IMO this article is kind of all over the place in terms of where it's going in relation to the primary thesis. It's sort of confusing, because at the end it mentions that anime is not a genre (and it's not) but in itself contains sub-genres. Yet at the start we see the typical formula for a shonen action anime aimed at 14 year old boys:
Find the biggest bowl you own and inside of it, place one protagonist with powerful and unique abilities. Next, pour in an exceptionally talented team of supportive friends. Then, add a seemingly impervious villain who aims to remake the world according to his own warped ideals. Throw in a few dashes of strong themes like family, friendship, fear, and death, blend it all together with plenty of beautiful visuals and flawless voice acting.
These kind of shows are no doubt popular, but it's a great misconception I feel in the west that this encapsulates all of anime. What about K-ON!, Air, Kanon, Clannad? What about Monster? What about Haruhi which has no villain at all? Hyōka? Nichijou? There's too many, of course, to list.
Anime, to me, just means animation from Japan. It's all animation. Animation is a medium to me, Anime is animation from Japan. I consider, for example, Panty and Stocking with Garterbelt to be an Anime despite the fact it looks like a Nickelodeon cartoon. Animation from America is "American Animation", from france is "French Animation"; it just so happens that Japanese Animation is the only one with a nerdcool, chic nickname.
The reason the term gained popularity is due to the proliferation of the medium in Japan. I would wager they have the largest animation industry in the world. We had the Simpsons, Family guy and Futurama all air on prime time. Those are, more or less, the three big cartoons in the west. In Japan you have a ton of new cartoons airing each year in prime time from a ton of talented studios. In the west we just don't have that.
Basically, what I'm getting at is it's just a cultural loanword that caught on and has taken on a meaning in western culture as "animation from Japan." This is not the first word to be borrowed in English and have it's meaning altered, and it won't be the last. Is this not okay? Why must Americans strive to fit in their animation to fit in common Japanese stylings? Even if it does, why does it
need to be called "Anime"?
It's akin to asking "Can Americans make a Bollywood movie?" Well, was the movie made in Bollywood? If not, then no, you can't do it because that's what being a Bollywood movie is. Sure, you can have 3 acts and 6 songs in your movie. You can follow the Bollywood formula, hire Indian actors and even have the actors speak Hindu; but it still won't be a Bollywood movie even if it's indistinguishable from the real thing.
And really, isn't this okay?