In the chat were were thinking of debate ideas, and this had a pretty good turn out. So I'm giving it a shot in the forums.


My opinion is no... and here's why:

Cartoons are ment for comedic value and have no continuing plot. Anime is drawn in a completely different style and are ment for a completely different audience. Cartoons, anime, stop motion, CGI, cell shading, ect... all these are forms of animation and you can't call any of these another from the same list.

I guess a good example is saying that when you think of Bugs Bunny, you default to "A cartoon character"... where as if I were to say Edward Elric, you'd probably default to saying he's "An anime character." Besides, I think there's a big differnce between the Coyote trying to catch the Road Runner and Ed and Al fighting the homunculus.

well, it's nice to see you presented both sides of the issue =P

i voted yes, basically because you presented your side so well ^_^

That makes sense. I mean, for those who don't care much about animated series, they're all the same (some friends say japanese cartoons instead of anime) but that doesn't mean they ARE the same. So... I vote NO

.. Actually, its a difference in culture.

Anime serves the same purpose as our cartoons - entertainment. Most of it for the demographic of children. The speech used in anime is very very limited, only sometimes introducing more complex sentence structures. It introduces people to harder contexting of words.

Anime is a learning tool for a language, mostly. While doing that, it has to remain interesting so that people will actually be willing to pay attention to it. Most of compulsory education in japan is spent learning kanji. Kids dont want to come home to reading more kanji in a bland manner. Cartoons here.. don't have that. It's purely entertainment.

Anime in a sense IS a cartoon, but because of such massive differences in Japanese and North American culture, it also cannot be considered simply a cartoon. Their version is much more advanced, just like everything else they've got.

Nevermind the kotatsu. Just because they apparently don't know what a thermostat is doesn't mean anything.

While you make a good point, but Japan DOES have it's own set of more child like cartoons. Remember that toilet training one that's been floating around the net?

I voted no because I don't think that all Anime are cartoons, thus Anime is not necessarily equivalent to cartoons.

I do however think that some Anime (if I understand what Anime is, I may not) can properly be considered cartoons. Teen Titans is an example. Something like Ghost in the Shell is not a cartoon though.

Would you consider Fantasia a cartoon, what about the Boondocks? What about the earliest cartoons that weren't really that comedic. The ones that only had the animals playing the eukelele.

So I do not think there is a clear example of what a cartoon is, but I think that some Anime clearly is not cartoons, thus cartoons and Anime are not synonymous.

EDIT: I am still happy with my vote regarding the best way of addressing the question as phrased, but I guess my answer is yes, anime can be considered cartoons if you are talking about Teen titans and no Anime can NOT be considered a cartoon if you are talking about Ghost in the Shell.

EDIT EDIT: Is Superfriends circa 1978 cartoons? Is Justice League circa 2003 cartoons? What is the difference?

Teen Titans isn't even close to anime.

And Lantis, the anime you're referring to isn't so much anime. There's a difference between something you'd see on Treehouse and something you'd see on Cartoon Network or Teletoon.

Comparing that toilet training show with a proper anime is a very unfair comparison.

To make it a little more clear (my argument, that is)..

A show you would typically find on Treehouse tends to focus on very basic right vs wrong type of scenarios, and provide examples of things you should do as a child. It focuses on teaching you the very basics of what it is to be a young human.

The same would apply to said toilet training tv show.

However, I think there is a pretty big distinction between that type of show and a cartoon - my stance is that they are different. However, for simplicity's sake, we refer to them as cartoons all the same to make things simpler for a child's mind.

I would say the cartoon vs anime argument begins at something aimed to an older audience - anything around 10 and beyond. Anything from Clifford on PBS kids to Happy Tree Friends to.. even Robot Chicken. (That's a big stretch - its more animation than cartoon)

The same is true for anime. Anything from Shugo Chara, Card Captor Sakura etc to something aimed at far older and more mature audiences like, say, Kodomo no Jikan. Ninja Scroll. The entire Higurashi franchise.

Anime, however, focuses a lot more on more things than simply entertainment. Something that North American animation has taken much too far, in my opinion.

I am voting anime as cartoon.

Perhaps my definition differs and is why I voted yes to cartoon.

I think it all stems back to the days of Astro Boy when I first viewed it in the 80s as a child. Back then, an animated program was considered a "cartoon" per se. Whether or not it was stop motion, cel, or even vignettes.

I believe an anime has its own class/style of art, and thusly, should be considered in the "anime" department, but the general concept that these animated shorts and series have in common was that they are created for entertainment using a medium other than real life actors to play out the actions of the show.

The Bugs Bunny show I consider as well to be a cartoon, but in the animated cel style. It was entertaining, had some sort of vague message aimed at its viewers, like don't play with dynamite(lol k bad example).

Reboot, although not a cel animated series, nor anime style drawings, I believe we can all agree is still a cartoon in the end.

And while I think about it, all of these have their own styles, if there really is any issue, why not stop referring to anything as an anime/cartoon/CG, and just call it ANIMATION? I for one would be willing to accept this as a politically correct term over all the others. After all, that is what they are. Unless I've missed something.

I think I have to go back to part of what was originally said. Whatever the differences in drawing styles and cultures, the main difference that keeps anime from being a cartoon and vice versa is that anime is a continuation of a plot. Styles can change and stories can change. A show can have very childish art but still be an anime if it continues a plot. For instance. Though reboot was an odd continuation, and quite and odd art style, I consider it to be an anime and not a cartoon.

Anime - plot
Cartoon - just a lesson or something like that.

And yes I know that this can probably be argued against very easily. I know it's not the end all be all opinion. That's just how I feel and is the easiest way for me to explain things.

So no...Anime is not a cartoon.

@lantis - would you say teen titans is a cartoon? cus it has a continuous plot.

i didn't vote at all, cus i figure it's all how you define cartoon or anime. i just say cartoon for american styled ones, and anime for japanese styled ones. but if you say cartoon for anime i don't think it's a big deal as long as one know's what you mean.

i taked to someone once on a .hack forum that said Pokemon was not an anime and when i asked him why he wouldn't even talk about it o__o

it's like people arguing about comics vs graphic novels vs manga.. that can get confusing.

mostly i kind of agree with Stythe's first thing he said.. that's it's a cultural difference and they are basically about the same thing, just different places and styles and whatnot.

I consider anime's cartoons. It's drawn the same, they just differ in style.

Drawing + animation = Cartoon

*Kitty steals Lantis shoes for even suggesting such a crazy hypothesis*

@Kajakfaucon

Forgive my boldness.

After having read that last post, how would you classify The Adventures of Teddy Ruxpin? It had both plot(first american cartoon series to my knowledge that had a continuing storyline), as well as Corey Haim and Corey Feldman among other celebrities at the end of each episode to convey a message relevant to the plot.

I am also curious about the placement of this category regarding Gargoyles as well.

Sorry if I seem like I'm sounding like a poop disturber here, but I feel as though I am onto something here and can't resist this particular set of questions.

Is any Anime animated Manga because when the style of expression is changed like when beast boy makes this face:

or when Starfire will turn super small and her sytle changes to something like isn't that animated Manga?

Rodak, I'm deleting all of your posts in this thread.

DO NOT post again until you are going to contribute something worthwhile.

((Sumi Edit: Sorry, posts related to this topic were split into a new topic in case anyone wonders.))

Bo: Anime (in this context) refers specifically to animation originating in Japan, which no one can argue differs greatly from animation found here in North America. Teen Titans, while having slighty anime-ish styles to it, is of North American origin and thus falls better under simply "cartoon".

Manga isn't a style of animation, either. It refers to a type of comic originating in Japan, which is more like a novel than a comic while still retaining the panel concept.

[spoiler]... rodak was only expressing his opinion, unless i read him very wrongly. i sort've agreed with him, actually; i honestly couldn't care more than... i honestly couldn't care, whether animation A is a cartoon, an anime, or both. it doesn't strike me as one of life's more important debates, interesting as it might be to read.

there is no way to check what was so wrong with Rodak, of course, because his sacreligious post was deleted. i don't even totally remember what he said, tbh. w00t.

imo post deletion is stupid, and if you think i'm off topic, well... i'm only following up my thoughts on your own post. *shrug*

go ahead and delete me or something if this is too annoying. or edit me. rotfl. *sigh*[/spoiler]

*cough*

for the sake of on-topicness, i guess I agree with Stythe, if forced to the wall at gunpoint. I'm not gonna pick up on anyone for using what i personally think is the wrong term, though.

::EDIT:: I further note that the vote is at 50/50

[spoiler]I'm with Regal.[/spoiler]

I was always under the impression that if you draw a set amount of pictures and place them in a specific order to protray a 'moving image or whatever', then it was basically considered a cartoon.

I don't really think, imo, that it matters where these cartoons come from, they are all created with a certain style of art that is given movement according to whatever procedure they use to get the images moving.

Honestly, if I had to choose, it would be cartoons, but really, I just consider them different forms of art that have the ability to tell stories, or teach lessons or whatnot.

Yup, I hope that makes some sense to y'all.

EDIT: I love 'anime' and 'cartoons', and consider them to be in the same category, but with different origins.

Nothing can beat Freakazoid and the classics. Not even anime. I consider both Anime and cartoons to be different.

First of all there is a difference between continuous plot and a plot within each episode that ties to a general theme of a series. But anyways.

Yes...if you want to get stupidly technical then Japanese animations are indeed Anime and pretty much everything from North America is a cartoon......... Which I think in all honesty is a stupid way to look at it.

Let's take a popular example...Teen Titans.... Hmmmm....Looks like an Anime.....sounds like an Anime....Plots like an Anime..... Well I'll be damn....Maybe, just maybe, it might be an Anime?! Albeit a sh*tty one...But an Anime none-the-less.

And no..I do not really think Gargoyles is an Anime...It doesn't have much of a continuous plot and ironically I used to watch it with my other Saturday morning cartoons.

Oh...And comics, graphic novels, and manga are very different. As I believe are Anime and Cartoons. Spider-man? Comic. Watchmen? Graphic novel. Bleach? Manga. And Anime on technicality, though the manga is better. Loony Toons? Cartoon.

------------------

I guess what I'm half saying is that culture and location don't lock something into place. Just cause there's an animation made in North America doesn't mean it's automatically a cartoon and not a manga. And there are very large differences between the two. But like everything in this world, there are some examples that blur the lines. That's natural. As humans we like to take the best of what we see and mesh them together. A lot of really great stuff has come out of it. But the differences are still there.

*points at Kajak's previous responce*

I pretty much agree. It's America's failed attempt at anime.

But here's the thing. It can't really be a cultural thing... if both Japan and the US both have what we consider anime as well as what we consider cartoons, then there's definate a difference between the two.

Granted, anime is definately more prominant in Japan, where as cartoons are more common in the states, but that really doesn't discredit my point, I would think.