No.1666
>1665
a dobson classic
No.1703
This one is of one of Rumiko's assistants (Aya Shimizu) drawing UY characters back in high school. Furinkan found them, which is cool.
They bring it up in an article discussing when a magazine said one of her assistants did most of the work on Ranma 1/2 and Rumiko had to sue them for libel.
https://www.furinkan.com/features/articles/lawsuit.html No.1710
>>1703Rumiko a hack??1!?!!/
No.1722
>>1710Nothing will taint her reputation as long as she is a woman. Men will always simp regardless of her writing. if she was a man half of her fandom would be uninterested in her works.
No.1723
>>1722It'll be honest, Rumiko is an insult to female writers. She can't really write a story without fucking it up. But at least she's funny, if it's even her making the jokes…
No.1726
>>1723She is great at comedy, pacing and character design, the writing is just not as good especially when you compare it to other authors who also are women, her best written work is maison but it never became as popular as her other works for some reason.
No.1727
>>1726I need to watch Maison, it's next on my list
No.1728
>>1726Maison Ikkoku sold 25 million copies with only 15 volumes. It was also a seinen rather than a shounen and released for monthly for the vast majority of its run. It is simply not as popular as her other works by there being less of it.
>>1722>>1723I don't know why you guys are on a board dedicated to the works of Rumiko Takahashi if you hate Rumiko Takahashi.
No.1729
>>1728You can value certain aspects of an author’s work without being a fan of everything they do.
No.1730
>>1729No one who says that she is an insult to female writers or "if she was a man, half the people would be uninterested in her work" values her work.
Do I think Rumiko is a perfect writer? No, but she mainly writes gag series on a weekly basis, which will naturally result in sloppier narrative.
No.1731
>>1728I love Rumiko, and yet I also love to criticize her work. It's only natural. I do this even to my favorite writers. No one is perfect. The idea of a fan having to have a perfect picture of an artist is quite absurd and out of the realm of reality. You seem to want everyone that talks about Rumiko to either be this black or white figure that MUST stick into their lane. I don't agree with your idea of a fan.
>>1726>She is great at comedy, pacing and character designShe's great at comedy, I'll give you that. Pacing completely depends on the story she's telling so it's a hit or miss. Character Design? I disagree, she tends to reuse a lot of those designs, sometimes I get confused when I see other characters from her work because they tend to look extremely similar. But when she does put some effort into her designs, they do come out looking fantastic.
No.1732
>>1731I think there's a pretty big distinction between critique and the comments I was responding to. There's a difference between realistically evaluating the work's merits and just disrespecting the author.
>Men will always simp regardless of her writing. if she was a man half of her fandom would be uninterested in her works.>It'll be honest, Rumiko is an insult to female writers No.1733
>>1732Well it's true, saying Rumiko is a great writer is an insult to female writers as a whole. Just because I use strong words to convey my critiques of Rumiko, doesn't mean I disrespect her as an artist. One can use strong words in a critique you know. I like to have fun with my words. Unlike you who finds any bit of expression an attack against the artist (unless it's praise, then you'll hop on the bandwagon and continue the parade). Such a dull way of expressing thoughts. You ought to know better.
No.1734
>>1733No one said Rumiko is a great writer. The original comment said she herself was an insult to female writers. Saying "she is a bad writer" isn't disrespecting her, it is simply stating an opinion. Saying "her work does not match the quality of other female writers" is also not disrespecting her, though I would say that it is indicative of a serious issue with her work. There're plenty of ways to express critique that isn't disrespectful, even fun ways. Hell, even something like "She really fucked up Shinobu as a character" or "Rumiko can't write an exciting fight scene to save her life" is completely fine.
Broad sweeping statements regarding a person's work is not engaging with it critically and it is disingenuous to claim it is. And no, I do not jump on the bandwagon to praise her work in the same fashion, I state my viewpoint in regards to specific aspects of her work. The idea that I find only praise for her is absurd. There's a bunch I don't care for and am fine saying that. I've read a lot of dogshit one-shots.
No.1738
>>1734You simply reworded my sentence. I still stand with my opinion. You won't change my mind, nor will I change my words to sooth your feeling. Call it disrespectful all you want, but if one were to compare, the statement could hold true in many ways.
No.1741
>>1738I mean, it is fine if you literally find Rumiko's writing worse than any given random female writer ultimately. And I guess you can be a fan of the art alone or the adaptations of her work without being contradictory.
I am definitely not trying to change your mind or words, I just find it unusual to call yourself a fan of her work if you ultimately find almost any other work more compelling.
No.1744
>>1741Well, she's not the worst writer in the world. There are way worse writers then Rumiko. And to me, a lot of her work is charming even if it's not very good, but there are fans out there who consider her an example of good writing. I still like her stuff despite her massive flaws, sometimes she does write something worthy, the problem is that she never tries to continue that good concept. Overall, I really do think there are better female mangakas then Rumiko. Shit, Japan has some good female novelists like Murasaki Shikibu . Rumiko just isn't one of them. She seems like she could be decent if she actually read more and understood literature better.
No.1745
>>1744You're free to stick to your guns, but you would be much better at communicating ideas if you didn't sound like a psychotic.
No.1746
>>1730because half of her audience praises her work on the basis that she is a woman, if she was a man people would look at half of ranma's manga with completely different eyes and you know it.
No.1747
>>1745Rumiko's mindless drones that are her audience tends to get on my nerves. I'll always enjoy her work, but I can never stand a Rumiko fan. At least you understand. Which is great.
>>1746Some of them. Not all. And I partially disagree. That market of Rom-coms was going to be filled up no matter how poorly done it was.
No.1748
>>1744There definitely are great female manga creators, but I definitely don't think Rumiko is in the bottom 10% as you allude to. Manga not being as well plotted as written prose is to be expected, though some obviously manage it.
No.1750
>>1748I never alluded her to be the bottom 10%.
No.1751
>>1750>It'll be honest, Rumiko is an insult to female writers. She can't really write a story without fucking it up.Bottom 30%? I don't know how else to read this comment.
No.1753
>>1752So, it was simply being hyperbolic when essentially saying 'not good'.
No.2004
>>1997This is awful trash
No.2009
>>1753What is not?
>>1879>Screeching lol lmao even.
No.2011
>>2010We must do harder, really channel that insane space energy of the series
No.2053
>>2052this isn't the first time someone posted those edgelord edits on here
>>>/cel/2260 No.2103
>>2102Either she participated in a communist themed slumber party or made a visit to Jusenkyō