Growing Up?

[Lost_Wanderer]

An exception to both rules is one particular title, Final Fantasy Tactics, that is both cynical (in the way of the Organized religion, the source of inspiration and faith for religious people in the game, being predictably evil) and anti-Christian (guess what Church that religion looks like, down to its central figure having twelve disciples and having been betrayed by one of them…guess who the final boss is. Hint: Blasphemy, blasphemy, blasphemy). I actually threw that one away as soon as I realized the offensive storyline. The others seem okay…FFX sometimes dances close to the cynical “Organized religions are evil oppressive forces and we don’t need em” theme, but the religion is so alien to any real-life religion that it was still bearable. Uncomfortable, but bearable–which is fortunate, given that the more central themes to the game were among some of the most beautiful of any Final Fantasy. That’s another key–the controversial elements were not only just barely mild enough to bear, they were more of a vehicle for other elements of the story than being the main focus in themselves.

Funny how you should mention FF: Tactics because I’m actually guilty of liking the game. However, that’s only as far as it’s gameplay (being able to switch jobs and having two genders was something I found seriously lacking in FF: Tactics Advance). In terms of story however, I rank it between D or F (Disappointing or Failure).

However, I will say that cynical “authority is evil” theme–even [especially] if that authority is religion–is a disturbingly common theme in Japanese RPGs, and those Final Fantasy examples seem more the norm than the exception, even if other Final Fantasies are somehow not nearly so emphatic on that. Newer JRPG’s often prove unable to resist at least taking a small “take that” at authority, and sometimes that authority, even if not explicitly religion, is deliberately described in detail so that a Christian will notice it is very very reminiscent of God’s authority (one villain, though not a religious figure or deity, was going to let those who served him live in his paradise; those who didn’t had to remain outside in a miserable world…the game harped on this at such lengths that I couldn’t help but get the impression that the parallel was a deliberate commentary on what the developers would think of anyone, deity or otherwise, assuming such “serve me or do not enter Paradise” authority–especially since this bit of commentary was out of place, having no impact on the game at all and only being quite suddenly mentioned by the villain out of nowhere, as though the only motive for putting it in there was so that the parallel would exist). It’s a shame; I love JRPGs, so I hate to see the tendency of being increasingly incompatible with my values, or else making not-so-subtle criticisms of my beliefs, even when such soapbox statements are jarring and out of place with the storyline.

I have to wholeheartedly agree you. I’m glad I’m not the only one who notices this trend. Yet then again, as Havard noted, it’s a trend not exclusive to Japan. It’s everywhere these days. However, I’ve seen some very awesome J-RPGs that stray from this trend. I recommend Kingdom Hearts (another game from Final Fantasy creators) and Atelier Iris 2: The Azoth of Destiny.

Thinking about it though, perhaps that’s the reason why there are Catholics such as ourselves who love the genre. We can take this as a chance to turn this trend around. Personally it’s been one of my life’s goals to write something that could deviate from this trend in the industry without coming off as preachy or even religious for that matter.

I don’t play Japanese RPG’s, but I will say that this anti-authority undertone certainly isn’t limited to them. It’s in Western culture as well… just look at how fictional depictions have changed. The villains are just as likely senators, generals, and corporate executives as they are mafia, street gang members, or terrorists. Probably moreso.

It’s pretty balanced from where I’m standing. Anything in this world can be corrupted to serve the purpose of evil. One hand you can have a tyrannical authority on the other, a chaotic anarchy. Stalin and Hitler were both authoritative and we know just how Christ-like those were.

And how often are vigilantes glorified because “cops just aren’t enough”? Considering how many police officers give their lives in the line of duty to protect us, the least we can do is honor them more in art. But instead police precincts are depicted with corruption and intrigue, with a healthy dose of incompetence thrown in.

Aren’t you forgetting shows like CSI or Numb3rs? If you want shows with just the cops, you can watch those and other shows like them. They make a very believable presentation of lawmen-in-action in my opinion.

You see the problem here is that once you start making the police capable and clean, I doubt there would be any need for superheroes. You know it’s funny, this reminds of a Powerpuff Girls episode where the girls grew tired of the Townsville folk always asking them to do things for them. In the end, they wound up teaching the people how to kill a giant monster without their help to the point that they were confident that they didn’t need the superheroines anymore. It looks like Watchmen wasn’t the only work that made an intriguing deconstruction of the superhero idea.

Also, you forget there are superheroes who actually work alongside the police. The best example? Batman.

I mean what kind of guy would go as far as to befriend the police commissioner if he knew that what he was doing was so against the law hm?

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

As for vigilantes, I tend to like superheroes, but then superhero films aren’t (typically) saying law enforcement is incompetent so much as that law enforcement is (understandably) not superhuman like, say, Spider-Man, who has an unnatural advantage that the city actually appreciates him for using–while at the same time joining the law enforcement would require him to reveal his identity (probably) and endanger his loved ones, so his reluctance there is also understandable. So I guess it depends on the exact movie as to whether or not I think superheroic vigilanteism is sending a cynical message (“law is incompetent”) or an inspirational one (“You can use your exceptional talents to do something instead of just sitting around, and you can find a way to keep your loved ones safe in the process”). But then, superheroes are usually only “technically” vigilantes in that the Law Enforcement itself often appreciates them, and in fact they may as well only be a super-powered police officer than a vigilante…it’s only on paper that they’re vigilantes, and if any policeman tries to arrest them, it’s often in a “I guess I have to arrest you, wink wink, nudge nudge” way where the officer actually wants them to escape. In those sort of superhero stories, they may as well be vigilantes in name only, so it’s not all that cynical…at least in my opinion. Now, I agree that movies that show more realistic vigilanteism (realistic individuals who take the law, including use of force, into their own hands just because they don’t like the pace at which the system moves) is quite often cynical in nature, and does indeed usually depict policemen as corrupt and the law system as uncaring or incompetent. As you say, that does a disservice to all the brave men and women who risk their lives daily for our safety. It also tends to be tainted with the glorification of revenge, since often the vigilante in such cases has a personal vindetta against the criminal in question, and in such movies that sense of vengeance is considered just and glamorous.

I might have to slightly disagree with you on the more cynical vigilante stories. I’m quite fond of them but, like you, I don’t agree with their methods for revenge. However, I think they should be sympathized more. One of the best examples of such a story is the manga, Death Note. I haven’t finished it yet but I actually sympathized with the ideals of the main protagonist. How he went about them? Not so much.

 

[CTA1967]

Interesting that you suggest Care Bears. Back when Care Bears was popular, I was an evangelical Protestant raising two little girls. There was a huge backlash by evangelical Protestants AGAINST Care Bears. They were considered “New Age.” We were all urged to keep them away from our children.

One of many books that was popular back then called Turmoil in the Toybox by Phil Phillips. This books describes the dangers of toys like Care Bears. I remember many of my friends reading this book and discussing it.

I think that among Protestants, the issue is not so much what kind of arts and entertainment are appropriate for Christians, but the issue is, "IS any kind of art and entertainment EVER appropriate for Christians?"

And I think that these teachings have rubbed off onto Catholics, who are assimiliating them into their daily theology.

That is hilarious! Although, it is also kind of sad. This sort of puritanical thinking is all over the place at CAF.

 

[Eagelswings]

I hear you. I actually played that InFAMOUS game today which I rambled about on another thread some time ago, and I still regret it. Honestly, the fact that one of bosses (a woman) is so clad it ruines the game. For a T rated game it got away with a lot of bad things. I honestly don’t know why I played it at my friends today.

I got sucked into the more dark and depressing form of entertainment a long time ago before I was Catholic. Becoming Catholic changed that but now I am getting sucked in again. At least the Lord of the Rings had a much more bright side to it, although Gimli seldom did anything to avoid getting into a fight unless it was with one of those trees in Fangorn Forest. I honestly don’t know why I praise Gimli’s stubborn fighting nature rather than the virtues the story had like Aragorn showing mercy to Boromir or Grima Wormtongue.