IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )


 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> The "Three Loves of Candy" Real or out of Context? Mizuki's Myth Method and Motivation, Let's take a moment to examine this....
Lady Gato >^....
post Apr 7 2014, 06:38 AM
Post #1


DSD General "She's an Evil Genius" says Cyberfred
Group Icon

Group: Co-Admin
Posts: 8439
Joined: 3-May 05
From: Candy Candy Nation
Member No.: 5



Mizuki: Myth, Method and Motivation
an essay by Lady Gato >^..^<
main contents first posted on Bequi's blog on December 30, 2013.
Updates/revisions made as necessary

Let us start with an Extract from an essay by Keiko Nagita (a.k.a. Kyoko Mizuki)

わが友、キャンディ 'Candy, my bosom friend'

けれど、テリイと別れることは初めから決っていたのだ。キャンディには三つの愛を考えていた。アンソニーとの淡いはかない初恋、テリイとの激しい恋、そしてアルバートさんとの運命的な穏やかな愛。
しかし、いがらし氏の描いたテリイがあまりにも素晴らしい少年だったため、人気が集中してしまったようだ。
私でさえ、テリイの動きにほれぼれし、胸をときめかせた。キャンディとテリイの別れのシーンを書いている時、やけに息苦しく、目の前がくもるのでどうしたのだろう、とペンを置き、ハタと気づくと、呼吸するのを忘れ、目は涙でいっぱいだった。
Their parting was the preselected episode. I prepared three loves for Candy. Ephemeral faint first love for Anthony. ardent love for Terry. And destined gently love for Arbert.

児童文芸 1980年陽春臨時増刊号より
Spring 1980, extra issue of bimonthly magazine 'Jidou-bungei'


Is this "3 loves quote", in which Albert-san was tagged as a "destined, gentle love" the absolute proof that the man the adult Candy lives with as his wife in Candy Candy Final Story (CCFS) is Albert-san? Could it be possible that this quote (possibly taken out of context by certain fans) is verily reflective of what the author truly intended?

For starters, let’s look at a whole series of quotes that Mizuki-sensei has given over the last 30 years and then perhaps we can see the right context of CCFS. I will not post the exact quotes and contents as these are found on a couple of worldwide CC websites and on Vic Isono’s Facebook and MySpace page.– ergo, if you actively seek, you will find them.

In Spring 1980, extra issue of bimonthly magazine 'Jidou-bungei' Mizuki mentioned the following, which is something that certain fans, whether intentional or not, seemingly leave out in order to "boost" their assertion that Albert-san, Candy's adoptive father, is Candy's husband/lover:

-That Mizuki prepared three loves for Candy
-That Candy and Terry’s parting was a preselected episode. She even characterizes Candy and Terry as having loved each other from their heart and soul (for some of us westerners, that means Soulmate love) and that a quirk of fate parted the lovers.
-That having written the separation scene pained her as if she had lost her true love.
-That even though she was satisfied with the story, she asked herself had the story had achieved a satisfactory ending, and she asked herself if she had failed in writing the story more skillfully.

In her “Candy in my Heart” essay posted on her BBS, 2003-09-28:

-Mizuki mentions that what was presented in the manga differed from her manuscripts
-That a new editor changed the flavor of the story. She clearly states (in reference to the manga) "These final arts differ from my manuscripts!"
-We understand from Mizuki-sensei’s statements that Igarishi (the mangaka/artist, not the content owner) was in agreement on these changes made without Mizuki's consent.
-That the “some scenes” between Albert and Candy were cheap, and she asked them to stop portraying Candy as a fickle girl, who could easily move from one love to another.
-Once again, she cryptically says that perhaps her writing capacity at the time was perhaps responsible for these differences in the manuscript vs. the manga story.
-She states that Candy is a tough girl, an honest girl, that she will be distressed, and will be discouraged at failure, and will try to reflect on her actions. Then, someday she will gain true love certainly. Note that she had already told who that true love was in the Spring 1980, extra issue of bimonthly magazine 'Jidou-bungei'
-Finally she asks herself publicly, was the story as reflected in the manga was the story she wanted to create?

Then, in the 2010 CCFS Afterword/Postface:

-That as a result of the trial with Igarishi and Igarishi’s subsequent attempts to cheaply commercialize the CC story (most recently in 2007 in Taiwan) she felt emboldened to write CCFS. Igarishi herself answers to a question posed to her in 2007 regarding she if "she" were Candy, she would choose Albert (Ali Ba in Taiwanese Chinese) http://www.100accc.com/tibe/2007/news/news-048.html. Yet in 2012, perhaps seeing the futility and quite frankly a moral disgust of a more informed, mature audience of not accepting a story line of an Adoptive Father making married love to an Adoptive Daughter as a wife and lover the mangaka says : "I do not choose".
-That Mizuki asked herself that for CCFS, was she satisfied to publish the novel as it was?
-(As an answer to herself) Mizuki states that that CCFS represents a complete rewrite of CC story.

What can we make of this? When I take all this information in, I see the following:

-That at that time Mizuki engaged in this CC project in the mid to late 70's with the Manga editors and Mangaka, she had a story in mind that did not fit the editorial view (editorial view being likely a Prince in the Disney vein vs. a Benevolent, Fatherly Prince as I understand him to be based on how Mizuki characterizes him/intended him to be).
-Mizuki’s innocent youth and perhaps lack of assertiveness led her to go ahead and “agree” to the editorial direction of the story, albeit over time, she realized that intellectually she had short changed the true intent of the story, and this bothered her.
-Despite this, she honored the “agreed to” story and her statements at the time were in veiled support of the "end product" at the time.

So back to the three loves, are they really Mizuki’s intent, or just part of the myth she helped perpetuate when she was in begrudging editorial/creative alignment and support with the Manga Editors and Mangaka (Igarishi). A common theme in her few interviews is her unsettled feeling about the story (at least that is what I can observe). In addition, I believe her declarations after the controversial trials provide insight as to what really happened during that “editorial/creative alignment”. Igarishi’s attempts in 2007 to present what was basically a CC story (in Taiwan) motivated Mizuki to write CCFS, to assert her true intentions and ownership of the content and characters of the Candy Candy story. In her own words, however, Mizuki, amiable as always, had consideration for the sensitivities of the “oldest fans” and therefore obscured Anohito in order not to crush a certain fandom’s hopes. People who went straight to the last pages or relied on out of context fragments found an Anohito suited to them. People who read and reread CCFS from end to end found the real Anohito.

The recent discovery of the Someone in the woods poem from the first artbook cannot be denied. The art of Mizuki-sensei can be questioned, but it cannot be denied.

For reference, recently J.K. Rowling admitted that she made a mistake with not pairing Hermoine with Harry Potter. I will admit, I am not a Potter fan. I have neither read the books nor seen any of the movies. It only registers with me the same way other pop culture things register on my radar. However, despite not knowing anything about Potter, I am intrigued as to this declaration of the author regarding the "canon" she created. I don't pretend to second guess this very successful writer and very much owner of the story, but I do see how can a writer such as Mizuki has an initial idea of how a story should evolve but then as the story develops as it is being written, the characters themselves tell you how the story should evolve. I only say this as an incipient writer myself.

Therefore, every Candy Candy fan needs to ask themselves: if Mizuki truly intended for Albert-san to be the man who loves Candy as a husband, and that this was established and clear in the manga and previous version of the novel, then why the need for Mizuki to write CCFS? I do not assume to answer that for you, but I do exhort you to ask yourself that question. If you focus on that quote that Albert was truly the "destined and gentle love" Mizuki mentions in the Spring 1980, extra issue of bimonthly magazine 'Jidou-bungei' why then should she feel so strongly about publishing Candy Candy Final Story?

Ask yourselves and think about it.

If you ask me: what is the Candy Candy story about?

I believe the answer is: because from the very start, Mizuki wanted to tell the story of two lovers of heart and soul, separated by the trials and tribulations that fate presented them, and that after much tribulations and time, overcame these tests to realize and gain their one true love. Yes, Albert is a true and gentle love, in the storge/philia Greek sense, and the one Candy calls Adoptive Father (and she calls herself Adoptive Daughter) in the last pages of CCFS (not necessarily the most recent chronological events, by the way as erroneously parrotted by certain fans). Anthony is the platonic love in the Greek Sense, in fact is a type of Guardian angel/Celestine in CCFS. Terry, the name with the second most mentions in CCFS (over three hundred at last count, far beyond the Anthony mentions and the Great Uncle/Albert/William Albert/Bert/Prince of the Hill mentions; second only to Candy's 800+ mentions in CCFS- which for some literary critics would make him the Deuteragonist), represents Eros/Agape. The Eros quite evident and magnified in CCFS, and the Agape manifested in their self sacrifice of their love for the greater good of a third person, Suzanne Marlowe.

One needs to read CCFS in its entirely and more than once, and then reference Mizuki’s essays of past and present to understand the Myth, Method and Motivation of CCFS. Unfortunately, some fans continue to try to convince other fans of their position. An example is of Bequi at the time she wrote her essay: she neither had the books in her possession nor had considered or reviewed/viewed the fan translations that have been done in good faith. One can consider her analysis, but one must also be caveat emptor; for a great deal of information as it pertains to CCFS is missing from it and therefore if you are using this as your basis to draw conclusions on CCFS; know that the conclusion you have reached is lacking in actual content that cannot be ignored. Fans who ascribe to this view continue to perpetuate Candy Candy Urban Legends without basis in the author's true work.

If you are a fan that is dead set on the Head Canon/Albert+Candy Fannon then of course that is your perogative to believe how you want to ship Candy with Albert, and you will derive great pleasure of this alternate and unlikely pairing (indeed in alternate universes anything is possible), but I can say with great surety that one must not make no mistake that Candy+Albert is not Canon with Mizuki. In her method and motiviation in telling us the true story of Candy Candy, she has dispelled any Candy+Albert Myths that she may have uneasily supported in the past.

I am very welcome to engage in fact based debate regarding this topic in this forum. I promise you, you will be NOT THROWN OUT. That being said, there is a difference between allowing you to state your case with facts and a difference in allowing you to go on with statements that have no basis in Mizuki-Sensei - the Author's Canon. My gentle warning is that certain fans should recognize when their alternate headcannon/fannon is exactly that, and they should give thanks to the meddling of Igarishi and the Nakayosi editors with Mizuki's story --- and in this self awareness enjoy that particular headcannon/fannon in their kindred circles, and stop trying to convince and proselytize to the fans who do see Mizuki's true vision and support her FINAL STORY.

Sincerely,



Lady Gato >^..^<


______________________________________

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GRECIALICA
post Apr 7 2014, 07:47 AM
Post #2


CC Fan for life
Group Icon

Group: Honorary Mille Member 1000+ Post
Posts: 1385
Joined: 26-December 11
From: Alberta - Canada
Member No.: 2231



I'm short of words, all I can say is BRAVOOOOOOOOO!!!!
clappingsmilies.gif clappingsmilies.gif clappingsmilies.gif clappingsmilies.gif clappingsmilies.gif clappingsmilies.gif clappingsmilies.gif clappingsmilies.gif clappingsmilies.gif clappingsmilies.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
candyneige
post Apr 7 2014, 10:39 AM
Post #3


CC Fan for life
Group Icon

Group: Official CC Veteran
Posts: 405
Joined: 20-July 05
From: France
Member No.: 28



Three words : Lady Gato President !!!!! cheerleader.gif cheerleader.gif cheerleader.gif


______________________________________

QUOTE
"I loved her, at first sight, and will ever, for the rest of my life..."
Terry

www.candyneige.com
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
scacciapensieri
post Apr 7 2014, 12:00 PM
Post #4


CC Fan for life
Group Icon

Group: Active/Top Posters
Posts: 351
Joined: 22-January 12
From: ROMA
Member No.: 2269



Well done, mia cara!!!! appl.gif appl.gif appl.gif appl.gif

woodynotanohito.gif anohitotgbig.gif


______________________________________





Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Anneth White
post Apr 7 2014, 12:45 PM
Post #5


CC Fan for life
Group Icon

Group: Honorary Mille Member 1000+ Post
Posts: 4701
Joined: 15-April 13
From: South of Southamerica
Member No.: 3042



Well dear Lady Gato,

Definitively life makes you move in circles. I was just one year ago entering to this forum for the first time with this question to Mizuki:

Show me : How did Candy fell in love of Albert and is now his lovely and happy wife?

That was the conclusion of the majority of blogs I visited in Spanish word after 30 years of not knowing about CC.

Well, the CCFS is almost translated here we have a:

Volume 1: showing Candy´s life as a little girl, surrounded for lovely friends, learning how to go against evil souls (Leagan´s family) and succeed. And facing the dead, Anthony´s dead that let her in the arms of a very rebel and controversial boy, that hits women (Alfans´s opinion about terry).

Volume 2: a love story, Candy-Terry, with a very dramatic Romeo and Juliet ending, not surprise here, Mizuki loves Shakespeare, Terry was her Romeo and then he must be Hamlet in life.

Volume 3: lovely letters that show us that Candy couldn´t forget her past, her loves (Anthony and Terry), and that exchanges letter with her dear Albert.

Mizuki: you didn´t show me how did Candy fell in love of Albert and more than that you didn´t show me how did Albert proposed to her and married her, according the most popular Blog´s in Spanish world.

I wrote in other poster that I do not believe in faith dogmas, I believe in evidence. I tested the majority of evidence posted in Bequi´s Blog where is stated than Candy is with Albert, and I have to reject all of them. The evidence of CCFS talks about Candy´s love for Terry.

I do not blame Alfans, they are right with their feelings, CC animae and manga end with candy running to Albert arms, a gorgeus man physically and spiritually, and they have Mizuki´s words stating that Albert gives Candy the calm love than a mature person wish to have in her life…and those words were said in the 80, just when the animae was shown on tv all over the world. Well I just answered an Alfan last Friday that stated that we do not need a passionate love in our life (she is o.k without that). I am not!!!!

Mizuki affirms in her 2010 that she lets Candy and the other characters tell their story, I believe her, because is the same confirmation that other writers has told me their stories evolve (Lady Gato, Sunnyrainbow as exemple in this forum). There is a moment when the writer lose control and the characters take it.

We have a happy Candy, she told us through her letter box than Susana died, Terry told her that he has not changed, Albert wrote from Sao Paulo (he maintain his traveling spirit), and there are a lot of flowers blooming in her garden that are representative of Europe (England probably) and a treasure for me: Shakespeare books.

Thanks Candy, I got the message.
I follow the morse parsimoniuse route to try to find the answer (the shorter route), for me Candy-Terry route is the shorter one. Other could chose the opposite: Candy-Albert route but for that, they will have to construct so many bridges, and so many new and complicated situations, that since a logical pointo of view could give a very wrong and disturbing answer. And as I told a girl in Bequi´s Blog:

I can´t image William Albert Andrew telling all the Chicago´s society loud:” I have you reunited here to tell you that I am going to marry my adoptive daughter”. That is not the Albert I love!.

Thanks Lady Gato for opening this theme.

Anneth White


______________________________________

"As long as we are alive, we will be able to see each other again...someday" (Mizuki & Igarachi´s Candy Candy Manga)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Robert
post Apr 9 2014, 01:06 AM
Post #6


CC Fan
Group Icon

Group: Active Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 1-January 14
Member No.: 3400



QUOTE(Lady Gato >^..^< @ Apr 7 2014, 12:38 AM) *
Mizuki: Myth, Method and Motivation
an essay by Lady Gato >^..^<
main contents first posted on Bequi's blog on December 30, 2013.
Updates/revisions made as necessary

Let us start with an Extract from an essay by Keiko Nagita (a.k.a. Kyoko Mizuki)

わが友、キャンディ 'Candy, my bosom friend'

けれど、テリイと別れることは初めから決っていたのだ。キャンディには三つの愛を考えていた。アンソニーとの淡いはかない初恋、テリイとの激しい恋、そしてアルバートさんとの運命的な穏やかな愛。
しかし、いがらし氏の描いたテリイがあまりにも素晴らしい少年だったため、人気が集中してしまったようだ。
私でさえ、テリイの動きにほれぼれし、胸をときめかせた。キャンディとテリイの別れのシーンを書いている時、やけに息苦しく、目の前がくもるのでどうしたのだろう、とペンを置き、ハタと気づくと、呼吸するのを忘れ、目は涙でいっぱいだった。
Their parting was the preselected episode. I prepared three loves for Candy. Ephemeral faint first love for Anthony. ardent love for Terry. And destined gently love for Arbert.

児童文芸 1980年陽春臨時増刊号より
Spring 1980, extra issue of bimonthly magazine 'Jidou-bungei'


Is this "3 loves quote", in which Albert-san was tagged as a "destined, gentle love" the absolute proof that the man the adult Candy lives with as his wife in Candy Candy Final Story (CCFS) is Albert-san? Could it be possible that this quote (possibly taken out of context by certain fans) is verily reflective of what the author truly intended?

For starters, let’s look at a whole series of quotes that Mizuki-sensei has given over the last 30 years and then perhaps we can see the right context of CCFS. I will not post the exact quotes and contents as these are found on a couple of worldwide CC websites and on Vic Isono’s Facebook and MySpace page.– ergo, if you actively seek, you will find them.

In Spring 1980, extra issue of bimonthly magazine 'Jidou-bungei' Mizuki mentioned the following, which is something that certain fans, whether intentional or not, seemingly leave out in order to "boost" their assertion that Albert-san, Candy's adoptive father, is Candy's husband/lover:

-That Mizuki prepared three loves for Candy
-That Candy and Terry’s parting was a preselected episode. She even characterizes Candy and Terry as having loved each other from their heart and soul (for some of us westerners, that means Soulmate love) and that a quirk of fate parted the lovers.
-That having written the separation scene pained her as if she had lost her true love.
-That even though she was satisfied with the story, she asked herself had the story had achieved a satisfactory ending, and she asked herself if she had failed in writing the story more skillfully.

In her “Candy in my Heart” essay posted on her BBS, 2003-09-28:

-Mizuki mentions that what was presented in the manga differed from her manuscripts
-That a new editor changed the flavor of the story. She clearly states (in reference to the manga) "These final arts differ from my manuscripts!"
-We understand from Mizuki-sensei’s statements that Igarishi (the mangaka/artist, not the content owner) was in agreement on these changes made without Mizuki's consent.
-That the “some scenes” between Albert and Candy were cheap, and she asked them to stop portraying Candy as a fickle girl, who could easily move from one love to another.
-Once again, she cryptically says that perhaps her writing capacity at the time was perhaps responsible for these differences in the manuscript vs. the manga story.
-She states that Candy is a tough girl, an honest girl, that she will be distressed, and will be discouraged at failure, and will try to reflect on her actions. Then, someday she will gain true love certainly. Note that she had already told who that true love was in the Spring 1980, extra issue of bimonthly magazine 'Jidou-bungei'
-Finally she asks herself publicly, was the story as reflected in the manga was the story she wanted to create?

Then, in the 2010 CCFS Afterword/Postface:

-That as a result of the trial with Igarishi and Igarishi’s subsequent attempts to cheaply commercialize the CC story (most recently in 2007 in Taiwan) she felt emboldened to write CCFS. Igarishi herself answers to a question posed to her in 2007 regarding she if "she" were Candy, she would choose Albert (Ali Ba in Taiwanese Chinese) http://www.100accc.com/tibe/2007/news/news-048.html. Yet in 2012, perhaps seeing the futility and quite frankly a moral disgust of a more informed, mature audience of not accepting a story line of an Adoptive Father making married love to an Adoptive Daughter as a wife and lover the mangaka says : "I do not choose".
-That Mizuki asked herself that for CCFS, was she satisfied to publish the novel as it was?
-(As an answer to herself) Mizuki states that that CCFS represents a complete rewrite of CC story.

What can we make of this? When I take all this information in, I see the following:

-That at that time Mizuki engaged in this CC project in the mid to late 70's with the Manga editors and Mangaka, she had a story in mind that did not fit the editorial view (editorial view being likely a Prince in the Disney vein vs. a Benevolent, Fatherly Prince as I understand him to be based on how Mizuki characterizes him/intended him to be).
-Mizuki’s innocent youth and perhaps lack of assertiveness led her to go ahead and “agree” to the editorial direction of the story, albeit over time, she realized that intellectually she had short changed the true intent of the story, and this bothered her.
-Despite this, she honored the “agreed to” story and her statements at the time were in veiled support of the "end product" at the time.

So back to the three loves, are they really Mizuki’s intent, or just part of the myth she helped perpetuate when she was in begrudging editorial/creative alignment and support with the Manga Editors and Mangaka (Igarishi). A common theme in her few interviews is her unsettled feeling about the story (at least that is what I can observe). In addition, I believe her declarations after the controversial trials provide insight as to what really happened during that “editorial/creative alignment”. Igarishi’s attempts in 2007 to present what was basically a CC story (in Taiwan) motivated Mizuki to write CCFS, to assert her true intentions and ownership of the content and characters of the Candy Candy story. In her own words, however, Mizuki, amiable as always, had consideration for the sensitivities of the “oldest fans” and therefore obscured Anohito in order not to crush a certain fandom’s hopes. People who went straight to the last pages or relied on out of context fragments found an Anohito suited to them. People who read and reread CCFS from end to end found the real Anohito.

The recent discovery of the Someone in the woods poem from the first artbook cannot be denied. The art of Mizuki-sensei can be questioned, but it cannot be denied.

For reference, recently J.K. Rowling admitted that she made a mistake with not pairing Hermoine with Harry Potter. I will admit, I am not a Potter fan. I have neither read the books nor seen any of the movies. It only registers with me the same way other pop culture things register on my radar. However, despite not knowing anything about Potter, I am intrigued as to this declaration of the author regarding the "canon" she created. I don't pretend to second guess this very successful writer and very much owner of the story, but I do see how can a writer such as Mizuki has an initial idea of how a story should evolve but then as the story develops as it is being written, the characters themselves tell you how the story should evolve. I only say this as an incipient writer myself.

Therefore, every Candy Candy fan needs to ask themselves: if Mizuki truly intended for Albert-san to be the man who loves Candy as a husband, and that this was established and clear in the manga and previous version of the novel, then why the need for Mizuki to write CCFS? I do not assume to answer that for you, but I do exhort you to ask yourself that question. If you focus on that quote that Albert was truly the "destined and gentle love" Mizuki mentions in the Spring 1980, extra issue of bimonthly magazine 'Jidou-bungei' why then should she feel so strongly about publishing Candy Candy Final Story?

Ask yourselves and think about it.

If you ask me: what is the Candy Candy story about?

I believe the answer is: because from the very start, Mizuki wanted to tell the story of two lovers of heart and soul, separated by the trials and tribulations that fate presented them, and that after much tribulations and time, overcame these tests to realize and gain their one true love. Yes, Albert is a true and gentle love, in the storge/philia Greek sense, and the one Candy calls Adoptive Father (and she calls herself Adoptive Daughter) in the last pages of CCFS (not necessarily the most recent chronological events, by the way as erroneously parrotted by certain fans). Anthony is the platonic love in the Greek Sense, in fact is a type of Guardian angel/Celestine in CCFS. Terry, the name with the second most mentions in CCFS (over three hundred at last count, far beyond the Anthony mentions and the Great Uncle/Albert/William Albert/Bert/Prince of the Hill mentions; second only to Candy's 800+ mentions in CCFS- which for some literary critics would make him the Deuteragonist), represents Eros/Agape. The Eros quite evident and magnified in CCFS, and the Agape manifested in their self sacrifice of their love for the greater good of a third person, Suzanne Marlowe.

One needs to read CCFS in its entirely and more than once, and then reference Mizuki’s essays of past and present to understand the Myth, Method and Motivation of CCFS. Unfortunately, some fans continue to try to convince other fans of their position. An example is of Bequi at the time she wrote her essay: she neither had the books in her possession nor had considered or reviewed/viewed the fan translations that have been done in good faith. One can consider her analysis, but one must also be caveat emptor; for a great deal of information as it pertains to CCFS is missing from it and therefore if you are using this as your basis to draw conclusions on CCFS; know that the conclusion you have reached is lacking in actual content that cannot be ignored. Fans who ascribe to this view continue to perpetuate Candy Candy Urban Legends without basis in the author's true work.

If you are a fan that is dead set on the Head Canon/Albert+Candy Fannon then of course that is your perogative to believe how you want to ship Candy with Albert, and you will derive great pleasure of this alternate and unlikely pairing (indeed in alternate universes anything is possible), but I can say with great surety that one must not make no mistake that Candy+Albert is not Canon with Mizuki. In her method and motiviation in telling us the true story of Candy Candy, she has dispelled any Candy+Albert Myths that she may have uneasily supported in the past.

I am very welcome to engage in fact based debate regarding this topic in this forum. I promise you, you will be NOT THROWN OUT. That being said, there is a difference between allowing you to state your case with facts and a difference in allowing you to go on with statements that have no basis in Mizuki-Sensei - the Author's Canon. My gentle warning is that certain fans should recognize when their alternate headcannon/fannon is exactly that, and they should give thanks to the meddling of Igarishi and the Nakayosi editors with Mizuki's story --- and in this self awareness enjoy that particular headcannon/fannon in their kindred circles, and stop trying to convince and proselytize to the fans who do see Mizuki's true vision and support her FINAL STORY.

Sincerely,



Lady Gato >^..^<




I think if Mizuki considered to Albert as love destined for Candy, as she said at the essay ... then there would be no doubt and everyone would know that Albert is Anohito.
Also, if this were true, then why Albert fans need to write and write tests to show that Albert is Anohito.
This is because they are not sure if Albert is the destined love of Candy in CCFH, as Mizuki had said years ago.
Sorry for my bad English tongue.gif

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lady Gato >^....
post Apr 9 2014, 01:37 AM
Post #7


DSD General "She's an Evil Genius" says Cyberfred
Group Icon

Group: Co-Admin
Posts: 8439
Joined: 3-May 05
From: Candy Candy Nation
Member No.: 5



QUOTE(Robert @ Apr 8 2014, 05:06 PM) *
QUOTE(Lady Gato >^..^< @ Apr 7 2014, 12:38 AM) *
Mizuki: Myth, Method and Motivation
an essay by Lady Gato >^..^<
main contents first posted on Bequi's blog on December 30, 2013.
Updates/revisions made as necessary

Let us start with an Extract from an essay by Keiko Nagita (a.k.a. Kyoko Mizuki)

わが友、キャンディ 'Candy, my bosom friend'

けれど、テリイと別れることは初めから決っていたのだ。キャンディには三つの愛を考えていた。アンソニーとの淡いはかない初恋、テリイとの激しい恋、そしてアルバートさんとの運命的な穏やかな愛。
しかし、いがらし氏の描いたテリイがあまりにも素晴らしい少年だったため、人気が集中してしまったようだ。
私でさえ、テリイの動きにほれぼれし、胸をときめかせた。キャンディとテリイの別れのシーンを書いている時、やけに息苦しく、目の前がくもるのでどうしたのだろう、とペンを置き、ハタと気づくと、呼吸するのを忘れ、目は涙でいっぱいだった。
Their parting was the preselected episode. I prepared three loves for Candy. Ephemeral faint first love for Anthony. ardent love for Terry. And destined gently love for Arbert.

児童文芸 1980年陽春臨時増刊号より
Spring 1980, extra issue of bimonthly magazine 'Jidou-bungei'


Is this "3 loves quote", in which Albert-san was tagged as a "destined, gentle love" the absolute proof that the man the adult Candy lives with as his wife in Candy Candy Final Story (CCFS) is Albert-san? Could it be possible that this quote (possibly taken out of context by certain fans) is verily reflective of what the author truly intended?

For starters, let’s look at a whole series of quotes that Mizuki-sensei has given over the last 30 years and then perhaps we can see the right context of CCFS. I will not post the exact quotes and contents as these are found on a couple of worldwide CC websites and on Vic Isono’s Facebook and MySpace page.– ergo, if you actively seek, you will find them.

In Spring 1980, extra issue of bimonthly magazine 'Jidou-bungei' Mizuki mentioned the following, which is something that certain fans, whether intentional or not, seemingly leave out in order to "boost" their assertion that Albert-san, Candy's adoptive father, is Candy's husband/lover:

-That Mizuki prepared three loves for Candy
-That Candy and Terry’s parting was a preselected episode. She even characterizes Candy and Terry as having loved each other from their heart and soul (for some of us westerners, that means Soulmate love) and that a quirk of fate parted the lovers.
-That having written the separation scene pained her as if she had lost her true love.
-That even though she was satisfied with the story, she asked herself had the story had achieved a satisfactory ending, and she asked herself if she had failed in writing the story more skillfully.

In her “Candy in my Heart” essay posted on her BBS, 2003-09-28:

-Mizuki mentions that what was presented in the manga differed from her manuscripts
-That a new editor changed the flavor of the story. She clearly states (in reference to the manga) "These final arts differ from my manuscripts!"
-We understand from Mizuki-sensei’s statements that Igarishi (the mangaka/artist, not the content owner) was in agreement on these changes made without Mizuki's consent.
-That the “some scenes” between Albert and Candy were cheap, and she asked them to stop portraying Candy as a fickle girl, who could easily move from one love to another.
-Once again, she cryptically says that perhaps her writing capacity at the time was perhaps responsible for these differences in the manuscript vs. the manga story.
-She states that Candy is a tough girl, an honest girl, that she will be distressed, and will be discouraged at failure, and will try to reflect on her actions. Then, someday she will gain true love certainly. Note that she had already told who that true love was in the Spring 1980, extra issue of bimonthly magazine 'Jidou-bungei'
-Finally she asks herself publicly, was the story as reflected in the manga was the story she wanted to create?

Then, in the 2010 CCFS Afterword/Postface:

-That as a result of the trial with Igarishi and Igarishi’s subsequent attempts to cheaply commercialize the CC story (most recently in 2007 in Taiwan) she felt emboldened to write CCFS. Igarishi herself answers to a question posed to her in 2007 regarding she if "she" were Candy, she would choose Albert (Ali Ba in Taiwanese Chinese) http://www.100accc.com/tibe/2007/news/news-048.html. Yet in 2012, perhaps seeing the futility and quite frankly a moral disgust of a more informed, mature audience of not accepting a story line of an Adoptive Father making married love to an Adoptive Daughter as a wife and lover the mangaka says : "I do not choose".
-That Mizuki asked herself that for CCFS, was she satisfied to publish the novel as it was?
-(As an answer to herself) Mizuki states that that CCFS represents a complete rewrite of CC story.

What can we make of this? When I take all this information in, I see the following:

-That at that time Mizuki engaged in this CC project in the mid to late 70's with the Manga editors and Mangaka, she had a story in mind that did not fit the editorial view (editorial view being likely a Prince in the Disney vein vs. a Benevolent, Fatherly Prince as I understand him to be based on how Mizuki characterizes him/intended him to be).
-Mizuki’s innocent youth and perhaps lack of assertiveness led her to go ahead and “agree” to the editorial direction of the story, albeit over time, she realized that intellectually she had short changed the true intent of the story, and this bothered her.
-Despite this, she honored the “agreed to” story and her statements at the time were in veiled support of the "end product" at the time.

So back to the three loves, are they really Mizuki’s intent, or just part of the myth she helped perpetuate when she was in begrudging editorial/creative alignment and support with the Manga Editors and Mangaka (Igarishi). A common theme in her few interviews is her unsettled feeling about the story (at least that is what I can observe). In addition, I believe her declarations after the controversial trials provide insight as to what really happened during that “editorial/creative alignment”. Igarishi’s attempts in 2007 to present what was basically a CC story (in Taiwan) motivated Mizuki to write CCFS, to assert her true intentions and ownership of the content and characters of the Candy Candy story. In her own words, however, Mizuki, amiable as always, had consideration for the sensitivities of the “oldest fans” and therefore obscured Anohito in order not to crush a certain fandom’s hopes. People who went straight to the last pages or relied on out of context fragments found an Anohito suited to them. People who read and reread CCFS from end to end found the real Anohito.

The recent discovery of the Someone in the woods poem from the first artbook cannot be denied. The art of Mizuki-sensei can be questioned, but it cannot be denied.

For reference, recently J.K. Rowling admitted that she made a mistake with not pairing Hermoine with Harry Potter. I will admit, I am not a Potter fan. I have neither read the books nor seen any of the movies. It only registers with me the same way other pop culture things register on my radar. However, despite not knowing anything about Potter, I am intrigued as to this declaration of the author regarding the "canon" she created. I don't pretend to second guess this very successful writer and very much owner of the story, but I do see how can a writer such as Mizuki has an initial idea of how a story should evolve but then as the story develops as it is being written, the characters themselves tell you how the story should evolve. I only say this as an incipient writer myself.

Therefore, every Candy Candy fan needs to ask themselves: if Mizuki truly intended for Albert-san to be the man who loves Candy as a husband, and that this was established and clear in the manga and previous version of the novel, then why the need for Mizuki to write CCFS? I do not assume to answer that for you, but I do exhort you to ask yourself that question. If you focus on that quote that Albert was truly the "destined and gentle love" Mizuki mentions in the Spring 1980, extra issue of bimonthly magazine 'Jidou-bungei' why then should she feel so strongly about publishing Candy Candy Final Story?

Ask yourselves and think about it.

If you ask me: what is the Candy Candy story about?

I believe the answer is: because from the very start, Mizuki wanted to tell the story of two lovers of heart and soul, separated by the trials and tribulations that fate presented them, and that after much tribulations and time, overcame these tests to realize and gain their one true love. Yes, Albert is a true and gentle love, in the storge/philia Greek sense, and the one Candy calls Adoptive Father (and she calls herself Adoptive Daughter) in the last pages of CCFS (not necessarily the most recent chronological events, by the way as erroneously parrotted by certain fans). Anthony is the platonic love in the Greek Sense, in fact is a type of Guardian angel/Celestine in CCFS. Terry, the name with the second most mentions in CCFS (over three hundred at last count, far beyond the Anthony mentions and the Great Uncle/Albert/William Albert/Bert/Prince of the Hill mentions; second only to Candy's 800+ mentions in CCFS- which for some literary critics would make him the Deuteragonist), represents Eros/Agape. The Eros quite evident and magnified in CCFS, and the Agape manifested in their self sacrifice of their love for the greater good of a third person, Suzanne Marlowe.

One needs to read CCFS in its entirely and more than once, and then reference Mizuki’s essays of past and present to understand the Myth, Method and Motivation of CCFS. Unfortunately, some fans continue to try to convince other fans of their position. An example is of Bequi at the time she wrote her essay: she neither had the books in her possession nor had considered or reviewed/viewed the fan translations that have been done in good faith. One can consider her analysis, but one must also be caveat emptor; for a great deal of information as it pertains to CCFS is missing from it and therefore if you are using this as your basis to draw conclusions on CCFS; know that the conclusion you have reached is lacking in actual content that cannot be ignored. Fans who ascribe to this view continue to perpetuate Candy Candy Urban Legends without basis in the author's true work.

If you are a fan that is dead set on the Head Canon/Albert+Candy Fannon then of course that is your perogative to believe how you want to ship Candy with Albert, and you will derive great pleasure of this alternate and unlikely pairing (indeed in alternate universes anything is possible), but I can say with great surety that one must not make no mistake that Candy+Albert is not Canon with Mizuki. In her method and motiviation in telling us the true story of Candy Candy, she has dispelled any Candy+Albert Myths that she may have uneasily supported in the past.

I am very welcome to engage in fact based debate regarding this topic in this forum. I promise you, you will be NOT THROWN OUT. That being said, there is a difference between allowing you to state your case with facts and a difference in allowing you to go on with statements that have no basis in Mizuki-Sensei - the Author's Canon. My gentle warning is that certain fans should recognize when their alternate headcannon/fannon is exactly that, and they should give thanks to the meddling of Igarishi and the Nakayosi editors with Mizuki's story --- and in this self awareness enjoy that particular headcannon/fannon in their kindred circles, and stop trying to convince and proselytize to the fans who do see Mizuki's true vision and support her FINAL STORY.

Sincerely,



Lady Gato >^..^<




I think if Mizuki considered to Albert as love destined for Candy, as she said at the essay ... then there would be no doubt and everyone would know that Albert is Anohito.
Also, if this were true, then why Albert fans need to write and write tests to show that Albert is Anohito.
This is because they are not sure if Albert is the destined love of Candy in CCFH, as Mizuki had said years ago.
Sorry for my bad English tongue.gif



No worries, you have expressed yourself well ! candyhugs4you.gif


______________________________________

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
karentana
post Apr 11 2014, 05:42 AM
Post #8


CC Fan for life
Group Icon

Group: Active Members
Posts: 30
Joined: 22-February 14
From: Lakewood
Member No.: 3456



Excelent Lady Gato!! smil3ef381494eff6.gif smil3ef381494eff6.gif smil3ef381494eff6.gif hurrah.gif hurrah.gif hurrah.gif


______________________________________



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fairiesloveto
post Sep 11 2015, 02:23 PM
Post #9


CC Fan for life
Group Icon

Group: Active/Top Posters
Posts: 76
Joined: 4-September 15
Member No.: 3981



Well I thought in chronological order that it would be;
1-the prince on the hill (childhood fancy)
2- Anthony (who dies)
3- Terence (true love forever)
QUOTE(Lady Gato >^..^< @ Apr 7 2014, 06:38 AM) *
Mizuki: Myth, Method and Motivation
an essay by Lady Gato >^..^<
main contents first posted on Bequi's blog on December 30, 2013.
Updates/revisions made as necessary

Let us start with an Extract from an essay by Keiko Nagita (a.k.a. Kyoko Mizuki)

わが友、キャンディ 'Candy, my bosom friend'

けれど、テリイと別れることは初めから決っていたのだ。キャンディには三つの愛を考えていた。アンソニーとの淡いはかない初恋、テリイとの激しい恋、そしてアルバートさんとの運命的な穏やかな愛。
しかし、いがらし氏の描いたテリイがあまりにも素晴らしい少年だったため、人気が集中してしまったようだ。
私でさえ、テリイの動きにほれぼれし、胸をときめかせた。キャンディとテリイの別れのシーンを書いている時、やけに息苦しく、目の前がくもるのでどうしたのだろう、とペンを置き、ハタと気づくと、呼吸するのを忘れ、目は涙でいっぱいだった。
Their parting was the preselected episode. I prepared three loves for Candy. Ephemeral faint first love for Anthony. ardent love for Terry. And destined gently love for Arbert.

児童文芸 1980年陽春臨時増刊号より
Spring 1980, extra issue of bimonthly magazine 'Jidou-bungei'


Is this "3 loves quote", in which Albert-san was tagged as a "destined, gentle love" the absolute proof that the man the adult Candy lives with as his wife in Candy Candy Final Story (CCFS) is Albert-san? Could it be possible that this quote (possibly taken out of context by certain fans) is verily reflective of what the author truly intended?

For starters, let’s look at a whole series of quotes that Mizuki-sensei has given over the last 30 years and then perhaps we can see the right context of CCFS. I will not post the exact quotes and contents as these are found on a couple of worldwide CC websites and on Vic Isono’s Facebook and MySpace page.– ergo, if you actively seek, you will find them.

In Spring 1980, extra issue of bimonthly magazine 'Jidou-bungei' Mizuki mentioned the following, which is something that certain fans, whether intentional or not, seemingly leave out in order to "boost" their assertion that Albert-san, Candy's adoptive father, is Candy's husband/lover:

-That Mizuki prepared three loves for Candy
-That Candy and Terry’s parting was a preselected episode. She even characterizes Candy and Terry as having loved each other from their heart and soul (for some of us westerners, that means Soulmate love) and that a quirk of fate parted the lovers.
-That having written the separation scene pained her as if she had lost her true love.
-That even though she was satisfied with the story, she asked herself had the story had achieved a satisfactory ending, and she asked herself if she had failed in writing the story more skillfully.

In her “Candy in my Heart” essay posted on her BBS, 2003-09-28:

-Mizuki mentions that what was presented in the manga differed from her manuscripts
-That a new editor changed the flavor of the story. She clearly states (in reference to the manga) "These final arts differ from my manuscripts!"
-We understand from Mizuki-sensei’s statements that Igarishi (the mangaka/artist, not the content owner) was in agreement on these changes made without Mizuki's consent.
-That the “some scenes” between Albert and Candy were cheap, and she asked them to stop portraying Candy as a fickle girl, who could easily move from one love to another.
-Once again, she cryptically says that perhaps her writing capacity at the time was perhaps responsible for these differences in the manuscript vs. the manga story.
-She states that Candy is a tough girl, an honest girl, that she will be distressed, and will be discouraged at failure, and will try to reflect on her actions. Then, someday she will gain true love certainly. Note that she had already told who that true love was in the Spring 1980, extra issue of bimonthly magazine 'Jidou-bungei'
-Finally she asks herself publicly, was the story as reflected in the manga was the story she wanted to create?

Then, in the 2010 CCFS Afterword/Postface:

-That as a result of the trial with Igarishi and Igarishi’s subsequent attempts to cheaply commercialize the CC story (most recently in 2007 in Taiwan) she felt emboldened to write CCFS. Igarishi herself answers to a question posed to her in 2007 regarding she if "she" were Candy, she would choose Albert (Ali Ba in Taiwanese Chinese) http://www.100accc.com/tibe/2007/news/news-048.html. Yet in 2012, perhaps seeing the futility and quite frankly a moral disgust of a more informed, mature audience of not accepting a story line of an Adoptive Father making married love to an Adoptive Daughter as a wife and lover the mangaka says : "I do not choose".
-That Mizuki asked herself that for CCFS, was she satisfied to publish the novel as it was?
-(As an answer to herself) Mizuki states that that CCFS represents a complete rewrite of CC story.

What can we make of this? When I take all this information in, I see the following:

-That at that time Mizuki engaged in this CC project in the mid to late 70's with the Manga editors and Mangaka, she had a story in mind that did not fit the editorial view (editorial view being likely a Prince in the Disney vein vs. a Benevolent, Fatherly Prince as I understand him to be based on how Mizuki characterizes him/intended him to be).
-Mizuki’s innocent youth and perhaps lack of assertiveness led her to go ahead and “agree” to the editorial direction of the story, albeit over time, she realized that intellectually she had short changed the true intent of the story, and this bothered her.
-Despite this, she honored the “agreed to” story and her statements at the time were in veiled support of the "end product" at the time.

So back to the three loves, are they really Mizuki’s intent, or just part of the myth she helped perpetuate when she was in begrudging editorial/creative alignment and support with the Manga Editors and Mangaka (Igarishi). A common theme in her few interviews is her unsettled feeling about the story (at least that is what I can observe). In addition, I believe her declarations after the controversial trials provide insight as to what really happened during that “editorial/creative alignment”. Igarishi’s attempts in 2007 to present what was basically a CC story (in Taiwan) motivated Mizuki to write CCFS, to assert her true intentions and ownership of the content and characters of the Candy Candy story. In her own words, however, Mizuki, amiable as always, had consideration for the sensitivities of the “oldest fans” and therefore obscured Anohito in order not to crush a certain fandom’s hopes. People who went straight to the last pages or relied on out of context fragments found an Anohito suited to them. People who read and reread CCFS from end to end found the real Anohito.

The recent discovery of the Someone in the woods poem from the first artbook cannot be denied. The art of Mizuki-sensei can be questioned, but it cannot be denied.

For reference, recently J.K. Rowling admitted that she made a mistake with not pairing Hermoine with Harry Potter. I will admit, I am not a Potter fan. I have neither read the books nor seen any of the movies. It only registers with me the same way other pop culture things register on my radar. However, despite not knowing anything about Potter, I am intrigued as to this declaration of the author regarding the "canon" she created. I don't pretend to second guess this very successful writer and very much owner of the story, but I do see how can a writer such as Mizuki has an initial idea of how a story should evolve but then as the story develops as it is being written, the characters themselves tell you how the story should evolve. I only say this as an incipient writer myself.

Therefore, every Candy Candy fan needs to ask themselves: if Mizuki truly intended for Albert-san to be the man who loves Candy as a husband, and that this was established and clear in the manga and previous version of the novel, then why the need for Mizuki to write CCFS? I do not assume to answer that for you, but I do exhort you to ask yourself that question. If you focus on that quote that Albert was truly the "destined and gentle love" Mizuki mentions in the Spring 1980, extra issue of bimonthly magazine 'Jidou-bungei' why then should she feel so strongly about publishing Candy Candy Final Story?

Ask yourselves and think about it.

If you ask me: what is the Candy Candy story about?

I believe the answer is: because from the very start, Mizuki wanted to tell the story of two lovers of heart and soul, separated by the trials and tribulations that fate presented them, and that after much tribulations and time, overcame these tests to realize and gain their one true love. Yes, Albert is a true and gentle love, in the storge/philia Greek sense, and the one Candy calls Adoptive Father (and she calls herself Adoptive Daughter) in the last pages of CCFS (not necessarily the most recent chronological events, by the way as erroneously parrotted by certain fans). Anthony is the platonic love in the Greek Sense, in fact is a type of Guardian angel/Celestine in CCFS. Terry, the name with the second most mentions in CCFS (over three hundred at last count, far beyond the Anthony mentions and the Great Uncle/Albert/William Albert/Bert/Prince of the Hill mentions; second only to Candy's 800+ mentions in CCFS- which for some literary critics would make him the Deuteragonist), represents Eros/Agape. The Eros quite evident and magnified in CCFS, and the Agape manifested in their self sacrifice of their love for the greater good of a third person, Suzanne Marlowe.

One needs to read CCFS in its entirely and more than once, and then reference Mizuki’s essays of past and present to understand the Myth, Method and Motivation of CCFS. Unfortunately, some fans continue to try to convince other fans of their position. An example is of Bequi at the time she wrote her essay: she neither had the books in her possession nor had considered or reviewed/viewed the fan translations that have been done in good faith. One can consider her analysis, but one must also be caveat emptor; for a great deal of information as it pertains to CCFS is missing from it and therefore if you are using this as your basis to draw conclusions on CCFS; know that the conclusion you have reached is lacking in actual content that cannot be ignored. Fans who ascribe to this view continue to perpetuate Candy Candy Urban Legends without basis in the author's true work.

If you are a fan that is dead set on the Head Canon/Albert+Candy Fannon then of course that is your perogative to believe how you want to ship Candy with Albert, and you will derive great pleasure of this alternate and unlikely pairing (indeed in alternate universes anything is possible), but I can say with great surety that one must not make no mistake that Candy+Albert is not Canon with Mizuki. In her method and motiviation in telling us the true story of Candy Candy, she has dispelled any Candy+Albert Myths that she may have uneasily supported in the past.

I am very welcome to engage in fact based debate regarding this topic in this forum. I promise you, you will be NOT THROWN OUT. That being said, there is a difference between allowing you to state your case with facts and a difference in allowing you to go on with statements that have no basis in Mizuki-Sensei - the Author's Canon. My gentle warning is that certain fans should recognize when their alternate headcannon/fannon is exactly that, and they should give thanks to the meddling of Igarishi and the Nakayosi editors with Mizuki's story --- and in this self awareness enjoy that particular headcannon/fannon in their kindred circles, and stop trying to convince and proselytize to the fans who do see Mizuki's true vision and support her FINAL STORY.

Sincerely,



Lady Gato >^..^<


Attached File(s)
Attached File  kiss.jpg ( 14.47K ) Number of downloads: 3
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kgrandchester
post Oct 27 2015, 03:48 PM
Post #10


CC Fan for life
Group Icon

Group: Active/Top Posters
Posts: 118
Joined: 28-April 15
From: Dominican Republic
Member No.: 3851



QUOTE(Lady Gato >^..^< @ Apr 7 2014, 06:38 AM) *
Mizuki: Myth, Method and Motivation
an essay by Lady Gato >^..^<
main contents first posted on Bequi's blog on December 30, 2013.
Updates/revisions made as necessary

Let us start with an Extract from an essay by Keiko Nagita (a.k.a. Kyoko Mizuki)

わが友、キャンディ 'Candy, my bosom friend'

けれど、テリイと別れることは初めから決っていたのだ。キャンディには三つの愛を考えていた。アンソニーとの淡いはかない初恋、テリイとの激しい恋、そしてアルバートさんとの運命的な穏やかな愛。
しかし、いがらし氏の描いたテリイがあまりにも素晴らしい少年だったため、人気が集中してしまったようだ。
私でさえ、テリイの動きにほれぼれし、胸をときめかせた。キャンディとテリイの別れのシーンを書いている時、やけに息苦しく、目の前がくもるのでどうしたのだろう、とペンを置き、ハタと気づくと、呼吸するのを忘れ、目は涙でいっぱいだった。
Their parting was the preselected episode. I prepared three loves for Candy. Ephemeral faint first love for Anthony. ardent love for Terry. And destined gently love for Arbert.

児童文芸 1980年陽春臨時増刊号より
Spring 1980, extra issue of bimonthly magazine 'Jidou-bungei'


Is this "3 loves quote", in which Albert-san was tagged as a "destined, gentle love" the absolute proof that the man the adult Candy lives with as his wife in Candy Candy Final Story (CCFS) is Albert-san? Could it be possible that this quote (possibly taken out of context by certain fans) is verily reflective of what the author truly intended?

For starters, let’s look at a whole series of quotes that Mizuki-sensei has given over the last 30 years and then perhaps we can see the right context of CCFS. I will not post the exact quotes and contents as these are found on a couple of worldwide CC websites and on Vic Isono’s Facebook and MySpace page.– ergo, if you actively seek, you will find them.

In Spring 1980, extra issue of bimonthly magazine 'Jidou-bungei' Mizuki mentioned the following, which is something that certain fans, whether intentional or not, seemingly leave out in order to "boost" their assertion that Albert-san, Candy's adoptive father, is Candy's husband/lover:

-That Mizuki prepared three loves for Candy
-That Candy and Terry’s parting was a preselected episode. She even characterizes Candy and Terry as having loved each other from their heart and soul (for some of us westerners, that means Soulmate love) and that a quirk of fate parted the lovers.
-That having written the separation scene pained her as if she had lost her true love.
-That even though she was satisfied with the story, she asked herself had the story had achieved a satisfactory ending, and she asked herself if she had failed in writing the story more skillfully.

In her “Candy in my Heart” essay posted on her BBS, 2003-09-28:

-Mizuki mentions that what was presented in the manga differed from her manuscripts
-That a new editor changed the flavor of the story. She clearly states (in reference to the manga) "These final arts differ from my manuscripts!"
-We understand from Mizuki-sensei’s statements that Igarishi (the mangaka/artist, not the content owner) was in agreement on these changes made without Mizuki's consent.
-That the “some scenes” between Albert and Candy were cheap, and she asked them to stop portraying Candy as a fickle girl, who could easily move from one love to another.
-Once again, she cryptically says that perhaps her writing capacity at the time was perhaps responsible for these differences in the manuscript vs. the manga story.
-She states that Candy is a tough girl, an honest girl, that she will be distressed, and will be discouraged at failure, and will try to reflect on her actions. Then, someday she will gain true love certainly. Note that she had already told who that true love was in the Spring 1980, extra issue of bimonthly magazine 'Jidou-bungei'
-Finally she asks herself publicly, was the story as reflected in the manga was the story she wanted to create?

Then, in the 2010 CCFS Afterword/Postface:

-That as a result of the trial with Igarishi and Igarishi’s subsequent attempts to cheaply commercialize the CC story (most recently in 2007 in Taiwan) she felt emboldened to write CCFS. Igarishi herself answers to a question posed to her in 2007 regarding she if "she" were Candy, she would choose Albert (Ali Ba in Taiwanese Chinese) http://www.100accc.com/tibe/2007/news/news-048.html. Yet in 2012, perhaps seeing the futility and quite frankly a moral disgust of a more informed, mature audience of not accepting a story line of an Adoptive Father making married love to an Adoptive Daughter as a wife and lover the mangaka says : "I do not choose".
-That Mizuki asked herself that for CCFS, was she satisfied to publish the novel as it was?
-(As an answer to herself) Mizuki states that that CCFS represents a complete rewrite of CC story.

What can we make of this? When I take all this information in, I see the following:

-That at that time Mizuki engaged in this CC project in the mid to late 70's with the Manga editors and Mangaka, she had a story in mind that did not fit the editorial view (editorial view being likely a Prince in the Disney vein vs. a Benevolent, Fatherly Prince as I understand him to be based on how Mizuki characterizes him/intended him to be).
-Mizuki’s innocent youth and perhaps lack of assertiveness led her to go ahead and “agree” to the editorial direction of the story, albeit over time, she realized that intellectually she had short changed the true intent of the story, and this bothered her.
-Despite this, she honored the “agreed to” story and her statements at the time were in veiled support of the "end product" at the time.

So back to the three loves, are they really Mizuki’s intent, or just part of the myth she helped perpetuate when she was in begrudging editorial/creative alignment and support with the Manga Editors and Mangaka (Igarishi). A common theme in her few interviews is her unsettled feeling about the story (at least that is what I can observe). In addition, I believe her declarations after the controversial trials provide insight as to what really happened during that “editorial/creative alignment”. Igarishi’s attempts in 2007 to present what was basically a CC story (in Taiwan) motivated Mizuki to write CCFS, to assert her true intentions and ownership of the content and characters of the Candy Candy story. In her own words, however, Mizuki, amiable as always, had consideration for the sensitivities of the “oldest fans” and therefore obscured Anohito in order not to crush a certain fandom’s hopes. People who went straight to the last pages or relied on out of context fragments found an Anohito suited to them. People who read and reread CCFS from end to end found the real Anohito.

The recent discovery of the Someone in the woods poem from the first artbook cannot be denied. The art of Mizuki-sensei can be questioned, but it cannot be denied.

For reference, recently J.K. Rowling admitted that she made a mistake with not pairing Hermoine with Harry Potter. I will admit, I am not a Potter fan. I have neither read the books nor seen any of the movies. It only registers with me the same way other pop culture things register on my radar. However, despite not knowing anything about Potter, I am intrigued as to this declaration of the author regarding the "canon" she created. I don't pretend to second guess this very successful writer and very much owner of the story, but I do see how can a writer such as Mizuki has an initial idea of how a story should evolve but then as the story develops as it is being written, the characters themselves tell you how the story should evolve. I only say this as an incipient writer myself.

Therefore, every Candy Candy fan needs to ask themselves: if Mizuki truly intended for Albert-san to be the man who loves Candy as a husband, and that this was established and clear in the manga and previous version of the novel, then why the need for Mizuki to write CCFS? I do not assume to answer that for you, but I do exhort you to ask yourself that question. If you focus on that quote that Albert was truly the "destined and gentle love" Mizuki mentions in the Spring 1980, extra issue of bimonthly magazine 'Jidou-bungei' why then should she feel so strongly about publishing Candy Candy Final Story?

Ask yourselves and think about it.

If you ask me: what is the Candy Candy story about?

I believe the answer is: because from the very start, Mizuki wanted to tell the story of two lovers of heart and soul, separated by the trials and tribulations that fate presented them, and that after much tribulations and time, overcame these tests to realize and gain their one true love. Yes, Albert is a true and gentle love, in the storge/philia Greek sense, and the one Candy calls Adoptive Father (and she calls herself Adoptive Daughter) in the last pages of CCFS (not necessarily the most recent chronological events, by the way as erroneously parrotted by certain fans). Anthony is the platonic love in the Greek Sense, in fact is a type of Guardian angel/Celestine in CCFS. Terry, the name with the second most mentions in CCFS (over three hundred at last count, far beyond the Anthony mentions and the Great Uncle/Albert/William Albert/Bert/Prince of the Hill mentions; second only to Candy's 800+ mentions in CCFS- which for some literary critics would make him the Deuteragonist), represents Eros/Agape. The Eros quite evident and magnified in CCFS, and the Agape manifested in their self sacrifice of their love for the greater good of a third person, Suzanne Marlowe.

One needs to read CCFS in its entirely and more than once, and then reference Mizuki’s essays of past and present to understand the Myth, Method and Motivation of CCFS. Unfortunately, some fans continue to try to convince other fans of their position. An example is of Bequi at the time she wrote her essay: she neither had the books in her possession nor had considered or reviewed/viewed the fan translations that have been done in good faith. One can consider her analysis, but one must also be caveat emptor; for a great deal of information as it pertains to CCFS is missing from it and therefore if you are using this as your basis to draw conclusions on CCFS; know that the conclusion you have reached is lacking in actual content that cannot be ignored. Fans who ascribe to this view continue to perpetuate Candy Candy Urban Legends without basis in the author's true work.

If you are a fan that is dead set on the Head Canon/Albert+Candy Fannon then of course that is your perogative to believe how you want to ship Candy with Albert, and you will derive great pleasure of this alternate and unlikely pairing (indeed in alternate universes anything is possible), but I can say with great surety that one must not make no mistake that Candy+Albert is not Canon with Mizuki. In her method and motiviation in telling us the true story of Candy Candy, she has dispelled any Candy+Albert Myths that she may have uneasily supported in the past.

I am very welcome to engage in fact based debate regarding this topic in this forum. I promise you, you will be NOT THROWN OUT. That being said, there is a difference between allowing you to state your case with facts and a difference in allowing you to go on with statements that have no basis in Mizuki-Sensei - the Author's Canon. My gentle warning is that certain fans should recognize when their alternate headcannon/fannon is exactly that, and they should give thanks to the meddling of Igarishi and the Nakayosi editors with Mizuki's story --- and in this self awareness enjoy that particular headcannon/fannon in their kindred circles, and stop trying to convince and proselytize to the fans who do see Mizuki's true vision and support her FINAL STORY.

Sincerely,



Lady Gato >^..^<



Lady Gato,
Thank you sooooo MUCH for this!!!
i am speachless... i am on panicsmiley.gif


to know that Misuki´s real purpose for Candy since the very begining was to keep Terry by her side, made me tear up of happiness...

Keep sharing with us Lady Gato!!! you are an awesome-great-amazing help to us!!

ps: forgive my english, my native language is spanish.


______________________________________

Kat
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Magda Vidales
post Mar 28 2018, 12:44 PM
Post #11


Yume Sakura
Group Icon

Group: Active Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 29-September 16
From: USA
Member No.: 4232



Thank you for this awesome explanation , I love it!!!



terryanohitowink.gif terryanohitowink.gif terryanohitowink.gif terryanohitowink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gretzky
post Apr 17 2018, 11:28 PM
Post #12


CC Fan for life
Group Icon

Group: Honorary Mille Member 1000+ Post
Posts: 2329
Joined: 3-April 14
Member No.: 3493



Here's my thought on Candy's 3 loves:

1. Terry
2. Terrence
3. Terruce

terryhugs4you.gif


______________________________________

Alexa

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 27th April 2018 - 05:30 AM