I'm just going to leave this here because not everyone is on IRC or Twitter:
http://tamerlane420.wordpress.com/2014/09/29/japanimation/
I loved reading that even though I take it at a focused criticism at myself. I think he is a bit unstructured and unfocused though, I would jump at an opportunity to respond in a more direct manner.
real critics work with aesthetic philosophy instead of checklist summary. The mindset of the anime critic theoretically supports shows which excel in all areas but more often than not promotes those which are merely competent in all areas (in AnimeGAF’s voting for best anime of 2013, the number 1 choice was the enjoyable but unexciting Yamato 2199 while the more daring works like Aku no Hana and Kyousougiga languished below Attack on Titan).
This is more reason why the GAF anime of the year should be more restricted, Our good name is at stake here people!
The use of a checklist structure is a shorthand for remembering the points of discussion, not the final say on the quality of a work. However it is simply impossible for a work to "make up" some areas with others. No matter how good a show's soundtrack is it can't make up for a poor story. And a show doesn't get points simply for being daring - It still needs to accomplish something. Naturally there is a draw towards simpler works as they are easier to digest and disseminate so the fact that Kyousigaga even showed up shows we are striving towards a better criticism of works.
I think there is a definite problem when viewing a lot of crap that one's standard of quality drops, but at the same time being pretentious and liking something just because it is outlandish lends no credence to any critic.
I disagree with his assertion that we have "no forgiveness for eccentricities and a bland fetishization of polish" when we just had a long conversation criticising Gundam Unicorn which is polished to hell and looks and sounds amazing. Inferno Cop was janky and cheap but got views and attention. And whilst I dislike the absurd sexualisation, poor storytelling, and substandard animation of Trigger's KILL la KILL that show has a visual flair and outlandish sense of style not seen outside of a Quentin Tarantino flick.
And the idea that Yamato got in because it merely ticked boxes is distasteful. I have
plenty of problems with Yamato but it got my no.2 slot because I was able to put those problems aside in light of other areas it excelled in. Having taste is personal, but getting salty because your favourite anime didn't get in is unbecoming. If he has analysis as to why he fells this way then I take it back, but using your own personal opinion of a show to say that we aren't real critics and are just using a checklist summary is uncalled for.
I agree that an analysis of less mainstream works not on AniChart would be extremely cool, but I think that is outside the realm of what AnimeGAF and other higher end anime critics want to be involved in. Sazae-san has over 7000 episodes, been running for over 40 years but you'll not likely see an analysis of it's leftist themes in the face of a changing Japan on here either.
Debates rarely tackle the big issues of the medium, its significance and so forth, and more whether X animator’s cut in Y scene was good or not (quality is an ill-defined and often commonsensical concept in these discussions). The canon for anime is somehow less flexible than the literary canon, an amazing feat.
That's because anime isn't significant. Done in one. However we do talk about the actual issues of the medium, it's reliance on stock tropes, the treatment of women and minorities, the lack of original storytelling, the increasing reliance on Otaku spending etc. It's just not possible to have a wider discussion on its impact on society like one can with books when the medium is mostly aimed at kids/teens or super obsessed man children.
The latest episode of Anime X didn't change the way anyone thought about anything since it was just an edition of the already popular VN or manga. That's the reality of the situation.