The debate of
dub vs
sub is unfortunately often dominated by unfounded generalizations
and rampant
elitism on part of those who claim that subtitles are always superior, weak
forms of which are also observable in the other writeups. In bad cases, anybody who prefers
dubs is
summarily accused of being illiterate.
Let's analyse it a bit closer:
Pro sub / Anti dub
- Subs allow you to pick up fragments of the foreign language: true, but these are worthless
(often worse than worthless) if used out of context and without true understanding of the
language, which can only be acquired through real lessons. Only when you actually know the
language well enough to understand a substantial amount of what is being said and still
read the subtitles at the same time can watching subtitled movies truly help you to learn
a language. On the other hand, your pronounciation can benefit right from the beginning.
- Dub voice actors are bad / the voices are emotionless: unfounded generalization - sure,
too often, this is the case, but it's a matter of budget, and experience, not a fundamental
weakness of dubs. In the case of anime this is nowadays usually not the case, but bad
experiences from 10 years ago still aren't forgotten. Some also say that the original voice
actors are also often bad, but this is less noticeable when one doesn't understand the
language.
- Dubs destroy the experience / drain the culture of the movie: Define "experience". if
the main reason you watch the movie is because it's in another language, this may be right,
but for the movie itself, very rarely does the language really make a difference, even less if
you can't even understand it. And the culture is conveyed by settings, people's actions and the
content of what they say, not the language. Of course, if this is really your gut feeling,
it can't be disproven, but be aware that it's a personal preference, not an objective
difference.
- Subtitles are translated more exactly / dub translations lose the content: the latter is
nonsense, probably an unfounded generalization from a few hacked anime shown on US TV
(e.g. Dragonball, Sailor Moon) that were intentionally changed. It is true that subtitles
are a bit less restricted in respect to mouth movement, but this is usually a minor factor.
In some cases, subtitles are more literal and assume more knowledge from the audience, while
the dub is targeted at a broader audience and does things like substitute expressions that
require background knowledge. But this is a decision made by the translator, not a fundamental
weakness of dubs.
- Subtitles show you the movie as the director intended you to see it: He or she sure didn't
intend you to watch it in a language you don't know and read a translation at the bottom
of the screen. The language being used was almost certainly not a deliberate choice of the
director. There are reports of cases where the dub was considered superior by the creator
of the original.
- A dub changes the work, and I want to see the original: Well, a sub also changes it,
and realistically, there isn't really anything sacrosanct about the "original" - it was
likely a compromise between the artistic visions of the various people involved in the making,
as well as considerations of the target audience and budget and time constraints. Even without
all these factors, most creative people are never really completely satisfied with a work and
would continue to change it if they could. Still, this is a valid reason to prefer subs if you
feel that way, just don't overestimate its significance.
Pro dub / Anti sub
- You can watch a dub more casually, e.g. while eating and don't miss as much of what's
going on. Obviously true, but then, it's kinda sacrilegous not to give your full attention
to a good film.
- Dubs are cheaper: true for VHS tapes, but this is of course artificial (well, a function
of market dynamics), not an inherent benefit of a dub. And with the advent of DVDs it
ceases to be an issue.
- The subtitles sometimes change to fast so that you miss stuff: Depends of course very much
on the film. People often dismiss this by questioning the education and/or intelligence of those
who complain about this, which is a cheap underhanded way of avoiding the issue. It may be true that some
people can read faster than anyone can talk, but you can't expect everyone to learn that, and
beyond a certain minimum, reading speed does not correlate directly with education, far less
intelligence. And in some cases, when actors talk extremely fast, or in Kare-Kano, where the
original extensively uses on-screen text on top of fast-talking actors, subtitles are
simply insufficient.
- The subtitles lessen the viewing experience: film is a visual medium, and the subtitles
partially hide the visual part, and drain away attention that you should be able to pay
to the visuals. Some people claim that they can take in the complete screen and read all
the subtitles at the same time without moving their eyes. Personally, I find this
physically impossible; it obviously depends on how sharp your peripheral vision is, which
is not something people can control. So for some, this may be less of an issue than for others.
In conclusion, it should be clear by now that there exists no encompassing superiority of either
format; what you choose to view depends on personal preference. My opinion is that the
weaknesses of subs are stronger and cannot be avoided, but those of dubs, while avoidable,
are worse when present. IMO a bad dub is a helluva lot less watchable than a bad sub,
but a good dub is much more enjoyable than any sub can be. However, I watch almost exclusively
subbed anime because by now, my Japanese can really benefit from it.
If I missed anything, /msg me.