Where did pokemon come from?

[SPARTA]

If Pokemon had a bible, it would be like a religion. If Pokemon was like a religion, they would get sued by people who think that their kids are perticipating in a different kind of religion than the one their family wants them perticipating in. Even if Pokemon wins, they would be too scared to publish more of the bibles (like with that Kadabra thing). In the end, if Pokemon were to make a bible, they would not publish any after the first 6 months because of being attacked by law suits. They should put their time and effort into making something that wouldn't make them the biggest law suit target on cartoonnetwork.

I know, but it would be funny anyway, and you gotta admit, seeing Richard dressed as the Pope preaching would be worth it.

 

[Marril]

If Pokemon was like a religion, they would get sued by people who think that their kids are perticipating in a different kind of religion than the one their family wants them perticipating in.

Clearly you have no idea how the judicial system works. Or what "fiction" is in regards to religion.

 

[Flaming_Spinach]

This thread has run its course.

 

[SPARTA]

Not yet, we still havent gotten an answer.

 

[Burninating_Torchic]

This thread has run its course.

Funny, back when I used to say things like that, people called it mini-modding.
=/

 

[Marril]

BT, FS is apparently entitled to mod because of that "Feature Editor" title under his name.

 

[Flaming_Spinach]

^ gets it.

 

[(TYranitarFReak)]

What I mean by pokemon 'bible' is all about How / When/ where pokemons come from. It shouldnt has anything to do with religion!

 

[Marril]

It doesn't matter if it's a bible written in-character from the Pokémon world, or an out-of-character thing explaining where Pokémon come from. Nobody can sue anyone. The only people who would even get in a knot about it are hypersensitive religious types who should be ignored anyway.

Also for the record, "getting it" doesn't mean I see the rationale behind it.

 

[dogma]

I'd like to know, though, how the original "Pocket Monster" came to be identified with Kami? I'd have thought a monster was more of a unique physical manifestation of some grotesque form, rather than a form that represents species of creatures that have some spiritual aspect.

I think three points should be borne in mind here:

1) Shigeru Miyamoto (creator of Zelda, Mario and I think had some influence with designing the first Pokémon games) argues that videogames aren't really works of art - whilst there is inherent artistic value in them, there are more driven by commercial restraints.

2) In explaining his involvement in the Wii game 'Super Mario Galaxy', he says that the best designs are those which are designed with their function at the forefront. Thus enemies in Mario games have very specific looks and actions so that you know precisely how you can defeat them.

3) It's fairly well documented, and someone else has mentioned this already, that the original inspiration for the game was bug-collecting, and the joy you can have exploring and catching them.

Bringing all of these to together, I assume that the first Pokémon that were created were those which resemble animals. As the game design progressed, there was the need for more 'cooler' and more powerful Pokémon which would entice someone to carry on playing the game and catch them (those spawning the first legendary Pokémon).

Not against 'outside' insipiration, the creators of the next games, Gold/Silver, decided to base some of the Pokémon on kami. Most children in Japan know what they are, and there is need to further explain what they are and how thay came about ('oh look, here's a uber-powerful kami Pokémon'), given that kami are an 'accepted' (can't think of a better word) part of the Japanese culture.

This is all (mostly) speculation. But it seems that the original design, based on 'pocket monsters' just evolved and became broader. There is no need to explain where they come from in the games (in a proper manner), simply because the videogames function perfectly fine without them. Having manga and anime based on such a vacuous source is only asking for trouble (although some would argue that as these things are only cash-cows anyway, who cares?)

NOTE: I actually watch the anime. Yes, I'm sad. But it was actually decent during the 'Advanced' seasons...

imho, 'god' is a lousy translation for 'kami'.

kami are more like guardian spirits, rather than a creator/judgemental 'god' who rules all. trying to force the concept of 'kami' through the western all-powerful creator 'god' mold just won't work, if one is looking for any type of accuracy as to what was meant by the concept of something like 'umi no kami' (lugia).

'mom

Is it bad that I only know that because the kami are featured in a M:TG expansion...

I don't really see the current discussion of the role of religion as pertinent here. Sure, it is a factor in explaining why the same explanations in Japan aren't transferred in their original form in the US/elsewhere. But surely it is better to ask, as Zegnarfol did, why the heck religion was involved in the first place? But I suppose if you are going to have uber-powerful creatures toying around with metaphysical abilities, faux-religion is going to feature at some point...

There's a big difference between serious Satanism and the shock-factor punk-rock "Satanism" that teenagers engage in.

It's about the same as the difference between Jesus and Jerry Falwell.

So true (actually, I don't know who Falwell is...) The same can be said about the difference between actual religions and the explanations given for the origins of Pokémon in the games.

EDIT: Now I know who Falwell is, I can agree with the comment whole-heartedly.

 

[Marril]

I think three points should be borne in mind here:

1) Shigeru Miyamoto (creator of Zelda, Mario and I think had some influence with designing the first Pokémon games) argues that videogames aren't really works of art - whilst there is inherent artistic value in them, there are more driven by commercial restraints.

2) In explaining his involvement in the Wii game 'Super Mario Galaxy', he says that the best designs are those which are designed with their function at the forefront. Thus enemies in Mario games have very specific looks and actions so that you know precisely how you can defeat them.

3) It's fairly well documented, and someone else has mentioned this already, that the original inspiration for the game was bug-collecting, and the joy you can have exploring and catching them.

While I do admit that Shigeru Miyamoto is as a game designer billions of times more successful than I currently am, I would like to respond to a few of the points you brought up involving him. Namely, that I do not feel the Mario archetype of games is necessarily the best type for all gamers. While it may be the most widely-accessible due to its simplicity, there are also games which focus almost entirely on their artistic merits

I also heavily disagree with the "games aren't art" point. It's just like any other medium—you get things made entirely for cash, and you get things that are undeniably art. The fundamental problem is beyond the scope of this discussion, however I do think it was summed up remarkably well by Tycho Brahe to Roger Ebert, when the latter mentioned that video games are inherently not art: "If Bioshock isn't 'art', then art is the poorer for it." The only issue is that people have arrogant definitions of what's "art".

In any case, just so as to not be totally off topic (and to split an infinitive), I don't think that Pokémon gods were necessarily created specifically as a marketing ploy. In any fictional world, there's going to be the question of the mythology of that world. Many old gods in the real world were based on animals, so it's completely logical that gods in a Pokémon world would essentially be really powerful Pokémon.

 

[dogma]

I would agree with both of your points - I just wanted to offer a differing view from someone closer to the action, as it were.

Ironically, the newest cartoon show (A Secret Sphere of Influence) touches on the origin of Pokémon. One of the things I got from that is that the fourth-generation legendary Pokémon are part of the mythos only for the Sinnoh region.

Different regions have different legends, and so it's not so much as a unifying theory, but one for each generation of Pokémon videogames.

Watch that episode (it's my favourite from the new season by a long way - it's actually watchable).