Noa-senpai wa Tomodachi. - Vol. 3 Ch. 25 - Noa-Senpai and Her Account Leak

[GreenOwlRanger]

This week, in "Married couple, but not"...

 

[deathmailrock]

But it can still be interesting to take it at face value. If you'd wave the, "it's meant to," wand at all discussions, there'd be very little left, because at the end of it, most of it is to create emotion rather than to be realistic.


That's a matter of intensity, not what she's actually doing. If she does something wrong, it will still be wrong whether it's cranked up to 11 or just a 1.

Sorta, but if something is exaggerated, then you need to know if it's counted.

Like, when there is slapstick in a series, you aren't supposed to take slapstick hits as abuse (note, actions from tsunderes and stuff like that).

If something is meant to be taken as comedy or not taken seriously, you aren't supposed to take it seriously at all.

Same with comic stalkers or comic yandere

 

[Jordygo]

Characters that put other characters on a pedestal and are hostile to people that are close to said character always piss me off. It's down right creepy, and overused

 

[Nemo2342]

Not gonna lie, it's quite funny to see comments saying that Nao is an "exaggeration" of the menhera stereotype when, in fact, she's not even close to the upper limit of what an actual menhera can be and how they can act.
At the very least she's not of the Toyoko kids kind.

That's the thing that always causes me conflict with this series; I know it's supposed to be comic, but Nao in particular has some behavior patterns I've seen too much of in real life. So it doesn't come off as an exaggeration at all.

 

[rabidfish]

Characters that put other characters on a pedestal and are hostile to people that are close to said character always piss me off. It's down right creepy, and overused

She hasn't done anything bad so far, relax.

 

[adm0726]

wonder when is Metube gonna show up

 

[FrankieRGG]

Awesome work. Thanks for the chapter.

 

[Chronigan]

I've always just been lurking in chat and decided to say nothing about the absurd discussions about whether or not Noa is insufferable and is forcing her friendship on Rihito which always just baffled me. I can't believe some people don't understand the fact that Noa, Rihito, Toyotake, every character in this series and this story itself was cooked up by some middle-aged woman (cuz the mangaka is a woman i think, not sure, don't quote me on that) in her room, the laws of our society and world just do not apply here, I noticed this somewhere else as well when I was watching "Science fell in love, so we tried to prove it" where people would call a character a manipulate little bitch and that they hate her, when in reality she's just the side character loli messing with her childhood friend.

Take situations like where the main character of a romance anime does something stupid and gets the shit slapped out of him, that just romance stuff, take Kaga Kouko from golden time who was absolutely obsessed with the main character when she was in love with him, thats just romance stuff, take jinshi from apothecary diaries who messes with maomao, thats jut romance stuff (i hope, author please), take Iwanaga from In/Spectre who goes against the mc's wishes and is just over friendly with him, thats just romance stuff, I just don't understand why the same principle doesnt apply to noa and rihito everything noa's doing to rihito might be annoying in our world and maybe in theirs but Rihito himself has no problem with it, and he's the one having these things done to him and he isn't complaining or resenting her or anything of the sort

Though, everyone can have their own opinion on a subject, so feel free to call noa whatever you want, I just find this whole discussion dumb

(i suck at explaining my point, but this should get it across better)

Yep, this is pretend. However, everyone has their hot button issue that causes them to project their own feelings onto the characters.

 

[Skater901]

Man this chapter really tickled my funny bone. I was laughing basically the entire time reading it, at how Noa and Tachibana are basically the same as each other, and all the things they were saying and doing. What a pair of idiots. XD

 

[draxdeveloper]

I've always just been lurking in chat and decided to say nothing about the absurd discussions about whether or not Noa is insufferable and is forcing her friendship on Rihito which always just baffled me. I can't believe some people don't understand the fact that Noa, Rihito, Toyotake, every character in this series and this story itself was cooked up by some middle-aged woman (cuz the mangaka is a woman i think, not sure, don't quote me on that) in her room, the laws of our society and world just do not apply here, I noticed this somewhere else as well when I was watching "Science fell in love, so we tried to prove it" where people would call a character a manipulate little bitch and that they hate her, when in reality she's just the side character loli messing with her childhood friend.

Take situations like where the main character of a romance anime does something stupid and gets the shit slapped out of him, that just romance stuff, take Kaga Kouko from golden time who was absolutely obsessed with the main character when she was in love with him, thats just romance stuff, take jinshi from apothecary diaries who messes with maomao, thats jut romance stuff (i hope, author please), take Iwanaga from In/Spectre who goes against the mc's wishes and is just over friendly with him, thats just romance stuff, I just don't understand why the same principle doesnt apply to noa and rihito everything noa's doing to rihito might be annoying in our world and maybe in theirs but Rihito himself has no problem with it, and he's the one having these things done to him and he isn't complaining or resenting her or anything of the sort

Though, everyone can have their own opinion on a subject, so feel free to call noa whatever you want, I just find this whole discussion dumb

(i suck at explaining my point, but this should get it across better)

hum...
My view in this topic is different.
I mean, Noa does have social issues, Rihito always think that, and he knows that.
Since everyone forget things like therapy exists in fictional histories, we have to think that people like her can't do much about it.
I mean... Sure, Noa would be a cling friend and probably be annoying to most people... And that's why despise all her other qualities, she is a loner.
One thing that really bothers me on the internet is people treating like nobody can have issues, like they are a perfect person themselves.
No have issues that would make it hard being her friend? Sure, she is a loner, after all.
That's meaning her issues are horrible, and she deserves to be a loner? No, of course not. Come one, she has issues, but it's not like she wants to hurt other people.
Long story short, stop acting like you all are the virtue incarnated.

 

[Eighty-six]

You saying we should stop engaging with the story and its characters on all levels but the very surface one?

I'm partial to his argument (only partial, because I see some value in your position) for three reasons:

1) Anime and manga consumers regularly fail to engage with stories and their characters on even the surface level, even when they make critiques.

2) You're still here after 25 chapters. You know what this work is about.

3) He's not asserting that the story should only be engaged with on the surface level, but that it should be engaged with for what it is.

Me, I'd forcefully argue that a story should be engaged with in a way where a consumer can extract the most value out of it and be able to justify their spending their time on it, regardless of whether they recognize that value as being an intentional export of the story on the part of its author.

I can't answer to how exactly that should look, not least of all because there's not going to be a uniform approach, but part of it definitely involves accepting the work for what it is-- especially if one is also choosing to continue consuming it. There's value in applying, say, conventional realism in one's analyses of fictional stories, but there's certainly a point where that exercise ceases to be more globally valuable than not. In the worst case scenario, one wastes their time criticizing the story for not being something it never even implied it would be-- at that point, the "interesting" exercise is either wasted on the story or outright obfuscates it.

Realism is a spectrum, not a binary, and it's not applied equally to all parts of a story.

I think most agree with this, but we all draw the line differently. We also have different rationales and implicit biases for why we draw the line where we do. The work, itself, also has some role in implying such delineation as intended by the author.

 

[luigismanslave]

everyone in this conversation should ask their mom to drive them to a doctor for an autism test asap

 

[theredendermen]

Why tf is there so many words

 

[AnotherDuck]

Me, I'd forcefully argue that a story should be engaged with in a way where a consumer can extract the most value out of it and be able to justify their spending their time on it, regardless of whether they recognize that value as being an intentional export of the story on the part of its author.

Are you referring to the "death of the author" standpoint? That's where I stand unless you specifically argue the author's intention (in which case it doesn't make sense).

There's value in applying, say, conventional realism in one's analyses of fictional stories, but there's certainly a point where that exercise ceases to be more globally valuable than not.

The only real question here is, "Is it enjoyable to engage with the story in that way?" Whether it's "globally valuable" doesn't matter.

I think most agree with this, but we all draw the line differently. We also have different rationales and implicit biases for why we draw the line where we do. The work, itself, also has some role in implying such delineation as intended by the author.

And in this case, we both have people who think she's an exaggeration, and people who think real people can easily be much worse.

 

[Kushikime]

Thanks for the chapter

 

[KimKowabunga]

This manga is a good litmus test of who had a lengthy close encounter with a mentally ill woman in their lives at some point and who hasnt. I find the writing to be VERY realistic, despite being slightly exaggerated since its a cartoon.

 

[Eighty-six]

Are you referring to the "death of the author" standpoint? That's where I stand unless you specifically argue the author's intention (in which case it doesn't make sense).

I don't care for the "death of the author" standpoint-- what the author intended, to the extent that such knowledge can be accessed, is important to understanding why the narrative is shaped the way it is, and more so than personal appraisal.

I'm advocating that a reader be reluctant to admit that they wasted their time consuming a work they actively choose to complete, whether they ultimately come to that conclusion. This naturally implicates attempting to understand the work with the presumption that the author is being intentional. What I wrote acknowledges the theoretical "intended meaning of the author" and the possibility that one may still not appreciate said intended meaning when identified.

The only real question here is, "Is it enjoyable to engage with the story in that way?" Whether it's "globally valuable" doesn't matter.

To illustrate my point: if you presuppose an "obvious" anti-war story as a pro-war story, to the point that you then criticize the work for not making the case for war (because it's "supposed" to be a pro-war story), then you're refusing to engage with the work on even a basic level and your contributions to discussions of the work are more detrimental than not.

The author's intentions do matter, especially when they sufficiently execute them.

 

[AnotherDuck]

I don't care for the "death of the author" standpoint-- what the author intended, to the extent that such knowledge can be accessed, is important to understanding why the narrative is shaped the way it is

That's a specific goal with examining it that explicitly is about the author, which was the exception I mentioned.

The author's intentions do matter, especially when they sufficiently execute them.

It depends entirely of what you want out of it. You have your definition based on what you want out of it. The author's intention may or may not matter for that. You can both analyse a story based on what you think the author intends, and based on what's actually present in the work on an objective level regardless of the author's intent. Either is not more or less valid than the other.

 

[Eighty-six]

That's a specific goal with examining it that explicitly is about the author, which was the exception I mentioned.

I was aware, thus the rest of my response.

It depends entirely of what you want out of it.

Nobody can stop you from enjoying a work in whatever way you want, but I'm addressing the prospect of critiquing and discussing it in the context of a conversational subthread that started with someone criticizing how others discuss this manga. If your discussion is based on premises that are "objectively" (read: as objective as a subjective observation can be) irrelevant to the material in the work, then it's nearly certainly worthless.

On the other hand, known authorial intentions are far less likely to be irrelevant to the work because they normally greatly influence the final product, if they're not outright manifest in it.

 

[AnotherDuck]

Nobody can stop you from enjoying a work in whatever way you want, but I'm addressing the prospect of critiquing and discussing it in the context of a conversational subthread that started with someone criticizing how others discuss this manga.

My impression was that they were arguing why people shouldn't discuss the manga outside authorial intentions, which I'm arguing against. In that discussion both author intent and death of the author are relevant.

On the other hand, known authorial intentions are far less likely to be irrelevant to the work because they normally greatly influence the final product, if they're not outright manifest in it.

My approach on that matter is usually about how well the author's intentions seem to match up with the actual story as written (and drawn). Usually they match but there are also often discrepancies where the author missed things or didn't approach the subject well enough. What people usually discuss is their own viewpoint, which, especially for manga, can be from a different culture, so the perceived message of the story doesn't match up with what the author intended.