sonfaro - Tumblr blog

sonfaro · 3 years

Text

Missed this argument somehow. Mea culpa.

“And Naruto does more than just ‘be nice’ to Hinata. You’re, again, being vastly disingenuous.” Nothing romantic till the film. It’s all real sweet, but the romance is one sided till then.

“At best, this is an issues of a failure of terms to be defined, which is understandable, I suppose.”

Fair enough.

“Somewhat, yes, but that wasn’t the point either. That doesn’t make it ambiguous, it just makes it unexplained.”

Ambiguous is literally a synonym of unexplained.

“Except they’ve plainly set up the love aspect. What Sarada stated falls flat given Sasuke confirms they are married, and we, as readers, are privy to meta information that in universe characters are not.”

This was going in circles. Marriage =/= love. It should, but doesn’t always.

“Stating nothing says they’re married except their statement they are is misleading, as we’re told they are out of universe, AND even IN universe what more are you asking for.”

Clarity.

“Their relationship is hardly ambiguous.”

Unexplained is a synonym of ambiguous.

“Further, Sasuke does not say they are connected because they have a kid, IE: the kid is why they are connected, he says she’s proof they ARE connected, IE: they are connected, and Sarada is the embodiment of that. Those are fundamentally different statements.”

Connected also =/= love.

Your statement ‘this is by design’ is conjecture with no basis.

The question of Sakura and Sasuke’s relationship is literally a plot point in the gaiden.

Further, that does not throw their relationship into confusion at all. Their relationship is a known quantity.

That they say they are married. That’s it.

Your wrong because your stating he’s ‘like Minato and Kushina’ when, in reality, he really ISN’T like Minato.

Naruto directly inherits his fathers ambitions and tenacity, and they share a tendency towards unothrodox jutsu (though Minato is less perverse). And again, Naruto takes after both parents. At no point did I said equally.

In the same way folks claiming Boruto is a clone of Naruto is blatantly false. They look similar, but share little else.

Literally had the same goal.

They’re polite, respectful, quiet, etc. The issue you have here is you’re being rather selective with what constitutes Hinata’s traits, and going with purely superficial elements rather than actual character personality.

No, the issue I was having was that you were stretching things for them to match. Again Manga!Minato wasn’t ‘quiet’. He didn’t suffer from shyness like she did. Again, he was bold and proud with his desires and goals. The two are not similar.

We aren’t necessarily told she didn’t like anyone, and Naruto didn’t like anyone really either, sparing his crush on Sakura.

True. Again, they are similar.

Your use of the term ‘obsessively enamored’ is also something of a weaselly statement because Hinata was not ‘obsessively enamored’ with Naruto. She admired him, and respected him.

Watched him behind trees.

Further, the turning point of their relationship being the moment they were ‘saved’ by the person, which, shockingly, has their expressions rather clearly paralleled too.

But that isn’t the turning point. She nearly dies, he freaks out, and then they don’t have a 1 on 1 interaction essentially till the war arc. As the Last shows, Naruto isn’t even aware it was a romantic gesture. It’s the genjutsu that gets Naruto to see her in a different, more romantic light.

So yes, MinaKushi is one thing, and NaruHina is another, but they DO parallel each other.

They really don’t.

It absolutely has been. Stating there are ‘rival factions’ is incredibly reductive again. The Kage are meeting as partners, villages are intermarrying, etc. If Naruto was to die tomorrow what’s keeping the issues? Well, all the major leaders subscribe to his ideologies and were his friends, for one.

And the next generation must? (Rhetorical. Of course not.)

You simply don’t know what you are talking about. C’mon. It’s fairly naïve.

There are Kage who are bound by an ideology inside the Shinobi Union, there are villages who are now intermarrying, there is radical growth of economics and technology.

For now. There’s no indication that intervillage unions couldn’t or didn’t happen during the truce years (though I’m sure would be rare). And even if they didn’t the examples we have expatriated. They aren’t dual citizens. Also What has growth in econ and tech that to do with anything? America has radical tech compared to 20 years ago too. Tech =/= peace.

Your being hung up on this ‘kids trained to kill’ shit which isn’t even entirely accurate. They’re being trained to be shinobi, which is more than killing people. It’s as much an aspect of the culture as anything.

To be a shinobi is to literally be a trained mercenary: used to guard, spy, and kill. It is entirely accurate to say the children are being trained to be able to commit murders.

Saying ‘it’s clear he’s been coming and going’ is a lie, it’s not clear. And even if he was, what exactly do you suggest?

Actual prison.

He’s not a pushover, and indeed is safer doing what he’s doing than actively plotting against the world because they’re plotting against him.

It’s “safer” for others in an actual jail.

His assistance during the last war is a thing, after all, as is Karin’s. Karin yes. His was coerced.

The fact their being monitored very much makes it akin to house arrest. But Karin isn’t. She’s not at ‘this’ base.

Well, as I said, cloning experiments were prior, for one. For two, what prison is going to hold him? And why the hell waste the resources on it?

One that could be designed in this world with such “radical growth of economics and technology.”

This is a blatant lie. Now you’re using the term children being BRED to be soldiers, which is abolutely 100% untrue. Hyperbole. Calm down. The problems are being actively worked on, and we’re SHOWN what his plan for peace was, and its WORKING.

Which is it? Are the problems fixed, or are they being “worked on”?

The thing that stops the cycle was bonds. Seriously, all of folks, ALL of them, who hated the ending to the point they’d post about it demonstrate such a poor grasp of the story that I can’t help but understand. Of course they think it’s bad, they weren’t paying attention.

No, many of us get it. We just think that’s such a naive answer. Because once those bonds are gone there’s nothing stopping this cycle from happening again.

Your attempt to be narrow about what affection stands for is a bit odd, too, because Sasuke shows THAT EXACT THING IN HOW HE SPEAKS.

He really doesn’t. As always he’s blunt and distant. He helps her up after the fact and that’s about it.

Hardly, because it doesn’t matter, the point remains fundamentally the same. The outright statement is that she’d be terrible, and is wholeheartedly towards Sasuke.

Specifically, a terrible woman. Not fickle. Terrible/Bad/bitchy woman. Her gender was invoked by his statement. That she is also all in on Sasuke is in addition to that.

But you refuse to apply context. Seriously, you just HATE context, you fucking loathe it, you always exclude it, and pretend it’s not there. Because you HAVE to. It’s literally the only way you argument ever makes any SENSE, and even then, it falls apart once you DO apply context.

Context is applied. I just don’t omit or change from the actual text.

Contextually speaking, it very much could be called fickle. Deal. Again, given the sentence structure and actual words used, no.

By this logic, you can’t absolutely say it WASN’T what Kishimoto meant.

Certainly less likely than “fickle” given the evidence and actual words used.

But I’m absolutely comfortable reading context and saying what it does mean. You can’t make the argument its my personal interpretation and vague, then make a declarative statement of what it means.

I didn’t say it was vague here. I said your statement is not clear: as in it’s not the clear interpretation here. It quite literally requires adding words to peoples mouths.

Except her love for Sasuke was absolutely PART of her character arc and would have fundamentally altered it.

It’s really not an arc. It’s more of a trait to Kishimoto.

As for ‘normanl human behavior,’ so would Naruto giving up on Sasuke. We agreed on this.

We’re not dealing with ‘normal humans’ here. It absolutely is not ‘slut shaming,’ you’re applying a new context not found, and also fundamentally altering the statement.

It isn’t. “For Sakura to come to here, if I had made her have a change of mind towards Naruto, as expected of that, Sakura would have been an overly “terrible” woman, probably.” Reminder, the actual word used is Japanese slang generally translated as ‘bitch/bitchy’. And it’s literally if she changed her mind and was interested in Naruto.

The point is you act as if Kishimoto’s jokes and comments are sexist, because… reasons, rather than based in observable reality.

Yes. Reasons such as gendered statements like: “For Sakura to come to here, if I had made her have a change of mind towards Naruto, as expected of that, Sakura would have been an overly “terrible” woman, probably.”

Sakura HAS been hated and called ‘ugly.’ Hinata HAS been bashed and also talked about for her breasts. Acknowledging those facts is not ‘sexism,’ its observable truths. The fact is you seem unable to make the connection.

Joining in or agreeing with those statements would also be sexist though. Which Kishimoto does. You were barking up a weird tree here.

And the funny thing is, I’m not even saying he’s not sexist. He comes from a very much traditionalist society so I suspect very much he is. I’m just saying these examples fall flat and also show your inability to make connections.

But they don’t. X character falling for Y character is a bad/bitchy/terrible woman” is shady regardless of which character it would be. It’s a flat dumb, disgusting thing to say. That you defended it this much was weird.

Negative, provable truth, as always. It really wasn’t.

Except that’s utterly false, it would have required ignoring a lot.

No, just explaining it would suffice. And it’s not like he hadn’t pulled things from nowhere before.

Your insistence it’s just ‘shippers’ who would be sad, as if that’s the issue here. And guess what, bittersweet is still sad.

Bittersweet is literally bitter but sweet. And again I said “at worst”. I doubt most of the fans who just wanted to see the fights would care too much.

You still feel pity and empathy for bittersweet things. I never said it would ‘ruin the manga’ nor be ‘the end of the world,’ but it absolutely would leave a lot of characterization utterly superfluous. Actually, Kishimoto COULD have written it, arguably.

Great! We agree. Weird that took so long.

The issue is he never did. Which means that by the ending, it would have taken a significant time to write that in a way that wasn’t a hack job, that didn’t leave all the focus on those emotions and the interactions between the two a fundamentally empty in retrospect.

But he okay’d a movie that essentially did that by rendering Naruto blind to said emotional growth she’d taken. End with 700 and fans can guess that he and she had a talk shortly after; fanon can lead to explanations. The movie squashes that and has Naruto literally think she loved him as one might love Ramen.

“And further, it would have still made, by an large, the focus on those emotions and goals pointless. But instead, you have to try to jab as many times as you can at Kishimoto. I’ve never claimed he’s a master writer, but he’s far better than folks give credit.

I mean he’s not the worst writer ever. He’s darn good at world building and lore. He’s not great at realistic behaviors – particularly in his female characters (but Naruto’s arguably just as bad).

Further, you’re adding an extra thing here. You don’t think they’d come to nothing. But had 700 rolled around, just reversed so Naruto and Sakura were together, yes, it would have been bad writing and they’d have come to nothing.

By 700? Sure. By then he’d regressed Sakura back to her character trait of being behind the boys again.

The amount of necessary work through to make it not having come to nothing would have required more than that chapter to really justify and avoid being bad writing of the nth degree.”

Or a timeskip, which gets us Sasusaku.

Your basic argument boils to ‘if the manga was written differently, it could be different, and therefor better.’

No, my argument was “try-hard female in love with protagonist doesn’t win but grows from the experience and is thankful” is not a bad arc, and is a fully capable thing that could be written and not be out of left field even within the last arc of the manga. Don’t even think I said better (given his writing it may have been worse honestly), just that it could make sense.

Which is irrelevent. Because the manga is written the way it is. We’re not making a value argument here, we’re talking about what is or is not true. No, it has nothing to do with putting weight in the ship, but it’s an easy excuse for you to use. False, but easy.

Put another way: It is true that a Naruhina happy ending is not required for what came before to pay off.

You’ve pointed out several things and been wrong every time. Saying I ‘admit to paraphrasing’ isn’t one, because the core principle remains the same.

It doesn’t though. If you hadn’t been paraphrasing you’d get that.

Your inability in ANY context to READ context seems more the issue here.

It’s easier to get context when you aren’t haphazardly including your own interpretation of words that the speaker didn’t even say. Hope you’re well.

Kishi giveth and he taketh away, (Two manga “based” arguments Anti-NH/SS have no credible reasons to respect)

79 notes · View notes