Talk:Original English-language manga

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, which aims to improve and expand anime and manga related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.

	comics Portal This article is in the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! Help with current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project talk page.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Please explain the rating here.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
More information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Contents 1 Japanese Story-Telling 2 Manga-Influenced Comics 3 Examples 4 Merge 5 Public use of "OEL Manga" 6 My view 7 Where are we on naming this page? 8 Requested move 8.1 Survey 8.2 Discussion 9 NPOV/Contradiction tags still needed? 10 Unsourced POV statement. 11 "nissei comi" 12 Definition 13 Origin 14 Biased intro? 15 A Better Name/ Opinion 16 Book Sources 17 Reception Has Mistake 18 Citation needed 19 German manga

[edit] Japanese Story-Telling

Y'know, something tells me it is possible to have a manga-styled work with American story telling. Currently, that has not happened yet; and indeed, Wiki is not a crystal ball. However, there is a book called "Manga without Borders" which makes point about localized flavor put into a manga art. KyuuA4 08:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Manga-Influenced Comics

Recommend name change to article. The name recommendation parallels Anime-influenced animation. KyuuA4 15:59, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

• Please read the gigantic discussion below on exactly what you're recommending. Luvcraft 18:01, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Examples

Does anyone know of any Amerimanga examples prior to the mid-eighties Shuriken and Eagle? Aside from Ninja High School, those are the earliest ones and I'm getting ready to work on the history portion of this article, so any assistance would help. If anyone has any information in this regard, please drop me a line at my talk page about it. Thanks.--Mitsukai 04:07, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Merge

This article is redundant to Manga outside Japan. It is an article that covers the same topics and issues involving OEL manga, without the Anglo-centric theme. KyuuA4 01:19, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Not really. That article mostly talks about the publication of manga from Japan in other countries. Notice that it has a link to la nouvelle manga which is an article which parallels this current article, but for French instead of English.—pfahlstrom 07:22, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Not that there is anything from Original English-language manga to merge. But at the very least, Original English-language manga should be redirected to Amerimanga. --TheFarix (Talk) 20:06, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

To me "Amerimanga" is a neologism and an Amero-centric thitle that is not in keeping with WP:CSB. A more neutral term should be used for the phenomenon. --Kunzite 02:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Manga-influenced comics (MICs) is a nice neutral term I've seen pop up on discussions about this subject. However I can accept maintaining Amerimanga as an entry solely on the magazine that bore the name. --72.137.173.201 18:28, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Um, how is Amerimanga a neologism when it's been used for over twenty years (see my statement from above; all those series are from the early to mid-eighties)? If anything, OEL is a neologism, not Amerimanga. Is it Amerocentric? Yes - but that still does not deny the existence of the earlier term.--み使い Mitsukai 14:05, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I disagree with the merge. Amerimanga has been used, but it I don't believe it was honestly that popular, much like "Japanimation". I've definitely heard OEL used far more often in the past couple of years as a generic term for this American-made manga. Both terms were created by companies publicizing their work, but I believe OEL-manga deserves its own page, especially since it has a recent history that can be written up and its growing neologism status (rather independently of Wikipedia). Also, it is a commercial label that applies to a line of books, like CMX or Vertigo. Also, most google results for "Amerimanga" result in ads for that specific anthology. --SevereTireDamage 03:05, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

The problem with OEL is that Tokyopop, the company that promoted its use has dropped it in favour of "global manga"(which has its own problems, but I won't get into that here). So whatever grassroots use it has garnered will fade without the company reinforcing the term. It's worthy a subsection at most in a general article about non-japanese manga style comics. --72.137.173.201 20:07, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I think that the merger should occur, but that the article should remain as Amerimanga for historical purposes. If needed, the article can reflect that the term has since fallen into regional use. By doing so, that's not systemic bias, that's accurate reporting, as there are tons of amerimanga artists (including some that work for Tokyopop) who use the term amerimanga, even if the company itself does not.--み使い Mitsukai 20:24, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

"OEL" was not promoted or pushed by TOKYOPOP. It spread purely as an internet meme and then became a print meme with ICv2 and Publishers Weekly. People started using it because it was a good descriptive term, and they still use it far more often than "Global Manga" (though that has seen some use such as on MangaCast). —pfahlstrom 21:21, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Are you sure? Beside the interview cite from June 2005 that I already put up, even a cursory google search shows that many major news sites (Newsarama, ICv2, Comic Book Resources, ComicCon's official site) use it even to discuss both Tokyopop and non-Tokyopop books today. This August 2005[1] CBR review flat out says Tokyopop was calling their books OEL at that point, which I already believe started with the June Newsarama interview. Not to mention Seven Seas bought the oelmanga.com domain. To say that there is no push from actual companies to use "OEL manga" as a term doesn't seem particularly accurate. --SevereTireDamage 21:52, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

You're offering evidence against your statement. I'm saying that the push for "OEL" was from the artists themselves and the news sites, not TOKYOPOP or Seven Seas. Please read my comment at the bottom of this Talk page. In the Jeremy Ross interview, it was Heidi MacDonald who brought up "OEL" first, then Jeremy responded--if you'll note, Jeremy said the TOKYOPOP internal term was actually OGM, a portmanteau of Original Graphic Novel and the M from "manga," and no one could decide for sure what it stood for, so they called it "Original Gangsta Manga." (The G now stands for "Global," but before the announcement of "Global Manga," TOKYOPOP's policy was always to just externally call it manga. I know that Rivkah had an advertisement on her own website calling her book Steady Beat "Authentic American Manga" which TOKYOPOP was not exactly pleased with; she changed it to read "Authentic American Shoujo.") In the Newsarama interview, Benjamin Ong Pang Kean is not a TOKYOPOP employee. And the CBR article is hearsay, not a direct quote; Tony Salvaggio hung out on pseudome.net where Carlo Santos and many of the creators also hung out, using the term constantly; it's easy to see where he got confused. See my other comments in the other section below. But anyway, as you say, many of the news organizations are still using OEL rather than "Global Manga," which is evidence against 72.137.173.201's claim that the grassroots support will fade away. —pfahlstrom 22:34, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Look: I have cited several reliable sources from different times that are interviews with Tokyopop people or artists, where their work is being labeled "OEL manga". I am not denying the term picked up steam on the internet - however - I am citing evidence here that shows Tokyopop promoted it. Your interpretation is that they were passive observers and did little to nothing to push the term. This despite that they are in fact the largest OEL manga publisher. Despite lots and lots of press labeling their work as OEL, they just didn't seem to care the label, it was all the media. If it's Tokyopop artists pushing, well, isn't that the same thing? Then later the companie goes out of their way to distance themselves from "OEL manga", even though they never actually supported it in the first place? Honestly, I believe this is stretching the bounds of reasonable doubt. --SevereTireDamage 02:29, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

What is your definition of "promote"? You have not cited evidence that TOKYOPOP has actively promoted it, just that they have not discouraged its use in those articles. None of those articles show TOKYOPOP promoting it. And no, TOKYOPOP artists using it is not the same thing. TOKYOPOP artists are all freelance. They do not work in the company offices; they are not on the company payroll. They do not work for TOKYOPOP any more than J.K. Rowling works for Scholastic. Some of the series they work on are done under a shared copyright, but Rikki & Tavisha of ShutterBox specifically do not--they have full control over all rights concerning their manga, and they have vocally disagreed with TOKYOPOP decisions in the past; there is no reason to believe they would toe any company line.

If you find a press release from TOKYOPOP or advertisement from them that uses the phrase, then that will be proving they promoted its use. TOKYOPOP has put out plenty of press releases over the years, and they are available on the TOKYOPOP website as well as archived in other places such as animenewsservice.com, so it should not be hard for you to find an example if one exists. Advertisements are trickier, of course, but a press release should be easy to find. As for me, I'm not sure what you want ME to prove; it's hard for me to argue from a vacuum. Why would someone write and publish an article explaining that TOKYOPOP never officially promoted their books as OEL? —pfahlstrom 05:27, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

And no offense, but you saying that Salvaggio is wrong without anything to back it up is also unreliable and original research. All you have to do is find a reliable source to back up your assertions about the "OEL manga" term. Also note that according to WP:RS, blogs, self-published sources and vanity press are inherently reliable and can not be used to verify claims, in particular with Santos' claim, his blog should not be used as a sole source, if at all, about his originating the term. I would not consider him a "well known, professional researcher", especially with his claims being on a low-traffic personal blog, not to mention they're about crediting himself. (Not to mention he wasn't even writing his ANN column at the time, so his claim to popularizing it through forums, also unreliable, is borderline unverifiable.) You called it weasel wording, which I can understand at first glance, however I was merely reflecting the inherent unreliability of the statement and source. Just find a reliable secondary source (such as the ComicFoundry article), we don't need to go through this argument. Just find external proof; that's all you need to do. --SevereTireDamage 02:29, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

If you like, I will write to Salvaggio and ask him to clarify this issue. I have read through WP:RS, and it does not seem at all clear on whether someone's statements about themselves can be considered a valid source. Aren't personal journals generally considered to be primary sources? It's not like Carlo is saying "someone I know did this" or "when X is added to Y, Z happens"—he is saying "On this day, I did such and such thing." There is no way anyone else could give a more reliable account of his own actions than he himself can. Could he possibly NOT be the first person to use the term? Yes, but nobody else has claimed it, so unless you go out and find evidence that someone else came up with it, why isn't his personal account good enough? He also did not claim to popularize it through forums. The OEL manga creator community is pretty small, but quite active on the internet, and they read each others' blogs regularly. Carlo was responding to Queenie Chan's blog, and she responded in kind and it was picked up by Rivkah and it went from there. Tony Salvaggio himself is a writer for an OEL manga called Psy-Comm, for example, and he and many other creators hang out on the forums of the Van Von Hunter creators, at pseudome.net, where they discuss TOKYOPOP and the manga industry as a whole. It's no surprise that he started using it in his "Calling Manga Island" columns, and it's easy to see why he might assume that TOKYOPOP was using it, if so many of their artists were. The phrase spread through blogs and forums; Heidi MacDonald is a very prolific comics blogger who also started doing work for Publishers Weekly's comics coverage, so when she picked up the term it's not a big jump at all to Publishers Weekly using it. —pfahlstrom 05:27, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Early to mid-80's can still be a neologism. There was an article on "Proteanism" that was recently culled because it was a neologism. The word was originally coined in the 1800's and used once or twice in acadmic papers. The word never entered into mainstream usage and it was still a neologism when it was deleted. We should find a neutral term that defines this phenomenon and describe it with that term and not the marketing phrase that was hot in a particular year. "Original English-language Manga" is a phrase that could be used, though it apparently has attachments to a publisher. What about "Manga inspired comic books"? Google search says that "World manga" is more popular than "amerimanga".

Finally, reading this article again, it seems to be mostly OR and REALLY needs some sourcing for such statements as:"However, "OEL Manga" has also received criticism from some quarters. According to some Western anime and manga otaku, this word would be an oxymoron, since the word "manga," being a Japanese word, would inherently mean that the comic was published in Japan. Some of these people refer to "Amerimanga" instead as "Manga-Influenced Comics" (usually abbreviated to MIC) in an effort to disambiguate the use of the word "manga" to refer to works created outside of Japan." Who are these "otaku" or these "some people" and why do we give a damn about what they say? --Kunzite 12:45, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

"Manga inspired/influenced comic books" is probably the most neutral way to go. It describes what the subject is without using marketing-speak or omitting certain cultures/languages/geographies. I lean towards "influenced" myself because it's basically comic books that have incorporated certain elements of manga.--72.137.173.201 20:05, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I would actually go for "Manga-influenced comics" so that it also covers non-comic books (there is a subtle distinction on Wikipedia between comics and comic books, see Category:Comics terminology and Category:Comic book terminology)such as the many manga-inspired webcomics and the rare example of newspaper print comics such as The Boondocks. I also would prefer this sort of neutral term over the current "Amerimanga".

As far as OEL manga goes, I hadn't realized they dropped the name.[2] I still believe that term and label deserves its own page, considering they broke ground in the industry on a creative and marketing perspective. Many others tried to make a huge impact with this genre, but Tokyopop actually made it into real bookstores piggybacking the success of their imports. It doesn't necessarily have to be included in this article - it's just the current OEL article is pretty weak, even weaker than the section in the main Tokyopop article. --SevereTireDamage 23:09, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, let's go with "Manga-influenced comics". I've edited the article accordingly. I'm not sure what to do about the Amerimanga magazine section. Reading over the Studio Ironcat article, it only lasted for less than a year, so it doesn't seem to be all that significant compared to other publications of the subject. I think OEL would be better as a section in this article, as part of a general history of manga-influenced comics. It's not going to go much further with Tokyopop pushing new terms around. --72.137.173.201 04:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Excuse me? I don't particularly like the word "Amerimanga" myself, but it was the status quo, and it does have decades of use. I do not like "Manga-influenced comics," because this implies that 1. Manga are not comics, 2. Comics are only in English, and 3. Manga in Japan is not influenced by other manga.

"Original English-language manga" is a simple descriptive phrase invented by one particular blogger, and has not been used in any official capacity by any publisher, but it HAS been used in industry publications like Publishers Weekly. "Global Manga" is the one attached to a publisher, TOKYOPOP, and they use it to refer to anything produced outside Japan, including works in Korean or German.

Anyway, I don't feel comfortable with an unregistered user moving this page with no formal RfC or vote. As much as the word pains me, I think it's best to go back to the status quo until a more neutral yet appropriate term can be decided upon.—pfahlstrom 00:05, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, by the way, I do support "Manga-influenced comics" if it is used as an umbrella term covering manga as well, so that all comics influenced by manga, whether they come from inside Japan or outside of it, may be called "manga-influenced comics." That's the only way the term makes sense in my book. "Manga-influenced comics" as a superset of "manga"—if that's the way it gets explained, I'm all for it. —pfahlstrom 00:18, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I reverted. We did have a discussion on the matter. I really find "Animanga" to be too Amerocentric of a term for this phenomenon, even though it might have had some prior, very minor, usage, based on a magazine name. If there is a better, country neutral term that we can use to describe these works of fiction that draw inspiration from the Japanese manga medium(and sometimes call themselves "manga".) I personally DO not feel that this term needs to make reference to the fact that "manga in Japan are influeced by other manga" that's a given since Osamu Tezuka and his cinematic style gave birth to the modern genre and belongs in the main manga article. I also do not believe that the article insinuates that all comics are written in English. --Kunzite 01:26, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I reverted back. I see the discussion, and I don't see convincing consensus beyond the idea that "Amerimanga" is a bad term. I also don't see support in the wild for the term "manga-influenced comics." There are 18,000 hits for "amerimanga" (and the usage did NOT begin with the short-lived magazine; it's been around since the early 80s with Ninja High School, etc.) and only 527 for "manga-influenced comics." "World manga" gives almost 30,000 hits, but it's difficult to determine how many of them are actually talking about non-Japanese manga (the top hit, for instance, is definitely talking about Japanese manga). However, "oel manga" gives 11,800 hits, much higher than 527, and it's doubtful any of those hits are for pages not talking about this subject. In fact, searching for the terms not in quotes gives 88,000 hits, and again, it's likely that any page with both of the words on it is actually talking about this subject, since "oel" is an unlikely combination of letters.

The term "OEL manga" has large support in the wild, while "manga-influenced comics" has almost none. However it does by definition restrict itself to things written in English. What does this article want to be about—does it want to be about any comics influenced by the Japanese tradition, or does it want to focus on the comics of one language? In the past the "Amerimanga" article certainly focused on things published in English, but a broader scope might be better. Of course, I also do not have any problem applying the term "manga" to something that originates outside of Japan, any more than I have any problem applying the word "sushi" or "pizza" or "cheddar" to something made not in Japan, Italy, or the English county of Cheddar.

Anyway my point is that while Amerimanga is a bad term, "manga-influenced comics" is neither adequate nor actually in use. This article should have a name that is actually used by people involved with what it describes. —pfahlstrom 02:18, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

The problems is that your search is flawed. A basic "Animanga" search on google turns up all of the commercial sites that have the Animanga magazine for sale. Your hits are also skewed because you do not exclued the word wikipedia from the search. Guess we'll have to do a formal move request... --Kunzite 12:44, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

That may be, but the vast disuse of the term "manga-influenced comics" is still clear. (I assume you meant Amerimanga when you wrote Animanga, and it's indeed difficult to separate out the hits that refer to the magazine rather than the term.) Excluding wikipedia from search results, "manga-influenced comics" gives only 492 hits, while "OEL manga" gives 9,960. Searching for just the words OEL and manga but limiting to English pages and excluding "wikipedia" and "Öl", the hits are 23,600; jumping to random pages in the Google search results and perusing the results shows that the vast majority are talking about the subject at hand. Conclusion: "OEL manga" is widely used in the wild; "manga-influenced comics" is not.—pfahlstrom 18:01, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

The "manga-influenced comics" is meant to be a descriptive term for a disaprate series of phenomenon. It's not meant to google. I was following what's laid out at WP:NCON in assigning a descriptive name. If you would like to propose an alternative descriptive name, feel free. I have no major attachments to this one. I will also suggest deleting the unsourced, self-referential, nitpicking about this term from the article itself. --Kunzite 00:24, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the link. You will discover that the artists who are involved in the production of the comics addressed in this article do have some Self-identifying names. They identify themselves as mangaka, and they call their product manga, Original English-language manga, or a few other things. As it says in that link, Wikipedia is descriptive, not prescriptive; it is not Wikipedia's job to declare what the name should be, only what it is; it's not Wikipedia's job to tell them they cannot use a term ending in the word "manga," merely to say what term they use. —pfahlstrom 02:09, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

(comment split) Of course, but that usage is universally self-identifying amoung these artists nor is it universally accepted by all persons... so, we should try to find a neutral term to describe them. I personally don't think that we should even use the term "mangaka" on wikipedia because it violated the "use english" directive, but... these things are hard to remove. (Though we were successful at getting rid of dorama.) --Kunzite 03:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

As a purely descriptive term, I have no problem with the terms "manga-influenced comics" or "manga-style comics," as long as they are used to describe that which the words themselves describe: comics that are influenced by manga or are in a manga style, both of which logically include comics from Japan. If the article's first line reads "Manga-influenced comics are non-Japanese comics that..." then that is a logical impossibility I cannot support; if it says something like "Manga-influenced comics are sequential art grounded in the comics movement of Japan and are a global superset of manga," that would be a logically acceptable statement that I would have no problems with. But what is this article about? Is it about any comic stemming from the manga tradition? Or is it about comics stemming from the manga tradition whose original publication is in English? Or those whose original publication is in any language other than Japanese? It might be a good idea to have one article for any comics in the manga tradition which says "Main article: manga" for the Japanese part, "Main article: manhwa" for the Korean part (etc.), and "Main article: Original English-language manga" for the English part; others such as Original German-language manga (examples would include Yonen Buzz and other titles published by TOKYOPOP Germany) could be covered in subsections of the umbrella article. Amerimanga could be a separate article acknowledging the history of the term and the magazine that bore that name, but directing users to Original English-language manga for the current usage. The OEL article could acknowledge the other terms such as "World Manga" and "Global Manga." Controversy could perhaps be kept to the umbrella article so as not to clutter things up. Comics which are influenced by manga but which are not marketed as manga, such as Frank Miller's work, could be touched on by the umbrella article. —pfahlstrom 02:09, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Right now the lead of the article is still mostly crap and it doesn't know what it wants to be. The solution of splitting the article up into many little bits is not what we should be doing. Wikipedia articles on the same topic are usually concatenated into the same article. (i.e. share taxi.) We should have one article. Redirects can take care of shuttling people between the various terms. Amerimanga is no longer the prefered term (I think your google search showed this) and should not be used. OEL manga is better and more current. It's better than Amerimanga. --Kunzite 03:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think what I described was "the same topic"; I thought I described three separate (though related) topics, each of which would get their own article. Subsets articles that would be linked to by the umbrella article already exist—manga, manhwa, manhua, and la nouvelle manga; Original English-language manga would be another; unless you suggest combing all 5 topics into one superarticle, which I don't think is a good idea, it makes sense to have an umbrella article for these 5 closely related comic styles as well as to act as a catch-all for things like Original German-language manga which may not be notable enough to get their own articles. Finally, "Amerimanga" could maybe then be a disambig article leading to the OEL article as one option and to the Studio Ironcat article as another option, since the magazine is already discussed in detail there. That would mean only one new page would be made--the umbrella article. —pfahlstrom 05:27, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

First of all, I performed the move, not an anonymous user. Second, Amerimanga in particular was a bad term for this page, because even though it's been around for a while, it never caught on and even has a negative connotation now (according to Tokyopop and Anime News Network, anyway). Not only that, but just about any term that falls into ___ manga is inherently going to be somewhat off by definition, since manga only comes from Japan, just as you won't call The Powerpuff Girls anime by any stretch of the imagination. I personally don't see any of the connotations you mentioned with "manga-influenced comics".

What's important here is the subject of the this article: Western comics being influenced by manga. It's not Wikipedia's job to coin neologisms. The position I am taking here is that it is better to take a more neutral term is better than using a failed neologism that has arguably been supplanted by OEL manga, World manga, what have you. However, it seems that these terms themselves are rather fleeting, so again, it seems to make sense that we take an article title that will make sense. "Manga-influenced comics" to most people will convey the main topic: Western comic books influenced by manga. Would you prefer Japanese-influenced comics? (Though that would probably be too broad.) The "manga being influenced by other manga" statement has nothing to do with this article at all, as of course all artists are influenced by their peers.

If you have a suggestion, I'm open to hearing it. So far, though, the articles for keeping Amerimanga aren't very strong, besides the historical value. Other existing terms are too new to be used (as the Tokyopop announcement even indicates). A neutral title that isn't a coined term makes sense here. --SevereTireDamage 03:20, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Then call it Western comics influenced by manga or Manga-influenced comics from outside of Japan. Neither of those is particularly wieldy, but they more accurately describe the subject than "Manga-influenced comics." However, I do in fact disagree with your definition of manga. I do not see any reason why manga must come from Japan, as I said—pizza doesn't have to come from Italy, an American can learn karate, etc. etc. Most of the people who actually draw the stuff discussed in this article just call it manga.—pfahlstrom 04:50, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I still prefer the short "manga-influenced comics", as those phrases sound like a specified list rather than a concept. I'll give you that many Westerners do call their comics manga, but that doesn't mean it's not being misappropriated (as Korean comics also being sold in America as "manga"). By the same reasoning, American slasher films are not considered giallo. Also I believe most of these comic creators, even the ones mentioned in this article, still call the comics, simply "comics" (Does Bryan O'Malley call his books manga? Frank Miller, Aaron McGruder?), but that's pretty hard to prove either way. Still, I would like to hear a greater consensus either way, so I will leave messages on the Comic and Anime/Manga Wikiprojects. --SevereTireDamage 05:32, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

"manga-influenced comics" does not inherently refer to things produced outside of Japan; it refers to comics produced inside Japan as well. As for Bryan O'Malley, he says his work isn't trying to be manga [3], though it has manga influences. This Amerimanga article originally was about non-Japanese comics that are more or less trying to be manga; more mainstream comics such as Frank Miller's which show manga influences but which were always intended to be marketed toward the American comics crowd are not really the same thing. (That's another problem with "manga-influenced comics"...it's just so broad.) (However, I do know that Chuck Austen, who has been creating American comics for years, does call his baseball sex comedy Boys of Summer manga.)

Korean comics are marketed as manga for a good reason: they appeal to the same crowd. If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck... English is an ever-changing language. Terms come to have different meanings as time goes by. I am a descriptivist; in short, I believe the way people actually use words is what defines what correct usage is.—pfahlstrom 05:52, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I haven't commented in this in a couple of weeks, but I was asked to by a friend, so I will. Frankly, I think Amerimanga should stay. It is no longer politically correct? Absolutely, assuming it ever was. But that's not the point. The point of the matter is that the first generation of amerimanga-ka (or amerimanga artists, for nitpickers) chose to call it that to seperate themsselves from being "knockoff superhero artists", "indie comickers" or "those guys who normally draw the Robotech comic". Frankly, I don't see any of that mentioned in the history section, and that bothers me (I note that it's mentioned in the main manga article). To anything less than that is historical revisionism.

As long as we explain that amerimanga is the historical term, we should keep it as is. Yes, I agree that it is now out of vogue and that in truth, it should all be called “manga” or “comics” (including that in the CJK triangle) To come up with a "more descriptive" name is not only coining a neologism, the more descriptors added merely serves to balkanize the creations. As one of the artists once said at an anime convention (it was at Katsucon 2004, sorry, but I don't remember the exact artist who said it), "I want to be known as a manga-ka. If I wanted to be a comics artist, I'd be drawing Superman."--み使い Mitsukai 17:25, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Funny, I've been reading manga and manga-inspired comics for decades (two, two is plural ;) ), and I've never heard them called 'Amerimanga'. Well, maybe once or twice, by some fan who had fallen into the 'if it's from Japan it must be better' trap. Certainly not as any sort of generic term. I'd much prefer to see something akin to "Manga-influenced comics"; maybe "Manga-style western comics" (maybe). Do keep in mind that 'actual manga' would, in the sense of this kind of term, not be influenced by manga, it is part of the definition of what is doing the influencing. You don't talk about the influence of Western Culture on itself, you talk about its influence on the rest of the world, or you break it down to component pieces and talk about their influence on each other. 'Manga-influenced comics' would be talking about the influnce of manga (a particular, if exceedingly general, type of comic) on all other comics. --Rindis 18:38, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I can't find an article on the Influence of Western culture. I did find Early western influence in Fujian, but Fujian is a specific place, not a gernal term like "comics" which already includes manga. Can you find an article that's analogous?

Kingdom Hearts is a Disney-influenced manga. However, it also has manga influences. So yes, even though it is itself a manga, it is still influenced by manga. It is a manga-influenced comic, a manga-style comic, and a manga. Manga-influenced comics by definition include manga; manga are drawn in a manga style so therefore they are manga-style comics. —pfahlstrom 20:21, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Simple: Japan-influenced comics

[edit] Public use of "OEL Manga"

I highlighted Publishers Weekly's use, because they are one of the few authoritative voices, if not THE authoritative voice, in the news of the publishing industry, so it was the most notable use. I do know that Jeremy Ross used the word "OEL" a few times in his letters from the editor in the monthly Manga Online section of tokyopop.com, but this was only after the term appeared in the print edition of Publishers Weekly. (The Tokyopop website was recently overhauled though and I can't find those letters anymore.) I have not found any advertisements or press releases from Tokyopop using the term; the press releases at least are available on the website. I do know that as Tokyopop has decided to use "global manga," Seven Seas pushed the term "world manga" when they first announced their line of original titles, but they soon dropped this in favor of just "manga." They did snap up the URL oelmanga.com soon after the term became popular (this may be one reason Tokyopop went with "global manga"--so they could get the domain), and the word appears in a July 2005 posting with their Aoi House webcomic, but I've been unable to find a press release or advertisement from Seven Seas either officially using the term "OEL." Most of the reputable non-forum uses of the term to refer to Tokyopop's or Seven Seas' non-Japanese manga seems to be in the form of news articles written by outside sources such as PW, Comic Book Resources, ICv2, etc. —pfahlstrom 06:20, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My view

It says in the article "the term "OEL Manga," or Original English Language Manga, is most commonly used today.". Therefore, as Wikipedia articles should be at the most common names, this article should be at OEL Manga.
That, and Amerimanga is a silly name. --Jamdav86 09:25, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. It is indeed by far the most common term to reference them. The fact that is has the word "manga" attached. It is a step in the right direction. KyuuA4 08:47, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

It was decided prior to the move that the page for Original English-language manga was to be merged here to Amerimanga. I disagreed, but went along with the consensus. However, if we choose to move this page to OEL manga, that means non-English Western manga (such as German, French, Spanish, etc.) would probably need its own page. I suppose one solution is to keep Amerimanga (which almost everyone here seems to accept is not the preferred page title) and OEL manga on the OEL page and have an international umbrella article as proposed by pfahlstrom. I don't think we really need to split the articles, or that all the other movements are strong enough on their own to warrant a page, though. --SevereTireDamage 22:14, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

The International influence part of the manga article might be a good place to start for the umbrella article. If nothing else happens in the next few days I'll try to find time to give it a go. —pfahlstrom 01:38, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Where are we on naming this page?

Discussion has died down. Is there a concensus? Should I open formal move request? --Kunzite 17:28, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Please, someone just move it away from this page. --Jamdav86 17:30, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

The general consensus was that the article should not stay at Amerimanga. The problems are, where should this moved to, and what should the scope of this article be? For instance, is everyone okay with moving this page to Original English-language manga and excluding the international influence of manga on the West, and keeping the focus on American/English/Canadian manga that directly imitates (clearly and plainly, not just influenced by) Japanese manga? --SevereTireDamage 05:05, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, there are not that many "Euromanga" and there are already seperate articles for manhwa and manhua. And it doesn't necessarily exclude non-english manga--there could be a section on non-english manga-style comics. I don't care for "OEL manga", but I suppose "Manga-influenced western comics" wouldn't fly either. --Kunzite 05:33, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I still have the same opinions as last mentioned (two articles), but am unfortunately too busy right now to make a major contribution. —pfahlstrom 05:14, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

[edit] NPOV/Contradiction tags still needed?

Is the neutrality of the article still in dispute? Also, which article(s) does it appear to contradict? —pfahlstrom 17:38, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

The original tagging author didn't leave any comments here, but I think s/he was referring to this paragraph:

However, "OEL Manga" has also received criticism from some quarters. According to some Western anime and manga [[otaku]], this word would be an [[oxymoron]] since the word "manga," being a Japanese [[loanword]], in English use initially meant comics published in Japan for a Japanese audience. For instance, comics in China ([[manhua]]) and Korea ([[manhwa]])—which are often labeled by Westerners as manga—do show many influences from Japanese manga, but are not described locally as manga; however, comics from Japan are not called "manga" in those countries either, so the relevance of this point is debatable. Those who prefer not to use the word "manga" to refer to non-Japanese-origin comics have proposed the term "manga-influenced comics" as a possible neutral term for to works created outside of Japan, but this term does not inherently refer to non-Japanese comics, but simply to any comic which is influenced by manga, which would include comics produced in Japan as well.

But it looks to me like any contradictions there have already been removed, so I'll toss the tags. Vectro 02:41, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unsourced POV statement.

The conversion of American comics into the Manga style, as in the case of the Marvel Mangaverse has also drawn ire from some American comic fans, as they feel the format is unsuited towards American comic heroes such as Spider-Man. Of course, this has also drawn in the ire of some fanboys who decry the trend towards making American comics into manga, as an invasion that threatens the future of all American comics. This is, however, in all likelihood, nothing more than typical fanboy v. fanboy arguments that are common from everything from comic books to fantasy. (Harry Potter v. Lord of the Rings, Star Wars v. Star Trek, etc.)

Please re-source it and remove biased statements before re-adding it. --Kunzite 03:14, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Judging by the popularity of Harry Potter Doujinshis, I can see the fans letting the concept of an HP manga slide by (as long as it was drawn talentedly). Interview With the Vampire had a Japanese manga that looked SO much better than the Vampire Lestat American comics. LikaLaruku 8:33 pm 27 November 2006

[edit] "nissei comi"

I see a lot of works online using the word "nissei comi" to refer to OEL manga, but the word "nissei" is incorrect. Second generation (usually referring to second-generation Japanese Americans) is termed nisei, not nissei (nisei comi has also been used before, though to a lesser extent). It's also not at all clear who refers to these - are they Japanese, or are they American purists? ColourBurst 21:15, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Definition

In general, I wouldn't concider ALL nonasian oriented mangas to be Amerimanga, but rather Euromanga or Eigomanga. Amerimanga brings "Amerime" to mind. Manga from anywhere, even Japan, that has terrible character designs, usually it's an American Artist who trys to encorperate simplistic Anime style instead of detailed Manga style. Hellsing manga & Labyrinth manga (chinese artist) have artists who can draw clothes, props, landscapes, the earlier does great hair, but the overall design is sloppy. Anime style hair is very different from manga style hair. Comparing several mangas designs to their anime counterparts character designs is a good way to learn. But there are some Americans who study actual manga & end up making very good, believable character designs. In Amerime, the big offence is using outdated designs; going for the Slayers/Speed Racer/Astro Boy look that was popular in the 90s/70s/60s. LikaLaruku 8:28 pm 27 November 2006

[edit] Origin

This term was coined by Fred Gallagher in a Megatokyo rant, wasn't it? --Masamage 22:37, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Wait, nevermind. I just found the rant I was remembering, and he's totally making fun of it. X) I guess you could use that for a 'criticism' in the article. --Masamage 22:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Biased intro?

Referring to OEL-manga as an "oxymoron" right at the beginning of the page smacks of someone's biases. Something like that is best saved for the "Criticisms" section. The whole article seems biased, but the introduction is the worst. --MayumiTsuji 00:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)MayumiTsuji

Wow. This article has POV written all over it. I tried to improve the intro a bit, but it's almost to the point of needing a complete rewrite for the first several sections. --tjstrf talk 09:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

While it is better to include OEL manga work simply as manga , there exists a resistance to that notion. Other terms such as "world manga", "amerimanga", and the like have been introduced; and OEL manga is the one with the most use. KyuuA4 06:01, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A Better Name/ Opinion

Seeing all this I can't help but think, people (although are right to a degree) think the manga means ONLY Japanese comics correct? Don't people usually use this to decribe the Style of the art here in the West? Or it could be a possibility to create a similar name like the Chinese "Manhua" and Korean "Manhwa" which are basically that nation's version of the Japanese "Manga" ( Not a name incorperating Ameri- though,that is too American Centric, there not the only Western country that creates Manga inspired art) Post Here If You Agree or want to discuss this user:Editor=toast

The Japanese term "manga" according to the Japanese involves ALL comics. Naturally, like anime, we've managed to delegate manga to imply "Japanese only", without consideration of the Japanese meaning itself. However, the differences between comic and manga is distinct to us Westerners. So, we separate manga work from comic work. Regardless, for well over 10 years or so, we do find some non-Japanese work starting to "imitate" manga. Why do we use OEL-manga? It's become the most dominant term used in the industry. That's all. KyuuA4 06:39, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Book Sources

Here is:

• Dream Land Japan, by Fred Schodt

If I find more, I'll link them here. KyuuA4 19:17, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reception Has Mistake

There's a mistake here. Let me explain.

Here's the quote from the cited websource, which, BTW, is a Malaysian on-line newspaper:

"However, licensed manga still fares better than its OEL counterpart, according to an April 2007 article in Austin American-Statesman titled Manga, American-style. The article quoted Lillian Diaz-Przybyl, a Tokyopop editor, as saying that while a top Japanese manga will sell as many as 100,000 copies in the United States, a best-selling OEL will sell only about half of that."

This does not say that the total US sales of OEL manga is half that of import, original-Japanese manga. TokyoPop might want you to believe that, but tain't so. The reason is that import, original-Japanese manga vastly outnumbers US-produced OEL manga in the US. Diaz-Przybyl is talking about individual titles, not the combined market for the two kinds of manga.

Here's how the numbers work. Let's say we have "Jethro, the American Ninja Boy," as an OEL manga, and it sells half of what a best-selling manga title sells, like Fruits Basket. That's not bad for the author of "Jethro," because it might amount to 10-20,000 copies of a trade paperback. But then there's Rurouni Kenshin, Full Metal Alchemist, Naruto, Death Note, Berserk, Yotsuba&, Saikano... plus the other 42 original-Japanese manga titles from the top 50 list on Anime NewsNetwork.

And poor little "Jethro, the American Ninja Boy" vanishes under all those other titles.

I'll give this a few days, and revise the entry. Is that OK with everyone?

Timothy Perper 10:28, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I fixed the mistake mentioned above, and added data from ICv2 top 50 list. I also fixed the description of Lillian Diaz-Przybyl's comments. So it ought to be OK now. Bottom line? OEL manga is nowhere near the popularity of Japanese-origin manga. Timothy Perper 14:57, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citation needed

"Original English-language manga or OEL manga is a term commonly used to describe comic books or graphic novels whose language of original publication is English^{[citation needed]}"

That tag is idiotic, and whoever placed it should die a slow and painful death. 91.22.121.117 (talk) 14:12, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Now, now... be civil. Actually, it does need a citation, since a variety of terms have been proposed instead of OEL. Timothy Perper (talk) 16:50, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, that whole section needs citing, since Manga-Inspired Comics is also in heavy use, including by major industry sites. It is still an extremely contentious issue so sourcing is a must before declaring "this one won" as these statements do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Collectonian (talk • contribs) 21:32, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] German manga

Well, Gothic Sports is an example of a German manga. Per this article, and I quote:

In Germany, where comic-book reading has traditionally been less widespread, manga now accounts for 70% of all comics sales, says Joachim Kaps, managing director of Hamburg-based Tokyopop, a manga publisher. "manga is one of the biggest success stories of publishing of the last decade." So successful, in fact, that Germany is now producing and exporting its own manga.

All this "terminology" stuff is simply a matter of market influence. This Japanese-originality is basically moot, especially when Western artists are able to license their work to Japan. KyuuA4 (talk) 00:31, 30 December 2007 (UTC)