Sunday, June 2, 2013

Golden-Ani Updates: Future Posts and Hall of Fame Votes

For those of you who may have noticed, we have been low on content recently. Part of this is intended, as editing two articles per week has become heavy lifting. (No real complaints here, but it's more taxing than it first appeared!) Part of this is also unintended, as we have had one person back out on us at an inopportune time.

However, that doesn't mean the blog has been left to grow weeds in the intermission. A little brainstorming during a podcast (more on that in another post) and with some fellow bloggers at Anime Boston has led to some ideas that merit some acknowledgement.

The Future of Golden-Ani

First of all, there have been a few people who have wondered if there will be a printed book version of Golden-Ani. At the moment, it would be hard to envision how such a project would come about, but I can picture some sort of print media that could be distributed at a con event in the future. Perhaps it would get people's minds focused on older shows if they were to be given something that required a turn of the page and not the click of a link. It's been on the burner for now, but certainly not ignored.

Second of all, there have been questions about the future of this blog once we do hit 2012. Does it sit here like Stonehenge for visitors to explore? Does it get revamped every year, maybe with a blogger covering a single show into more depth?

What we have been exploring is a better way to cover the decades. Currently, we're exploring the past 50 years as yearly slices of the loaf of bread that is the past half-century of televised anime. If we were to push those slices back together and cut along the grain, perhaps we could envision a study into particular genres (e.g. harem comedy, sports drama, seinen, shônen, shôjo) and how they have evolved over time. We'll be drumming up business for that kind of analysis perhaps around July.

Hall of Fame Voting

Lastly, what has come to mind is some sort of way to analyze all of the shows overall. We've been nailing some of the bigger features, but once this thing is over, there should be some way to pick out the important ones. That's where you, the writer, and you, the reader, come into play.

We will be starting a formal vote for a "Hall of Fame" ranking that stretches over the full 50 years. The plan is to post a generic ballot in the next day or so, then have people send their choices for the best shows of the past 50 years to a generic mail account. This will likely be something akin to the Hall of Fame voting styles used in professional sports, where voters can say yea or nay to shows and are not restricted to having to select a certain amount of shows. (But for sanity's sake, the ballot will likely be capped at twenty selections.)

Once a ballot is composed, it will be posted here on Golden-Ani, so keep your eyes peeled! We'll also be resuming our posts this week, once our emergency replacement has sent the 1997 article. Almost 15 more years to go before the end!



  1. Some thoughts on the hall of fame idea (these are mainly influenced by the Wrestling Observer Hall of Fame).

    Limit it to anime made between 1963-2003. This will avoid a Hall of Fame being full of things that are simply freshest in people's minds. You could even make an argument for a fifteen year cut off.

    Some anime should be in a Hall of Fame without needing voting on. For example, an Anime Hall of Fame without Sazae-san is without credibility. My personal preference would be to just include everything that has aired continually for 10+ years without a vote (by my reckoning that's 9 shows).

    Limit each voter to 10 votes.

    Require 60% of the voters to vote for an anime before it gets in.

    Have nominations, rather than allowing people to choose from the whole of anime.

    Don't allow a public vote, limit the voter base to those who submitted to the blog.

    I would group franchises together as one vote. So you'd vote for Gundam or Lupin III, rather than voting for individual outings.

  2. You know most of my thoughts already, influenced by AFI's 100 Years 100 Movies list. But I'll restate some of them for debating here.

    If the original goal of this HoF is to enumerate 50 anime over 50 years, eligibility should extend through all 50 years. But there are caveats.

    Guidelines! What are you looking for exactly? Outstanding critical quality? Longevity? Mass appeal and commercial success? Trend setter or innovator? Decide which qualities are most important and insist your voting body make selections based on them.

    Like Brian said, you, or better a committee, should provide a short but thorough list of nominees (200-250?).

    Each ballot should have a spot or two for write-in titles in case the nominee list missed something or for personal flavor.

    True HoF-style voting, with limited total votes and 60% cutoff and such, is appropriate for an annual voting system where new candidates and past nominees return for eligibility each year. If this is going to be a one time thing, we want to get everything in one go. If that is indeed the case, voters should expand their lists to as many titles as there are spots (50).

    I'm also in favor of a closed voting pool, perhaps extending it to contributors + 2 friends each (each writer who wants to participate nominates 2 colleagues). There are a lot of well-connected writers attached to this project; who knows who else we can rope into it if a friend asks them to join.

    I like the idea of automatic inclusions, though what qualifies is open to debate.

    I'm against lumping franchises together. A title should stand on its own, and if sequels deserve recognition too, so be it. If Godfather I, II, and III are distinctly acclaimed (or derided) entities so too should anime titles. You also get into hairy situations with remakes, spinoffs, and quasi-sequels. Are both Fullmetal Alchemist or Hunter x Hunter series in equal standing? Would Diebuster be attached to Gunbuster despite 15 years apart and a world of difference in production philosophy? Keep them all separate.

    Give voters enough time to research the nominees. Whatever list you come up with, I would be very surprised if anyone is already familiar with every last title. If you're aiming to publish the list by year's end, making the voting deadline 1 month before should be adequate time.