#all-loving hero protagonist with very strong morals
Text
I cannot stress enough how much I appreciate JJBA's willingness to explore morally grey characters, especially as the series progresses. At the end of the day, this facet of a character is what keeps me engaged, because you have an (often) deeply flawed person doing their best to achieve their goals, protect the people they care about, and to survive. I genuinely don't think it'd have the same effect if this series was full of Perfect Heroes.
JoJo protagonists (with the exception of Jonathan but I'll discuss that in another post), are messy. Yes they're strong and brave and have a sense of justice but they're also rude, con artists, manipulative, and hurt/kill people as they see fit. And honestly? I love it. I wouldn't have them any other way. It humanizes them. It transforms characters who essentially have superhuman or even godlike abilities and makes them relatable. They struggle with guilt, regret, shame, and anger just like anyone else. They have damaging coping mechanisms. They sometimes take their frustrations out on people who don't deserve it. They're fucked up just like a regular person.
The whole point of this is creating a world where there are no true Good Guys. Everyone's hands are dirty. AND YET, in spite of all of this they still have good hearts. This series could have very easily taken a turn in the other direction and gone the nihilistic route but it doesn't. JoJo could have become a series full of nothing but characters who are only motivated for selfish reasons but it isn't. Not to be cliche, but, at it it's core JoJo is a series about love and friendship and protecting it at any cost. It understands that the connections we have with each other are stronger than any stand. That no matter how fucked up a protagonist or supporting character is they still have the potential to do good. This is a story where, at the end of the day, love will always prevail and I think that's pretty damn wonderful.
#jjba#jojo's bizarre adventure#don't mind me just in my feels after reading jojolands lmao#I've known my new crime son for all of 5 minutes and I already love him#character analysis#b talks jojo
610 notes
·
View notes
Text
One of the reasons I find Snape kind of unique as a character in the stories I've read in that his particular combination of traits is... rare. By this I mean in that A) he has virtues and skills that would normally appear in a main character, a hero, hell even a teen boy power-fantasy, completely larger than life demonstrations of competence and virtue, while at the same time B) having traits that would normally be given to petty villains in order to make them look lame/pathetic, in order for the audience to laugh at the loser. (petty villains are not the same as regular villains, it's the difference between Filch and Voldemort. Voldemort is infinitely more evil but is rarely someone you pity/think is a loser the way you do Filch).
For A) he is a genius immensely skilled at magic and is hyper competent, inventing spells and potions as a teenager, is self sacrificing and brave to ridiculous extremes, over and over again, more than any other character bar the protagonist himself, is a spy that constantly makes the main villain look like a fool, is so virtuous he risks himself to save people he hates because it's the right thing to do, has tons of sarcastic one liners and witty jokes, is intimidating and smooth and has presence, I could go on. All these are traits you give to the Harry Potters of the world.
For B) he's ugly in a very visceral way, he bullies children who did nothing to him and makes them cry, he's bullied and never truly gets his revenge, in fact the girl he's in love with gets together with his bully, he's constantly humiliated (i.e. the Neville boggart scene where he's made to dress in an old woman's clothes, Dumbledore telling him that he disgusts him, the SWM scene). All this is stuff you give to the Filch's of the world.
More interesting than gray morality of whatever the fuck, which I've seen before, Snape is unique to me in that he's as much of a classical hero, larger than life teenage hyper-competence power fantasy made to idealize and try (and inevitably fail) to live up to as he is a pathetic petty tyrant loser made for the audience to laugh at and feel sorry for while hating him at the same time. It's like if you fused Harry Potter's virtues with Argus Filchs flaws. And he never really stops being either of these things throughout the story, he is cool and pathetic always. It's what makes him so incongruous to me, and part of what makes him inspire such strong emotions. People, whether fans or people that hate him, don't really know on what traits to lean into more: Is he cool or pathetic? Lame or awesome? The reality is that he's both. At both extremes at the same time, writing Snape correctly requires toeing the line between power-fantasy and masochistic self-flagellation.
381 notes
·
View notes
Text
PROPAGANDA
Goro Akechi
have you seen this man. the fandom doesn't seem to grasp that he can have a "good" goal but still go about it absolutely the wrong way. he's not baby but he's not evil incarnate either, he's just 18. being 18 is just like that
People who are like "he's an irredeemable psychopath who became a serial killer just because he has daddy issues" piss me off. People who are like "he's the only person who ACTUALLY cares about the Protagonist and all of the Protagonist's other friends are fakes and users" piss me off even more. He's a foil for the entire main cast. He has faced all of their traumas with none of the support. He believes that he's responsible for his mother's suicide, and that he's unlovable. He was abandoned by everyone. He made some bad decisions when he was like 14, and his abusive father manipulated him into being a hitman. He lies all the damn time, so you can't really tell when he's being genuine or not. He's a double agent who befriends you and then tries to kill you, believes that he's succeeded, and shows absolutely no remorse. He dies to save your life (and then gets sorta resurrected and then dies again to literally save the world). It's complicated! He's complicated!
Gwen Cooper
God forbid women do anything. Gwen Cooper is a classic victim of fandom misogyny, a complicated kinda fucked up female character who is ultimately a hero, and people act like she’s the antichrist because she’s about as fucked up as every other man in the cast. Gwen’s main crimes are cheating on her then-boyfriend (with another male lead character who weirdly does NOT get any hate for participating in this affair) and having a very emotionally intimate and sexually tense (but never actually sexual) relationship with Jack Harkness, who also has a boyfriend in Torchwood (this is the classic “she’s getting in the way of our ship!!!! Situation, despite the fact that Gwen and Jack literally never do anything together and Gwen is never anything but supportive of Jack’s relationship); perhaps Gwen’s most morally grey action is confessing adultery to her boyfriend and then erasing his memory when he reacts poorly, but I must stress that this is about on the par of the shitty things other men in the show have done (hide dangerous aliens in the secret base, sacrifice children to dangerous aliens, use alien cologne that makes people want to fuck you in a way that is at best DUBIOUSLY consensual, etc). Meanwhile, Gwen also gets hate for things that are NOT morally grey, namely, being an outspoken woman with a strong moral center. She is the HEART of her secret organization, she is the MORAL CORE, and because that means she has the AUDACITY to criticize her male coworkers, she’s a bitch. There are over 100 works on ao3 tagged “gwen cooper bashing,” and even more untagged that bash, demean, belittle, or simply ignore the existence of THE MAIN CHARACTER OF THE SHOW!! Gwen bestie you’re so fucked up and I love you and I need more people to appreciate that.
Gwen is a paranormal investigator who accidentally joined the worst polycule on Earth. The Torchwood fanbase (especially the one at the time) really hates/hated her, despite the fact that her coworkers were equally as bad if not much worse than her. Maybe she did a bit of cheating and maybe she’s kind of mean but have you considered: she’s the most beautiful girl in the world, she’s a bad bitch, and I love her? God forbid women do anything
#misrepresented morally grey#round 1#bracket b#did everything wrong bracket#persona 5#goro akechi#akechi goro#torchwood#gwen cooper#fun new drinking game: take a shot everytime 'God Forbid women do anything' is used in propaganda!/j
43 notes
·
View notes
Text
my fav thematic things about atla:
1. the protagonists (the gaang) lose. a lot. they aren’t just portrayed as incredibly strong characters (though they ARE very strong/talented), and it makes sense that they aren’t the most powerful. they’re children. it’s realistic. and they have to learn to grow and improve, which is also portrayed realistically too (hence the fact that the gaang don’t win every one of their battles).
2. the antagonist’s redemption arc (zuko) wasn’t pushed or dictated by the protagonist (aang/the gaang). zuko came to decisions on his own - with guidance from iroh of course - and learnt, and changed ON. HIS. OWN. and he had to WORK for it. not once does aang force zuko to challenge his position in the story. zuko does this himself.
3. the final battle isn’t smooth-sailing. the protagonist (aang) isn’t even present at first. their plans to invade the fire nation and defeat of the firelord were ruined from way back in s2. it’s rushed, it’s messy, but it WORKS. people get injured, things get destroyed, and although aang was victorious, it isn’t painted as a victorious day. thematically, this is very strong, and shows the reality of war.
4. the antagonist’s mental decline (azula) is fitting to the story and doesn’t villainise her any further. it is portrayed as a tragic thing, and does a good job of showing that not everyone is as perfect or powerful as once thought. (this also applies to aang as the hero and his inner conflict on morals before sozin’s comet. he isn’t perfect. he isn’t an idolised character - for the most part. it works.)
5. female characters (katara, toph, suki, azula, mai, ty lee, etc.) are written as strong, independent, realistic women. they do not revolve around a male character, they are not exclusively in the story to act as love interests, and they are given freedom to explore their own emotions and motivations without being degraded for doing so. also, male characters are actually shown expressing emotion (sokka, iroh, zuko, etc.) on more than one occasion. breaking stereotypes and unrealistic beliefs on screen helps to influence the way audiences perceive the world around them - in a good way.
6. sokka and suki coming back to each other all the time ik this isn’t the same as any of the other above points but i just love them i love them and their relationship and their growth as individuals and-
#atla#the gaang#aang#zuko#azula#toph#katara#ty lee#mai#suki#iroh#sokka#sukka#gotta include sukka#analysis
598 notes
·
View notes
Text
I have to admit that I'm kinda disappointed in Bucchigiri so far, but at the same time I want to see more 'cause the setting and the designs are really cool. Even the story could be interesting if it's done right. I've seen all the discourse with Arajin and as much as I love my boy Matakara I've realized something.
Matakara and Arajin are actually very similar but Matakara is just done better. Let me explain.
Arajin's goal: lose his virginity
Matakara's goal: become a Honkibito
Arajin's obsession: Mahoro/ girls
Matakara's obsession: Arajin/ become Honki people with him
Mahoro shows no interest in Arajin, broke his love stone but Arajin still believes he has a chance. Meanwhile, Arajin avoids Marakara, rejects him and still Matakara believes in him and holds on to his stone.
They both don't let go and pursue the person they like in some ways.
Matakara is as obsessive as Arajin, but his character is more fleshed out. He has a social circle with good friends. We have a backstory with his brother, so there's someone important to him other than Arajin.
He doesn't only use his strength for selfish reasons like Arajin but to protect his friends or the Minato Kai gang.
There's mystery surrounding the shadow in his room, we don't know what will happen to him. That gives the audience some anticipation and keeps its interest in the character and his potential.
I don't think people don't like Arajin because he's flawed. Matakara as sweet as he is has flaws too and other characters on the show as well. Sen'ya for example is shady af and doesn't tell Arajin everything and keeps stuff from him, so not everyone is a saint. And it's not because of bad writing or anything, it's just the way it was intended to be.
The intent here is to subvert expectations. I was surprised at first that it didn't go the way I thought. First, the harem trope is completely different from what we're used to.
- The mc pursues a girl but mostly men are after him, every gang leader wants him on their team because they think he's really strong. So they completely change what people expect of the harem genre.
- Mahoro is not the typical cute and innocent girl the mc usually falls for. She's ruthless, a brocon and doesn't hesitate to manipulate people to get what she wants. That makes her interesting because she's really not what she seems and is similar to Arajin and Matakara (her obsession with her brother)
- Arajin is not the typical shonen prota with big morals or big dreams (the "I want to become xx" type of hero), he doesn't want to be strong or anything significant other than losing his virginity like a normal teenager, and that's the joke. You expected something else? No, we get a pathetic mc who's most likely going to surprise us again just to break our expectations.
We're not supposed to root for Arajin, I think he is a tool to tell a delinquent story in a new kind of way. His character is annoying but I think it's on purpose and he's going to be useful somehow. How? Idk time will tell.
The process is not enjoyable right now and that's fine that people feel that way, but I think it's going to make sense at one point or another as to why Arajin acts like that.
I've seen some people not understanding all the criticism he gets, but I think it's fair criticism, judging that Arajin is not the type of character you would root for. While we know he's going to change it still seems like a long way, especially when you just don't care about the mc or you don't find him interesting in any way. That got me thinking that this is exactly how we're supposed to feel about him, at least for now. Arajin's not supposed to be a likable character so I'd say it's working. it's all fine because for once it's different, this is not what we expect of a shonen protagonist, so it's interesting.
I've also seen people say that Arajin has some development and I'm not sure about that. Sure, as the story progresses and he's getting more and more in a mess, Arajin's reactions have more range, there are some elements here and there that show us he cares about some things. But his attitude remains the same. And I think something bigger has to happen for him to actually break out of his character.
We've seen how he reacted to Akutaro's speech about Mahoro. It demonstrates that he can get mad for someone else, but he left Matakara tied up in a basement and doesn't get mad for him at all. We have a whole flashback with him feeling guilty for leaving Matakara and he has no remorse doing it again because he's not his priority. Something bad is going to happen so Arajin will finally snap out of it and pay attention to Matakara and realize his behavior was not okay. I hope that's the course of action at least or I'll be really disappointed. Arajin is not a good mc and that's cool, it's not groundbreaking but different. That being said, it has to mean something in the story and I haven't seen that yet.
So yeah, I'm not giving up on this anime and I'm looking forward to see how the story will unfold!
#bucchigiri?!#all of this to say that i think that's something is cooking for us and i hope it's good#episode 6 don't let me down pls#sorry for the rambling#but i had some thoughts after ep 5
27 notes
·
View notes
Text
What makes an interesting and well-written protagonist?
These are opinions and preferences from readers themselves across all different types of genres. You’ll find yourself agreeing and disagreeing with them— but that’s the beauty of art. The thoughts of readers can help to see what different people like and dislike. Here are the answers to this question:
“Someone who is smart but evil and a little bit humane.”
“When they used to be best friends with the protagonist.”
“They have the morally right end goals but the way they achieve those goals are morally wrong.”
“If they directly impact the life of the protagonist. ‘King Bad’ making life tough doesn't count.”
“Absolutely cruel but honest with what they do.”
“When you can actually understand why the antagonist is acting this way.”
“An antagonist that can properly bring out the weakness of the protagonist.”
“If the antagonist’s goals have a good point.”
“Relatable motivation e.g. loss of a loved one.”
“Known as messy and clumsy to the world, but master strategist in evil.”
“An antagonist should have a close or familiar relationship with the main character.”
“They are right. Even if their methods look wrong in the end, their goals and methods are correct.”
“Empathy and when it’s the main character's fault that they turned for the worse (when done correctly).”
“Their weakness and intelligence.”
“Someone relatable, but not always a ‘tragic backstory’ type thing.”
“When they have a good and complex backstory and that is the reason for their actions.”
“A contrast to the protagonist. If the protagonist punches problems, the antagonist should be a thinker.”
“Not being pure evil, like they have some things even they won’t do.”
“In my opinion: goofy antagonists. I love antagonists who aren’t super serious all the time but are still evil.”
“Backstory, connection to the reader.”
“Madness, but the controlled and calculating type.”
“An antagonist that hangs out with the protagonist and reveals themselves later is really cool.”
“Personal things that keep them going, like giving them traits that readers could relate too.”
“CHARACTER ARCS!!! I also love when they have a really unexpected personality.”
“They have to be hot 🧍🏿♀️”
“They have a valid reason to do what they do, like a life lost or revenge.”
“Antagonists that are given good or funny reasons to be the way they are.”
“A non cliché backstory.”
“Goals that make you reconsider supporting the protagonist.”
“Having a motive.”
“I personally LOVE when the antagonist is sympathetic and does wrong for the right reasons. And also, relatable antagonists are a really good addition to any story!”
“I find it really interesting when antagonists are just evil just because they feel like it.”
“They feel they are doing the right thing even though they’re misguided.”
“Ones you’re attracted to.”
“They need to succeed where the protagonist fails, or best them in their greatest strength.”
“Strong motivations and not just the desire to rule the world. And also their background.”
“Still has a heart.”
“A very good backstory on why the person has become an antagonist.”
“A connection to the protagonist. Ex. childhood friend, cousin, sibling.”
“Flaws people can relate to.”
“A well written motivation.”
“Him/Her having flaws as all humans, also learning from mistakes”
“Motive and intelligence; I also want the protagonist to be challenged and have to struggle to defeat them.”
“His actions are for his goal and not to train the hero.”
“They need to have a good reason to be the villain.”
“Reliability.”
“They have a reason that’s more righteous than the protagonists.”
“When they feel real. Like not all bad, with sensibilities.”
“Deep backstory.”
“A solid motive.”
“A storyline describing what they went through to have become what they are.”
“Motives people can relate to or sympathize with.”
“They’re still human and have emotions.”
“A thread binding the protagonists together. A twisted reflection of something the heroes wished.”
“One with a unique and interesting motive!”
“Someone who is doing it for their own justice, just on a different stand to the protagonists.”
“Actual motivation! An antagonist with weak reasoning or no reasoning for their actions is :/ “
“His evil laugh.”
“His behavior can be justified when his past is well written.”
“When you can understand their reasoning but not their choices.”
“The more “evil” they are, the more ambiguous their backstory.”
“Humor.”
“Comedic evil personality, traumatic backstory that makes the readers want the hero to save the villain.”
“Positive traits.”
“An antagonist with motivation that makes sense, not one about how tragic their life was.”
“Too much action in everything! Be evil without physically fighting.”
“Reasonable motivations, when you can understand why they do even irredeemable actions.”
“Understanding that villains are human.”
“A strong, non-cliché theme/ideology to their villainy. Evil is much scarier as a force.”
“A sympathetic motivation.”
“An unwillingness to do bad but is forced to anyway.”
“Goals and development / character arc.”
“Flaws and reasoning behind their ‘evil’ plans.”
“When you understand why they behave that way.”
“I think that (depending on the genre) a bad guy that actually holds its own. Meaning that they could be a character without the hero.”
“An antagonist that knows what they want.”
“A well written and valid reason that made them an antagonist, no one is a villain by nature.”
“I’m not one for there being an overall “main antagonist” but I like viciousness.”
“Someone who has an upsetting backstory (not traumatic) but makes you understand them.”
“A good reason/motivation, not just I WANT TO DESTROY THE WORLD!”
“One with problems that even the readers can relate to.”
“Mysterious and not entirely evil, the question of what made him evil. His intentions about a good/bad cause but in a bad way are not revealed until the end.”
“Have some morals, contrary to the usual ruthless types.”
“Chemistry with the protagonist; their banter/quips + how well they play off each other!”
“They have their own traits that are simply human/unrelated to their motives or traumas.”
“This is my opinion, but have the protagonist slowly becoming the antagonist.”
“Mysterious and powerful inner strength.”
“The unpredictability of their next moves!”
“Someone who you can sympathize with, who has a motive to their madness.”
“Character foil with the protagonist! As well as a solid motive.”
“Reflecting/mirroring the protagonist, showing them the road they’re on.”
“Purpose and motive.”
“The villain’s motivation and action makes sense in the story.”
“Mixed feelings about what they are doing.”
“Has a good reason for being bad, back story is explained with no plot holes.”
“Development of the character.”
“Somewhat relatable.”
“Someone you can relate to in some way and someone who has good qualities as well.”
“Traumas he faced and the evil personality he came out to be because of them!”
“A good motive but a bad way of carrying out their goal.”
“A solid backstory/motivation.”
“They have a strong motivation that goes against the protagonist’s interests.”
“Relatability.”
“Clearly telling his point of view and his justification of what he did.”
“The reason behind why they’re the antagonist.”
“This isn’t a must, but something both the antagonist and protagonist want makes a story interesting.”
“That he is likable, because he goes through the same struggles as everyone.”
“A good character that you loved originally slowly goes evil overtime, so you don’t want to hate them.”
“Good natured. Rounded. Readers think the antagonists' errands are forgivable. They like them more than the protagonist.
“They feel justified in their actions/movies.”
“That he has the same complexity as the protagonist, without being pure evil.”
“Competent villains are the best and most frightening. Intelligence plus a nice sense of humor is even better.”
“An antagonist with a backstory, not the weepy cliché kind but an interesting one. A goal they’re for. Maybe someone they care for in a twisted way. Essentially, a three dimensional villain.”
“Personal connection to the hero. I’ll always love the goal of a petty prevent more than world domination.”
“A well-explained backstory.”
“That they always keep you guessing, I’ve found that really intrigues readers.”
“That he has the same complexity as the protagonist, without being pure evil.”
“If it’s a girl, she still gets her period, cramps, has to go to the toilet, etc.”
Instagram: coffeebeanwriting
#writing tips and tricks#writing tips#writing advice#creative writing#writeblr#writing blog#how to write#writing help#writing fiction#writing prompts#fantasy writing#authortips#authoradvice#writingtips#writingmemes#writers blog#writingblog#authorsblog#howtowrite#writingtipsandtricks#writerscommunity#writers community#writinghelp#writingprompts#writertips#howtowriteascene#writingfiction#fictionwriting#fantasywriting#writing memes
265 notes
·
View notes
Note
How would you say is the way to write a morally unique / blue and orange morality character without letting a writers own moral code leak into their characterisation?
I understand that most of the time, the protagonists of a story are likely meant to portray the virtues of a moral code and the antagonists are meant to portray the reverse or absence of that code, but whenever I try to work out a morally weird character into a story I make up, I keep seeing conspicuous little pieces of the normal morality mixed in so the character doesn’t feel quite right, so the blue and orange character starts seeming more white/black and orange.
I know this is because of my own moral biases and I was wondering if you had any particular thoughts on it, or if this problem is just me and it’s not something that’s you’ve encountered as an obstacle in your own writing?
(Also, I freaking love this comic and your art style, it inspired me to start learning drawing and digital art this year. Since I’m in Australia, the pages upload around dinner time so I get to spend the days they come out looking forward to them!)
I love this question!
I think it's probably impossible to completely separate an author's core moral compass from the stories they tell, since an author's self-awareness only runs so deep and there will always be things about themself and their worldview they aren't actively aware of, and thus can't consciously leave out of their work. But I think this is more of a problem in heroes that the author is trying to make good people, since that'll naturally follow from their idea of what "goodness" means. I do think it's possible to construct individual characters that operate on very different rules than the author does, and the trick to that is figuring out what internal axioms they operate on, if "right and wrong" aren't applicable.
To simplify, most real people have desires they pursue, and a gradient zone surrounding the space of things they won't willingly do that starts with "things they might do but won't enjoy" and escalates until it reaches the center point of "things they absolutely will not do." Separate from this dichotomy of "want vs don't want", most people also have something approximating a moral code, "should vs shouldn't". Despite cultural attempts to standardize, everyone's code is different. If we wanted to imagine a cartesian coordinate system showing this person's internal judgment of any possible action, the X axis could be "desire" and the Y axis could be "morality", and the (0,0) point could be complete neutrality - an action they neither like nor dislike, that they consider neither good nor bad.
"Blue and Orange Morality" is the term typically used to describe characters who do not have a black-and-white moral code anywhere in their brain. They don't have things that are Right and things that are Wrong - they operate on a completely different axis. Most commonly, Blue And Orange Morality applies to characters who are entirely driven by the "want vs don't want" axis; their actions are not colored by an external code, but only by their personal drives and desires. However, this is not the only way to write this character. Sometimes, Blue And Orange Morality takes the form of a Y-axis that is something completely different than "morality". Someone with a really, really strong honor code might approach Blue And Orange Morality if they gauge all their actions based solely on how much honor it will gain or lose them; characters embroiled in games of status and power might have a similar internal compass, where the morality of their actions doesn't factor into their decision-making because they're too busy calculating how much clout it'll gain or lose them. A glamour-obsessed fairy creature might weigh all actions based on the drama it will reap them.
A character who operates under Blue And Orange Morality might have a moral compass somewhere in there, but they typically believe whatever other axis they operate on is more important and relevant. Power play stories like Game of Thrones seem to highlight that doing the right thing is a good way to die horribly. Immortal beings often lose their attachment to their moral compass as they age and perhaps become jaded, doubting the long-term good of acts of heroism after seeing so many hopeful efforts fail and be forgotten; or maybe they become detached, not malicious but generally uninvested.
I write a lot of characters that are, for various reasons, disconnected from the people around them.
Some, like Kendal, operate on a moral code that I personally agree with, but this is almost the only axis he currently operates on, as personal drive isn't something he recognizes within himself, producing a different kind of Blue And Orange Morality where he works so strictly on Right Vs Wrong that it puts him at odds with the people around him.
Others, like Tynan, understand morality enough to know that it's an exploitable weakness in other people, but operate only on the want-vs-don't-want spectrum - Tynan wants to be feared because he likes what that belief turned him into, and hurting people helps him get that.
Beings like The Collector were once mortal, with presumably a standard moral code associated with that state, but she experienced a world-shattering eldritch existential crisis that instilled in her a new axis that completely superseded her existing drives: a being vaster than comprehension and older than the world desperately wanted to be free, and she will make that happen. Anything that serves that is good; anything that hinders that is bad. Nothing else matters, because everything else is so much smaller than the mind she briefly touched. She has no need or intention to be purposefully cruel, but cruelty happens because her ultimate goal will unmake the world and her process to get there involves a lot of vivisection.
Tahraim is an interesting case. I won't say too much, but his primary axis really is "interest". Anything old, overdone or stagnant doesn't interest him; he pursues innovation and transmutation, the process by which things become better and more efficient. He has the patience of immortality and clearly takes joy in talking to people and seeing new things, but he is essentially what happens when a craftsman becomes boiled down to his absolute essentials. The pure joy of creation and improvement, the sweet enthusiasm of concentrating fully and entirely on making something - uninterrupted by mortal concerns like food, pain and time. While morality can be assigned to his actions, it holds very little weight for him.
236 notes
·
View notes
Text
~Writerly Thumbprint Challenge~
Rules: look back on your work, both past and present, finished and unfinished. what are five (or more!) narrative elements, themes, topics or tropes that continuously pop up in your work?
Thanks to @thana-topsy for the tag! I was admittedly a bit intimidated by this one, but it was so illuminating. It's been a long time since I've taken a step back to evaluate my stories through a critical lens, and sometimes I forget what I've written 😅 I know a lot of people have already been tagged, so I'm tagging: @wispstalk @atypicalacademic @thequeenofthewinter @chennnington @rainpebble3 @justafoxhound @dumpsterhipster @skyrim-forever @sylvienerevarine @gilgamish @burningsilence
I'm a baby writer. Only two fics, both TES. Here is what I came up with:
1. An Inner Darkness, A Downward Spiral — Most of my OCs have a secret (sometimes not-so-secret) viscousness that's always simmering under the surface, threatening to ooze free. They're not necessarily mean, but they're not good people. They may not be evil, but they all do very bad things. Why? Because 1) thieving and necromancing and murder for hire are kinda fun in-game, and if our Hero is doing all of that while saving the world, it needs to be explained with something other than whimsy lol, and 2) I like the challenge of writing morally grey characters who are flawed and fucked up and unforgivable while simultaneously asking readers to root for them. I've found it quite difficult to make them likable and deserving of sympathy while not overlooking their wrongdoings or writing them inconsistently, but it makes for such interesting conflict.
2. The Pursuit of Knowledge — My protagonists and their close friends are mage-nerds because I am a nerd, and perhaps this is a case of it's easier to write what's close to home?? I love University settings and the looseness of the elder scrolls magic system. There is so much great lore to work with but in many cases it's not so rigid that you can't also twist it and grow it and shape it to your own desire. Knowledge is power as the Telvanni say. Most of my protagonists are not physically strong and rely on cunning and/or magic for defense. In that way, knowledge is the primary avenue by which they assert control over the world around them, which facilitates a lot of conversations surrounding the ethics of magical use cause well... given the way my OCs use it, it deserves to be questioned.
3. Identity — How does a character perceive themselves? How does this compare to what is perceived by those around them? I love exploring the discrepancies between these two and often write arcs that involve a character breaking through the facades they've constructed to conform to what is expected of them and/or shield themselves from the discomfort they feel in their own skin.
4. Loneliness, A Desperate Need for Love — I write characters who have been placed or place themselves on the fringes of society, yet long for acceptance and a place to belong. This leads to a lot of unhealthy and messy relationships, both familial, platonic, and romantic. Often times they hurt people they care about. They let others hurt them too, but it's okay as long as they're not alone, right? It's angst all the way to the top baby.
5. Romance is not the End Goal — Yeah, my work features ships. I'd say it's actually a huge part of the stories, but mostly because the relationships my characters are involved in "fail." People break up or they die tragically. They become incompatible and move on (sometimes lol). Maybe they endure, but romantic love is not the only kind nor the highest valued, and most importantly, I want to write characters whose self-worth is not tied up in whether they're loved by someone else.
Bonus is Awkard Bisexual Losers because all my OCs are cringe-fail and have no game.
This was such an informative exercise! I encourage everyone to take a stab at it. Please tag me if you do. I'm so excited to see what you come up with :))
25 notes
·
View notes
Text
Exclusive ITV screening shares first look at new thriller, The Suspect, featuring Aidan Turner
by Yasmin Turner [X]
We joined other members of the press and media who gathered at the Soho Hotel in London last Friday 8, July for an exclusive preview of ITV’s new psychological thriller, The Suspect. Following the screening, some of the cast and production attended the event for a Q&A. Those in attendance included cast members Aidan Turner (Poldark, Leonardo, The Hobbit Trilogy), Shaun Parkes (Small Axe) and Anjli Mohindra (The Lazarus Project, Vigil, Bodyguard), as well as screenwriter Peter Berry (Gangs of London), director James Strong (Vigil, Liar, Broadchurch) and executive producer Jake Lushington (Vigil, Born to Kill).
The first episode that was screened at the event introduced the leading role Doctor Joseph O’Loughlin (Aidan Turner), a man who on the surface seems to have the perfect life – a loving wife, daughter and successful career as a clinical psychologist. The series opens with a dramatic scene that sees Doctor Joseph standing on a ledge of a tall building to save someone who’s considering suicide. But all it takes is a murder victim, a troubled patient and one monumental lie, for him to go from rooftop hero to likely sick killer.
Speaking to us about the leading character who undergoes a huge change in the first 50 minutes of the show, Turner revealed, “He’s a complicated person. But that’s what was interesting about it.
“His recent diagnosis [of Parkinson’s] is something that when I first read it, as a reader I was qualifying the decisions he was making because of that,” he said. “But then you’re thinking is it just an excuse, is that problematic for him, would he have done this anyway. He’s just a very interesting character. Very layered. He makes some decisions that are very questionable. I think it’s interesting to have a protagonist that’s so flawed and for me to play someone like that.
“In recent past, with other characters I’ve played, it’s been that there’s a moral centre and a compass, and that’s the direction we go in,” Turner added. “Not to say he’s not a good guy. But he feels real and layered and difficult. What was really interesting for me reading the character, was the ambiguity around good and bad. Is he good or evil? Is he both? Can you be both? Where’s the lie and is there some truth in that lie?”
X
77 notes
·
View notes
Text
@hooded-and-cloaked said: I’ve never read any SJM books, but aside from the plagiarism, can you elaborate on the writing crutches that you’ve also seen in other books (for my edification. I haven’t written in years, but maybe I will again)?
For sure!
Perhaps the broadest and most egregious thing I keep encountering is super special omnipotent characters. SJM loves to heap on unlikely inheritances, never-before-seen powers, connections to gods, etc., onto the same person. I think there's real fun to be had with overpowered characters, but in her writing, it's purely a bestowing of authorial favor. And it's EVERY time. The protagonist gets the most powers and advantages; secondary characters get less but still have insane, impossible gifts compared to most people in the world; and if any of the heroes misbehave, they lose what makes them special as a consequence.
The reason I call this a crutch and not just an annoyance is because her characters aren't very strong—you know, writing wise. They act inconsistently, and she has no sense of nuance or moral gray area when writing their decisions. Sooo I'm not sure whether giving them super-special-awesome powers is shorthand to let the reader know who to like (e.g. the protag has seven magic powers, therefore she is the coolest, therefore she should be liked the most)? Or if it's an attempt to make the characters more interesting, or what? But it's tiring and unnecessary. The truth is that if you hand me a well-written character, whether they're a scruffy nobody or have godlike powers, I'll like them!
Related to the superpowers is the way the stakes of the story make insane jumps and become impersonal. In short, her plots aren't very good. Later villains are one-note, moustache-twirling forces of evil who are going to destroy the entire world for no reason unless the heroes stop them. Basically, SJM uses the highest stakes imaginable (world blows up, etc.) in lieu of planning out a plot with any intrigue or complexity.
A lot of new authors have bought into the idea of a Force of Evil rather than a villain, some nebulous badness that must be defeated. And to me, that's lazy writing. Come up with an interesting reason for someone to oppose your heroes! Give me a villain and a plot!
Anyway, to accomplish these stakes half the time, she has to retcon everything. It's another side effect of her not planning out her world or her story: she finds herself stuck in a corner, having to make something up. (It's also a side effect of her work no longer being edited.) This is absolutely a crutch, and she leans all her weight on it. She presents things that contradict earlier writing in order to achieve:
more powers bestowed upon the protagonist (Even though we know her heritage already, she is ALSO related to ANOTHER magical being!)
an even bigger bad force (I know we said the last guy was the only one who could use the demon powers, but now there's another one who is somehow worse!)
moving characters from the Good to Bad category or vise versa (Actually he never did that bad thing earlier! He's never done anything wrong in his life!)
I see a lot of that last bullet point especially in other books. Rather than character development, some authors spring for explaining away a character's crimes. Hastily wiping clean the slate rather than letting a story work through anything. Boooooo.
Retconning is straight up awful writing and I'm tired of seeing it. It's so much fun to create a world and rules within it, and then make characters work within those limits! Breaking those rules very occasionally can be such a great dramatic hit. But constantly? No. Stop lying to me in every book. >:[
Last but not least, SJM needed a way for all of her female characters to be sad and frightened and undeniably damaged, and it's rape trauma. Around every figurative corner is another woman with PTSD from rape. It's a shortcut to get the audience's sympathy and show you that a character is a broken woman who needs love. But please note that several of her male characters have also been raped, and that's just kind of :/ and never brought up again. And while some authors have written characters with rape trauma and done it well, many have not. At all.
So yeah, I wish new authors wouldn't copy the class clown's homework.
20 notes
·
View notes
Note
okay so I know that Jason now is like completely different than he was pre 52. I hate new 52 with all or my heart, but at the same time im a huge fan of how Jason is now
Do you have any thoughts on like the change to his character or like opinions on how it's different now or whether or not you like it?
New 52 Jason sucks and I hate him. He's not a terrible person. He's not a horrible villain. He is something far worse.
He's flawless and boring.
(DISCLAIMER: I'm only going to be talking about post-crisis vs new 52 here. I have not read anything after the new 52 yet. Rebirth/Infinite Frontier Jason may or may not be great. I don't know yet, and I'm not gonna make claims.)
So, without putting words in your mouth here, I think that when a lot of people say they like Jason better post-Flashpoint than pre-Flashpoint, that's not...actually what they mean. They mean they like Jason better as a protagonist and hero than as an antagonist and villain.
That might be for any combination of (a) preferring your faves to be morally supportable and (b) just wanting the narrative to give attention directly to them rather then using them as a tool in the real protagonist's story. And that's fair!
But I care about execution more than concept. I am open to both the concept of antagonist Jason Todd and protagonist Jason Todd. And New 52 Jason is--to his detriment--not just the same Jason Todd now turned antihero.
Post-Crisis Jason was far from a perfect character. He was a supporting character (and usually antagonist) who was tossed between short story-arcs with different writers, and the character's consistency absolutely suffered for it.
Sometimes he was a very sympathetic antivillain doing bad things for understandable reasons that genuinely challenged the protagonists' viewpoints. Sometimes he was an insane villain. These extremes were not stitched together well.
But, dammit, he was interesting. He was defined by trauma. He had strong emotions that were regularly unhelpful or unhealthy. He had principles that often conflicted with those emotions, and he usually let his feelings take precedence. He had complicated, messy, layered relationships and history with characters around him. He was a walking tragedy. You could write ten thousand essays just on his interplay with Bruce.
New 52 Jason Todd, on the other hand, is just fucking boring. He's an adolescent concept of A Cool Guy.
New 52 Jason is the world's most specialest boy. He's the chosen one, and he's good at everything, and he's the best ever. His friends would be helpless without him because he's so cool and he always saves the day. He has no meaningful flaws. He's never allowed to be truly wrong. He's never allowed to mess up in a significant way.
He's an encapsulation of why Mary Sues are bad characters.
I want to be clear here: it's not that Jason has to be tragic and antagonistic to be interesting. I would have loved Post-Crisis Jason to get protagonist focus in a good book. I would have LOVED an arc of him becoming a better and/or healthier person.
But the New 52 didn't just skip that arc--it also stripped out anything interesting or complicated from Jason's character.
The most nuanced and compelling relationships he had (particularly Bruce; also Dick, Barbara, Alfred) are simplified down to nothing. The new relationships he was given (New 52 "Roy" and "Kori", even Tim Not-Drake) only exist so there are other characters around to prop him up.
The flaws and trauma and complicated emotions are gone. He has the mildest aesthetic of a bad boy, pasted onto a Perfect Person.
And the most compelling potential--the conflicts of morality or principle--is missing entirely.
How does New 52 Jason feel about killing? I literally don't know, because none of his stories give a shit about questions of morality. New 52 Jason kills when Lobdell thinks it will look cool and badass, and he refuses to kill when Lobdell thinks that would look noble and heroic--and it's the same for every character around him. He has no principles, because his stories don't think silly things like principles are interesting. He is, again, always right.
I hate him.
tl;dr: Post-Crisis Jason is an example of how a compelling character concept can survive even messy, inconsistent stories. New 52 Jason is an example of how to squander every interesting thing you could have done with a character because a shitty writer decided to adopt him as a self-insert instead.
#*#ask#anon#dc#*dc#dc meta#jason todd#once again this is tied to the vagueness of post-flashpoint backstories#meaning none of his relationships *can* be truly nuanced because their history is unclear#but even without that new 52 jason would still suck#because lobdell just wrote him as a gary sue#ANYWAY forever amazed (derogatory) that dc looked at jason todd in 2011 and was like hm...let's give him a wacky team book#when he was CLEARLY designed for a solo book targeted and mature audiences#*at#anyway ask me about how i'd fix the new 52 batfam book line up sometime#sorry for the delay anon <3 the thing about me is that sometimes i am ready and excited to do a thing#and then i wake up one morning having forgotten it and don't remember it exists for 2 weeks
49 notes
·
View notes
Text
Spectacular Spider-Man: Still Lives Up To Its Title
I started rewatching this a couple days ago while babysitting and it had a pretty big legacy to live up to. It is THE series that made sure Spider-Man was my favorite hero of all time. The reason why The Amazing Spiderman 2 probably had a lot of good will from me because this show's interpretation of shocker literally never left me. The show that solidified my love for smart fighters above brute force wins because how Peter beat the Rhino never left me.
And... Seven episodes in and it's effectively everything I remember. Great animation, a unique style, but above all else just really good writing, especially for Spider-Man. One that really sells the struggle that Peter has to deal with. Not just in missing things but all the times that he hates having a secret identity, the reasons he keeps it, how it plays off of others but also how Spidey genuinely keeps good company.
One thing I don't think I ever quite got is how much it sold to me my love for well written teenagers. The show itself talks about teenagers making mistakes when under pressure and how they start dealing with bigger pressures and seeing that weigh on Peter is good. It allows for more interesting morals than normal while also still allowing for morals and a focus on real life issues that I feel are unique for kid's shows. How many kid's shows have protagonists who don't just worry about money for selfish gain after all but because their family is genuinely broke?
I'm not going to say its flawless, you can see where some of the corners are cut for the animation from time to time, the theme REALLY needs a better singer, and while its serialized, it makes sure it's episodic enough to have a villain of the week and that can sometimes lead to a bit of a quick pace. I don't mind because I like the comic book esque style writing and the smart serialization means that when all Rhino wants is to murder Spider-Man, he doesn't come across as just an asshole because he's already a reoccuring character. Not a complex one but one that we understand why he wants Spidey dead so badly. Motivations lead into each episode and you can see the shifting tide in characters, even as the show makes sure no one is making unreasonable moves. I understand anyone who can't quite get into the pacing like I can though, especially since there is probably some amount of nostalgia blinders on for me. Speaking of: I get if anyone doesn't really like the style. It's very simple and angular and while they get a lot out of it, it's not always the prettiest to look at.
But it is nice that the show that made me first interested in the character is still so strong, even 15 years later. I didn't think about media in the way I do now and it always makes me worry how I'll see old favorites. Instead, my favorite version of the webhead continues to impress.
======+++++======
I have a public Discord for any and all who want to join!
I also have an Amazon page for all of my original works in various forms of character focused romances from cute, teenage romance to erotica series of my past.
I have an Ao3 for my fanfiction projects as well if that catches your fancy instead.
If you want to hang out with me, I stream from time to time and love to chat with chat.
A Twitter you can follow too
And a Kofi if you like what I do and want to help out with the fact that disability doesn’t pay much.
2 notes
·
View notes
Text
Thief
Alignment-
Active
Counterpart-
Rouge
Mythological Role-
One who steals (aspect), or steals through (aspect), for themselves
Thieves are a stealing class, and their job is to take their aspect from others in order to benefit themselves. They will improve themselves the more they learn to embrace their class and steal their way to victory.
Themes-
Thieves are naturally drawn towards gambling, and love currency of any type.
Thieves often have very few people that they can call friends. They are extremely close to those they are friends with, and they are often ostracized from their social circle due to the thief’s own nature.
Thieves often have a close relationship with sylphs. Whether it be a bond of friendship or romance, they are both drawn to the other.
Thieves have a tendency to be last to important events. It is usually due to time shenanigans, and they have no choice in the matter. While everyone else is partaking in this event, often for years at a time, the thief has no idea that they are late until they arrive. Because of this, thieves often appear to be “missing”.
Thieves often have an inherent lack of their aspect before they learn to embrace their class and take from others what they are lacking.
Thieves have a hard time abiding by the standards of society. They typically have opposing viewpoints, yet try to uphold the responsibilities society has for them.
Personality-
Thieves portray a sort of persona within their personality. They appear to be nothing more than a self-absorbed, self-confident, lone wolf-type who doesn’t need anyone’s help. They truly are very much self-absorbed, confident, and prefer to do things by their own rules, but they often exacerbate these traits of themselves in order to hide their insecurities. Often these insecurities stem from the persona they try to maintain, and anything that breaks this persona down is seen as a threat to the thief. They don’t want others to think little of them, because they see themselves as the main character, the hero, and the protagonist. Showing that they are insecure about something is a sign of weakness, which a strong hero does not have in the thief's eyes. A thief's worst fear is not being good enough, both for others, society, and themselves.
Thieves often have a hard time acting on their own morals. Their values tend to go against what society wants them to do, and this can be very stressful for someone who relies on the heavy approval of others as the thief does. They won’t ever make it known that they need this approval, however, and it becomes a secret aspect of the thief.
They tend to become overwhelmed by the pressure of trying to maintain their own values while upholding the values of society as well. This imbalance often results in the thief acting in a morally grey realm when making decisions of this caliber. They don’t always make the correct choice in their actions, and someone is always upset with them because of it.
Thieves tend to run away from the internal problems that arise within them, pushing them away and ignoring them until it is too late. They would rather pursue a physical goal than an internal one. The one thing that a thief is most afraid of is themselves after all, and it is often a challenge for a thief to come to admit to their flaws.
Despite acting in a morally grey area, they know right from wrong quite well. They are able to discern when their actions are not right, and they often beat themselves up for it. This leads them to not feel like the hero they portray themselves as. They often act even more like the protagonist in order to fill this hole.
They want to be the perfect hero, and this can become either a huge advantage or a huge flaw. They do what they think is right in many cases, and if their logic is flawed, which it often is, it can lead to hurting their teammates. A thief will never truly forgive themselves if they hurt people they care about unintentionally, no matter how deep they bury their emotions or rationalize their actions.
A thief takes charge of a situation quite well. They are excellent planners, even if they conveniently forget to tell others of their plans. They know what their goals are and will do anything to reach them. They play unfairly and win by any means necessary.
Thieves are loud and often rude individuals, and they are proud of who they are (or at least the person they outwardly appear to be). Even with their insecurities, they don't hate themselves. They only hate their actions in the past, and they often strive to be better than they were before. They constantly strive to be better than everyone else, including their past self. They tend not to realize when they make a mistake until it is too late, and they will beat themselves up over it internally. Thieves don’t like admitting when they are in the wrong, even when they know that they are.
Despite appearing like a lone wolf, a thief deeply appreciates those whom they care about. The thief might seem rude to people, but this is often due to the thief not quite understanding social cues or how to show people when they do appreciate them. They don’t often show it, but they would go to great lengths to protect their allies, even if doing so may seem impossible. Nothing is impossible for the thief, and they will attempt to accomplish their goals no matter what.
In Canon:
Vriska Serket (Thief of Light), Meenah Peixes/The Condesce (Thief of Life)
14 notes
·
View notes
Note
Okay okay okay okay
When this fic finishes I will be turning to my non-miraculous friend’s with your fic open on my phone and point to it with the biggest and most deranged smile on my face and proudly yell “THIS IS CINEMA”
My voice will reach far and while some will cringe harder then when I sang country road it will be worth it because this chapter took me
Im in love with your Marinette especially. She has every layer, anxiety and profound strength a Marinette type character should have. She is like an onion she has layers lmfao.
I will cheering you on, on the road to the finale!
awwww sizzle 🥺 if that doesn't sell it to your friends i don't know what will lol (although country roads is hard to beat)
thank you SO much for your compliments on my marinette! something i wanted to convey in this second to last chapter is the contrast between starting marinette vs. ending marinette! she began the fic bitter, angry, and vengeful. she ends the fic with a heart full of healing love, with which she ends up saving the day.
marinette is a character who values truth, justice, and morality. she prioritizes doing the right thing; a trait i had fun translating this from canon into odnlb. for the most part of this fic marinette has been an anti-hero: the protagonist who fulfulls the "heroic" role without having heroic intentions (don't let taylor swift fool u). now, she has fully returned to being the hero: defeating the villain and saving the world with all the best intentions. 🎶the power of love always so strong 🎶 really came through in her character arc! i'm very proud of her too <3333
#marinette's the most goodest onion girl in paris#she once was lost but now she's found#and in being so adrien is too#it sounds so cheesy when i say it like that#so we can just say they changed from not loving breathing to being grateful for it#odnlb#one does not love breathing
13 notes
·
View notes
Text
The Scholomance Series by Naomi Novik
Synopsis: This novel is about a girl, struggling to graduate from a school that is trying to kill her. Although to be fair, it’s not just the school but also the other students and the maleficaria. The Scholomance is a place for the children of the magically gifted to be both sheltered from the dangers of the world and toughened up to survive it. El has managed well enough on her own so far, but by your third year, one is expected to have gained allies. And no one wants to ally with a prickly loner like El. No one except the school’s golden boy, Orion. El can’t stand him but she might need to tolerate him if she’s to keep her ill-fated destiny a secret. I mean, just because she could wipe out a nation with a single breath doesn’t mean she should.
My Quibs: I know I’ve said this a thousand times too many, but I really need to stop reading books with teenage protagonists. I really just can’t with her. She’s bitter and angsty and resentful and rude and the worst of all, hypocritical. She thinks she’s better than most other students who are elitist or aggressively competitive or judgmental, but then she believes them when they tell her she’s the most worthless person. She resents people for not befriending her but then she resents Orion for spending so much time with her. And to top if off, she is so morally high-grounded it infuriates me. All of this I could somehow manage, if we didn’t get so much internal dialogue. It’s like a one-sided endless stream of consciousness about the terrible conditions of the school, the social behaviors of her classmates, the fears of her deep secret and accidentally fulfilling her prophecy. The closest I get to another perspective is when Aadhya and Liu snap her out of it and El takes a long enough breath to recognize other people’s struggles. And this isn’t even balanced out by my love of world building. Novik created an interesting premise, not so unique as to need an encyclopedia to understand but still different enough to be engaging. Unfortunately, we don’t get to hear it from Novik. We hear it described through El in either textbook-like paragraphs detailing the functional mechanics of how rooms are organized and the hallways get cleaned or bitter rants about how students behave socially to protect themselves in the lunchroom. I’m not one to fall on old standards and rules because rules are made to be broken. But Novik needs to do more showing and less telling. Though I don’t want to crush everything about this series. For instance, it may be cathartic for a reader to see characters express their emotions and Novik knows how to thoroughly work them with her characters. I mean, if there’s one thing El can do, it’s express everything.
Should you read it? Considering my review, I can’t personally recommend it.
Similar reads? It has similar elements to so many other YA series: strong female protagonist and world-altering destiny/prophecy.
(Spoiler Alert!) Novik is not one for the twist. I mean, she titled her second novel “Last Graduate” so even though I kinda know where it’s headed, I was excited by the how and the why. But it wasn’t hard-hitting enough for me. Orion’s self-sacrificing self-destructive push is very Hollywood. You can almost see El’s slow-motion outstretched hand as she scream echoes ‘nooooo’. And setting the school adrift into the void didn’t sound like the ultimate no-return kind of demise El kept insisting it was. And surprise surprise, in book three, it wasn’t. And that’s what was infuriating to me. El’s massive attitude swings of “he must be dead” depression to “I can go back to him” stubbornness and even when he’s alive and more-or-less well, she still chose to be angry because he’s not mentally healthy and grateful. I’ve also realized I’m not a “destined hero saves the world” kind of plot seeker anymore so I’m not really invested in the core of this series. I’ve finished the series though so despite my frustrations and rantings (uncomfortably similar to El’s) Novik’s writing must still be decent. Even if I disagree with all her choices.
What did you think of The Scholomance series?
4 notes
·
View notes
Text
I was having dragon ball thoughts a second ago and wanted to say stuff because I love dragon ball. just spur of the moment thoughts that could be refined a million times over but that's not why I'm here- I'm here to ramble!
But basically I really really love and appreciate that throughout OG dragon ball, through all its emphasis on fun and jokes (as is expected from a manga made for kids) the core "moral" I guess is just Goku's kindness.
It ain't preachy, it's a fuckin' joke haha fight manga about a super strong kid with a monkey tail, but it really is the core moral because from the very beginning Goku's defining characteristics are "Naive as all hell, even more naive than a normal child" and "Nice."
Like, it's that simple though, the star of the show, the guy we follow the entire time, is naive, and nice, and I just really like that because of how it's handled.
He falls for shit, he gets tricked, he makes mistakes (all the time), he fails social cues, but from moment one to the last he's nice to strangers and likes his friends and that's what motivates him to defeat the various evils of the world- be that "Mean monster wants to eat a stranger I met on the road" or "evil army wants to take over the world" or "Assassin killed my friend's dad"- it's a series about a naive kid being granted (by the author) the strength to resist the evils of the world, and his core motivation isn't directly to make the world a better place, it's not some higher calling "I must be like a comic book hero" motivation, his entire motivation is just, "I like my friends- hey those guys are dicks."
And this is shown to be admirable, Goku is presented as incredibly likable and as a genuinely good role model for kids because it's a simple, attainable goal.
Be nice. Kinda just that, man.
But what makes it stick is that this never ends. Goku grows up, we get Z, the stakes rise, his friends are threatened and killed, his family as well, the WORLD, the UNIVERSE- and Goku grows and matures but never changes his core values.
He's Naive because the world intrigues him at the simplest level, he finds joy in the simple pleasures- yes he's lacking understanding on a million things- but this characteristic isn't a 1 to 1 aspiration for viewers- it's just who he is and seeing the good it does- like his willingness to find happiness in simple things- these are the parts that are most important.
And he's Nice because it's how he was raised by his grandpa Gohan and being nice has never once steered him wrong in life.
Even during events as recent as the tournament of power his motivation is to save those he loves- he's gone from being the silly kid who couldn't comprehend the greater evils of the world but kept finding himself fighting them because he had care in his heart for those around him- ironically becoming the hero despite his motivations being so grounded- to being a silly adult who doesn't fully comprehend the evils and risks around him but still, after a million fights and losses, finds himself being the hero STILL, because his motivation and simple core characteristic of being nice keeps putting him there, and he's happy for that, he likes fighting for his friends :)
I usually enjoy media with intense themes and morals, things that make you think or cry, and dragon ball arguably stands out as a favorite piece of media because it's not a particularly "challenging" piece.
But I don't need every story to be challenging, and I really do find the underlying moral to be just as good despite being so simple.
Dragon Ball is about fun. It's about big fights and silly characters. Cool big attacks dreamt up purely because it's cool and that's that. But it's also about being nice, as ludicrously silly as that is to say, and honestly? I really like that :)
Goku is a fantastic protagonist.
4 notes
·
View notes
Last Seen Blogs
iw4n5x
ivona:)
bunnblu69
Untitled
davideyamazaki-blog
Thirsty [for coffee]
ampersketch-art
Local Skeleton
m-wtactical
Untitled