Revolutionary Girl Utena-Why rated so highly?

[Ark]

I just got finished watching RGU. I don't really tend to watch things in the fantasy/magical girl/fairy tale genres but I decided on this one because it is accepted to be a classic. As I don't really watch series/films in this genre the only thing I really have to compare it to is Madoka which to me was much better than Utena. I'd like to understand the reasons why it is ranked so high?

 

[Rui]

I don't think the two can be compared; one is a surreal and hyper-feminine show exploring various social issues within a dense fantasy setting, whereas the other is aimed more at male anime fans and, while it deliberately pushes/subverts the boundaries and expectations of its genre, Madoka Magica is still rather obviously a magical girl show at heart.

For what it's worth I much prefer Utena of the two. I guess they are both popular, a bit weird, and full of pink things and girls, but then that also describes Queen's Blade.

Utena is quite a bit older now, and a lot of the things which made it stand out at the time have of course been reused since. If you take it completely literally as a fighting show where Utena battles mean guys and cool random stuff happens all around her, it's probably pretty weak. What I enjoyed about it were the complicated relationships and the interesting, quirky stories it touched upon; I cried watching certain scenes during my first viewing so it definitely made an emotional connection. An awful lot of it is subtext and a lot of the situations never get resolved (just like in real life). The extremely theatrical presentation of the whole thing also gave it a unique charm.

R

 

[Ark]

Utena is quite a bit older now, and a lot of the things which made it stand out at the time have of course been reused since.

I agree, it probably is slightly dated now but a show's appeal shouldn't be based primarily on how innovative it is. Just because something is innovative for its time doesn't mean it's good. I'd say at this point Madoka wasn't really that innovative but it was still engaging.

If you take it completely literally as a fighting show where Utena battles mean guys and cool random stuff happens all around her, it's probably pretty weak. What I enjoyed about it were the complicated relationships and the interesting, quirky stories it touched upon; I cried watching certain scenes during my first viewing so it definitely made an emotional connection. An awful lot of it is subtext and a lot of the situations never get resolved (just like in real life). The extremely theatrical presentation of the whole thing also gave it a unique charm.

One of my main problems with Utena is a problem I've seen with a lot of other dramatic anime. I don't believe these characters are real people. The way they react emotionally to situations seems forced and unrealistic. I liked Madoka because it didn't have this problem. There was a lot of emotion expressed and it all seemed appropriate and genuine. You understood how the characters had got to that point. With Utena I didn't get that at all.

 

[Rui]

I agree, it probably is slightly dated now but a show's appeal shouldn't be based primarily on how innovative it is. Just because something is innovative for its time doesn't mean it's good. I'd say at this point Madoka wasn't really that innovative but it was still engaging.

Absolutely, but not all of the people regarding it highly are watching it for the first time in the context of it being 2012 now. The impact it had on us originally is going to play a part in its reputation.

One of my main problems with Utena is a problem I've seen with a lot of other dramatic anime. I don't believe these characters are real people. The way they react emotionally to situations seems forced and unrealistic. I liked Madoka because it didn't have this problem. There was a lot of emotion expressed and it all seemed appropriate and genuine. You understood how the characters had got to that point. With Utena I didn't get that at all.

Ha, whereas I found with Madoka that the only relatable characters were Homura and Madoka herself. Everyone else either felt flat or sort of not-really-there to me (I enjoyed the show overall, mind, and Homura more than made up for the lack of emotional resonance I felt with the others).

I think you raise a good point though when it comes to Utena. It's deliberately theatrical, in that the characters and presentation owe more to traditional stage plays than normal, and some things are accordingly impenetrable if you're expecting a typically understated anime reaction. Just like the way actors in traditional theatre have tended to wear larger-than-life costumes and ridiculous makeup to better perform the classics on stage, Utena dispenses with any kind of visual subtlety and wears its heart on its sleeve, from the exaggerated character designs to the jarringly contrasting styles of music (Miki's dainty piano versus the fierce duel songs...). I found Utena herself layered and interesting, but I can see why some people might not, and Anthy seems to polarise a lot of critics even more so.

R

 

[Ark]

Ha, whereas I found with Madoka that the only relatable characters were Homura and Madoka herself.

That's two thirds of the central cast.

I think you raise a good point though when it comes to Utena. It's deliberately theatrical, in that the characters and presentation owe more to traditional stage plays than normal, and some things are accordingly impenetrable if you're expecting a typically understated anime reaction. Just like the way actors in traditional theatre have tended to wear larger-than-life costumes and ridiculous makeup to better perform the classics on stage, Utena dispenses with any kind of visual subtlety and wears its heart on its sleeve, from the exaggerated character designs to the jarringly contrasting styles of music (Miki's dainty piano versus the fierce duel songs...). I found Utena herself layered and interesting, but I can see why some people might not, and Anthy seems to polarise a lot of critics even more so.

R

For me it really does come down to this issue of verisimilitude. There's plenty of films I like that have very surreal elements but they end up always relating those elements back to reality which is what makes them meaningful. I didn't feel Utena had any relation to reality at all. It just seemed like weirdness for the sake of weirdness.

 

[chaos]

Utena is quite a bit older now, and a lot of the things which made it stand out at the time have of course been reused since.

I agree, it probably is slightly dated now but a show's appeal shouldn't be based primarily on how innovative it is. Just because something is innovative for its time doesn't mean it's good. I'd say at this point Madoka wasn't really that innovative but it was still engaging.

While the argument of innovative not automatically making something good is valid, but about the show being engaging or not is down to personal taste, and therefore subjective. I've can't comment on the Utena show as a whole, as I haven't finish it yet, but it all have to be seen in perspective.

The exagerations of the show are there to make it enjoyable, even if you just skim the surface, but the more you dip into it, you would be able to see layers and layers of complexity on it. The director of Utena was the same as the one for Sailor Moon. I've read somewhere (wiki?) that when he created the show, he thought it would be his last anime, so he put his all into having ridiculously big production values for a TV anime. I was true until last year, as after Utena, he didn't make any other show until he joined the crew for Mawaru Penguindrum.

Homura and Madoka relationship is very similar to Utena and Anthy. That sort of relationship is visible all over now, and is a fundamental part in Bee Train's Girls with guns trilogy and to a certain extent, Gunsmith Cats' Rally and Minnie May, but before Utena, I can't recall any show where the "prince" is another female, rather than a male. So this is one point where it broke the mould and several others followed.

Strong women have been present in anime for tim immemorial, such as Osamu Tezuka's Princess Knight. But, as Helen McArthy notes on our podcast (go check it out, it's awesome), that came from Tezuka growing up and seeing his mother on the post-war having to take on typically male tasks, while still dreaming about the girly things. At the end of Princess Knight, Sapphire chooses to be a princess. This is where Utena broke the mould again. Utena wants to become the prince she admired rather than the princess.

Madoka is a great show, but it's not a complete break through, as it had shows like Utena and Pretear to pave the way. On note I can even feel like it has some similarities to Cardcaptor Sakura's ending.

At any point... I could go on and on, but I sum it up to this.
I've seen Death in Venice recently, which is regarded as one of the best films ever, photography direction whose frames could be hanged on the Louvre or the Vatican, etc, etc. In my opinion, it looked ugly, exaggerated and i couldn't relate to it at all. It's only redeeming qualities was the superb performance of Dick Bogarde and nothing else. However, I do understand that it's high artistic value is what keeps it being screened almost 40 years after it's original creating. Madoka is only a baby and Utena is 15 years old now. Let's wait another ten years or so and see if people will still be talking about Madoka and Utena. As a matter of fact, considering the lower attention spam of audiences, let's make it 5 years. If the shows survive another five years maybe there was something more to them, than simple entertainment. Maybe they were meant to be considered art.

One of my main problems with Utena is a problem I've seen with a lot of other dramatic anime. I don't believe these characters are real people. The way they react emotionally to situations seems forced and unrealistic. I liked Madoka because it didn't have this problem. There was a lot of emotion expressed and it all seemed appropriate and genuine. You understood how the characters had got to that point. With Utena I didn't get that at all.

In a show like Utena, the creators seemed to deliberately make things unrealistic, idealised and unrealistic, but not going for the traditional fare. The show have so many allegories and symbolism on it, that one could probably do a Phd on it.

Absolutely, but not all of the people regarding it highly are watching it for the first time in the context of it being 2012 now. The impact it had on us originally is going to play a part in its reputation.

As I'm re-watching Dragon Ball Z now to review it, I admit that maybe if I got fresh to the franchise now, I would not be enjoying it as much as I am. Again, if you put things in perspective. People who are making shoujo anime now are very likely to have been Utena fans.

I think you raise a good point though when it comes to Utena. It's deliberately theatrical, in that the characters and presentation owe more to traditional stage plays than normal, and some things are accordingly impenetrable if you're expecting a typically understated anime reaction.

It has Takarazuka written all over it.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takarazuka_Revue
Once again, this is a matter of style. No one can (or even should) try to please everyone, but even if it didn't pleases certain parts of the audience, it doesn't reduces it's value.

For me it really does come down to this issue of verisimilitude. There's plenty of films I like that have very surreal elements but they end up always relating those elements back to reality which is what makes them meaningful. I didn't feel Utena had any relation to reality at all. It just seemed like weirdness for the sake of weirdness.

Not really. The theatricality of it is a point of the show. Being heavy in allegories (fairy tales, religious references) and it's symbolisms (phallic symbols and roses all one), this all seems to be a way to deal with it's heavier themes and concepts of implied lesbianism, incest, sexual abuse and the end of innocence.

Utena in a way reminds me of Twin Peaks an awful lot. With the difference that in Twin Peaks, you get to learn what the symbols meant later, while in Utena, you never get a straight answer. Madoka is easy to understand while Utena was not meant to be understood.

And wow, and I wrote and wrote and wrote..... But in my opinion, these are the reasons Utena is rated so highly. It basically told a whole generation that girls don't need to be "princesses". It's also cool for girls to be "princes" if they want to. Madoka never brought any strong message to the table.

 

[Ark]

Homura and Madoka relationship is very similar to Utena and Anthy. That sort of relationship is visible all over now, and is a fundamental part in Bee Train's Girls with guns trilogy and to a certain extent, Gunsmith Cats' Rally and Minnie May, but before Utena, I can't recall any show where the "prince" is another female, rather than a male. So this is one point where it broke the mould and several others followed.

I don’t really see how they’re similar at all. There’s no implication as regards gender roles in their relationship. Homura is tough because of the things she’s experienced relatively recently. Before everything started (in ep 10) she’s not portrayed as being any more masculine than the other characters. Also she wants to save Madoka because she’s the only one who can and because she’s her friend, not because of any preconceived view of herself and what her role in the world should be.

Not really. The theatricality of it is a point of the show. Being heavy in allegories (fairy tales, religious references) and it's symbolisms (phallic symbols and roses all one), this all seems to be a way to deal with it's heavier themes and concepts of implied lesbianism, incest, sexual abuse and the end of innocence.

I didn’t really feel that any of those issues were handled seriously though. They were just thrown out as plot devices but didn’t really go anywhere. If you want to do a story about incest for example then you actually have to explore it seriously through the plot otherwise it just becomes a gimmick. Also, the symbolism seemed very redundant to me. Symbolism should be used to reinforce plot points and themes but only as a back up to the narrative, not in place of it.

And wow, and I wrote and wrote and wrote..... But in my opinion, these are the reasons Utena is rated so highly. It basically told a whole generation that girls don't need to be "princesses". It's also cool for girls to be "princes" if they want to. Madoka never brought any strong message to the table.

I would say that’s not really very innovative or positive though. The idea of individual women adopting “male” roles is ancient. It’s also implicitly sexist in the sense that adopting a male role/appearance is seen as something that makes a female more noble, whereas it’s never suggested that a male adopting a female role is something noble. It merely perpetuates the idea that there are Male roles and Female roles but that there are certain females who from strength of character can transcend their Female-ness (again male-ness is never shown as something that needs to be transcended). The Lesbian undertones only reinforce this by associating bravery and strength with being like a man which includes loving women. I’d say it also infantilises teenage females by encouraging them to view themselves in light of fairy tales that are meant for children. Again, when is this ever done with males?
I would say that the message of Madoka is not to give up hope. It might be simplistic but so are many other meaningful themes. What’s important is that it was explored in a powerful and convincing way.

 

[Rui]

I added some spoiler tags as I can see someone coming into this Utena thread and choking on their coffee at the way Madoka spoilers crept into the debate.

Ark, I think it's fine for you to dislike Utena; a show being called a classic does not mean that everyone should like or be able to relate to it. There are plenty of well-regarded shows I find unwatchably bad and illogical myself.

she’s not portrayed as being any more masculine than the other characters

I picked out this line; the point about Utena is that it's not about being portrayed specifically as the lead having masculine characteristics. She's cute, has pink hair and prominent breasts, and she's shown to have feminine thoughts too from time to time. The prince/princess issue is not as straightforward as Utena simply wanting to be a boy. It's not a nod to the transgendered members of the audience so much as a story for all humans who have wanted to aspire to something they've been told is out of reach.

It's true that the heavy issues such as homosexuality, incest and abuse (psychological, sexual and physical) are never the focus so much as the backdrop, but I would say the level of exploration is satisfying. The complicated relationships that various characters found themselves in throughout the length of the series fascinated me and when I first watched it I felt for them. The lack of resolution or even public disclosure of the sinister secrets that the characters were dealing with was realistic and beautifully tragic. Utena isn't a slice of life series aimed at highlighting dark issues and thrusting them into the foreground; it instead presents food for thought and lets the viewer decide how much they want to focus on those aspects of the show.

Symbolism should be used to reinforce plot points and themes but only as a back up to the narrative, not in place of it.

Why? Is there an instruction pamphlet somewhere laying down hard and fast rules for writing a story? If so, I applaud Utena for ignoring the rules, as in doing so the staff managed to create a series I've been in love with for many years now.

Regarding the show focusing on females and their roles, well, it's blatantly aimed at women, so of course there's a bias in the presentation; Madoka is similarly clearly aimed at men and its presentation of its girls accordingly skewed. There are still examples of masculine weakness in Utena, and many of the male characters exhibit traits more commonly associated with females, such as submissiveness (socially and sexually).

With the fantasy trappings exaggerated and laid on so thickly for viewers to peel away and interpret, I don't think it's fair to accuse the series of infantalising female viewers. What's the alternative, we watch series firmly aimed at male tastes and repress our own so as not to offend a largely male idea of what is suitable for girls to enjoy? Where are there rules which dictate how the human mind is supposed to be entertained and educated when it comes to completely optional television shows?

R

 

[Ark]

I picked out this line; the point about Utena is that it's not about being portrayed specifically as the lead having masculine characteristics. She's cute, has pink hair and prominent breasts, and she's shown to have feminine thoughts too from time to time. The prince/princess issue is not as straightforward as Utena simply wanting to be a boy. It's not a nod to the transgendered members of the audience so much as a story for all humans who have wanted to aspire to something they've been told is out of reach.

The problem is that in the series fixed gender roles are established. They are not fundamentally challenged or shown as being fluid. The majority of females behave in a certain way, and the majority of males behave in a certain way. The only two who transcend these roles are Utena and Juri, both girls.

I understand that Utena doesn’t want to explicitly be a boy, but the fact is that a Prince is by definition a gendered role. If she wants to be brave and strong why does she have to be a prince, wear male clothes and be in a protective semi-lesbian relationship with a female playing a traditional female gender role? The end result is bravery and strength are still associated with male-ness, and that male-ness should be envied by women with no suggestion that female-ness should be envied by men.

There are men who look after their children while their partners work. They don’t start calling themselves “wives” or “mothers”, or dressing in women’s clothes or trying to adopt stereotypical female mannerisms.

It's true that the heavy issues such as homosexuality, incest and abuse (psychological, sexual and physical) are never the focus so much as the backdrop, but I would say the level of exploration is satisfying. The complicated relationships that various characters found themselves in throughout the length of the series fascinated me and when I first watched it I felt for them. The lack of resolution or even public disclosure of the sinister secrets that the characters were dealing with was realistic and beautifully tragic. Utena isn't a slice of life series aimed at highlighting dark issues and thrusting them into the foreground; it instead presents food for thought and lets the viewer decide how much they want to focus on those aspects of the show.

I guess from my point of view I don’t see that as very creative. I already know these issues exist in the world. What I want from art is a perspective on them otherwise it’s no different from reading a newspaper.

Regarding the show focusing on females and their roles, well, it's blatantly aimed at women, so of course there's a bias in the presentation; Madoka is similarly clearly aimed at men and its presentation of its girls accordingly skewed. There are still examples of masculine weakness in Utena, and many of the male characters exhibit traits more commonly associated with females, such as submissiveness (socially and sexually).

Males displaying weakness doesn’t really challenge conventional gender roles. Males have never been portrayed as being strong all the time in art. The question is whether strength is associated with or disassociated from male-ness in any significant way. Just a note, I didn’t actually have a big problem with the gender issues while I was watching it. I’m only bringing it up because it’s been pointed as being a reason for why it’s so popular.

With the fantasy trappings exaggerated and laid on so thickly for viewers to peel away and interpret, I don't think it's fair to accuse the series of infantalising female viewers. What's the alternative, we watch series firmly aimed at male tastes and repress our own so as not to offend a largely male idea of what is suitable for girls to enjoy? Where are there rules which dictate how the human mind is supposed to be entertained and educated when it comes to completely optional television shows?

The issue isn’t that girls should or shouldn’t like something. It’s about claiming something as being progressive based on certain justifications. A lot of women liked Fifty Shades of Grey and it was written by a woman, but it's still claimed to be sexist by a lot of people regardless.

 

[chaos]

From all the things said here, all I can say is that I don't get Abstract art. Cubism is the most illogical thing someone could have ever conceive. But still, although I can't relate to any of it at all, from reading about it and putting things in context, I understand their value as art.

Films, TV Series and everything else follow the same logic. Watching a "classic" in a lot of ways is very similar to watch a thriller with an amazing plot twist like The Usual Suspects or The Sixth Sense, knowing how it's going to end. You don't feel the novelty side of it and pick up the small holes here and there to form your opinion.

Ark, I think it's fine for you to dislike Utena; a show being called a classic does not mean that everyone should like or be able to relate to it. There are plenty of well-regarded shows I find unwatchably bad and illogical myself.

As Rui says, I think it's time we agree on disagree.

Your original question was "Why is Utena so highly rated?" and we pointed the reasons why. But the way the discussion is going it only feels like what you really want is to put Madoka in the highlight as the bigger show. The only real innovation on Madoka that I can think of is bringing goriness into Magical Girl anime. Don't get me wrong here, Madoka is still a great show and something that gave me a sense of enjoyment I haven't had in ages, it has amazing aesthetics concepts (such as the witches lairs) and high production values, but still it doesn't bring a lot of new things to the plate. The aesthetics parts have been explored to a bigger or lesser extent in shows like Kakanagatari, Gankutsuo, etc. Death, self-sacrifice and the feeling of guilty brought to whoever is left alive and eventual redemption have been explored in Clamp shows before, like Magic Knight Rayearth.

Utena has a much bigger list of innovations from aesthetics to plot, from concept to final product. If you don't like / relate to it, that's a matter of taste and there's no point in discussing taste. One can influence, but not really change another's taste. And even to influence one's taste, the one trying to do so must prove some common ground first, otherwise there wouldn't be any real change. This is really evident in couples - how couples influence each other's tastes.

A lot of women liked Fifty Shades of Grey and it was written by a woman, but it's still claimed to be sexist by a lot of people regardless.

Being liked or written by women doesn't mean something is not sexist. According to wiki Sexism is marked by "conditions or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex", so even without reading it, but knowing what the main idea behind it is like, I can tell 50 Shades of Grey is sexist.



And now I really want to find some time in my schedule to finish watching Utena....

 

[Ark]

Your original question was "Why is Utena so highly rated?" and we pointed the reasons why. But the way the discussion is going it only feels like what you really want is to put Madoka in the highlight as the bigger show. The only real innovation on Madoka that I can think of is bringing goriness into Magical Girl anime. Don't get me wrong here, Madoka is still a great show and something that gave me a sense of enjoyment I haven't had in ages, it has amazing aesthetics concepts (such as the witches lairs) and high production values, but still it doesn't bring a lot of new things to the plate. The aesthetics parts have been explored to a bigger or lesser extent in shows like Kakanagatari, Gankutsuo, etc. Death, self-sacrifice and the feeling of guilty brought to whoever is left alive and eventual redemption have been explored in Clamp shows before, like Magic Knight Rayearth.

Utena has a much bigger list of innovations from aesthetics to plot, from concept to final product. If you don't like / relate to it, that's a matter of taste and there's no point in discussing taste. One can influence, but not really change another's taste. And even to influence one's taste, the one trying to do so must prove some common ground first, otherwise there wouldn't be any real change. This is really evident in couples - how couples influence each other's tastes.

That’s not my intention at all, I just haven’t seen anything else I could reasonably compare with Utena other than Madoka. Like I said before, I didn’t find Madoka to be innovative and I wouldn’t claim something to be of a high quality on that basis anyway.

Being liked or written by women doesn't mean something is not sexist. According to wiki Sexism is marked by "conditions or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex", so even without reading it, but knowing what the main idea behind it is like, I can tell 50 Shades of Grey is sexist.

I agree. My statement was addressing Rui’s point which seemed to suggest that criticism of stories aimed at women is a form of repressing female perspectives. Which I don't understand since most art aimed at women is still created by men or exists within generic boundaries created by men.

 

[Rui]

I wouldn't say only women can create stories for women, and indeed the Utena anime's major creative drive also comes from a male creator. The reason I object to Madoka being presented as a less sexist alternative to Utena, for women, is simply that it isn't. Both are driven by male creators, but one is aimed at female viewers and the other is aimed at male viewers. To decry the one aimed at females as sexist then present the one aimed at males in its place feels disingenuous.

Regarding Fifty Shades, I have never read it but I think people who criticise it so openly online are confusing the issue if they expect their light, kinky, throwaway entertainment to be balanced and rich in moral guidance. Men in the real world also enjoy fantasies of being forced to be submissive in a relationship. Fifty Shades is not trying to push any social boundaries any more than laddish magazines are, it's just cheap entertainment aimed at people old enough to choose what pushes their buttons.

Perhaps unlike Fifty Shades, I do think that Utena has the power to make young female (and indeed male) viewers question the world around them.

The problem is that in the series fixed gender roles are established. They are not fundamentally challenged or shown as being fluid. The majority of females behave in a certain way, and the majority of males behave in a certain way. The only two who transcend these roles are Utena and Juri, both girls.

I disagree strongly that the ways in which Miki, Akio, Saionji, Ruka and Tsuwabuki behave can all be so neatly simplified as being the same. Furthermore, while Juri and Utena are more outwardly defying their gender roles, other characters such as Nanami, Shiori and Kozue also wield power in their own ways without casting off their femininity; the only one who is almost completely submissive is Anthy herself (and arguably some of the minor characters), and it's important to show that extreme too just as much as it's important to have a few alpha males in the cast. If this series had simply had everyone in the cast be completely without the trappings of their gender, it wouldn't have been able to explore the issue with Utena herself as effectively.

I understand that Utena doesn’t want to explicitly be a boy, but the fact is that a Prince is by definition a gendered role. If she wants to be brave and strong why does she have to be a prince, wear male clothes and be in a protective semi-lesbian relationship with a female playing a traditional female gender role? The end result is bravery and strength are still associated with male-ness, and that male-ness should be envied by women with no suggestion that female-ness should be envied by men.

I think we may be speaking at cross purposes now. Being a prince is a gendered role, but why? You can say that being a princess should be the same thing if you go about it with the same sense of pride and power, however, it's not, and for all of our modern equality even now people will treat you differently based on archaic gender labels in many fields. Her clothes are what she wants to wear (they're not even the same as those of the male characters), and her relationship with Anthy is far more complicated than a storybook masculine/feminine lesbian pairing.

It's unfortunate you came away feeling that men shouldn't strive to appreciate traditionally feminine values, as my other friends who liked the show felt no such divide. Utena's own courage, despite her open goal to be a prince, never came across as a male quality to me. She combined the stereotypical passion and understanding of a female role and the power and decisiveness of a male role, within in a feminine body headed towards a masculine goal, and made these things into a strength which came to more than the sum of its individual parts.

There are men who look after their children while their partners work. They don’t start calling themselves “wives” or “mothers”, or dressing in women’s clothes or trying to adopt stereotypical female mannerisms.

They don't need to. There's nothing to challenge. But a good male carer will usually embrace traditionally female qualities such as sympathy and communication where possible, toning down the traditionally male qualities he might have. Nobody has felt a need to make a series about men doing this because in the context of the society we live in, it's not seen as a problem to do this. This does however touch on another world of gender-related unfairness, which is explored in the unrelated (yet also excellent) series Wandering Son.

What I want from art is

And that's the problem here; you have a preconceived idea of what you want from a show, which is fine (I do too). Unfortunately, the people raving about Utena in articles have a different wishlist to you. I'm not going to tell you that Utena is objectively brilliant and everyone under the sun should watch it, because that's untrue; for every person who is moved by the series it will leave five others scratching their heads and wondering why there are upside-down castles and cars whizzing about.

It is however a beautiful classic I can watch again and again, and if I come across someone else with similar taste to myself I'd recommend it without hesitation.

R

 

[Ark]

I wouldn't say only women can create stories for women, and indeed the Utena anime's major creative drive also comes from a male creator. The reason I object to Madoka being presented as a less sexist alternative to Utena, for women, is simply that it isn't. Both are driven by male creators, but one is aimed at female viewers and the other is aimed at male viewers. To decry the one aimed at females as sexist then present the one aimed at males in its place feels disingenuous.

I never said that Madoka was anti-sexist or less sexist than Utena. I don’t think it really provides any strong perspective on gender. The reason I focused on the gender issue was because it was pointed out as a reason why Utena was seen as a revolutionary series. Not to compare it with Madoka.

I disagree strongly that the ways in which Miki, Akio, Saionji, Ruka and Tsuwabuki behave can all be so neatly simplified as being the same.

They’re not the same but they’re not challenging basic gender roles. None of them want to wear female clothing for example, and all of them are presented as unambiguously heterosexual. The only sexually ambigious male character was a villain which is a very common anime trope and not really challenging stereotypes.

I think we may be speaking at cross purposes now. Being a prince is a gendered role, but why? You can say that being a princess should be the same thing if you go about it with the same sense of pride and power, however, it's not, and for all of our modern equality even now people will treat you differently based on archaic gender labels in many fields. Her clothes are what she wants to wear (they're not even the same as those of the male characters), and her relationship with Anthy is far more complicated than a storybook masculine/feminine lesbian pairing.

It's unfortunate you came away feeling that men shouldn't strive to appreciate traditionally feminine values, as my other friends who liked the show felt no such divide. Utena's own courage, despite her open goal to be a prince, never came across as a male quality to me. She combined the stereotypical passion and understanding of a female role and the power and decisiveness of a male role, within in a feminine body headed towards a masculine goal, and made these things into a strength which came to more than the sum of its individual parts.

But by wanting to become a Prince you’re by definition accepting the necessity of princesses and thereby perpetuating a role which constricts women. Take this as an analogy, if you’re a slave in a society where everyone is either a slave or a slave owner you have two choices. Either you can work to escape slavery and become a slave owner yourself, or you can struggle to destroy slavery itself. You couldn’t really call the first course of action anti-slavery. Plus there’s still this issue of the one sidedness in that men aren’t shown as wanting to become princesses and have a female prince defend them.