usually carry the connotation of an insult; IME there’s generally an understanding in conservative circles that anything “cartoonish” is inherently childish and therefore unworthy of any respectable adult’s attention, and any adult who admits to enjoying animated TV is given a raised eyebrow, at least by the older folks.
I grew up in Texas and don’t remember anyone ever calling any of those shows cartoons.
How curious, especially because Tennessee imports so much of its culture from Texas. Maybe its an age thing, I am mid 40s and my impression is that that idiom is less prevalent with the youth. Never gave it much thought before.
As someone who likes both Cartoons and Anime equally, I have yet to find someone who doesn’t get offended by me saying that.
Hi, it’s me, someone who doesn’t judge what you enjoy. This does not affect me or put anyone down. I am unoffended. Pleased to meet you.
I mean … some people say it to be insulting. “you still watch cartoons?”
It shouldn’t be but you know how people are …
Yeah I do, while I clean my firearms.
Yeah I get why people don’t want to call them cartoons. I will say though that animation in the us has changed so much that it is kinda moot.
the main difference is that cartoons are for children and anime is for people who are sexually attracted to children
I don’t think it’s inherently an insult, but most of the time that’s how people mean it, so of course you’ll get lumped in with them
Connotation vs denotation.
