Ask John: What’s John’s Opinion on Abbreviating Manga?

Question:
What is your opinion of companies like Viz and their habit of “editing” manga for “the consumer’s benefit”? By this I am not referring to censorship, but rather the habit of cutting out “boring” chapters or entire stories in manga so that the story can “pick up faster”. Do you consider this to be disrespectful to the rights of the creator(s)?

Answer:
I appreciate your thoughtful phrasing and considerate use of quotation marks to denote questionable phrases. I have more respect for some domestic manga publishers than others based on a variety of factors, but I can’t condone the practice of domestic translators and publishers editing or censoring manga. The motivation for skipping chapters is different from the reason for censoring objectionable material, but in my mind both actions constitute censoring, so I can’t discuss one action without discussing both. Offenders include Viz, which has censored manga titles like I”s and skipped entire long story arcs in manga series such as Jojo’s Bizarre Adventure; Dark Horse, which has censored Narutaru and Exaxxion; CMX, which has censored Tenjho Tenge; and AD Vision, which has censored manga including By The Sword. It’s regrettable for Americans to be introduced to a manga series at a point already well into the story, but in an example like AD Vision not having translation rights to the early volumes of the Peacemaker Kurogane manga series, it’s unfortunately unavoidable. Viz intentionally choosing to skip over the first two generational story arcs of the Jojo’s Bizarre Adventure manga series can be spun as an effort to offer readers the best of the manga story, but more likely it’s actually a shameful and crass marketing decision.

An episodic series with no continuing linear storyline, such as Golgo 13, is suitable for piecemeal American release. But a linear narrative is specifically designed to be read from a single starting point onward. Forcing consumers to pick up the story from a point beside the beginning eliminates the author’s efforts to create a developing narrative, and compromises the reader’s comprehension of the intended effect of the story. Skipping to the “good parts” isn’t a service to the consumer. The American entertainment industry doesn’t charge consumers to watch movie trailers, so why should American consumers be forced to pay for “just the good parts” of printed fiction? Publishers are not editors. The role of a publisher is to provide access to a work; not to impose creative decisions on the work or make judgmental decisions in the place of the reader. I believe that American publishers should be knowledgeable about the works they license for American release, and should be respectful of the intelligence of American consumers. Targeting publications to an appropriate American audience avoids the need to artificially manipulate works. Even clearly identifying publications as an excerpt from a longer whole is more responsible to the original work and the consumer than literally trying to pass off a publication as something that it’s not. And finally I do believe that domestic publishers should tailor their acquisitions and releases to their own strengths and standards. It’s admirable to want to expose a popular manga to a wider audience, but altering the original work or artificially manipulating readers’ perception of the work don’t do justice to the original work. I do believe that most manga artists want their work read by as many readers as possible, but the point is to have readers appreciate the artists’ work, not sanitized highlights of the artists’ work that have been manipulated and altered by a foreign publisher.

I’d like to emphasize that this response is my own, personal opinion. I don’t speak for any group, although I do believe that there are other American anime and manga fans who share my perspective. I also believe that there are Americans who disagree with my stance, and who believe that compromises are both necessary and appropriate in order to achieve a greater goal. I don’t object to original creators and editors revising a work during the original creative process. I don’t object to editors changing a work at a later time if the original material is also available for those who prefer it. I do object to third parties imposing creative alterations on artistic works that are not their own, and forcing those compromised works onto consumers. Excess alteration of an artistic work in order to improve commercial success is an action motivated by unchecked greed. When I’m interested in a manga, I’m interested in the literary art that the original artist wanted me to experience, not the product that avaricious corporate businessmen wish to force upon me, the original artist, and the original manga.