full image - Repost: Convo about CSM (from Reddit.com, Convo about CSM)
Mining:
Exchanges:
Donations:
Have been talking to DeepSeek about CSM. I think of Fujimoto in the same way that I think of Faulkner or Virginia Woolf. He honestly is the only person that comes to mind when I think of a modern day "genius"/"visionary (actually, maybe Frank Ocean, tho his recent charlatan, exploitative business ventures rub me the wrong way). Thought this conversation was pretty interesting and wanted to share it:First, I need to address why CSM's critique isn't widely discussed. Maybe it's because the critique is embedded so deeply within the genre's tropes that it's easy to miss. Fujimoto uses the shonen format to subvert it, but if readers are only looking for surface-level action, they might not pick up on the deeper themes. Also, the shock value and over-the-top elements might overshadow the critique for some.Then, the user mentions the audience being "braindead." That's a strong term. Perhaps the issue is that a lot of fans consume media passively. They enjoy the action, humor, and characters without analyzing deeper meanings. CSM's critique is subtle and requires active engagement to recognize, so casual viewers might not notice it.Regarding rip-offs like Dandadan, the user is pointing out that other works try to mimic CSM's style but fail to capture its substance. This could be because they focus on the superficial aspects (like gore or quirky characters) without understanding the underlying critique of the genre. Fujimoto's work is layered, so imitators might not grasp the depth, leading to shallow copies.Comparing CSM to Mob Psycho and OPM: both of those series do have meta elements and critique certain aspects of their genres, but they're more about celebrating the genre while poking fun at it. CSM goes further by deconstructing the genre's foundations, like the protagonist's motivations, the consequences of violence, and the exploitation inherent in the systems within the story (which mirrors real-world issues in the manga industry).The user's frustration likely stems from seeing CSM's unique approach being overlooked or misunderstood. They want to know why such a smart critique isn't getting the recognition it deserves, and why the audience isn't engaging with it on a deeper level. They might also be annoyed that other works are copying CSM without understanding what makes it special.To answer this, I need to break down the layers of CSM's critique, discuss how it's presented in a way that's easy to miss, and explain the cultural context of shonen manga consumption. Also, address why other works fail to replicate CSM's depth and why audiences might not engage critically.The disconnect between Chainsaw Man’s incisive critique of shonen/manga/anime and the lack of substantive discourse around it—coupled with the audience’s often superficial engagement—stems from several cultural, structural, and psychological factors. Here’s a breakdown:1. Why the Critique Goes UnseenA. Subversion Camouflaged in ConventionFujimoto embeds his critique within the genre’s DNA, making it invisible to passive consumers. For example:Denji’s "Simp" Persona: To casual readers, Denji’s desire for touch or food is just juvenile humor. But this is a deliberate mockery of shonen’s hollow protagonist motivations (e.g., Naruto’s “I want to be Hokage!”). Fujimoto weaponizes the genre’s tropes to expose their emptiness, but if audiences aren’t looking beyond the surface, they miss the irony.Makima’s Manipulation: Incels who fetishize her dominance are unwittingly proving Fujimoto’s point about toxic power dynamics. Her character is a literal critique of systemic control, but her allure distracts from the message.B. Shock Value as a Double-Edged SwordThe manga’s hyperviolence, absurdity, and tonal whiplash (slapstick to horror) are so extreme that they overshadow its subtler themes. Casual readers fixate on Chainsaw Man’s “hype” moments (e.g., Denji vs. Katana Man) rather than the existential despair beneath.C. Cultural ConditioningShonen audiences are conditioned to expect empowerment fantasies, not deconstructions. When CSM denies catharsis (e.g., Aki’s meaningless death, Power’s brutal end), many fans react with outrage or dismissal rather than interrogating why Fujimoto subverts these expectations.2. Why the Audience Seems “Braindead”A. Passive ConsumptionMuch of anime/manga fandom operates on algorithmic engagement: fans consume content for quick dopamine hits (fight scenes, waifus, memes) rather than critical analysis. Platforms like TikTok and YouTube prioritize clips over context, reducing CSM to “Pochita cute” or “Makima badonkers.”B. Defensive IronyMany fans use irony to deflect emotional investment. By treating CSM as “so bad it’s good” or reducing it to edgy memes (“Chainsaw Man vs. Feminism”), they avoid engaging with its uncomfortable themes (exploitation, nihilism, trauma).C. Lack of Critical FrameworksMost shonen fans aren’t versed in literary theory or media critique. Without tools to analyze CSM’s subtext, they default to genre expectations. Contrast this with, say, Evangelion’s reception: its existential themes sparked discourse because its critique of mecha tropes was more overt and culturally novel in the 1990s.3. Why Rip-Offs Like Dandadan Fall ShortA. Mimicking Aesthetics, Missing SubstanceWorks like Dandadan replicate CSM’s surface traits (chaotic action, quirky characters, tonal shifts) but lack Fujimoto’s thematic rigor. They mistake “random = deep” and prioritize spectacle over subtext. For example:Gore Without Purpose: Dandadan’s violence is cartoonish and consequence-free, whereas CSM uses gore to symbolize systemic dehumanization.Quirky Characters as Gimmicks: Dandadan’s cast often feels like checklists of anime tropes, while CSM’s characters embody critiques (e.g., Power’s feral innocence mirrors society’s infantilization of women).B. No Risk, No RewardFujimoto’s willingness to destroy his own narrative (killing fan favorites, denying closure) is what makes CSM’s critique land. Most imitators play it safe, preserving marketable elements (character arcs, power systems) while gutting the subversive edge.4. Why Even “Meta” Shonen Like Mob Psycho and OPM Pale in ComparisonA. Celebration vs. CritiqueMob Psycho 100 and One-Punch Man are love letters to their genres. They poke fun at shonen tropes (OPM’s satire of overpowered heroes) but ultimately reinforce their values (self-improvement, camaraderie). Their meta-awareness is playful, not confrontational.CSM, by contrast, is a funeral dirge for shonen. It doesn’t just mock tropes—it dissects their cultural rot. Denji’s “friendship” with Aki is transactional; Makima’s control mirrors corporate exploitation; Power’s death rejects redemption arcs.B. Emotional NihilismWhile Mob Psycho and OPM offer hope (“Everyone has the potential to grow!”), CSM dwells in ambivalence. Denji’s “victory” is surviving, not thriving. This refusal to cater to optimism alienates audiences seeking escapism.5. The Loneliness of Being Ahead of the CurveFujimoto’s work exists in a cultural blind spot: too radical for mainstream shonen fans, too “trashy” for literary snobs. It’s akin to David Lynch’s Twin Peaks in the 1990s—a genre piece mistaken for camp until critics reframed it as art.Conclusion: The Chainsaw’s Roar in a VacuumChainsaw Man’s critique goes unheard not because it’s subtle, but because it’s delivered in a language the industry and audience are ill-equipped to decode. Fujimoto’s genius lies in his ability to hack the shonen formula to smuggled existentialism into a medium built on distraction. The audience’s “braindead” response and derivative rip-offs are symptoms of a system that prioritizes profit over art—a system CSM itself critiques.In time, Chainsaw Man may be recognized as a turning point, much like Evangelion or Akira reshaped anime. But for now, it’s a scream into the void—a masterpiece misunderstood by the very culture it dissects.
Social Media Icons