ghostlightning: In my favourite things there are certain aspects which I am aware a lot of people don’t like. Things that other fans of these series really don’t like. It’s just that for me, they aren’t flaws. Now I could say that’s awesomeness overcoming blemishes – but I don’t really believe in those blemishes that don’t affect me.

Thing is, I can’t see myself asking whether I’m qualified to dismiss these flaws without implying that I must ask myself whether (in other shows) I’m qualified to consider flaws as flaws in the first place.

Which is not a position I want to be in.

Not that I necessarily want to be an arbiter. But if we all wear the mask we wind up with an (inaccurate and somewhat randomised maybe) critical weight as a collective. Which is the kind of collective do-dah I benefit from massively in conducting my selfish research. And the kind of thing I find fun.
———————-

omo: I’m not 100% on why I’m over-involved with the 9/10s. I really don’t think, in my own experience, that the distinction between the 9s and 10s is so much one of execution as one of reaction. The difference in terms of how they’re made can be quite minor, even if their impact upon me is categorically distinct. I see pursuit of 9s as an attempt at open-mindedness. A show might make the step up while I’m watching it.

I really do think that a show which produces the best possible experience for me has to be treated in terms of absolute quality. I don’t see what better measurement of quality there can be than the relationship between a person and a story. And I believe in the illusion represented in my list and think it stands for something vital.
————————–

lelangir: My preference for a canon of “quality” over one of tradition is really selfish. Looking across different media, I’ve tended to get more out of listening to people from one school of opinionated imposition than from the other.

I can’t help but think of the way certain idiots (especially British footballers) promise to give an effort of over 110% (often reaching suggested targets in the thousands or millions). Basically the only difference between my wanting things to be 100% and them wanting 110% is that I’m being harsher on those who are 10% below maximum. And I do so want to be harsh.

I don’t think the approach I set myself up against really is utterly distinct. Or rather – I think it is similar in how it is carried out, but massively different in result.

I also think that the emphasis in the harsh one is better suited for my personal purposes, and makes for a better critical dialogue. I’m being broadly optimistic about the results of my own selfishness, perhaps because I prefer the fan-language of, say, cinema, to that of anime.
————————

sarah: Duly noted. Not that I study literature.
———————

Ryan A: I think I remember you posting on this idea before (in fact I plan to do my end of year ratings using your system).

I agree that relative-tiered levelling is more accurate in dealing with the broad range of shows out there – especially at the lower ends of the scale. Especially in that some people will be stricter than others depending on their personal aims in rating shows. Arguably Baka-Raptor’s recommendation based system is an other-directed form of this.

Still the lack of a magic symbolic 10/10 doesn’t quite click with my actual experience. My favourites really do mean that much more to me. Maybe I’d have to include a couple of empty theoretical tiers to segregate them from the crowd. This might more accurately represent my personal obsession with the very best.
———————

TheBigN: I reckon the advantage of doing things out of 10, as opposed to something like Ryan suggests, is that the extent to which shows are in combat with one another is reduced. The numbers take on a vague but evocative meaning – and it hopefully becomes less about competition. There’s
no fight betwen the 9s and 10s, just an absolute and personal qualitative distinction.

I’m kind of jealous that you have so many 10/10s. Although perhaps that’s just because I refuse to hand out the imaginary 10/10 unless it is a “favourite”.
——————-

Baka-Raptor: Whike I’d probably feel the need to invent an unneeded ++++, your system is what I’d be using if I gave scores with reviews. That said, there’s a difference to my being a critic for myself and a critic for others.

When I write stuff here in critical tone I avoid scores like the plague. Only in my own head do the complex bollocks of precise criticism and the utilitarian rating system collide. Result: wonderful neurosis.

I think your recommendation ratings are great! These allow for all sorts of ‘customization’ based on what you know of the person you’re making the recommendation to. Furthermore, the exercise is a practical one than an academic one.

I don’t mean that an academic goal is less valuable, I was from the academe long ago too. Recommendations are just closer to the point-of-sale/consumption. The value is practical.