A “Quick” Question

It feels like I talk about this sort of thing way too frequently, but there’s always something that keeps pulling me back to thinking about the adoption of the term “slice of life anime” (to the point of where I’m getting sick of seeing that to the point where he’s probably already at). In this case an article from a CNN blog focused on geek culture about anime that’s decently written, but glosses over some things and pokes my nerves again with using the term and defining it in a way that bothers me:

“slice of life anime”, in which characters didn’t really do anything, but spent a lot of time talking about nonsensical subjects and looking pretty. “Moe” characters – young, adorable girls on the cusp between puberty and adulthood – were a pervasive signature of these anime shows.

“Slice of life anime” marked a stark shift between darker themes and comedic themes, affecting the climate of anime on a major level.

In an article that uses various “turning points” to explain how anime has changed over time, this is one of those examples, and with my bias showing, I don’t feel like it’s used in a positive light.

I’m still at a loss as to why this definition (variations on “stuff not happening” tied into “moe” characters and whatnot) has become acceptable and mainstream enough that it gets thrown around frequently. And that’s because this usage often evokes a negative connotation in my head (as in “this is what’s wrong with anime today” doomsday-type of connotation) to the point where it feels like it’s becoming the new scapegoat in anime, incorporating the old scapegoat (moe) into something that’s more definable. A genre that shifts anime into places “we” don’t like.

As with issues of this nature, there’s few clear-cut examples where people actually say this sort of thing and mean it, so that what I’ve said with many grains of salt. That being said, what I want to know is how this definition has developed over the years to become a catch-all, as well as why people (in the west) are using it as an explanation of what anime has currently become. Does anyone have any suggestions or clues?

30 Responses to “A “Quick” Question”

  1. 1 otou-san September 5, 2011 at 12:17 pm

    In this particular case, I would say it’s the author being glib for the sake of not alienating readers who don’t comprise our little niche group.

    People need shorthands to refer to things. Regardless of how I may cringe at the use of “slice of life” as a genre of anime, anything becomes valid once it’s consensus, no?

    Even the bit about how it’s about characters doing nothing is just a shorthand. True, I’ve never heard “slice of life” described that way outside of anime (after all, things happen in life). But there’s Seinfeld, the “show about nothing,” which was just a convenient shorthanded way of saying it wasn’t a plot-driven show in the traditional sense.

    I do agree that it’s inaccurate and unfair to do this kind of oversimplification for an outside audience that is geeky enough to know anime, who will now legitimately believe that anime is now about “nothing” — but being honest, it’s probably only reinforcing that audience’s opinion that anime “used to be better.”

    But I also think the question of why “slice of life” is associated with some downfall of anime is a separate question, and one that assumes there is a downfall of anime (in the sense that the author means it).

    • 2 TheBigN September 5, 2011 at 4:07 pm

      About the first point, I do think that the “anime used to be better” crowd end up using select shows that tend to be more popular than what they like and pin the “blame” on them. That is, it’s a more “sophisticated” way of voicing their displeasure on just not having their needs catered to. For a while now, we’ve had moe, which hard to simplify, so it’s better for them to grab a whole group of works with same qualities, pin “moe” to those shows, and apply them to a genre that may or may not accurately reflect what the shows about. At least the CNN article doesn’t simplify them as “shows where cute girls do cute things”, since that really grinds my ax.

      About your second point, I do like that the author phrases it not as “anime is dying”, but for what it is: anime is becoming “different” from what they’re used to. But as omo notes, that’s for a variety of reasons as well. The main question for people is “is it different in a way that I like?”, and at least among the more vocal people I see in cons, and in more “professional” organizations that focus on anime here in the west, this change is not a popular one. Again, that can be due to expectations created by what came first here in limited capacity that’s become more freely prevalent here, and so on.

  2. 3 Asian Ed September 5, 2011 at 5:43 pm

    With advances in technology, every subgroup of the entertainment industry has had to adapt and compete with the faster rate of consumption. The internet and social media have accelerated the rate at which people consume. More crucially, it has reduced the attention span of the average consumer. As little as five years ago, it would take about one year before a movie released to theaters would be available in a home-consumable format. Today, that gap has shrunk to six months or less. Likewise, book publishes have driven the gap between hardcover and paperback down significantly to combat the (potentially) lower cost eBooks. In anime, DVDs and BluRays almost always release while the series is still airing in order to capture the maximum amount of exposure with the audience. There’s a constant fear of “out of sight, out of mind.”

    A lot of people pine for the good ol’ days of x, where x can be cars, music, economics, anime, etc. From the title, it’s clear that the author is one of those. Pointing the changes to an increase popularity of a particular genre as a reason is pretty ludicrous. Those slice of life shows are fighting for airtime and viewership just as much as the giant robots and science fiction. Even looking at otaku hubs like Akihabara, you can get a feel for this constant competition between artists, everyone wants a piece of that money in your wallet.

    One thing that has saddened me is the lower amount of creativity of new material today. Much like with American cinema, a lot of new shows coming out are either rehashes of existing story, sequels, or recycling of themes that have already been done. Every so often something will come out that’s a bit refreshing, but that is getting fewer and further between.

  3. 4 du5k September 5, 2011 at 10:28 pm

    The slice-of-life genre is probably the only genre that allows the series to focus solely on the moé aspects of the characters, which allows it to sell so well. It’s an effective method and had a large market, and the demand created the supply… So the large number of slice-of-life shows made itself a defining aspect of modern anime.

    So…what we see now stems from the demand of people in the first place.

    So… all’s right with the anime world, no?

    • 5 Asian Ed September 6, 2011 at 9:49 am

      More accurately, I think the genre allows for more focused character development. So while the majority of slice of life contains moe characters, I don’t see one necessarily leading to the other.

      • 6 du5k September 6, 2011 at 4:08 pm

        Actually, I have to disagree with you on that one. Character development usually happens with the progress of the storyline, but more than often slice-of-life anime contain very little story, if any at all.

        Now that you’ve mention it, I feel that slice-of-life is very much drama without the story. Sora no Woto is a good example here; any less focus on the story would have made it a pure slice-of-life, any more focus on the story would have made it a pure drama.

      • 7 Asian Ed September 6, 2011 at 4:26 pm

        You say it usually happens with progress of storyline, however it’s very possible for it to happen without any storyline developments at all. I would cite Noir as a very good example of this, as there are many episodes scattered throughout that are focused purely on exposing various aspects of the main characters. The episode “Lost Kitten” in particular jumps out at me in that you get almost no progress in the main story, but you learn a lot about Kirika’s personality.

        Granted, for many, episodes like this are extremely tedious to watch. There’s nothing happening, there’s no progression, and may feel like a waste of time. Many shows with the slice-of-life modifier are victim to this trait and are viewed as intensely boring if there aren’t any creative devices used to interrupt the monotony. I’d say Kino no Tabi falls into this category, as there really isn’t much of a story for the whole series, but rather some general themes and social commentary. You learn a great deal about the characters in each episode, even though you’ll likely never see or hear from them again.

      • 8 TheBigN September 8, 2011 at 10:33 am

        The thing is, character development does not necessarily have to mean story development at the same time. You have several series with “a day in the limelight” sort of episodes that focus on one character, and develop the character well in general. Oftentimes, that’s a one-off thing, and it at least gives us a facet about the characters. But in the shows that we seem to be talking about here, it’s the characters that drive the show, rather than the story. The main overarching story might be “let’s get to perform a concert at the Budokan as a band”, for example, but the focus is different when you focus on the band trying to reach that goal, compared to how the band is coming together along the way. It’s the latter we’re focusing on here. There tends to be a story, and it can be pretty simple, but that story is not the main point of the show.

      • 9 du5k September 9, 2011 at 7:58 am

        Asian Ed> I gotta ask, does “learning about the characters” constitutes to character development to you? For me, no…

        BigN> got any good examples? Well, if I take T&B’s Sky High episode as reference, I’ll say that there is a story going on in that episode as well, even if it does not affect the main story in any way. Besides, I can’t consider episodes like this (or at least, this particular episode) as SoL.

        And I’m not sure I get what you mean, but “aiming for budokan” is just one of the random things Ritsu says, and isn’t really the story here. After all, we hardly see the club work towards that goal.

      • 10 TheBigN September 9, 2011 at 10:54 am

        du5k: I was using “aiming for Budokan” as a hypothetical example, but what I was trying to say is that while there might be a set “goal” in mind in these works, reaching that goal isn’t the important part. What the characters learn, what we learn about them, and what we feel in response to that might be.

        Re the T&B episode (have not watched Tiger and Bunny yet, so I’m not sure if this helps). Episodes that I’m talking about are probably ones to you where “nothing happens” of any importance besides bringing in a “day in the life” of one character. If the main focus of the work are these “days in the lives of people”, or this focus is more important than the story, than that might be a good starting point.

        Though in Bartender’s case, if you look at it as “here’s Ryuu’s bartending experience for the day” with each patron he sees, you definitely can see it as “days in the life of a bartender”. As shown in this discussion, this gets messy quickly, and that’s part of the reason why I don’t use the phrase “slice of life anime” anymore. I think “anime with slice of life elements” explains things better, especially because it does not try to pinhole a specific genre that these works have to be in. Though that might be too simplified for the time being.

  4. 11 TheBigN September 6, 2011 at 9:45 am

    In your eyes, what makes up the “slice-of-life” genre, since I personally don’t see it as a genre myself. Why is it a genre to you?

    What you’ve said is basically what bothers me, as it’s as if you’re just forcing things together to a) make them stick, and b) easily mark it at something forgettable. What I want to know is how you came up with that description.

    • 12 Asian Ed September 6, 2011 at 9:52 am

      Perhaps genre is not the right term to describe it. It may be more like a sub-genre or modifier of an existing defined genre. e.g. you can have comedy slice-of-life, mystery slice-of-life, or romance slice-of-life.

      Maybe one of these days we’ll have a giant robot slice-of-life.

    • 13 du5k September 6, 2011 at 4:29 pm

      Uh, yeah, like what I’ve said above, slice-of-life is like drama without the story. That’s one way to look at it.

      I have another good example here. It’s call Yokohama Kaidashi Kikou. Not sure if you’ve heard this relatively unknown series, but it’s probably the best representative for the slice-of-life genre, and probably one of the first. That’s the avatar of The null set blog and its writer…

      What else can you call it? It’s not comedy, there’s no humor. It’s not drama, there’s no story. It’s not romance, there’s barely anyone else in the show. It’s too tranquil to be action, thriller, horror, or anything like that. But there are still people who enjoys watching Alpha doing practically nothing in her empty café. Thus the term slice-of-life is created.

      In answer to your original question of why this term has stuck as the defining trait of anime, I think I have popular stuff like K-ON and Lucky Star to blame; first for their popularity (which makes fanboys do a lot of stupid shit) and it’s uniqueness (curiosity spawns where people don’t understand the selling point of these shows).

      I mean, well, when anime was still relatively low-key to the rest of the world, things like tentacle porn are the defining traits. Things like that happen, I don’t read too much into it.

      • 14 Asian Ed September 6, 2011 at 4:53 pm

        I was a very early adopter of YKK (back in 2003, I think?) I think was probably the person who introduced TheBigN to the manga. 🙂

        I think the place we need to start is the definition for each genre. According to Wikipedia, drama is “a film genre that depends mostly on in-depth development of realistic characters dealing with emotional themes.” Also, we should examine the film theory definition of genre: “In film theory, genre refers to the method based on similarities in the narrative elements from which films are constructed.”

        With both of these definitions in hand, we can argue that YKK meets the requirements of drama and that slice-of-life can be considered a genre. Another important thing to note is that almost everything can belong to more than one genre. Just because something is classified as drama doesn’t mean it can’t also be science fiction or romance.

      • 15 du5k September 7, 2011 at 1:03 am

        I guess it’s pretty hard to agree on this, but anime that I’ve associated “slice of life” to, doesn’t really have any kind of “development”, so they aren’t dramas to me.

        I’m not saying that anything can be classified under one genre, I’m just saying that YKK can hardly be classified under any other genre.

      • 16 Asian Ed September 7, 2011 at 8:37 am

        I don’t think plot development is a necessity when it comes to character development. Sure, in most cases, character development comes at the expense of the primary storyline being advanced since you learn about the characters as they deal with what is happening in the plot. One could argue that it is the primary (and most common) vehicle for character development.

        But how about those series that are clearly classified as something else? Even there, there are episodes and components that don’t fit in to advancing the overall story. Noir, for example, has a few episodes dedicated solely to character development. The episode “Lost Kitten,” for example, does almost nothing to advance the overall story. Instead, it is purely an exercise in how Kirika reacts to her assignment. As far as I can tell, there isn’t any connection between the old man and anyone else in the series. However, through the course of this episode, you learn a great deal about Kirka’s personality, the amount of compassion she is capable of, and her resolve as an assassin.

        Shifting back to what is normally considered slice-of-life, Kino no Tabi jumps to mind. This series is full of examples where there isn’t any overall plot development, but intense character development. You learn a great deal about Kino in each episode in the way she reacts to every situation she finds herself in. It is as much a social commentary and study into cultural norms as it is about an exploration into the human thought process.

        I think what it really comes down to is that each episode really stands more on its own than in any other sub-type. In that sense, the “genre” isn’t unlike a lot of other forms of media or mainstream television. Even in American television, the majority of content is delivered as an episodic exploration of characters and how they react to the situations they’ve been put in. There’s no real overarching plot or story, it will just come to an end when the screenwriters decide it’s time to stop.

      • 17 du5k September 7, 2011 at 11:32 am

        I wasn’t talking about plot development. I was talking about -any- kind of development.

        Anyway, I haven’t watch Noir, but I don’t really feel that episodes like these are about character development.

        And we’re not looking at genre of a single episode, but on a whole anime series. Or should I say, we should stick genres onto single episodes. Sometimes a series would have a change of pace using a relatively slow episode, but we can’t let that one episode define that the series is about. Otherwise, super-long series like Gintama and stuff would have 50 different genres attached to it.

  5. 18 Daryl Surat September 6, 2011 at 10:42 am

    I’ve told you this before, but you didn’t believe me! WHY didn’t you believe me?!

    The trouble with calling all this stuff “slice of life” is that it’s effectively creating an entire new genre that applies ONLY to anime, except using the name of an existing genre that has no real similarities to its proposed anime counterpart. Imagine if anime fans started to use the term “tragedy” to refer to those wacky frenetic gag-a-minute anime, and that’s basically the situation as it stands now with regards to “slice of life.” People would look quizzically and say “wait, how the heck is THIS a tragedy? It has nothing to do with tragedy at all!” and then the anime fans would create a separate Wikipedia entry for “Tragedy Anime” to show those jerks who’s the boss.

    As such, its usage among anime fans bothers me. But then, why do so many people use it? People get mad when I say that the one-word answer to this is “Japanophilia,” since the shows commonly denoted as “slice of life” have much more in common with low-key situation comedies than anything else, only the “sitcom” is such a specific staple of American media that those looking to anime as a means of distancing themselves from such things would not dare equate the two by using the same classification. So let me rephrase it in a few more words, which will also account for why people don’t just exclusively use the Japanese terminology:

    The fundamental problem is that the recent trends in “otaku anime” are becoming demarcated not by adherence to sets of plot/narrative conventions–as we traditionally do in English–but by the emotion they’re meant to elicit. Oh sure, comedy is meant to make you laugh and tragedy exists to induce catharsis, but there are formalized structures that come into play for this stuff. There are no such structures for “moe” or healing/relaxing/”iyashi-kei” material. The most defining features of their structures is their well, lack of them.

    So in trying to classify them using English-language terminology, people just kind of think “hmm ‘slice of life’ is the name of a genre and that phrase suggests like it would fit” and off they go. Because hey, most of us (myself included) are not literature majors. The best we can do is try and find common elements with which to form a set of conventions, and with the exception of stuff like Bartender, the most prominent recurring trait among most all of these titles is “emphasis on underage girls not really doing anything in particular.”

    So for both the diehard adherent to “otaku culture” and the “anime used to be better” type of fan alike, the umbrella label of “slice of life” works, misguided though it may be. With it, you now have a descriptive phrase that you can use to describe “those” cartoons in either the superlative or pejorative.

    Like, y’know, and stuff.

    • 19 TheBigN September 6, 2011 at 11:36 am

      That’s a good way of looking at it for sure, though I do think originally, the intention wasn’t to apply the label as a catch-all, but to highlight the elements of a show that demonstrate “slice of life”. At least, that’s what I meant when I used the term “slice of life genre/show” years back. And maybe it’s my defensiveness, but currently I’m hearing the term used more in a negative than positive way. Especially because now it seems like people use it to tie the concept of “moe” into something more “substantial” as a board to sound off on.

      As for the “emphasis on underage girls not really doing anything in particular” bit, I disagree with the “not really doing anything in particular” portion. That’s just my bias showing, but when I hear that, I always tack on “that interests me” mentally to the end of it (as in “not really doing anything in particular that interests me). Stuff’s happening. Just not stuff that you’d care about.

  6. 20 DL September 6, 2011 at 2:33 pm

    I have no answer to your question, but it’s nice to see I’m not the only who thinks this.

    I don’t know why the fandom doesn’t just find an authoritative definition and stick to it instead of using “slice of life” to describe shows where girls do nothing.

    If people want to talk about shows with all female casts, then they should just say it instead of hijacking an already existing term and turning it into a genre.

    It makes no sense and I just ignore them. Same goes for people who insist on classifying shows as “cute girls being cute” or “moe”.

    • 21 du5k September 7, 2011 at 11:20 am

      Because of the need to “name” the genre, and SoL is probably the best they’ve got?

      • 22 DL September 7, 2011 at 11:48 am

        First of all, a genre is a classification based on a set of stylistic criteria. “All female casts” doesn’t constitute a genre. If you are going to group shows together because they have all female casts, then you are going to include a selection of diverse shows that would render the classification utterly useless.

        Secondly, if slice of life is the best they can come up with, then they should just drop it. Slice of life doesn’t even match the show’s content. Slice of life is the depiction of everyday experiences in entertainment. Not a show with all female characters. As mentioned above, shows like Bartender go against the currently proposed definition, there’s obviously something wrong with the definition if Bartender isn’t considered to be slice of life.

        I understand what people are trying to do, it’s just silly.

      • 23 du5k September 9, 2011 at 7:49 am

        Lol! If “slice-of-life” means “all female cast” to you… I doubt anyone can convince you of anything else.

        While I do consider Bartender as SoL, I consider it more as… um… educational? I dunno… haven’t made up my mind about that.

        • 24 DL September 9, 2011 at 8:54 am

          Did you even read what I said?

          I said that slice of life is the depiction of everyday experiences in entertainment and that the characters being female has nothing to do with it.

      • 25 Daryl Surat September 9, 2011 at 10:05 am

        “there’s obviously something wrong with the definition if Bartender isn’t considered to be slice of life.”

        “While I do consider Bartender as SoL, I consider it more as… um… educational?”

        I think these two quotes sum up why this conversation/issue has remained wholly unresolved for several years, and will never ever be done away with such that nary shall the two sides ever meet.

        Here’s the thing about Bartender. The stories have a distinct beginning, middle, and end in which we learn all about the characters involved: their backgrounds, troubles, desires, and so on are all a setup for the climax of the story which entails them being given a particular drink and how its effects on them prove contemplative to their current situation for the better.

        If you look at any of that and consider “yep, that’s definitely slice of life!” then you’re completely misunderstanding the term. Structurally, Bartender episodes are closest to one-act stage plays, right down to the characters-in-spotlight monologues directed toward the audiences. If it was “slice of life” per the traditional definition then there would be no “beginning, middle, end” structure, no traditional narrative structure of “exposition, hook, rising action, climax, resolution,” no full insight into who these people are, no gradual world-building, and so on.

        In other words, it’s pretty much impossible to have just a “slice” if you’re dealing with multiple chapters or multiple episodes. Or for that matter, a complete single episode. If Yokohama Shopping Log or Haibane Renmei or insert-counterexample-here were just one chapter long and then they never made any more stories revisiting those characters ever again, then that’d be closer to the mark. It’s a flaw to advocate that they should “count” because “each episode/chapter is its own individual slice,” because the audience is intended to take all of those pieces together and form a collective whole. Very, very little happens in an individual episode of Aria, but when you put it all together you do get a fairly realized science-fiction environment. With slice of life, you could never be able to really do that. You just get one part.

        Slice of life kind of only exists in prose and we really shouldn’t be using the term at all, but “guys stop calling it that” is not an argument that’ll gain substantial ground without offering a counter-example. People shy away from the Japanese emotive terminology because we don’t tend to want to use loanwords unless there is a widespread applicability, and this stuff isn’t actually THAT popular. Many are inclined to reject my advocacy of “sitcom” because there exists a small amount of non-comedic titles they want included in the classification for whatever reason (personally, I fail to see why so many people are gung-ho about putting Azumanga Daioh in the same category as Kino’s Journeys). And the phrase “animated novella,” despite being a bit more on-the-mark, sounds counter-intuitive in a way “slice of life” doesn’t because people see that the word “novella” contains “novel” in it and think “but we’re dealing with illustrations.”

        I think I’m just going to start using “low-key.”

        • 26 DL September 9, 2011 at 12:50 pm

          I think you explained your point better than I did mine.

          I did say that classifying these shows as slice of life doesn’t make sense and that it should be dropped.

          I also said that it makes even less sense to exclude Bartender because it doesn’t involve teenage girls doing nothing, despite the fact that it’s just as much a “slice of life” show as they are.

          The usage of slice of life just strikes me as a way of shoehorning shows with all female casts into one classification rather than an actual genre classification.

      • 27 dm00 September 10, 2011 at 1:10 pm

        “In other words, it’s pretty much impossible to have just a “slice” if you’re dealing with multiple chapters or multiple episodes”

        Right. You have multiple slices. Does that really exclude the episodes of such series from meaningfully being described as “slice of life”? I see your point, but this is a new aspect of the “slice of life” characterization for me.

        Lots of low-key anime, including some of the sitcoms, are such that, while you couldn’t watch episodes out of order, you could easily just watch an isolated episode from time to time without worrying about how it fits into the series overall. Doing so, you might be tempted to think that you’d seen a slice of someone’s life.

  7. 28 dm00 September 6, 2011 at 3:30 pm

    I don’t get it. I’ve never understood the objection to “slice of life”. “Slice of life (comedy)” seems like the right term to me — ordinary days, ordinary lives, ordinary conversations — for shows like K-on! and Lucky Star or manga like Yotsuba&!. What else would you call them (“cute girls being stupid”, maybe)? In what way are these shows not “slice of life” in the true non-otaku literary sense of the word? (Aria I’d class as “feel-good”, if not “Venice Tourist Board”, similarly YKK.)

    Daryl Surat suggests “sitcom”. Okay. That works for me. I think the problem isn’t “Japanophilia” (those people would be using kuu-kei or whatever), it’s more that the criticism of the use of “slice of life” is so abstract (see all the talk about “those shows”, without mentioning any specific shows) and doesn’t offer up an alternative.

  8. 29 Daniel R. September 8, 2011 at 2:38 am

    IMHO, it’s real simple… a few REALLY popular animes came out that were slice-of-life AND moe AND not-easily-liked-by-mainstream-American-audiences… and their minds just categorized them all together because humans frequently make weird assumptions like that. =(

    Normal adventurous and romantic America just won’t get K-on! and Lucky Star. Heck, a great many people don’t get Haruhi and consider it the bane of anime (unlike, say, Cowboy Bebop).

    The only other popular slice-of-life that I can think of is Honey and Clover, but I’m pretty sure that’s NOWHERE near as famous K-on/LStar.

    In other words, I think what mainstream people know about is whatever gets a spotlight. And what gets the spotlight is Kyoto Animation’s hit slice-of-lifes.

    Think about it…
    Shounen – Naruto, Bleach, Dragonball, One Piece, Inuyasha
    Shoujo – Card Captor Sakura, Fruits Basket, Vampire Knight, Sailor Moon
    Mystery – Death Note
    Action – Akira, FLCL
    Adventure – Cowboy Bebop, Full Metal Alchemist, Miyazaki Films, Haruhi, TTGL, Code Geass, Gundam, Evangelion, Pokemon
    Slice-of-Life – Lucky Star, K-on!
    …okay, incomplete and kinda-mixed list, but you get the idea.

    Think about all the popular anime you know about and see how many slice-of-lifes there are. Kyoto has no competition in the mainstream slice-of-life world. And so when mainstream talks slice-of-life, they talk Kyoto’s moe-loving style that most Americans are not wired to appreciate. And when Americans don’t understand something, then we have some coffee-time subjects we can make fun about! 😀

    Humans. >_> How can you make fun of my beloved Athena from Aria??

    • 30 TheBigN September 8, 2011 at 10:44 am

      I don’t think it’s a matter of “not getting” it, but rather that it’s not what people are looking for. The over-exposure of shows that they wouldn’t like to watch plays a role too, and I think has fed into the creation of this “genre”, as well as the definition that people like the author of the CNN blog article and du5k bring out.

Leave any thoughts here.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

The Good Old Days

Blog Stats

  • 975,060 hits

%d bloggers like this: