@TheCrystalShip:
No seriously you're a textbook Internet "critical thinker" type who worships the false notion of objectivity in debate, while simultaneously devaluing emotion. Reading your posts makes me feel like Matthew Broderick in War Games, except that computer exhibited more feelings than you're trying not to. "ANALYZ1NG HUMAN 5P33CH PATT3RN5; TRAC35 0F 3M0T10N D3T3CT3D; 0PP0N3NT'5 ARGUM3NT 15 1NH3R3NTLY FLAW3D." Like really, you just told somebody to read House of Leaves do you understand that you're a parody?
I don't think that's what Mr. Toto was trying to do.
I don't necessarily agree with him about HxH, but let us be careful in judging others. Sample this:
[hide]
@Mr.:
Your post makes broad statements as if there's established rules to how someone should write a story. Sure, maybe you're taught some of these rules in high school. But rules were meant to be broken, right?
Different wavelengths are fine things.
@ZoroFTW9:
…an author is always supposed to watch out for how much exposition he puts.
And whether you like flashbacks is really not that important because it's a rule in the medium.
Togashi shoves information at your face is just a bad way of presenting a story... It's simply badly executed.
@Mr.:
Rules were meant to be broken. A rule according to whom? The first person to ever write a comic book or story?
That's a subjective critique–an author can do what they want. These rules are limited to classrooms.
You can only argue facts objectively. This entire discussion is subjective--meaning that there's no real answer. You don't have to like it.
@ZoroFTW9:
You seem to think that these stuff are kind of subjective when they are in no way true . …You might think that Togashi can do this but objectively speaking he simply can't.
...I don't really care if you like them or think they are great .
...these are the rules that every author follows . Stuff like that cannot be done.
...you seem to think that an author can put tons of pointless stuff and it can be consider good when that's not how it work in the slightest.
[/hide]
I think what Mr. Toto was trying to say is that: Subjectivity is fine and all. But that subjectivity that tries to present itself as objectivity is dangerous. Making your personal subjective preferences look like they are objective impersonal standards and rules that others just need to accept and follow – or following accepted standards and rules and considering them objective just because they are widely accepted, are dangerous. ZoroFTW9 was trying to argue that HxH's narrative was objectively bad, that his assessments were objective; while Mr. Toto rebutted that such assessments were not as objective as claimed. And if something cannot be more or less objectively decided, if it is simply a matter of harmless personal preferences, what is the point of debating about it rather than just giving an "each to their own"?
If all he did is claiming that "Your language is charged with emotions, therefore there are no objectivity whatsoever in your argument", then it's be indeed absurd. But that's not the case, and Toto's arguments can't be reduced to just that.
That's what I got from their posts. ^^
As for the father thing, well, a personal anecdote about being unable to feel longing for one's absent parent is not sufficient to refute the claim that a great number of children long for their absent parent.
http://www.timeslive.co.za/thetimes/2013/11/19/longing-for-my-absent-father
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/time-out/201202/the-power-absence
Robin also felt a strong longing for her absent mother. So did Usopp. Another famous story about a protagonist searching for his father is Riki Oh.
Also, insects don't feel pain. But many of us are wired to feel as if they feel pain. Many others just don't. We humans are highly anthropocentric, i.e we are a self-centred species. Most of us are wired to feel empathy for our kind more easily than we do for other species. This however can be modified by circumstances.
Gon is highly capable of empathy. It's just selective empathy. He can sympathize with Pakunoda while many others can't. He sees the good points in Killua that others can't see. He is not sociopathic. He is just someone who can show sympathy to those the vast majority of society have chosen to show apathy. He have contradictory tendencies and can be apathetic to certain groups of people in certain circumstances but that doesn't necessarily make him a sociopath. It's because of Gon that Killua decided to abstain from killing, and only reactivated the killing button in the ant arc.
As of now I won't say whether Togashi's narration is bad or good. But I liked it just fine. ^_^