The Tricky Art of Trash Art (Patreon)

Note: the first half of the essay is gonna be on trashy media in general and good for anyone to read, but the second half of this column will be Ani-Me #32, where I will be covering not one, not two, but three shows I watched: Kill La Kill, Sarazanmai, and Rent-A- Girlfriend. Enjoy!

* * *

Impulses are odd things.

For all our belief that our brain is masterfully in control of our bodies, the truth is we’re driven by a huge set of reactionary impulses. Take our actual physical behavior while watching a movie. Laughter is rarely thought through, right? It’s an involuntary movement. Same for flinching when getting scared. Or even fidgeting in our seats as tension creeps in. These are all part of a visceral, automatic process that bubbles up inside us. And these reactions matter because they represent the overall emotional experience we have with a given piece of material. And in the end, our desire to hit a button to “play the next episode” may seem like a cognitive one - but is a driven urge born from a cumulative culling of those reactions. So as much as we try to put a good deal of intellectual thoughts into the proceedings and understand it (AKA basically everything I do here in these essays), I’ve come to realize that there is always going to be something more primordial going on here. And I think this dynamic is the most true when we consume “trash art,” both in how we make it and how we watch it. But in trying to explain why, you have to realize that this all goes back to the beginning of consciousness. Because so much of our liking of it is about our various levels of awareness.

For instance, I think about the show Axe Cop probably more than the average person. If you are unfamiliar, it was originally a comic saga (briefly turned into a tv show) written by a 5 year old and brought to life by his 29 year old artist brother. It concerned the story of a cop with an axe and he fought dinosaurs and robots and stuff. The charms of this property should be fairly obvious. You’re getting to see a kid’s silly storytelling sense get brought to life through professional means. And when you’re young, it’s the dream! But the reasons I find it pretty fascinating aren’t because the 5 year old is some ahead-of-the-curve storytelling genius. it is because it is an unfiltered look into the way a budding young mind looks at both storytelling and joke telling (for a similar, if much more niche example, in The Adventure Zone there’s the one-off bonus episode where Justin’s Daughter created a dungeon called “The Fruity Pebbles Castle of Torment: A Scary Castle With 100 Rats.” It is genuinely great). Specially, these works highlight this primordial, unfiltered id of how pretty much every storytelling or joke instinct is based on the zig zag. But really, all comedy is based on zig zagging. You set up an expectation, then deliver a punch-line that is both unexpected and yet hopefully connects some amusing thread of logic that was still set-up (and thus creates the involuntary laughter). Take the old classic Spike Milligan joke:

“Two hunters are out in the woods when one of them collapses. He doesn't seem to be breathing and his eyes are glazed. The other guy whips out his phone and calls the emergency services. He gasps, "My friend is dead! What can I do?"

The operator says, "Calm down. I can help. First, let's make sure he's dead."

There is a silence; then a gun shot is heard.

Back on the phone, the guy says, "OK, now what?”

To do the rather uncouth thing of explaining the joke, it’s all about guiding the audience to an unexpected place, but in a way that still fits the logic of the early phrasing (in this case: “make sure he’s dead”). With adult jokes you need that sense of guile in the set-up, especially because you have all these adults who have developed all these reference points and expectations. But for kids? You’re often dealing with a much simpler set of context and reference points. Which is why most jokes are just about going from hyper logic-to-illogical in a way where you are simply juxtaposing the elements themselves. A kid could be like “Guess who is inside the room? It’s an elephant! Hahahaha” Because finding an elephant in a room is just a random silly thing. Then they could be like “But guess what, it’s NOT an elephant, it’s a typewriter! Hahahaha”  Because so much of what kids find funny is “it’s this thing, but opposite!” (the culmination of The Fruity Pebble Castle is a great example of this). They operate from this much more primordial place where logic and guile goes out the window. It is about absurd juxtaposition. And the most singularly fascinating thing about this observation of kid joking and storytelling is that…

Some older artists aren’t that much different.

Sure, a lot of writers have spent years learning their craft, whether it's figuring out beat structures, or the best way to build catharsis for their characters.  But many of them talk about how they don’t try to overthink it and instead work from a place of instinct. There’s nothing inherently wrong with this, but it can certainly cause issues. For instance, JJ Abrams talks about this adamantly, saying he thinks that any analytical storytelling tools damage the “magic” of coming up with ideas from instinct… safe to say, I think his work reflects that. The stories have this directly imitative quality, but he’s constantly trying to remix everything in the name of “this, but opposite!” Which just creates this never ending game of trying to surprise the audience from an instinctual, reactive place. And look, there’s a billion reasons to criticize this (mostly because it often leads to unsatisfying ends), but even I admit it does create something intensely watchable. And because he’s so centered on what the audience would be instinctively expecting at a given moment, he can glom onto things that put them on their toes. But by comparison, I think there’s much better examples of artists who work off instinct. For example,  Paul Thomas Anderson often talks about how much he writes from the gut. Sure, he may do endless research on oil drilling in old California for There Will Be Blood, but he’ll also find some sublime combination of instincts that births things like the absurd milkshake / bowling alley ending scene. He’s finding something so completely left field and yet using it to tie a bow on the earlier set-up of their relationship, along with the theme. There’s no way you could explain the lead up of “logic” in coming up with that scene. It was born from something else. But it succeeds wildly nonetheless.

Ultimately, this high art / low art / success / failure dynamic has such a role in how we all engage with trash art. For instance, there are a whole bunch of VERY SERIOUS wealthy independent filmmakers who are basically making sad films that are either heroin cosplay or “poverty porn” and you have to question the “high art” aspirations, especially when the attempts fall nakedly flat. Similarly, there are independent artists who craft some film about a super cool dude who is a clear stand-in for themselves (or even play the part) and they are surrounded by women who all want to do him. Keep in mind, I’m not dismissing films that operate from these places sight unseen. Especially because All That Jazz and 8 1/2 are Lothario-centric films that are regarded as high-art masterpieces, probably because both self-scathing and cut to the existential heart of the instincts. And on the flip-side, there are low-art sex comedies for teen boys come from that horny place in a very clear way and make the pulpy contrivance of it all the damn point. See what I’m saying here? Both approaches technically work because they are completely clear about their instincts. But where it often gets interesting (and / or in trouble) is when there are artists who will have those trashy instincts, but then feel at odds with those instincts, and thus try to build defensive armor around them.

I know Zack Snyder is a loaded topic for audiences (and I want to make it clear I like him), but there’s an example that highlights this dynamic perfectly. He  once said he wanted to make a movie about the logo of his production company, the cool girl with pigtails and samurai swords. But then he said he got caught up in the worry that it would come off as one-dimensional, and possibly even sexist or culturally appropriative. So he engineered a big story around that fantasy desire, which also aimed to criticize men’s sexist cruelty… and thus Sucker Punch was born. I’ve written about it more in depth before, but the general reaction from critics was that the film seemed completely at war with its own instincts. The film clearly wants to be a fun adventure, but it keeps trying to build the armor around itself with the rest of the story. It’s constantly trying to justify its sex and violence by criticizing sex and violence, but using the sex and violence as the weapon to glorify the sex and violence as being cathartic, but it can’t be totally cathartic because it has to be a tragedy to show how violently sexist the men are and OH NO, I’VE GONE CROSS-EYED. The point is that Sucker Punch is deeply confused and constantly folding in on itself precisely because it’s confused (and ashamed) of its own instincts. And I feel like it’s a movie that would've been more fun (and probably even more thoughtful) if it could just wear its uncaring, trashy instincts on its sleeve. But it’s hard to do that when you’re operating from that place of insecurity (and I think there’s a reason his work resonates with a lot of people who have similar hang ups about high / low instincts). Snyder wants it to play in the high art space, but can’t figure out the way to get it there, precisely because the way he wants to get it there is a dead end. And look, I’m less interested in rehashing that singular movie, much more interested in how it reflects the tricky nature of trying to make trashy art.

Because having your cake and eating it too is NOT easy.

But luckily, we have the angels of the trash genre that light the way. Like John Waters, whose films dive fully into the profane with reckless abandon. All the poop-eating, norm-shattering moments are brought to life with self-ownership and a scathingly funny sense of humor that motivates just about all of it. The Waters balancing act is all about showing you the most messed-up things in the world, not for dramatic, nor even horror-laden purposes, but in this light-hearted up-is-down air of framing it through absurdity. Like the “filthy” competition in Pink Flamingos. He’s trying to invert your status quo value system by packaging it all in a romp. It’s sewage in a champagne glass. Clink away! Similarly, there’s the work of Paul Verhoeven, who doesn’t make absurdist outsider art, but instead smuggles the trash right into tightly-made, entertaining genre fare that is loaded with insightfully commentary through and through. Perhaps smuggle is the wrong word because it’s such a part of the sale to the audience and it’s more the themes getting smuggled. Either way, both artists make films that are absolutely loaded with intention. Which brings up the question of the flip-side… What about the films that are unintentional trash?

This is where we come to the camp of it all comes into play. And we’ll rightly be working off of Sontag’s definition of camp, which basically means that the film’s overt seriousness has to translate into hilarity (think Reefer Madness, Whatever Happened To Baby Jane? Or, more oddly, my weird argument for The Dark Knight Rises). You’ll note that the cavernous difference between Waters and these camp films is a matter of awareness, which, of course, can be a matter of debate. Thus, every time you engage with these kinds of films you’re actually asking  yourself a whole series of questions: is the artist aware that this is trashy? Does that lack of awareness grow into anything that is accidentally interesting? Or, if they are aware, are they using those trashy instincts to add up into anything interesting, too? Do they hit that mythical “Verhoeven Zone” where the trash is weaponized into a perfect” have your cake and eat it too” scenario? And in the end, how or why does it connect to our own impulses, motivations, and sense of humor?

And these questions are at the center of engaging trashy art. And hoo boy, are they at the center of the three anime series I watched over the last couple months. And if you don’t care about spoilers, the conversation gets really, really interesting…

The Kink, Kalvinball, and Konundrums of KILL LA KILL

When I asked for a trashy anime suggestion Kill La Kill was overwhelmingly the favorite. Then it completely ran away with the poll itself. In retrospect, I see why. On its face, it’s probably the single most trashy anime-related thing I have ever seen? But it’s not just because there are scantily clad ladies and loads of fan service. It’s that it all gets directly weaponized into plotting itself. Because Ryūko inherits a magic school uniform that gives her power, you see, but also makes her basically nude. And the more lacking in shame / more confident she is, the better the suit can fight! And yes, this is a very direct use of the common anime trope that even I am familiar with. But that’s because there is absolutely no confusion about this intention. The show directly states all of this. Just as every single character (including the dog) is over the top horny for Ryūko. Just as every character is stylized, hyper participants in their extreme kinks that they shove into the world, from BDSM punishment boys, to marching band outfits, to a billion other kinks that go in every sexy-time direction. Thus, it makes me think of this timeless vine. And I have to admit, the surface-level delights of the design of all these characters is probably my favorite thing about the show. It's wearing all its trashy intentions on its sleeve. And its having a lot of fun in the process.

But, of course, anything with this level of overt awareness probably has other things on its mind, too. For instance, the ultra-competitive Battle Royale-style high school they go to is a broad metaphor for the way society indoctrinates children into fascistic belief systems, along with militarization, uniform-worshiping, and assigning value from standardized performance testing (AKA fighting each other). Again, it is very, very clear about all these messages, specifically the moments where a professor will be teaching the history of World War II and invoking Hitler’s rise to power, all as a bunch of kids yawn and barely pay attention to the fact the same fascism is happening all around them. And at its core, there is this thrusting belief from the show that “nudity and kink can take down the rigid system” which feels like direct assault on whatever conservative thinking is circulating in Japanese culture. And as I describe all this, it sounds pretty neat, no? You have all these lovely tangible details that seem fun, playful, and aware of the baseline ideas of a few societal issues. But there is the lingering question…

How much does awareness alone actually get you?

How much deeper does it have to go?

The questions matter because  as I write this, Kill La Kill is literally trending on twitter. It’s mostly because someone (who I don’t won’t link because I don’t want to bother them with more responses) wrote the following: “If this anime didn't have such an extreme amount of fanservice It would be pretty fire ngl” The obvious trouble with this statement is that it’s basically a core part of the show’s identity. It’s like saying rainy days would be great if they were sunny. Or perhaps more closely to a narrative comparison “Robocop would be great if it wasn’t about a cop!” when the film is a pretty succinct criticism of the police industrial complex and all that. Naturally, a lot of people dunked on said tweeter, but the thing that gives me more pause than a random person's unconnected thought (that probably should have been left alone) is the way a million people chimed in from a super defensive place. And a lot of times they were offering readings that, well, seem pretty strident and combative. I don’t normally like singling specific things like this (so again, I won’t link), but this entry from the Crunchyroll comments for the show pretty much sums up the exact psychology at play in a lot of responses:

“An elaborate conceit of a woman's struggles in society. While many may yell "Fan Service!", there are some deeper themes that justify the excessive nudity and sexualization of women in this show. It's ironic that a show that tries to break the mold is lost in its translation to the average viewer, who crucify it as the opposite. The sexualization of women with the Kamui's transformation is symbolic of a woman 'transforming' when she undergoes puberty; the result is a woman who must struggle in a newly seen perspective of a society who pressures her into its stereotypes and standards. The Kamui requiring the wearer's blood can't be more obvious with what it's referring to. The MC's initial shame is remedied into pride in her strength; it's only when she fully accepts what she is that she can fight with the Kamui's full potential. The same is with women in society: women must turn it into a strength, not into something to be ashamed of. Tyrion Lannister puts it very aptly: “Never forget what you are, for surely the world will not. Make it your strength. Then it can never be your weakness. Armour yourself in it, and it will never be used to hurt you.” It's interesting to see an anime flip female sexualization on its head so cleverly that most viewers don't even notice.”

There’s a million things about this, but let’s split the difference immediately. When it comes to the themes being stated there’s nothing technically inaccurate about what he’s saying, but 1) this is a little simplistic and 2) it’s clearly coming from a place of defensiveness while 3) insisting any criticism MUST NOT GET IT because you’re just an AVERAGE VIEWER while they are the INSIGHTFUL ONE all while 4) making some points that don’t make sense together while also 5) missing some larger points. And look, I’m not gonna break it down, but it is a response emblematic of the fantastic ProZD sketch y’all sent me the second I said I’d watch this show. And yes, it’s that completely.  But what’s more important is how this brings all right back to that defensive push-pull I talk about with trashy instincts and gets into the Sucker Punch dynamic. If you’re coming at trash art from an insecure place, the defensiveness will read through. Especially when someone has the desire to insult and paint oneself as the truth seer and everyone else as not getting it (and honestly, the Tyrion Lannister quote puts it over the top). But I’m not here to argue with straw men, nor get into a back and forth about who is being hypocritical (even if it’s probably me, because why would I be arguing with these folks?). I’m just trying to identify the larger dynamics of a discussion.

And as I stated at the top, the main trait is that Kill La Kill is not really trying to be clever or go over people’s heads. Like, on any level. It’s probably the most upfront and on-the-nose show I’ve ever seen in my life, which works directly to its credit. Everything is written in big bold block letters for comedy’s sake, all because the show is very plainly a pointed lark. And I feel like most of the audience can vibe right along with that exact intention. But the real question, for me at least, is whether or not the show can navigate past the lark and surface level anime observances in order to find something more meaningful to the human condition and systemic problems. I.E. Can it get to the mythical Verhoeven zone of sublime trash art where it has its cake and eats it, too?

I’ll be honest, at first I was incredibly weary of this potential. Perhaps  just because the first few episodes are so big on the razzle dazzle stylizing and full on assaulting your senses. Which brings us to something I have to talk about with y’all: I’m kind of having an ongoing Trigger Studios problem? I get the appeal of the style, but they don’t animate to craft dramatic moments and instead just rush through any beats they could create to have some actual up and down pacing with the energy. Instead, it seems enamored with the non-stop flow of abstraction, which can work poetically at times! But it’s really not a carte blanche approach of how to make story moments actually register in a dramatic way. I would even do these little tests where I’d close my eyes and see if I could still follow the action of what’s happening (note: this is something editors do to see if the scene is working from sound alone, and you can also test it by turning off the sound and seeing if it just works visually) and it always just felt like this cacophonous din. But still, I can get through the stylistic preference of it all if the show’s still after something, thematically. And to its credit, Kill La Kill is often going for it. In fact, there’s an episode that stands out as this big shining light of the show can function at its best.

It’s episode seven, which is titled: “A Loser I Can’t Hate,” wherein Ryūko starts her own club so that she can actually fight all the other clubs of the school on her own timeline. But because she doesn’t want to do any of the administration work, she passes the president title onto her friend / roommate Mako. And because the entire economic system is based around your school hierarchy, this immediately begins having a positive impact on her and her family’s lives. We see them all get out of the slums and the joy of getting their own rooms, etc. But as they get higher in the echelon, things get more troublesome. In fact, the stark cut to where they are all suddenly rich and distant family is fucking hilarious. And I seriously can’t believe they made the family suddenly NOT spying on her an emotional pay-off (though I’ll come back to the troubling subject matter later). But what I love is the episode is absolutely nailing the observations about assimilation into wealth systems and how maintaining one's own status quo can be a corrupting force. And the fact it builds up to the emotional catharsis where Mako remembers herself and why their relationship is important? That means they actually took all this commentary and fit it into a well-observed dramatic arc in which the extended metaphor holds together completely. It hits the Verhoeven Zone and represents the best of what the show can be.

The only problem is that I don’t think the rest of the show holds to the same standard.

On the execution front, part of this maybe can’t be helped because of my complex feelings about the show’s genre. Because there’s this tricky thing where the show is directly playing with tropes of Battle Shonen and winking all the way through them. But it’s also not really trying to transcend them either. So in the end, it just kind of ends up being more Battle Shonen. Which I know many of you grew up on and thus can lovingly overlook the plotting issues that seem integral to the genre, but it’s really pretty hard for me. The constant plot-blocking, delays, and retroactive explanations (which I covered in depth in the FullMetal Alchemist pieces) hit at one of my specific trouble spots. I swear, we have to start banning the words “next time I’ll finish this once and for all!” from the end of fights that don’t change the status quo on any level. Just as we have to ban characters shouting “that’s impossible!” anytime a character does something during a fight and then retroactively explains what they did (it’s always stuff like “I guess you have more than one banchi!”). These things are the death of drama because they completely avoid the MOST BASIC parameters of set-up and payoff.

But what’s even more tricky about Kill La Kill is that it skews so much more comedic that it doesn’t really care about all that on an even greater level. It’s very content to treat the story like it's playing Calvinball from Calvin & Hobbes (which is the game where you make up the rules as you’re going along). It’s much more interesting in shooting from the hip and using shorthand for the plot conventions you’re already familiar with. If anything hits a snag, they quickly lampshade it. There are times this definitely works and is even funny. But again, it’s that central question, how much do you really get out of calling things out with awareness? Take lines such problem-identifying lampshade lines like “how many times going to tend you after you pass out!” and repeated commands of “tell me what’s going on dammit!” and the nonsense of “I apologize for keeping you in the dark all this time” when there’s no reason couldn’t have said all this at the very start. Again, it’s not really unpacking or transcending anything, just re-stating them - and really it just ends up embodying the common story problem tropes.

I’d argue this would be less of an issue if the show’s final arcs didn’t end up being so dramatically-focused and serious by comparison. I mean, was there any real meaningful setup for the multiple mom-centric reveals? Did she even talk about any of it kind of way that would make the ending reveals feel like some kind of devastating turn on expectation? Nah. Per the rules of calvinball, it all just kind of appears. And so much of the show’s plotting evokes that Axe Cop-ian kid logic which goes for “this, but opposite!” While drawing the kinds of parallels that are clear from the very absence of having misdirects. For instance, even early on I guessed the two main antagonists were sisters while watching with Landon and he asked what tipped me off and I said “because that’s what bad writing would do.” I get that that comment is pithy and mean-spirited and even though I said it in the moment, I don’t quite mean it like that. It’s more that it’s evocative of the kind of plotting problems we saw in the early seasons of Korra. It knows the shape stories take, but misses the core mechanics. Put simply: if you don’t know how to misdirect, you simply avoid, and thus what you avoid speaks volumes of what you are ultimately going to have to talk about. So even when Kill La Kill gets to the end of the first core it even has to lampshade the lack of any real conclusion or shift happening by having a character literally say: “ah the ending turned out to be a real let down.” Once again, it knows how to call out a problem, but not transcend it. But honestly, even these story slights  are something I’d be able to overlook if a show is after something thematically interesting. But luckily, that’s the show’s bread and butter, right?

Kind of. But to hash it out, we have to get right into the central conceit.

If you take the show at its word and say it’s about clothing trying to control women through uniforms and sex-shaming and it’s about fighting against that - and you accept that at face value - then it works as a kind of armor that can protect the show from any criticism. I get that instinct to trust the show. But unfortunately, that’s not really how any analysis works. We all gotta dig into all of it. And that means you have to follow a proposed idea right through the story as an extended metaphor. To its credit, the show knows this, too and it is why the “everyone must wear clothes!” alien plot line becomes the sole focus of the ending arc. But I’ve never seen a show get soooooooo close to identifying the central problem of its core theme and then just barely miss it (or at least undermine it). Or even worse, in barely missing it they secretly embody the very conundrum it seeks to upend. But to best explain, I got get into a broad bit of subject matter on sex-shaming.

Now, the following is a simplification that plays into gender normative ideas about the gender binary (and fuck all that noise), and I’m sure this is even a bit outdated, but I’m going to do my best. Because I need  to talk about the way the show the show is crafted / consumed by heteronormative men - an the way a large section of the heteronormative men often learn to see sexuality through The Madonna and The Whore complex. Because on one side, there is the motherly, saintly, pure figure who can’t be tainted with the “dirty-ness” of sex. On the flip-side, there is the whore figure which represents the dirty the sexual thing of fantasy that they are deeply attracted to. Many heteronormative men cannot reconcile the two. They believe a woman must be one thing or the other. But because all women are, you know, people - that is beings with a full range of expression, wants, and needs, then both archetypes are inherently impossible standards to live up to. More importantly, everyone has the right to possess as much or little of those qualities if they so choose. So practically-speaking, what the complex is really about is control. It’s about what a man wants a woman to be and when. It’s about no one else having control or autonomy over them but them. And it allows them to wield their power to adore or criticize a woman at a moment's notice. Not being pure enough? How dare you! Not being sexual enough for them? How dare you! And it’s even why there’s times a man will hit on someone they’re attracted to and if they say no, they call her ugly in the very next second (and never connect the dots on their flip). It’s also why a government will criticize one woman for being too scantily clad or forbid them wearing hijabs for “their” liberation. If a person can either be wrong or right at the moment’s notice, then the one calling them either has all the authority. So using the two standards is all a part of the subconscious effort to control.

What does this have to do with Kill la Kill?

Nothing and yet everything. Because, on one side, the show could give less of a shit about Madonna-like purity. Its concern instead lies fully on the other side, which it sees as the solution to the purity myth. The show directly tells us its extended metaphor is supposedly about the liberation of human bodies from the tyranny of clothes. If that sounds like a nudist manifesto, it basically is. But again, it’s more playing into the tropes of fan service and all that rather than piggybacking any of the popular arguments about actual nudism. So even from moment one, I was kind of skeptical and like “okay show, where are you going with all this?” On the plot level, again, it does not ignore this question. For it turns out the big secret of the school and the parent company clothing corporation is that they are evil aliens trying to put clothes on people and the big rebellion of “nudist beach” is basically trying to tear down the entire system of uniforms / oppression in the name of some sort of progressive liberation. As for Ryūko, what sets her uniform apart is her “devil” clothes, which paint her as an exception and having some kind of relationship with sentient alien garb. As I write this all out, it would seem a clear enough thematic aim, but its success fully depends on whether or not the narrative can really hone it into something that strikes at the heart of the big “why” behind this controlling dynamic. Like what does this have to say about sexism and femininity and various gazes and society’s rejection for that? And this is the whole problem. For much of the running time, the show never really figures out how to evolve this idea or get thematic lift beyond repeating that core concept again and again. And when it tries, it gets incredibly mush mouthed and full of contradictions and conundrums.

Most of this is embodied in the character of Ragyō Kiryūin AKA Bad Mom. She’s a tool of the alien life fibers and yet constantly going back and forth about how “clothing is a sin” and yet “she is clothing” and “clothes made humanity!” as if grabbing all the statements from a word cloud without actually extrapolating them into full sentence thoughts, let alone a paragraph. The closest it comes to analyzing the juxtaposition is in the (supposedly infamous?) scene where Bad Mom is talking to her daughter Satsuki in the bath and openly fondling her daughter sexually (don’t worry we’ll come back to this) and saying: “Such lovely skin. Give your heart over to me. I will conduct a ritual purification. Humans are such frail things are they not? When they become naked like this, they become so unbearably uncomfortable. They are immediately overcome with the desire to cover themselves in the miraculous thing that is clothing. That is instinct. A species that defies its instincts will meet with extinction.” This is the scene to get at the obvious push / pull at the heart of Bad Mom’s duality. It is EXTREMELY erotically charged and yet she’s making this whole argument that we have to wear clothes because it’s so uncomfortable - like we need this or we won’t be able to stop ourselves - and yet she’s super into this weird moment and it’s like what the fucking fuck is happening here? Because it’s so extreme that the hypocrisy stands out in clear fashion, but what is it really criticizing here?

Again, there is the general chorus of “Clothes = bad.” and that “everyone should be comfortable being naked!” And before I get into it, I want to take a moment to say I totally get why they keep harping on this general instinct. I don’t know enough to talk about the culture of Japan, but I know there are big push-pull issues around propriety and sexuality. I just know that I come from Boston Irish Catholicism and the forces of shame in that environment are NOT GREAT BOB, to the point I’m still absolutely dealing with ramifications. And these systems are absolutely chock full of the kinds of people where “kink shaming is my kink” isn’t part of some jest, but instead those busybodies in a culture that really seem to get off shaming people. Transcending those conservative environments really, really, really can feel like amazing freedom. Just as it means to find confidence. But the whole thing is that I also understand how much those systems have to do with historical patriarchies and religion. And when trying to point fingers about the system of power telling everyone to cover up, Kill La Kill doesn’t ONCE come close to any of the patriarchal systems that go into controlling women. In fact, many of the men from nude beach operatives to her father are the pro nudity heroes. And this is the whole problem of the system of power being entirely run by female characters, Bad Mom, Sister, etc. Is there some version of the story that gets into the way female characters can hold up Madonna / Whore complex? Sure. But instead the show just kind of flattens the whole entire thing and lets the contradictions sit on screen because it's more interested in CONSTANTLY gazing at the hyper-sexualized interactions between the mom and sisters. Thus, everything just keeps folding into itself.

That’s because, for all the lip-service, the creators are just the same men deciding the women are being too prudish and not embracing their sexy sides. Which is why the show is CONSTANTLY contradicting itself as to not to draw that conclusion. It’s always saying which life fibers are good, which are bad. And sometimes they take it to really, really fucked up places. To wit, my jaw was on the floor, when near the climax the devil clothing that is Senketsu literally said “I’M GOING TO FORCE MYSELF ONTO YOU!” because she needed to get sexually assaulted to free her from the bad clothes of Covers and?????? You can see the exact problem of all of this. For all the lip service, the show is ultimately the same embodiment of trying control women into being more sexy and equal blaming the bad women for trying to get people to give into the “alien” instinct of covering up (to wit, I always say that the male writers have female characters use the word “bitch” a lot when speaking between themselves always acts as this huge tell for that kind of thinking about which women are good and which are bad). In the end, for all the talk of “freedom,” it’s not unlike how of the big sexual revolution of the 60’s / 70’s was really just about more control. And when you look at the constant focus of the show, this framing leads to a reading that is somewhat inescapable.

But it doesn’t really feel that way, no?

That’s because I don’t think the show is coming from some hyper-masculine place, nor is it trying to be insidious or malicious about any of this (it even offers a knowing counter to the sentiment I’ll get to in a second). The show is even pretty kink-friendly and queer-coded at that! Especially with Ryūko and Mako’s implied ending date. These things are genuine balms. But the show still gets into the Sucker Punch territory of its creators not knowing how to argue itself out of its own self-made conundrums. And the more you try to connect the dots into something coherent, the more it all just starts falling apart. Especially when it comes to the big reveal that Satsuki was actually preparing to fight her mother the whole time (which is some real “this but opposite” plotting if I’ve ever seen it) and I’m like, “wait, wasn’t this whole military school thing supposed to be an indictment of fascism?” Nope! Like many threads of the extended metaphor, it just gets abandoned to disappear into big battle shonen tropes. And it’s such a wasted opportunity moment because this SHOULD have been the big turn where Satsuki learns she has to tear down the whole terrible system she helped build, but instead it’s like NO, IT WAS ALL SECRETLY GOOD. Which is probably why even Ryūko gets confused about the thematic argument of the last fight, which she can only lampshade and exclaim of the human condition that “NONSENSICAL IS OUR THING!!!!!”

Which is also what could be said of Ryūko’s relationship with Senketsu. The whole entire show I’m constantly asking myself, what is it that makes THIS clothing with life fibers okay compared to others? Because it’s humanized? Because she’s different? The real reason it’s so mush-mouthed is because it actively wants to defy categorization. That’s because the show is playing directly into the undeniable “specialness” of its hero, which is a trend typical of all those YA lit type stories that were all about the fantasy of not being labeled. I’m talking about Hunger Games, Divergent, The Maze Runner, etc. All of which made fun of in this fantastic SNL fake trailer. Simply put, it’s all part of the teenage angst of not wanting to be defined. She tells us this things like this plainly, “I’M NOT HUMAN! AND I'M NOT CLOTHING!” She’s between anything and everything, yet, like a lot of those stories, it doesn’t actually add up to anything beyond said angst.

But luckily, Senketsu is also a pretty interesting, or at least emotionally meaningful character. For much of the show, he’s a confidant, supporter, and figure of commiseration. And at the end, he delivers the stalwart, perfect line of lip service that actually had me suddenly second guessing the show’s entire awareness level. Because as he burns up in the atmosphere to protect Ryūko, he says the magic words: “a girl outgrows her sailor uniform, wear whatever you want.” Boom. There it is. The thing that transcends the whole issue of control and the madonna / whore complex and is 100% about giving autonomy to the central character. Wear whatever you want. And I really, really want to honor the fact that this show knows that this should be the final line. But let’s be frank, it would mean so much more if it wasn’t IMMEDIATELY juxtaposed by having her crashing into a big warm naked pile of everyone on the ground. Hurray! Every character is finally naked! Between the lip service of “wear what you want” and the final shots, you can’t help but laugh a little. Because the big naked pile is just what the show so CLEARLY wants out of the entire show.

Which leads to the 10,000 question of Kill La Kill: is that what you want, too?

I don’t ask this negatively. This is my whole thing about trash art. It’s okay to love something that doesn’t quite add up. And I implicitly get the allure of a show that just essentially adds up to a big fun naked pile. The whole point is NOT to be ashamed of this. Especially given how much Battle Shonen is even more masculine and angsty. To suddenly get a show that’s fun and kink / queer friendly? It must feel like a breath of fresh air. And where it was easy to criticize the show’s more dramatic intentions, like dropping a Far From The Madding Crowd reference in an episode title, maybe that’s precisely the kind of self-seriousness that helps the show edge into camp over satire. Truth be told, I actually think the show could stand to be even MORE trashy. I mean, if we’re upending social mores here then how close can this come to Pink Flamingos? I kid, I kid. But It’s something that also helps me realizing just how much anime is overtly sexual without any actual sex (or even a kiss). Perhaps it’s just part of the same push / pull of hang-ups? I’m not sure (and would love to hear your thoughts on this). I just know that for whatever conundrums exist, unlike a lot of Snyder's work, Kill La Kill at least has the dignity to be utterly silly. But finally comes down to that last question I said at the start: “In the end, how or why does it connect to our own impulses, motivations, and sense of humor?” And that’s the thing I probably have the most trouble with in comparison to many of you…

Because a lot of it doesn’t make me laugh?

To be clear, it has moments that do. There’s the hacker guy sexy posing as he types all over his body. Then there’s the scientist commenting on his bad naming conventions and exclaiming “scientists don’t care how well things go over!” And, of course, there’s how episode 7 completely comes together into a perfect little narrative. But a lot of it just doesn’t make me laugh. I can’t help it. I feel like I can always see the joke. And that I understand the joke. But there’s no real turn on expectation for me? And sometimes it’s clear things that rankle, like how the first few episodes have not one, not two, not three, but four sexual assault fake outs for goofs and I’m like… No. This does not play over here. In a similar vein, a friend was asking why the Mako character doesn’t quite work for them when often that personality type is one of their favorite kind of characters and it’s a good question. I think it falls back to the Calvinball approach because in the end, all jokes are built on tension. Tension needs drama. And drama needs set-ups and payoffs. So instead, Mako is more a constant parade of silly behavior and affectations. I really do get the essence of it, but it’s all the problem of texture over function. So as crazy as a lot of the events are, instead of playing like Kung Fu Hustle (probably one of my favorite movies), it is (or I am) missing the internal joke logic a la Looney Tunes and it’s just going off on its own calvinball wavelength. But admittedly, this could just be the part where I don’t have the necessary framework.

I know I always use the term “mileage may vary,” but that’s because it’s important to invoke in this conversation between us. Wherever I am in this anime journey, there’s something simultaneously hitting and missing for me about this show.. Going back to the other metaphor I always use of “i don’t know how to eat this.” I imagine many of you can eat right up for all the many beautiful reasons I’ve outlined. And like in Promare, Trigger Studio is just so good at creating these queer friendly vibes that can feel like an nutritious oasis in the middle of a proverbial food desert. But for me, personally? It’s a bit more like bubble gum. It’s something I like tasting and chewing on, even blowing a bubble or two. But in the end it kind of loses flavor and I ultimately don’t want to swallow it? Look, it’s a silly, reductive metaphor, but it does work as an extended one. And in the end, there’s one thing that’s absolutely undeniable, thatl speaks to your recommendation, and is probably the thing I like about it best…

This show is trashy in its bones. And unlike other properties…

It has the courage to wear that on their sleeve.

Saying What!? To SARAZANMAI

Have you ever been completely confused by a show?

Like, on every possible level? Because that’s Sarazanmai for me. I watched this show with Landon and every episode there were five or six moments where we would go “wait, what!?” in total confusion. But let’s just start broadly with the background lore behind the show’s conceit because I was totally unfamiliar. The story is about three angsty-yet-vulnerable middle school boys (a troubled bad boy, a cross-dressing Idol impersonator, and a closeted queer soccer lover who has a crush on the other boy) and they the get caught up in a metaphysical adventure where they transformed into Kappas, which are frog-like reptilian creatures “found in traditional Japanese folklore, Kappa can become harmful when they are not respected as gods. They are typically depicted as green, human-like beings with webbed hands and feet and a turtle-like carapace on their back. The kappa are known to favor cucumbers and love to engage in sumo wrestling. They are often accused of assaulting humans in water and removing a mythical organ called the shirikodama from their victim's anus.”

If that’s not a hell of a description then I don’t know what is.

But the thing about the organ is that in this show is that “they are balls located in the anus that contains the physical manifestation of one's desires,” but really it’s a kind of soul essence, too? And so much of the show is about animating the extraction of these things and you really really got to see the animation of these sequences, but sadly the only version of the clip I could find was on this reddit post.  To be honest, the vagueness of what the shirikodama is, or could be, is kind of the point. Becomes a placeholder for whatever metaphorical thing in the story they want to tell. But all of this unfolds with this big introductory episode that I’m sure makes more sense if you understand the cultural references, but is at least gettable for us with some wiki tabs open.

But what makes matters more daunting is the show’s structure. Every episode is a kind of mystery where we’ll get these images, or a perplexing set-up and then by the end of the episode there will be “leaks” and we realize some truth that one of the three of them is trying to hide and then we’ll have to deal with consequences. They’ll also get wish plates for doing this and, again, this is confusing, especially as that’s not really the conceit of the plot that drives most episodes. Really, each episode has metaphysical journey where they have to solve some random case of a person who is on the verge of letting their desires become monstrous and turned into zombies or something - and thus they must get their shirikodama to have them admit the thing they’re afraid to and pass on. That may sound confusing, but it’s actually pretty close to the Persona games if you’ve ever played those? Also, they’re competing with an evil otter being who is using to cops to facilitate all these monsters so… yeah. It’s just one of those!

The truth is not trying to otherize any of these conventions because the show is very much having fun turning into its own weirdness. Moreover, any weird lore or conceit can work if a show guides us through with understanding acumen. But what makes Sarazanmai truly confusing is that it has the most bizarre way of ordering information imaginable. You remember how I talked in the Barbarian column about how writing is really just organizing the timing of information? Where you walk through what people in the audience know when to create a dramatic experience? Well, I am hard pressed to think of a piece of media with a more bizarre sense of that. Each and every scene just throws you into the deep end with absolutely no sense of what you really should be taking away, sometimes not even by the scenes end. The minute-to-minute logic is so bewildering that you’re playing this constant game of catch-up to get a sense of what’s even happening.

To wit, the following are some of my real actual notes I took while watching:

-HOW OLD ARE ANY OF THESE PEOPLE?

-Wait, do they know or not know that stuff just happened?

-“are they fighting the concept of soccer!??!?!”

-WHO THE FUCK IS THIS LADY

-Why are the things sexy now? Why are they a couple?!?!?

There are A LOT of notes like this. And these are all a testament to the perpetual confusion and it must seem like I’m coming down hard on this bad show for not making any sense, right? Well, that’s the rub…

Because the show is kinda good anyway?

The thing about all this confusion is that it doesn’t really matter for this kind of show. And it’s not because it’s a trashy show. It’s because we’re firmly in the dream logic zone. And while you might be confused about what in god’s name is actually happening 1) it usually wraps things up with a bit more clarity by the end of the episode and 2) you’re always pretty damn clear about what the characters are FEELING while it all happens. Which is good, because our main three boys are going through some serious shit, whether it’s neglect, loneliness, horrible guilt from accidents, and a surprising amount of gunplay and crime! But even then I feel like the specifics of the plot elements don’t matter that much either. It’s much more about the central push-pull of their own internal drives.

To wit, every episode has a naming convention of “I Want To Connect, But…” and it builds to some thematic point where a main character is wanting to create some sort of lasting emotional connection, but there is some internal part that is stopping them (or in good cases, that they are actually  transcending). It’s not an accident that a lot of these elements deal with queer relationships and behaviors and the characters are very much dealing with the shame of being exposed. Practically every element of the show is zoom right into the dark and punishing nature of being closeted, along with the complicated feelings of trying to reach out from it. For all the lack of clarity in other departments, the emotional clarity with which it brings all this to life is kind of amazing. And it speaks volumes and can connect with an audience in a way that goes so much deeper than logic itself.

In an ideal situation, the show could coast off of this connection and land with aplomb. And maybe for some of you, maybe it does? But perhaps there’s just too much strain on those who can’t just purely dream along with the dream logic of it all. I honestly find myself in between the two instincts, liking what it is, who they are, what they’re about, and ultimately being a bit unsure what to do with its whole variety of arcs. But in that, I recognize that  Sarazanmai  is precisely the kind of show whose “trashiness” only stems from the fact that it’s diving headlong into oddball imagery and outsider characters. It’s all these crazy soul anus extractions, not to mention a million other queer friendly dance sequences, etc. So it all feels like it’s something coming out from the bubbling id. But in uncaring how much it makes sense, it still knows that deep down it is an honest reflection of the heart itself. And in trash art? The emotional value of being earnest - that is being honest about one's exact intentions within the piece - and not getting into the push-pull kinds of defensiveness that has plagued the shows I’ve mentioned thus far? Well, that gets a big old passing grade from me.

But the good news is that trashy art can do even better…

Rom-Com-Ing With RENT-A-GIRLFRIEND

Ahhhh, now this is my exact kind of trash.

Now, thus far I’ve heard a lot about Harem and Reverse-Harem anime and I always thought the idea, if executed right, sounded silly and fun (and probably excruciating if executed poorly). And while Rent-A-Girlfriend (AKA Kanojo, Okarishimasu) might not technically qualify, it’s definitely playing in that space. Because the show concerns the love life of a young college student named Kazuya who, after being dumped and feeling lonely, makes an impulsive decision to try a rental girlfriend. From there, he ends up in a situation where she meets his family, he meets hers, confusion and chaos are sewn, and basically they enter this devil’s bargain situation where they have to continue to pretend to be real life boyfriend and girlfriend - and this obviously becomes a whole thing with his ex and other various love interests. Basically, delightful absurdity ensues.

Do not get me wrong. This show is very, very, very, very stupid. We’re talking hiding under covers and getting accidental boners stupid. We’re also talking overly-touchy, barrier-breaking grandparents stupid. We’re talking multiple life-saving events stupid! But what makes so much of the moment to moment plotting work is that it understands the plotting mechanics of romantic comedies and French farce through and through. To wit, even it’s full of constant contrivances it knows the thing that stops us from going “that’s dumb and unrealistic” is because it’s alsoways catering to the most fun form of conflict I.E. crafting the situation that we secretly want, even if the characters themselves are trying to fight (consider the hated alternative in rom-coms, where they have contrived reasons that push the characters apart). The other reason the show works so well as a rom-com is that this show isn’t so much a Harem show in terms of a “OMG who is he gonna choose!?” But instead is singularly focused on rooting for the two leads and almost everything else serves as a conflict (or better yet, an empathetic dalliance with other people). The rooting mechanics of it all are so, so finely attuned. And ultimately, the show is doing one of my favorite dramatic tactics, which is showcase the ability to take something really, really stupid…

And then make you care so damn much about it.

Take the main love interest Chizuru herself. She could so easily just be a cipher. But it’s so good at showing how much life she has to contort herself into, even when have this situation where Kazuya is clearly projecting on the (paid for) affection into a deeper romantic connection. But the way she draws boundaries and showcases maturity (at least by comparison) is stalwart. Not to mention the way the show not only breaks this down, but slowly pulls back the layers on who she is, what she wants, why she’s really doing this, and what actually builds bonds of friendship and trust within these hyper ridiculous scenarios. Two seasons in, it feels like the smallest of gestures have infinitely more stakes than the big bombastic stuff that came at the start. I am telling you, I have watched soooooooooo many of these kinds of rom com stories and what it’s pulling off is kind of a small miracle? Same goes for the way they do the push pull with the other characters. Every time Ruka (the almost “real” possible girlfriend in the scenario) muddles things to the point of breaking the show, the show finds this sudden, empathetic way of swooping in and reminding you how much she’s a real person who is in this impossible situation, too. And even the show’s “villain” is kind of an amazing creation.

I was joking with Landon that a new list of the top villains in all of cinema was released and it was “5. Hannibal Lecter. 4. Voldemort 3. Darth Vader 2. The Joker. 1. Mami-chan.” Apparently, we’re not alone in this and the words “Fuck Mami Chan” have become fully meme-i-fied. What inspires this level of villainization? It’s not that it’s because the character is some puppy-kicking miser. It’s that it gets at this very specific kind of pathological behavior that combines both anxious and avoidant attachment. She’s clearly not understanding her drives and wants as she constantly gets into this deceptive push / pull with Kazuya. Basically, it’s big old control issues writ large. Which is why she can alternate so quickly between wanting his adoration then saying horrible things about him in (Checkov’s) locked social media account. Her cheerful voice performance just makes it all the more stark. And in a rom-com like this, it makes super clear anti-rooting interest. But! I’m also going to say that even though I think the show is genuinely trying to craft the story of an actual human being (specifically in the ways other characters are constantly trying to open up her empathy), there are very, very real ways this kind of portrayal can tap into the misogynistic feelings of an audience. It’s super important to acknowledge that. And it’s just as important to acknowledge the depth of problems within Kazuya himself.

Early on I wrote the note, “Are young Japanese men okay?”

I mean, of course not, I don’t think any men are okay. I’m certainly not okay. And I feel like I've slowly been trying to puke out every shitty value I’ve inherited in this dumb world. But there’s this way we always seem to notice the small differences in shitty values between various cultures. And in watching so much Anime the last couple years, that question really seems to feel prescient? The whole thing is that I don’t really know anything, nor want to assume. There are so many stereotypes about shyness and emotional reservation that I have no idea what feels ACTUALLY culturally accurate, nor what is simply being amped up for storytelling sake. But there’s this way that this show characterizes so much of what I’d call “middle school boys psychology” with women and sexuality, even though all the characters are in college? This is probably just to make the mechanics of the more adult-subject matter work, but I have no idea what social mores and norms expect of when romantic things actually start happening. There’s this strange push / pull of sexuality in all of it. I’ve never seen a show that is so hugely obsessed with sexual thoughts and imaginings and yet has so little actual sex or anything even CLOSE in it? Unlike Kill La Kill, the purity myth stuff seems to be alive and kicking? But this seems true of so much anime I watch? To which, I question you, is this just about TV standards? Is this a more cultural headspace thing? Help me out there because I’m curious.

Either way, the important thing is Kazuya is absolutely depicted at first as a barely functioning idiot with a lot of toxic assumptions baked in. His headspace is a minefield of fears of emasculation and so much more. The thing I simply appreciate is how much the show seems to be about the gradual nuking of all of Kazuya’s delusions and assumptions. Every time he projects onto another character or tries to be cool, it blows up in his face and he needs to recognize what he needs to mature about. The show keeps playing that balance with shocking functionality. First, it will play the tongue and cheek farce, especially the way his brain explodes if he sees a girl's thigh or something. But it always finds the way to whittle all that away and get at something more rooted in human connection, specifically the emotional support of someone going through hardship.

I also like how the show seems to really dig into the psychology and needs of rental girlfriend culture in again. Again, it’s something I know nothing about. And I’m sure it could have been used as a simple plot device to propel the main scenario of the show. But instead it really takes its time and zooms into not just the mechanics of it all? Especially the central thematic and character elements of the enterprise itself: loneliness, projection, the way we will play roles for others and what we really feel under all that in our hearts. It’s all part of the way the show will be so, so, so, so stupid and then find the weird emotional heart underneath it.

Ultimately, Rent-A-Girlfiend is my exact kind of trash because it’s full of all the absurdity and contrivances that power the dumbest of plot-lines, but it also has the writing know-how to dramatize them so efficiently. More importantly, it then knows how to take the “joke,” whatever that joke may be, and figure out the ways to turn them into rousing pay-offs. And they’re the kinds of pay-offs that have so little to do with trashy kisses or boners or whatever else, and more that which reveals a more attune sensitivity to the human wants and needs and traumas and losses that have nothing to do with romance whatsoever. I even wrote the note at one point that this show is “idiots slowly doing things to show they care about each other,” and that could probably be a good subtitle.

* * *

But I understand that this may just be because my impulses value this kind of subject matter in dumb storytelling. Maybe I’m just vibing along with the fantasy. Maybe all three shows are equally deserving and its mere preference that puts this one further for me. Maybe each and every single thing I’ve written in this column is part of a push / pull. With trash, it’s hard to be entirely sure. I just know that, in the end, all three shows are reflective of how I don’t think trash is a bad word. Because I don’t think calling something “trash art” is indicative of something that is unworthy, less than, or should be thrown out. It’s just a word that lets others know that there are plenty of reasons that this piece of art could be easily dismissible by others. That you see and acknowledge its perceived lack of value. But as the old idiom goes, one person’s trash is another’s treasure. And like all the very real trash art sculptures that populate the world, it just takes a little love and effort to transform it.

And a little appreciation to truly see it.

<3HULK