| Author |
Post |
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
I unexpectedly had the opportunity to see this yesterday. I'm afraid I did not enjoy the film quite as much as Arren did. It's not a bad movie, precisely, but I found it to be dishearteningly run-of-the-mill in terms of story and execution. It confirms my opinion of Yonebayashi as a director: he's a skilled craftsman, you can tell he's learned from the very best, but he does not have the sort of artistic sensibility that would elevate his work to the level of Miyazaki's or Takahata's.
On the surface Marnie is everything you'd expect from a Ghibli movie in terms of quality: beautiful backgrounds, seamless animation, naturalistic performances from the voice actors, no pandering or anything of that sort. I think it must be the details that are missing. Miyazaki, even in his most fantastic films, has this incredible knack for infusing every scene with details that are true to life and memorable. This movie largely lacks those moments; as a result it feels a little like the pretty husk of a Ghibli film with the heart missing. It glides along placidly, perhaps too placidly, never quite rousing itself enough to form an identity of its own beyond a vaguely Ghiblish (that one will be in the OED next year, mark my words) atmosphere. The story had the potential to be different: it's a bit of a mystery, for one, and there are some scenes which flirt with spookiness, and the protagonist is unusually deadpan and angsty for a Ghibli heroine. But the director plays it safe and never really capitalizes on these opportunities to set his film apart, instead presenting the story as a straightforward drama, of nearly after school special ordinariness; occasionally he hews a little too close to melodrama for my taste, though he never quite stoops to soap opera levels of sentiment. Nonetheless this is one of few Ghibli films which could not unfairly be described as "a tad sappy."
There are certain plot revelations toward the end I would love to discuss, but I think Arren's the only other member who's seen the film, right? So maybe we should just carry out that discussion via PM.
__________________
 I like tea!
Post last edited by Orphic Okapi on 08.24.2014, 12:24 PM.
|
|
 08.24.2014, 12:22 PM |
  
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
Sorry I suck so bad at keeping up. For aforementioned health reasons I've had to make hasty arrangements to leave Japan and return home, and travel preparations have been keeping me busy. I have now seen up to Ep 10.
The past three episodes have seen a fairly marked improvement in quality, I think. Ep 9 suffers a little in comparison to the excellent episodes that bookend it, but placed in the context of all preceding episodes it is still pretty strong. Ep 8 features some of the best character development so far, probably because it focuses on Yasuburo, who is, I think, easily the most interesting brother (as well as being voiced by the most gifted actor). Prior this point the show had not really affected me at all on an emotional level, but I was touched a few times here.
Ep 10 obviously escalates the plot in a big way. I do wonder if the groundwork for these plot developments could have been laid earlier. Like, when you have to begin episodes past the halfway point with expository monologues about the nature of the ongoing family feud central to your plot, it's probably a sign that you didn't use the early episodes as efficiently as you could have. And why two new characters now all of a sudden? Vaguest possible spoilers: I was barely aware of the "mastermind" character's existence until the big reveal in which s/he was revealed to be the mastermind behind the dad's death. This made the revelation a lot less effective, I think.
How old is the ex-fiance supposed to be? She sounds like a six year old. When I first heard her voice, I thought she was voiced by the same actress who plays the youngest brother, who I assume is supposed to be sixish. I do not want to think of anyone with a voice like that as being anyone's ex-fiance. I don't know why all male characters in anime have to sound 10 years older than they are supposed to be (the brothers, minus the youngest, sound like thirtysomethings) while all the female characters have to sound 10 years younger. But anyway, she's intriguing. I wish they'd introduced her a little earlier.
Despite my usual nitpicky complaints, I am excited to see what happens next. We'll see if the show can maintain its upward swing.
__________________
I like tea!
Post last edited by Orphic Okapi on 08.24.2014, 10:08 AM.
|
|
| 08.24.2014, 10:06 AM |
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Saddletank
I haven't seen all of series one. After about 1/2 way though I found it harder and harder to watch for the exact reason you gave. It seems to be merely a random series of closed encounters with no over reaching story.
One of the things I do find curious and appealing about it is that its all set in medieval Japan, or at least seems to be, yet Ginko himself is modern. He's blonde and western-looking, wears contemporary clothes and smokes what look like modern cheroots.
Maybe this never gets explained. Maybe it just is and its a part of the strangeness of the series.
A number of your questions are answered at least partially in episode 12. But otherwise, yes, there is not much of an overarching story. I don't see it as being "merely" a series of vignettes, though; the fact that it's episodic isn't really a weakness, it's just a description. There are tons of shows like that. It's a valid style of serial storytelling, and considering how consistently high quality the stories are, I think the show definitely succeeds on its own terms. It's one of the best anime of all time, easily.
__________________
I like tea!
|
|
| 07.22.2014, 11:46 PM |
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
Yeah, I mean, the whole hiding at the bottom of a well and never coming out thing definitely seems to be a manifestation of guilt. Doubles as a way of hiding from responsibility. He's still my favorite brother. 
__________________
I like tea!
|
|
| 07.21.2014, 05:26 PM |
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Roarkiller
I mean, think about it: would a man of his stature get that drunk? Considering how he's always painted as a man of resolute ability, getting so himself totally wasted seems improbable.
This is Japan, though. It would be weird if a man (tanuki) of his stature didn't routinely get wasted.
__________________
I like tea!
|
|
| 07.21.2014, 02:54 AM |
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
Well, I watched 6 and 7.
I think you're reading into things a bit much, Saddletank. Yes, there has been some conversation bordering on the philosophical about what it means to eat and be eaten. Beyond that, I don't think there's been any indication we're supposed to take this story on a metaphorical or allegorical level. The amount we know about each of the three races is almost too disproportionate to allow for a symbolic reading: we've met several tanuki with various personalities but only one tengu, and the two human characters we've come to know are quite different. I'll allow you the possibility that humans are meant represent baser appetites of some sort, given that every human so far seems fairly remorseless about killing and eating things (as humans tend, on the most part, to be). But why should we assume that tanuki are meant to represent submissiveness when at least two of the tanuki characters introduced so far are fairly domineering (mother, eldest brother), and an aggressive rivalry between tanuki clans is a major subplot?
If the story is supposed to be symbolic (I'm willing to believe the original novel might have had some symbolism in it), the director isn't conveying that very well. There's been some philosophical dialogue but absolutely no visual indication that we're meant to be taking what's going on at more than face value. There are no visual motifs. We aren't shown anything that couldn't happen in the world of the story.
I still sort of like this show, but it's missing something, a certain spark. Even when I'm enjoying it I have this nagging feeling that it's not as enjoyable as it could be. I wish I could articulate better what I find lacking about it. Maybe it's that I'm still not sure what to expect from each episode (not inherently a bad thing). If it were a straight slice-of-life, a group of disconnected vignettes about this particular family, I could settle into that kind of rhythm and appreciate the show for being that. But it's not, because there is clearly an overarching plot going on here, a gradual build toward a climax. But I don't really care about where the plot is going that much, and the slice-of-lifey diversions are seriously slowing down its progression, so, like, meh. I guess it's still only just halfway done, plenty of time for my opinion to change.
__________________
I like tea!
Post last edited by Orphic Okapi on 07.20.2014, 09:11 AM.
|
|
| 07.20.2014, 09:09 AM |
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
Sorry for my absence, and for still not being caught up. I was suddenly diagnosed with Type 1 Diabetes last week and spent the next several days in the hospital. It's been a bit crazy. I hope to be caught up by this weekend, though.
__________________
I like tea!
|
|
| 07.16.2014, 05:34 AM |
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
Alright, I'm caught up. I don't have much to say about Ep. 4 (I find the rivalry between the tanuki clans to be pretty tedious for some reason), but I enjoyed Ep. 5 quite a bit. Even though not a lot happened, the show seemed to be playing to its strengths more. Good dialogue, lots of Benten, and a decent amount of backstory made for an intriguing episode. I miss the frog brother. I don't miss the eldest brother, who is annoying. The youngest brother is becoming more tolerable to me.
Just out of curiosity, I wonder what the target audience for this show is supposed to be?
As far as anime based on novels, I think Welcome to the NHK is also a novel adaptation. Then there's Aoi Bungaku, which is based on several classic Japanese short stories. Finally, a number of old World Masterpiece Theater productions, like Anne of Green Gables, A Dog of Flanders, and Heidi, Girl of the Alps. I haven't actually seen any of these, but apparently they are out there.
__________________
I like tea!
Post last edited by Orphic Okapi on 07.05.2014, 08:18 PM.
|
|
| 07.05.2014, 08:17 PM |
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
Like the animation, love the music, but the story was eh. Not a whole lot to it. Kinda sappy.
__________________
I like tea!
|
|
| 06.29.2014, 05:51 PM |
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
Just to elaborate a little on my original point: when an anime is adapted from a manga, the visual style is often lifted directly from the source material. Character designs usually aren't changed a lot, and you'll even see the anime reproducing scenes from the comic panel by panel. I think a lot of animation studios rely heavily on the original manga as a visual guide.
But a novel-to-anime adaptation is different, and in some ways a lot harder, I would imagine, which is probably why they're so rare. (Does anyone know of any other novel adaptations, besides Ghibli films?) You're much freer to experiment visually because there's no template laid out for you, but that means you have to start from scratch with character designs and everything.
Books are also made up of words. On average I'd say the average book has a lot more talking than the average manga; if it's in first person, the narrator is essentially talking the whole time, for hundreds of pages. So that poses a unique challenge: how do you animate a long conversation without it becoming visually boring?
Personally, I don't think the director of Uchouten Kazoku knows how to deal with this very well, but that could be because I'm looking for a more creative solution like Masaaki Yuasa's in TG. (I appreciate your perspective on this issue, Nausicaa_Cat, by the way!) I really like some of the visuals in this show. The colors are beautiful, the backgrounds are detailed and realistic, and the character designs aren't bad. But while the characters are talking, and they talk a lot, I feel like the "camera" (for lack of a better term) just sits there, and it's not very involving.
That's all I was trying to say, really, when I compared this to Tatami Galaxy. Although as the story unfolds it might also be interesting to see if they share any themes.
__________________
I like tea!
|
|
| 06.21.2014, 07:59 PM |
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
But...that's what I was trying to do, critique the show based on what I just watched. Since I didn't really like what I watched, I tried to explain why. That involved bringing up the director because I think he does a boring job. What am I supposed to do if I don't like the voice acting or the way the show is directed? Just say, "It sucks," and leave it at that? I could certainly limit myself to gut reactions and leave out all rationalization, but does this club really need a guy just occasionally grumbling "bah humbug"?
Posting general reactions as the plot develops is fine, and I get the sense it's the dominant form of criticism in a lot of fandoms. But if that's all we're going to do here, ignoring everything else that goes into a work of art, you know, like acting and directing...sounds kind of boring to me.
__________________
I like tea!
|
|
| 06.21.2014, 05:57 PM |
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
Okay, I've now seen episodes 2 and 3. I thought the third episode was the strongest by far, although I'm still not entirely sold on the series as a whole. I think the frog-brother is now my favorite character. His voice actor is the least hammy.
Have any of you seen Tatami Galaxy? I think it could be interesting to compare the two series, since they are both based on novels (somewhat unusual for an anime in the first place), moreover novels by the same author.
But Tatami Galaxy was directed by Masaaki Yuasa, probably the most creative mind currently working in Japanese animation right now. Uchouten Kazoku on the other hand was directed by Yoshihara Masayuki, who does not possess the same kind of idiosyncratic genius; he's directed a few episodes of GITS:SAC, a couple of Eden of the East, and some animated specials for children (according to his My Anime List page). Not saying he's bad; I think he's certainly competent. But if you compare this and Tatami Galaxy side by side, the gap between "competent" and "brilliant" starts to seem pretty wide.
One thing I've noticed about Uchouten Kazoku is the dialogue: there's lots of it, and the script has flair, it's not just perfunctory exchanges of information to get to the next plot point. I'm guessing a lot of the dialogue was lifted directly from the novel, since Tatami Galaxy is similarly wordy. But I don't feel like Yoshihara really knows what to DO with it. The animation is great overall, but so many scenes are just talking heads (sometimes cat heads). Whereas Masaaki Yuasa always seems in total control of the script and knows exactly how to make the rapid-fire dialogue work.
So I kind of feel like the most effective scenes so far are the ones without much talking (Benten swimming with the whale, for example), or the ones with voice-over narration, where the camera is free to do what it wants. The submerged clock tower and the flying inner parlor were nice visual touches; I want more stuff like that.
I hope the story finds its crux soon, because the plot seems a little aimless at the moment.
__________________
I like tea!
Post last edited by Orphic Okapi on 06.20.2014, 08:02 PM.
|
|
| 06.20.2014, 08:01 PM |
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Roarkiller
@Orphic: TV will never be similar to real life. You sure won't find anyone speaking in the same manner as Disney cartoons any more than a Japanese speaking like an anime character (outside of Akiba at least).
TV can be plenty realistic. Have you ever seen the Wire? Heck, even Game of Thrones is realistic enough for me. I'm not looking for realism, I just want characters who seem like real people. Miyazaki's films don't suffer from this problem, Takahata's certainly don't. Because they are good directors who know how to get natural-sounding performances out of voice actors. This is partly why Ghibli films are loved all over the world, while anime as a whole is swiftly becoming a tiny niche market. Which isn't to say there are no good examples of voice acting in anime outside of Ghibli: Utena and Anthy (not to mention Mikage, Juri, Kozue, etc.) from Revolution Girl Utena, Kino and Hermes from Kino's Journey, Reki from Haibane Renmei, Ginko from Mushi-shi. All of these actors create actual characters from the ground up instead of trying to do a "voice."
Now compare those performances to, say, the little brother who appears for a minute at the beginning of the episode. The actor is clearly a grown woman (who I'm guessing has played a bunch of moe characters) trying to sound as cute as humanly possible. It's not believable; no little boy talks like that. Trust me, I teach hundreds of them. It took me out of the experience.
Anyway sorry for rambling about such a nitpicky thing.
quote:
And idk, the whole sexualized school girl thing? I'm so immune to it now. Doesn't even bother me.
I find it kind of sad that in order to be an anime fan, you pretty much have to be desensitized to sexy schoolgirls, since they're so ubiquitous. Although it's not like the US doesn't produce tons of shows about sexy teenagers, so maybe I'm just being hypocritical. But I don't like how normalized the whole fetish has become in Japanese culture. In this first episode, the narrator's attitude is just like, "Of course old men are into schoolgirls. Who isn't?" Whereas in Western media, I think the idea of an old guy with a schoolgirl fetish would at least be portrayed as creepy.
__________________
I like tea!
Post last edited by Orphic Okapi on 06.09.2014, 07:44 AM.
|
|
| 06.09.2014, 07:39 AM |
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
I . . . enjoyed it. Wasn't crazy about it. I think I'll have to see where the story goes before I can really formulate an opinion. I like that exposition is minimal so far; you pretty much have to work out how all the characters are related to each other on your own. I also thought the production values - animation and music and so forth - were really good. The story hasn't hooked me yet, but it's intriguing.
This might seem like a groundless criticism but: I don't like the voice acting very much. This is a problem I encounter with A LOT of anime, so maybe it's just me. It might be because I hear ordinary Japanese people conversing on a daily basis, and they do not sound like anime characters; I don't recall being this sensitive to Japanese voice acting before I lived here. Anyway, almost all of the voice actors in this first episode are trying too hard, in my opinion. They sound like character types instead of believable people.
Also, it would be nice if Japan could produce a single goddamn piece of media that did not sexualize school girls. Jesus Christ.
__________________
I like tea!
|
|
| 06.08.2014, 01:21 AM |
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
Uh, why is San an outlier? Look at her face. It's the "Ghibli heroine" face. Sheeta, Satsuki, Kiki, Fio, Shizuku, and Nausicaa all have it. Their hair and clothes (and, in Sophie's case, eye color) make them readily distinguishable, but in terms of actual facial structure, they are almost identical. Even Ashitaka has the Ghibli heroine face, just slightly sterner-looking and with thicker eyebrows. This isn't a criticism of Miyazaki's art style; he just focuses on other things. I think he's even admitted in interviews that his character designs don't vary much.
Chihiro actually IS an outlier. Her face is rounder, her chin is less defined, her nose is higher, and her eyes are smaller than the rest of the bunch. But still, compare the amount of variation in Miyazaki's characters to the amount in Naoki Urasawa's. Now THAT guy can draw faces. The cast of 20th Century Boys probably exceeds a hundred characters and no two look alike (except the twins).
__________________
I like tea!
Post last edited by Orphic Okapi on 06.05.2014, 05:11 AM.
|
|
| 06.05.2014, 05:07 AM |
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
Thanks for bringing a new perspective to this debate Roarkiller. You raise some interesting points that might (if we're lucky) help bend the conversation in a more productive direction. I actually agree with you for the most part, but I don't think you take your argument all the way to its logical conclusion.
quote:
Originally posted by Roarkiller
Your analogies are inaccurate from the get-go. You NEED to read a physics book to understand physics. You NEED to read a math book to understand math. You do NOT understand either just by observing physicists and mathematicians.
Let's get the obvious objection to this argument out of the way. The fact is you DON'T need to read any books to learn physics or math, as both disciplines have been studied far longer than the printing press has been in existence. You can, in fact, learn from by observing mathematicians and/or physicists, and you can learn especially quickly if they are trying to teach you, which is how information has been conveyed through most of human history.
But that's not important. What I really want to argue is that religious books differ from math and physics books in a way that makes the whole analogy invalid. Not because "religious books are wrong, math books are right" or anything silly like that, but because they contain fundamentally different kinds of information. Basically, religious books are made up of stories, and stories are always ambiguous in their interpretation. Physics and math are much less ambiguous; what's written on the page cannot really be disputed (it can under very special circumstances, but I don't want to get too sidetracked here). Basically, physics and mathematics can be tested and verified; there is no similar way to test and verify the meaning of a story.
quote:
And if you are thinking of refuting this, think about it for a moment: how many different sects of Christianity are there in the world? If you claim that you can understand a religion just based on how the followers act, then which facet of Christianity would you be looking at?
Exactly. Now think about this for a moment: all of these wildly divergent sects of Christianity claim the very same Bible as their own. They might have supplemental texts which they consider to be of equal theological importance, but no sect of Christianity actually rejects the Bible as a religious text. Now how is it possible that so many different denominations of Christianity could claim the same exact book as the basis of their belief system?
Because a religious book is not a math book. Everyone who reads a math book can basically agree that, for all intents and purposes, 2 + 2 = 4. There are countless proofs you can perform to verify this truth. But stories are never so clear-cut. Ten people can read the same novel and arrive at ten different conclusions (as anyone familiar with literary criticism is well aware). Whose truth is the right one? The best you can do is read the book yourself and pick a side, or, if you don't agree with any established interpretations, you can form your own conclusion.
But every one of these conclusions is informed as much by the reader as by the text itself. There is no other explanation for such radical division within religions based on the same book. "Humans are fallible" doesn't cut it. Yes, humans are far from perfect, and we are prone to dispute, but that hasn't stopped us from agreeing that 2 + 2 = 4.
quote:
And if you talk about the heads of religion, think about it: aren't priests or imaams humans too? They make mistakes, don't they? Or are you seriously saying that every one of their mistakes is because their religion say so, instead of their own lapse in intelligence?
And if priests and imams are fallible, and capable of lapses in judgment, then who is actually qualified to interpret a religious text? What happens when you have two well-educated theologians studying the same religious text who come to opposite conclusions? My parents are Christians; they have both read the Bible thoroughly and try, it seems to me, pretty hard to uphold the tenets of their religion on a daily basis. They also do not believe that homosexuality is a sin. Obviously, a lot of other Christians would disagree.
Christianity isn't the only religion suffering from this kind of internal discord. Buddhism, broadly speaking, is divided into two vastly different strains. Islam is similarly divided; a Muslim friend of mine once informed me that Sufism was emphatically NOT a part of Islam and all its practitioners were heretics. But...I mean, they read the same Quran, don't they?
I understand where Saviour is coming from when he says it is impossible to judge Islam without having read its holy book. But the belief underlying Saviour's argument is that there is one TRUE form of Islam residing with the text of the Quran. I can't bring myself to believe that, not with the fragmentation of Christianity (and other religions) providing such blatant evidence to the contrary.
__________________
I like tea!
Post last edited by Orphic Okapi on 06.04.2014, 02:29 AM.
|
|
| 06.04.2014, 02:17 AM |
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
Good question. Um, guys? Who's participating? When do we start?
__________________
I like tea!
|
|
| 06.02.2014, 09:59 PM |
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
Sorry, Saviour. I have never read Dawkins, Hitchens, or Harris. I used Dawkins just because he's the most recognizable name in atheism these days. While I'm sure his arguments are well-reasoned, I don't like the way the condescends to the religious, something I have sincerely tried not to do. Being the son of two extremely intelligent believers, I find it hard to swallow his "all religious people are idiots" rhetoric. I think they are misinformed, yes. But not stupid.
__________________
I like tea!
|
|
| 05.31.2014, 07:17 PM |
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
Here Saviour, I'll try your method of debate:
I noticed you avoided addressing any of my questions. Do you read my posts? Of course not, you're too lazy!
To understand why religion is a huge crock, you need to do a lot of studying and read lots of books (like I have). Get back to me once you've read the complete works of Richard Dawkins. Also you might want to brush up on your history and geography, because frankly if you think pre-Colombian civilizations would have been exposed to Islam, you're a nutter!
And I'm done.
__________________
I like tea!
|
|
| 05.31.2014, 10:35 AM |
|
Orphic Okapi
Baron
Registration Date: 04.08.07
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 1335 |
|
|
Against all better judgment, I press on. I'll try to keep it short.
If Hinduism is not a religion, what is it? I don't think a book written by a Muslim scholar will provide me with an unbiased answer, considering the long history of dispute between the two religions in India. There is nothing wrong with getting information from books written by other Muslims, but if that is your only source of information, you are reading only to reinforce what you already believe. Have you ever tried reading a book that might challenge what you believe? Anyway, all evidence points to Hinduism being much older than the Abrahamic religions. I don't think it is even a matter of dispute in the academic world.
You shrugged off Saddletank's list of religions: ancient Greek, ancient Egyptian, Celtic, Native American, Shinto. Do you really consider all of these to be "bad" offshoots of Islam? What about the religion of the Aztecs? How'd Islam get over there exactly? In order to justify the existence of Islam in the Americas at that time, you basically have to throw everything we know about history out the window and insist on some kind of conspiracy in the intellectual community.
I mentioned my past with Christianity only because you implied that I do not "have what it takes" to be really be religious. But I do, or did. I was a member of the One True Religionâ„¢ (Christianity counts right? Since Jesus taught the same thing as Mohammed.) Like Saddletank, I have experienced both mindsets at different points in my life, the religious and the nonreligious. What about you? Can you really judge the nonreligious without ever having experienced a mindset outside of Islam?
__________________
I like tea!
Post last edited by Orphic Okapi on 05.30.2014, 06:52 PM.
|
|
| 05.30.2014, 06:50 PM |
|
|
|
Showing 1 to 20 of 1328 posts found. [ 1 2 3 4 5 ... › » ] |
|
Online Ghibli
Ghibli Tavern is powered by WoltLab, hosted by Teragon Networks
|
|
