My, it seemed I'm causing quite a stir, especially among old acquaintances in regards to this Model Vs Cosplayer thing. What's funny is that i'm seemingly being used as a forefront for pushing the "model is not a cosplayer" advocacy to whoever seemed to be pro-model to the one pushing it. According to the link's blog, he seemed to have conveniently left out the reason for my clarification (what a model is and what a cosplayer is), opting to give just enough bait to shell out a response to provoke(?) an answer from a well known individual. True enough, some people decided to surface from the void to defend the concept of modelling and still be called a cosplayer, making my statements look like I'm denying opportunities for cosplayers to what they perceive as "commercial gain", not to mention trying to make me look like a hypocrite by being one of those who do. I once again felt the need to clarify and even challenge the poster on her claims, but in the end, is no longer point of the argument.
Call me whatever you think is appropriate, including being a "purist", but there is to me still the defining line to being a model and being a cosplayer. The difference lies in the love and homage to the character you are cosplaying. The blogger's target in question did not answer, a wise choice actually, given she finally followed one of many suggested advice coming from those concerned, to think things through before answering any possible controversial question. But her sister answered in her own view of cosplay (quoted from Project Otaking): "As long as you’re wearing a costume to play a certain character from a game or anime or whatever then it’s cosplay.” But where's the love in it? Where's the character homage that came with cosplaying? If she added that, i would have completely agreed with her.
I wont be surprised if in a few days and a few blogs later this will eventually turn up to be a "me versus her" campaign. If it did, its just sad, really. My stand with the definition of cosplay and models is nothing more than just that. If certain individuals fit your description of what i just stated, then feel free to think that way. If it happened she says otherwise, and falls on my definition of what a cosplayer is, then she is what she is. Its funny how many people would love to turn my statement on what was originally an attempt to clarify between a model and cosplayer (which was between me and AMPED) into some sort of controversial ammunition against those they perceive as the opposite of what i believe a cosplayer should be.
Feel free to believe what suits you best. I gave my definition in response to AMPED's explanation to their belief of grooming future cosplayers like some sort of farm for their own benefit and promotion, and herding them into a paid career of "cosplaying" their own products. I'm sure he might have meant otherwise if worded right, but that's how it came out, and that's how i stood up and made my statements (and feelings) clear on the matter. No other names were mentioned, no examples were made, it was simply just between him and me. He gave his reasons and i gave mine, and in the end we shook hands and talked some more about it. I sincerely believed him to be a guy who simply didn't know a lot about the sub-culture but wanted his company to be deeply involved in it.
Now it seems I'm being pimped as some sort of voice of "models are not cosplayers" argument, maybe because the "of Cosplay.ph" tag seemed so authoritative, despite my say about my thoughts being my own. I guess it cant be helped. Some people would use the incident to further promote their own ends. And it wouldn't have made an article any more juicier without it. At least with this blog entry, you guys can decide what to make of it.
No comments:
Post a Comment