Forum - View topicANN Book Club I: Eve no Jikan.
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next |
| Author | Message | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Tris8
 Posts: 2114 Location: Where the rain is. |
|
|||||||||||||
|
Wow, the first 2 episodes just knocked my socks off! And before we go any further, I think we should follow the same rules from the previous book club:
WOW, am I out of my league here!  You guys know your philosophy.
I really liked these 2 episodes, especially the first one. I saw it coming that Akiko would be an android, but the starkness of the difference between her cafe self and her public self was excellently shown. One thing I find myself wondering about is how the androids discover the cafe Time of Eve. Possibly word of mouth, though from what little we've seen so far it seems the androids don't interact with other androids much outside of the cafe. What I find interesting (and foreboding) was that phone call at the end of the second ep. They were talking about how robots were developing individuality.... Hm. So that probably means when they are first created they don't have any individuality or thoughts of their own.
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
DerekTheRed
 Posts: 3544 Location: ::Points to hand:: |
|
|||||||||||||
During the second episode I was looking at the characters in the cafe and trying to decide if they were human or android. (I basically think everybody is an android.) Before the name drop I was toying with the idea that this guy was an android, but was unaware of it, just like Deckard. After the name drop, I've convinced myself that this is the case. Why was I thinking that to begin with? 1) Masaki keeps saying that his family has no android, and that this is a strange thing. I think they do, and it's him. Like he is an experiment. 2) When they arrive at the cafe, Rikuo tells Masaki that he needs to tell his dad about the place because the androids are not following the rules (not Asimov's, the one about the rings). This leads me to believe that the dad is some sort of regulator, official or researcher who would find this interesting. Just the sort of man who might be involved in some sort of test involving androids and individuality. 3) Masaki knows the three laws pretty well. Almost like they are ingrained into him.
Heh, I wondered about that  Here's what I typed into my notes when I saw that image:
"While talking with friend, explaining why looking at movement records, notice: no robots sign, same no robot made food propaganda in background." I also noticed that it seems to say "S BITTEN" in the top left, when I paused it to make the note. I tried to scan background images of that scene for the rest, but came up empty. It made me think of "once bitten, twice shy," but I think it's a red herring now. Just random text. And a couple random thought from my notes, now with commentary: "Android Holic or Dori-kei: dependence on droids, supposed to sound like dorky?" I'm leaning towards coincidence, because this show seems to be a little deeper than that. But at the same time, perhaps this is something that a typical Japanese viewer wouldn't notice... In school, looking through the movement records: “** Are you enjoying the time of EVE? **” This re-rwiting of the movement log makes me think that some sort of hacker is doing something (possibly the cafe owner girl?) to the androids while they are in the cafe. Perhaps lifting the restrictions or the 3 rules while they are inside? Maybe when the androids go outside they are unable to express themselves, rather than putting on an act for the humans. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
abunai
Old Regular
 Posts: 5463 Location: 露命 |
|
|||||||||||||
I'm going to have to take issue with this. In the first place, the very origin of the word "robot" (from the Czech word for "labourer") is in Karel Čapek's seminal 1921 play Rossum's Universal Robots. In this play, robots (not mechanical as we think of them, but biological) function as an allegorical device, reminding the audience of how slavery corrupts both master and slave. The underlying story, I would suggest, is not about robots, but about the contemporary politics of labor and capital. This way of using robots to symbolise contemporary inequalities shows up again in Asimov's works, where robots are often portrayed as the built-to-be-honest servants of a congenitally dishonest and self-delusional human race. Again, in Blade Runner, the replicants are portrayed as downtrodden slaves -- children of abusive parents, engaging in a futile and ultimately doomed rebellion. I'll pass on commenting on The Matrix, a film which I've always felt was far less deep than its fans seem to think, except to say that the backstory (again) presents robotic rebellion as if not justified, then at least understandable. My point is that the depiction of the robot in Western literature and film has, more often than not, been as victim -- or as stand-in for contemporary undertrodden classes. The threat of revolt and replacement of humans by their servants is certainly a part of this, but it is no more a theme of robot stories than it is in (for instance) the Planet of the Apes films.
Most Western depictions of robots involve some kind of Luddite theme -- it is such an obvious theme to build a conflict on, with so many historical links.
Nonsense. Of course they have Western counterparts. There is just not a Western tendency to organise marginal elements under labelled headers to the same degree as is the case in Japan. But the marginalised elements still exist, and some of them develop into subcultures with enough impact to become recognised in the broader Western culture.
Substitute "often" for "generally", and I'll agree with this.
Probably true. I'm not sure which attitude is healthier, to be frank.
Although the Blade Runner reference was painted with a very broad brush indeed, I'm not so sure he's a good parallel. I would say that the reference was more ironic.
100% agreed. - abunai |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
GeminiDS85
Posts: 391 |
|
|||||||||||||
I am going to refrain, at least for the moment, from explicating on who I believe holds the title of Eve in this narrative. Yet before we apply this title to any character/characters, I think we should all think about the myriad ways to interpret the events and ramifications surrounding Eve in Genesis. For example, does Eve really decide to eat the apple under her own free will, or is she simply predestined to eat the apple and free will does not apply? Is the clarity bestowed upon humanity after Eve eats the apple a blessing or a torment?
I will certainly return your gesture of goodwill, yet I suspect that your glass probably contains something a little more exhilarating than my tepid tap water. 
Just to give you a broader context in which to understand my postulations, I think it might be relevant to provide a little information pertaining to my background. First of all, I think it is pertinent to mention that I approach all cultural products from an atheistic perspective. Furthermore, a lot of my views on cultural products stem from a background in postmodernism and post-structuralism. Last edited by GeminiDS85 on Wed Feb 01, 2012 2:14 am; edited 1 time in total |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
Errinundra
Moderator
 Posts: 6523 Location: Melbourne, Oz |
|
|||||||||||||
My thoughts run in an entirely different direction. I interpret "Eve" as the "night before", as in the anime is portraying events in a state of flux prior to the establishment of a new paradigm. In any case, the two interpretations can co-exist happily; they aren't mutually exclusive. Time of Eve is also notable for its numerous shout-outs to other robot / android media. Blade Runner and Rossum's Universal Robots have already been mentioned. The trivia page lists others. I'm sure there's more we haven't discovered. One of the more intriguing connections is that the family android, Sammy, is played by Rie Tanaka who famously voiced Chii in Chobits. Given the comments made by Yasuhiro Yoshiura in the Crunchyroll interviews, where he voices his reservations about the notion that humans and androids can ever fully equatable, I believe (but can't prove) that choosing her as the seiyuu was deliberate. On one level I see Time of Eve as a sort of riposte to Chobits. This of course, fits in with GeminiDS85's notion of Eve. Seen that way, I think Sammy would be the more likely "Eve" character. It's worth noting that in the first Crunchyroll interview Yasuhiro Yoshiura said,
Perhaps he is being disingenuous but let's not go overboard with our interpretations.
No, it wasn't, but it's a wonderful connection. I may yet be converted to your Garden of Eden analogy. Last edited by Errinundra on Wed Feb 01, 2012 2:23 am; edited 1 time in total |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
GeminiDS85
Posts: 391 |
|
|||||||||||||
Hmm, that is certainly not an interpretation of the title that had occurred to me, but I certainly agree that it works well in the context of the narrative. I will surely keep that in the back on my mind when I am watching the next two episodes. Thanks for sharing your interpretation. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
Errinundra
Moderator
Posts: 6523 Location: Melbourne, Oz |
|
|||||||||||||
|
@abunai,
I notice in your "my anime" you list Yokohama Kaidashi Kikou as a masterpiece. Do have ready access to the anime? At the end of the older OAV Alpha provides a narration over the credits. At one point she says, "These dangerous times have since been called the Time of Evening Calm". What word(s) does she use for "evening calm"? I can't make them out. Your Japanese is infinitely better than mine. I'm aware that "nagi" can mean "calm" or "lull". BTW, welcome back! It's been almost a year. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
st_owly
 Posts: 5234 Location: Edinburgh, Scotland |
|
|||||||||||||
|
I really liked the emphasis placed on the 3 laws of robotics. Not much sci-fi these days seems to consider them as heavily as this show does. The "no robots allowed" signs definitely suggest fear to me, as if the humans want to try and remain in control and fear that if the robots can go anywhere, they'll take over.
My interpretation of "Eve" is that of the first woman, so in my mind, it could mean the first robot who lives equally as a human, or something along those lines. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
abunai
Old Regular
Posts: 5463 Location: 露命 |
|
|||||||||||||
Throughout the series, the phrase that is consistently used is 夕凪の時代 (yorunagi no jidai), the Age of Evening Calm (referring, of course, to the last, gentle expiration of Humanity).
I'm not back. This is entirely in your mind. Now take your meds. - abunai |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
wanderlustking
 Posts: 449 Location: Bozeman, Montana |
|
|||||||||||||
|
I really liked the little staircase that led to the cafe. As a liminal space, it marks the threshold between the outside (normal) and inside (abnormal) worlds present in Eve no Jikan. I'm interested to see how liminality might be used in further episodes.
It's worth noting, I think, (if I tend to say things that are fairly obvious, please bear in mind that I teach middle school English) that despite the (relatively) mundane setting and action taking place, Eve no Jikan still provides us with an almost perfect example of the hero's journey. We are presented with a known world ("In the future, probably Japan"), a call to adventure is answered by our hero (Rikuo finds the weird logs in Sammy's BIOS) and we even have a threshold guardian in the form of Sasaki (in the hallway mentioned above he tried to convince Rikuo to leave). I wonder how many more parallels we'll find as the series continues? @Melanchthon I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed that  . This is a fairly common trope associated with the nonomyth, but it usually isn't as obvious as this (I'm reminded of works by Tim Burton, especially Corpse Bride).
Seeing everyone voicing there opinions like this is awesome; I've definitely found some good food for thought in here, and will be re-watching the episodes tonight. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Imperialkat
 Posts: 227 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
Wow, I am clearly outclassed here. The best I can do in this discussion is stay in the shallow end of the pool.
@st_owly: The fear definitely goes beyond the "No Robots Allowed" sign, as it appears to be the whole point of the ring law. The androids of this world have advanced to the point that they're pretty much indistinguishable from humans, so they force some form of identifier on them. One could say it has shades of the Star of David program of Nazi Germany. Of course, this all depends on how one views the androids - either as things deserving of rights or just tools. It makes me wonder if the general public knows that androids can behave in the manner that they do in the bar. Our two guys (whose names escape me right now) do seem more concerned that the androids aren't wearing their rings than with the androids behaving pretty much like normal humans. Returning to the current point, maybe the bar itself is Eve -- the first place to break the world's laws and become a place where androids can act freely and interact with humans as if they were human themselves. We as humans tend to extend our humanity to the things arould us - we insult our cell phones, we talk to our cars, and we percieve animal personalities as if they were human. It's like fully aknowledging the humanity extended to the androids is the act of biting the apple. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
marie-antoinette
 Posts: 4136 Location: Ottawa, Canada |
|
|||||||||||||
|
Just watched the first two episodes and I am intrigued, though at the same time I feel perhaps too reminded of Chobits (or at least the more serious moments of Chobits).
I'd say that given the fact that there are also Christian imagery with the androids "halos" and that apple, I think the more Biblical meaning of Eve is a bit more applicable, though I wouldn't be surprised if a double meaning was intended. I think it's a bit too early to really say which character might be "Eve," though I definitely would be leaning towards Sammy at the moment. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
varmintx
 Posts: 1200 Location: Covington, KY |
|
|||||||||||||
|
I don't have anything to add to the discussion about the show (at least not yet), but I would like to voice my pleasure in seeing abunai posting again; the place just isn't the same without you.
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Megiddo
 Posts: 8360 Location: IL |
|
|||||||||||||
|
I'm not prepared to fully give my thoughts on these two episodes yet, but I would like to state that the fruit in the anti-android (pro traditional farming) advertisement is a tomato. So I'm not sure where people are getting apples from. The advertisement was clearly made more for the job safety of farmers/agriculture labor and to make the viewer think about how the labor system would be if nearly all menial labor were replaced by androids, not for any sort of religious symbolism.
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
dtm42
Posts: 14084 Location: currently stalking my waifu |
|
|||||||||||||
|
It's quite interesting. We've all watched the same first two episodes, but we've all written differing amounts, and on different . . . angles of the show and its themes. And even themes that are only tangentially related to what the show has touched on thus far. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, it's actually fantastic that we're having this sort of wide-ranging discussion. It's a book club after all, it's supposed to make us think and reflect.
I don't think I'm going to be writing several-hundred-word mini-essays. I just don't have a lot to say, at least at this point. I spent the two episodes absorbing things, but I haven't had a chance to really reflect on what I've seen. Too busy keeping up with trying to make sense of what's happening on screen. I already get the feeling that I'll have to re-watch this Anime to fully appreciate and understand it. Now despite all that there was one thought that I immediately started to ponder. Why would a society make androids so human-like? Not just physically but mentally too. And that doesn't even touch upon the emotional side of things; we've already pretty clear evidence that the androids are capable of many emotions. Do robots really need brains so complex and wired in such a way that they are capable of having sentience? We already have self-learning robots and they don't commiserate with one another over cups of coffee. A android doesn't need to be capable of feeling happiness to deliver an umbrella, or irritation to hold bags while their master is shopping. It isn't a software issue so much as a hardware issue. In fact, it isn't even that. It is a societal issue at heart. See, why make a race of slaves that look exactly like yourself, and then give them the ability for sentience and emotions? Yes, I'm now saying 'ability' rather than 'capacity', because androids are not accidents, they are created. By us. Every bolt, every rivet, every length of wire inside each and every one of them was designed by one human, built by another, tested by a third and signed off by a fourth. Although mistakes happen - defects in consumer products occur all the time - we're talking about sentience here, not the Ford Pinto's propensity to blow itself up. And that's why I think it is a societal issue. It ain't software. You could hack into a calculator all you like, but it wouldn't develop sentience. And it isn't a hardware issue either, because hardware doesn't suddenly increase its own capacity and complexity. For sentience to develop on hardware that wasn't designed for it, the capacity must already exist. And why would anyone put that much capacity in something which clearly doesn't need it? IBM's Watson can't do it, and it has voice-recognition and the ability to analyse questions in partially abstract terms. You don't need too much more software on a home-help android to make it functional, besides the stuff that controls the physical aspects (to stop itself falling over, allow depth perception, lets it climb stairs, yadda yadda yadda). The Japanese are close to making a robot that can help the elderly around the house. So it isn't software and it isn't hardware. That leaves us with us. We built them in our own image, as if we were playing God. We gave them the ability to think and feel, but then tried to suppress it (see end of episode two). We even made it so that they could turn their legally-mandated halo on and off at will. The robots didn't figure out how to do the impossible; that ability was already there. And we programmed them with Laws so vague that they can choose to disobey them. As seen in the surprisingly intelligent Will Smith vehicle I, Robot, robots programmed with the Three Laws are able to harm humans by convincing themselves that they are saving us.* I certainly would be pretty dubious about all of these robots sporting such an easily-abused system of morals. Oh sure, they're no worse than humans, except . . . oh shit, they're no better than humans either. Should they choose so at any rate. We're building a race of sentient creatures, designing them to look like us for no other reason than because we want to, then enslaving them from their 'birth' and hoping that they don't choose to attack us. Wow. Even if we ignore the robot uprising part there's cause for debate and alarm. We're giving objects made out of plastic and metal what many religious and spiritual people perceive as a 'soul'. Do we have the right to do so? Do we have the right to enslave them, just because we made them? And what does it say about us that we made them in our image? I don't know the answers to those questions, although I have strong opinions about them. But I'll be interested to see what Time of Eve does and where it goes with it. * Yes, I know the movie was based off several short stories from Isaac Asimov, but I saw it as mostly a Hollywood-written film which explains why I phrased it that way 876 words for my first post. Hmm, quite a bit more than I thought I was up for. Last edited by dtm42 on Thu Feb 02, 2012 4:37 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group