Constant weed whacking
So after seeing this meme in the Digimon tag for about the billionth time, I’ve decided to actually respond to this critique. Here begins a long and directionless rant.
Although the creator of the image, In-The-Machine (a fan of both franchises), intended this to become nothing more than a light hearted joke and not an attack, it’s taken on a life of its own and many people who do post it do so under the false pretense that a) there is only one way to create and design a monster series and b) that Digimon is just a copy of its more successful cousin, Pokemon.
Digimon are not biological creatures, but digital, hence its name, Digital Monster. The data that they are composed of comes from whatever Humans put into their computers and the internet. I can easily see an eight year old kid using Paint on his Windows 98 computer and drawing an orange dinosaur with wings and guns. That image is then saved and that my friends is how a MetalGreymon is born. Ok, so that’s not necessarily how a MetalGreymon is born, it has to go through a few stages in order to get to that level (Koromon > Agumon > Greymon being one, but not the only evolutionary lines it can take), but that’s not the point. What I’m getting at is that Digimon and the Digital World is a place where anyone’s dreams and hopes can be fully realized, even if they aren’t aware of it. On the flip side, one’s own fears and nightmares can become real. Or at least that’s my pseudoscience behind the designs, there really hasn’t been a canon explanation to where the data comes from, but that seems like a logical jump.
This image completely ignores the Digimon that aren’t just based off of “real life creatures.” Datamon, Poyomon, Apocalymon, Belphemon (Sleep Mode), Angewomon, and Puppetmon are just a some off the top of my head. A few of the Digimon listed are actually derived from stories and myths like Pinocchio, demonology, the bible. Garmmon has actually created an intensive list of Digimon and their corresponding mythologies.
Pokemon, being biological creatures, tend to go on the more natural side, and that’s great and it has clearly worked well for them. Digimon can (but not always) go on the other end of the spectrum when pieces of armor (chrome digizoid), metal, and weapons are included into the design, and that’s also great. Do the designers sometimes go a bit overboard with the “missiles, bombs, and knives?” Oh god, most definitely!
There really is more than one way to create a monster or a monster franchise. It is its own genre: Pokemon, Digimon, Monster Ranchers, Yu-Gi-Oh!, and V-Pet (Digimon’s predecessor) are just the ones that reached through to the American market. It’s only natural to compare two completely different things that belong in the same genre, but there really is a line. Sailor Moon and Cardcaptor Sakura are both magical girl series (and great ones at that), and you may compare the two, but saying one copied the other is stretch, at best.
Again, I have no problem with the image itself, I myself found it humorous the first handful of times I saw it. But when you post it with a “lol digman sucx its rip off” or a “pokemon is better (but only the first gen),” then you just look like an idiot.
Morphological Typology (illustrations from SpecGram)
Descriptions adapted from The Lingua File:
Analytic languages: also known as isolating languages because they’re composed of isolated, or free, morphemes. Free morphemes can be words on their own, such as cat or happy. Languages that are purely analytic in structure don’t use any prefixes or suffixes, ever. However, it’s rare to find a language that is purely analytic or synthetic since most languages have characteristics of both. Morphological typology is like a spectrum in which languages fit in somewhere from analytic to polysynthetic (a subtype of synthetic languages we’ll get to in a moment).Mandarin Chinese and Vietnamese are good examples of analytic languages. […] English, on the other hand, is one of the most analytic Indo-European languages, but is still usually classified as a synthetic language. […]Types of synthetic language (i.e. languages that have prefixes/suffixes):Fusional Languages: Similar to agglutinating languages, except that the morpheme boundaries are much more difficult to discern. Affixes are often fused with the stems, and can have multiple meanings. A prime example of a fusional language is Spanish, especially when it comes to verbs. In the wordhablo ”I speak”, the -o morpheme tells us that we’re dealing with a subject that is singular, first person, and in the present tense. It’s difficult to find a morpheme that means “speak”, however, since habl- is not a morpheme. Fusional languages can be tricky!Polysynthetic Languages: These languages are undoubtedly some of the most difficult to learn. They often have verbs that can express the entirety of a typical sentence in English, which they do by incorporating nouns into verbs forms. For example, the Sora language of India has one word that means “I will catch a tiger”. Many Native American languages are polysynthetic.This FASCINATES me.
