Decline of ‘Setting’, Appeasement by ‘Premise’
Posted by Aorii in Anime, Crossvision, tags: Fullmetal Alchemist, Macross Frontier, Neon Genesis Evangelion, Seikai no Senki, Setting Analysis, Shakugan no Shana, Sunrise, The Twelve Kingdoms, To Aru Majutsu no Index, WorldforgingAs a hobbyist worldforger, Lelangiric’s post and Eternal’s continuation on how the mechanics/setting of anime tends to fall short of expectations actually ticks me off a little bit. Not quite because of their viewpoints, but because modern Japanese animation, and much of recent scifi/fantasy in general, are a rather poor gauge on measuring the literary values of setting creativity. But then, that’s also partially our fault as the viewers…
By and most in today’s series, we don’t have ‘setting’. More precisely, we have a very much watered down version of ‘setting’ which is far better entitled ‘premise’. The difference between these two? A setting attempts to round out the details behind all the primary concepts and mechanics it introduce. It goes beyond just those two initial lines of conceptual explanations and seeks to reflect the cast’s understanding of their World to the audience, without inhibitions or convenient cutouts. On the other hand, a premise is a set of concepts and mechanics simply handed to the audience with minimum scrutiny, and the viewer is expected to accept it in order to make the story work. ‘Premises’ can be upgraded to ‘setting’ through storytelling, but without intricate detailing and/or in-depth analysis, it will always remain what is it: merely a premise, a set of ideas and foundations, not a World.
How does one tell if it is a ‘setting’ rather than a ‘premise’? Look upon this universe in which the characters reside in, and ask oneself if there are any major concepts that the characters conveniently brush aside and ignore as if it were an accepted norm. See if there are any topics hidden behind that brief explanation akin to “there’s a sleeping Snorlax on the road and you can’t get pass it”.
True, all those supernatural elements and pseudo-magic doesn’t necessarily have to make sense. After all, the explanation for magic is pretty much — magic. But there are things that do stay the same, be it sociology or strategy or the human curiosity for knowledge and exploration. People don’t just accept the existence of a strange element without altering their thinking patterns or investigating it. This, is where the differences between setting and premise broadens: characters question the mechanics within a ‘setting’ like how Newton stares at his apple tree.
This is also one of the foremost reasons for stories placed in creative settings: character development, as the cast retains their human (or pseudo-human) nature within the foreign World, trying to figure out why their gravity works the way it does and how to respond to a society properly ‘weighed down’ by gravity. Obviously, you lose most of this potential within a ‘premise’, as people simply don’t change if they never think about the World that envelops them.
I don’t think I need to discuss the issue of consistency. If we start violating physics, something’s wrong. If a setting violates its own rules, something’s wrong. Simple as that. The exception is when the cast realizes said law being violated and starts a shitstorm — then it’s fine. The exception to the exception is when too many laws are being violated… exception to exception to exception — this is like freaking chemistry.
.
Examples, Examples: the Good, the Bad
A few critical points of failure in popular modern scifi/fantasy animes:
- Shakugan no Shana: What’s up with that Crimson Realm anyways? Why is the cast still attending school instead of actively solving problems, by planeswalking or destroying gateways to stop conflicts preemptively?
- Index/Railgun: For a series with remarkable similarities to X-men, all the social implications of having super-humans are just… missing. Seriously, the Accelerator represents military power to threaten 1st world nations.
- Evangelion: The military never properly explored that convenient AT-Field which made them useless. The World never seriously considered or investigated the origin and implications of those angels.
- Anything Sunrise: Too obvious here. How many times did Code Geass make everyone go WTF!? How the fuck does that work? or Why hasn’t anyone noticed this? Same can be said for most of their other series.
I’m actually having trouble thinking of recent series that managed an exceptional job in constructing the ‘setting’. It may simply be that I watched the wrong series but…
Recent science fiction anime never seem to stand up to the scrutiny of a traditional scifi fan. New concepts are given little explanatory exposure (what’s up space aids curing), and new races are always cursed by simplistic psychology. Of course Ranka easily subverts all the Zentradi in Macross Frontier, there’s like zero individualism between them unless they’re at least a notable character.
Recent fantasy shows? It feels like the characters are always stuck in the middle of their own little microcosm, segregated from the rest of the world by either space-time defying bounding boxes (Nanoha, Shana) or some invisible veil of secrecy. Either that or the entire setting is generic as hell (Zero no Tsukaima).
Those who know the header picture probably knows which series I’d present as having a remarkably well-established setting: The Twelve Kingdoms introduced an entire new world and separate social structure, which the story struggled to explain to the viewer. They never quite managed it, as after all, their Mandate of Heaven is quite literally magic. But that didn’t stop its cast from tackling the mechanics from every philosophical perspective, attempting to answer the ‘why’ and probing for possible mechanical loopholes to exploit. Crest/Banner of the Stars is another series which deserves pride in its setting, explained in detail and explored in width, from the tactical implications of planar space combat to the social views on the Abh Empire’s genetic manipulation and unique psychology. (Although, since I don’t enjoy linguistics, that ‘Klingon’ language of theirs annoys me).
Out of the notable recent series, Fullmetal Alchemist deserves quite the praise on its ‘setting’. Yes, their alchemy is pseudo-science that doesn’t hold up to close scrutiny, but at the moment it’s also not holding up so well to the cast. That’s the notable part: Edward and co are actually reacting like real human beings to the mechanics of this strange World they live in. They seek pursue the quest for knowledge, to find out why their World works the way it does. Well, look at how much it changed them along the way, and how many story opportunities it opened.
Good settings tend to be a little on the aging side as far as anime goes, and not always the most popular around…
.
Why is poor setting partially our fault?
Because many of us don’t appreciate good settings enough. Because we can be appeased by less. Because by and most, the attention span of today’s viewers suck.
Setting takes time to develop. To use ‘setting’ to mold character development and storyboard progression you have to explain the details of the mechanics, be it through a long exposition or periodic breaks from the main story to tackle the information. Unfortunately, pacing the exposition to a scifi/fantasy setting is quite tricky. Give out too much information and the viewer is bored, give out not enough and they’re confused. Script writers aren’t perfect, and people will mess up (by varying degrees) in one direction or the other. There’s a trend going around and I doubt it took long for producers to notice: less detailing is often forgiven, for otherwise Sunrise would have gone bankrupt by now. On the other hand, more detailing is often responded by people dropping out as modernized attention spans expire. Well, I know which risk I’ll be taking if I wanted to make money from serialized productions, especially when those extra minutes the explanations will take is costing precious air-time.
Ever since I dropped out from Gundam 00 because its ‘politics’ and ‘tactics’ were killing my brain cells, I’ve began adapting a less serious attitude towards most anime: don’t over-analyze how it works, just accept that it works. True, it’s done well in letting me enjoy a lot more anime than I would otherwise. But at the same time, this is the kind of attitude that pushes studios to lean more towards ‘premise’ and move further away from ‘setting’.
So what am I complaining about? That you can’t have both halves of the pie here. Deux Ex will always find their way into high-paced exciting storylines. If you want your mechanics to make sense and applied to full potential, then you’re going to have to risk a few infodumps.
.
Setting-Driven
This is more of a post-note, but I think there are some who probably aren’t so aware of the fact: there are setting-driven fans. Actually, a lot of science-fiction and fantasy fans love ‘setting’ as much as they enjoy storylines or characters. Not exactly the most common bunch, but they exist, and they’re the type who can actually enjoy shows like Nanoha Strikers because it opened the doorway to a whole new world of creative thinking. So yeah, some of those in-universe jargon and crazy concepts are also designated for this audience.
Hence why there are soft science fiction and hard science fiction: the soft with only commonly used principles that are easy to understand, and the hardcore which can only be understood and enjoyed by a technophile (I have no clue what those books are talking about sometimes).
At the same time, worldforgers also take a particular pride for their setting design. It’s like how daddy Maes Hughes is proud of his daughter, really, and he just can’t hold back from showing it off. So excuse the authors if some of those infodumps went into something slightly irrelevant: they are just showing off and having fun. Of course, at some point it steps over the line to being unprofessional…
(Author’s rambling: I discovered I needed a separate category for this kind of serious posting, and hence begins the Crossvision category)





Entries (RSS)
I may be totally wrong, but it occurs to me that perhaps another way of putting this might be to say that you know “premise” is “setting” when it’s a “character” in the story.
This is probably the most bizarre example, but I was reminded by your banner. If the sakura tree in Da Capo were simply there to grant wishes and that’s it, it would be part of the premise (and in fact there are paths in the games that are like this). But when the nature of the tree, its interactions with the world, and the effect it has on all the characters in the story becomes a (the?) primary driver of the plot, it’s no longer just “premise” *even though* this example is clearly fantasy and not sci-fi (because the tree is basically “fate” or “god”). The characters actually have a relationship with the setting and this affects and even shapes their growth throughout the story. And because of this, the setting needs the same “development” that any character would have, but because the “setting” can’t talk*, others have to “talk” for it (hence the need for exposition). (Note of course that the tree is probably just about the only aspect of Da Capo that could be categorized as “setting”, so that’s why I recognize that it’s a weird example. It’s probably easier to discuss this whole thing with sci-fi examples rather than loose fantasy.)
* I say the setting can’t talk, but there are narrative “tricks” for this, of course. For example, the character happen to walk by a TV and the news is on and we “listen in” for a moment. But clearly, the main way the setting “talks” is through the characters’ struggles with it (either past or present).
That’s probably a concise way to put it, although I find it a bit harder to wrap my head around.
Your example on Da Capo is a direct hit, and my mind had completely skipped over that for some reason. Maybe it’s because, as you say, the Sakura tree is pretty much the only setting piece in that series. Of course, most of Da Capo doesn’t depart that far from the norm (except Miharu and her successor). The eternal sakura tree however, gave birth to the two pieces of drama that really made Da Capo worthwhile for me.
Well yes, settings can ‘talk’, but there aren’t many ways to do it outside blatant exposition scenes, and the informative content of those scenes are always… limited. So when you come down to it, you still have to ‘converse’ with the setting through another medium, as if it were a ‘character’ that needs developing.
Yeah, like the hilarious [but also interesting, IMO] meta info-dumps in LoGH.
Ah LoGH, there’s something I probably need to watch, although that 110 episode number is a real dis-encourager, not to mention the ship designs and pilot suits I’ve seen of it looked like something that jumped out of Star Wars.
[…] fiction and s’life is a good way to articulate the difference between premise and setting, as Aorii writes (if “premise” is plot, then setting is the universe in which premise/plot is situated). […]
This was an excellent read, and it really made me reconsider the shows I enjoyed the most from the past decade. However, I came to the conclusion that my attraction toward “premise-driven” anime is less related to attention span than it is to my appreciation for the surreal, for enigmas shrouded in mystery.
Obviously there are a lot of shows that suffer from just plain laziness on the part of the writers (all of Type Moon’s and CLAMP’s shit come to mind, as enjoyable as they were), but check out Miyazaki’s entire catalogue, or Gankutsuou (this especially; the space theme was completely out of left field), or even the brief but excellent Cencoroll. In the case of Miyazaki, the main appeal of his work is how he teases us with the unexplainable. It’s like surreal poetry; images work together somehow and the meaning and logic behind those images are less important than the impression they leave us with. The quality of the examples I gave would be severely compromised if the writers were to suddenly provide exposition on their gimmicks. Sometimes half worlds are better off being half worlds.
ParkAnimation´s last blog ..Ongoing Anime: Durarara!! – 01
I already had my say on the topic so I don’t have anything to add, but good post. You did a good job of defining the difference between the successful and not-so-successful setting-driven stories, and the setting vs premise concept is a useful one to keep in mind.
ETERNAL´s last blog ..Aiming for the Harem End, Or Not – An Eroge Theory
@ParkAnimation: Well I guess I see where you’re coming from, something leaving the surreal in its own is nice, goes along the psychological aspect that man’s obsession increases with mysteriousness. I can’t agree with that from a worldforger perspective though (=9). We have an inherent flaw of wanting to expand upon every interest concept we get in touch with…
@Eternal: Yeah, although sometimes it’s fine to just rate premise as ‘premise’ rather than comparing it against ‘setting’, seeing as setting development is simply too underrated these days to be bothered with half the time D=