#retrace ciii | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

fivekrystalpetals · 1 year

Text

Glens, Children of Misfortune and the Baskervilles

[When I say Glens, I am referring all Glens- past and present: Levi, Oswald, Gil and Leo. Hella lot of lore is here that I wanna write about ;-; so I might divide this into different posts let's see. Also fair warning: I might criticize Oswald's actions-past and present- a bit, since I love looking at characters from an unbiased pov. Also, maybe some characters' past actions in order to point to their character development so that too.]

[ Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 ]

1] Glen, Jury and the knowledge of the Abyss

Starting off with this panel, although it is passed off for gags, I realized something very important here (and got me to love Leo even more lol droopy eyed jerk yeah!!) (Retrace 103:)

Only after reading Retrace 93 onwards and actually visiting the Sablier from hundred years ago do we get the real, undistorted lore of why Children of Misfortune exist, what exactly is Glen, where the Juries come to play into this whole scheme and so on. But before I elaborate on the above panel, let's go back to go back to these ill-fated panels—the literal start of everything going wrong—Oswald casting Lacie into the Abyss for her sin of being born as a Child of Misfortune. (Retrace 69)

Two things to remember here:

i.) Oswald can't go against the Glen's orders until after the succession ceremony. He is bound to his master, the then Glen, Levi by the oath on his left hand so the only way to break free of it is by cutting off his hand like Gil did. ii.) Immediately after the last chain, the fifth one- Jabberwocky is transferred to his body, Oswald becomes the next Glen.

Now, if I think about it, with Jabberwock having been transferred into his body, Oswald had already become Glen when he was saying these words to Lacie. He was Glen when he cast her into the Abyss. He was Glen, the absolute head of the Baskervilles, whose orders can't be disobeyed by any of his people.

Maybe, this doesn't seem much significant. It didn't, to me, while I was reading this chapter,, because I was still under the impression that 'Glen' was a spirit passed down from one host to another as the Will of the Abyss said here to Vincent (Retrace 39)—

If that were the case, then, well, nothing. Oswald's body would have been taken over by 'Glen' at the Succession Ceremony. Nothing of Oswald's soul would remain,, so, it won't be Oswald, but 'Glen' that's casting Lacie into the Abyss— Lacie who is not the younger sister but a sinner bearing the Eyes of Ill-Omen as far as the spirit of Glen is concerned.

But... later, we get the reveal it's quite not the case. (Retrace 91)

It was because the tale would be boring otherwise.

Everything was a story for the Juries who have been collecting and preserving these for centuries. In their stories, worlds exist where humans never walked the earth at all. Or, stories where the world ended within a century of its beginning. Or even, stories where the world ran identical to this one but decisively different. The main point is the Juries decide whether the tale is interesting enough to continue or to be brought to an end so it can be 'shelved in their library'. There comes the significance of Glen. The Juries are present in every story and use a turning point (here, the Abyss and the Glen) to try and bring the tale to a climax. In this case, they were probably pinning their hopes on Oswald.

Anyway, back to the night of the Succession Ceremony. Glen, now we know is just the title given to the head of the Baskervilles who is a potential candidate for generating a main turning point for the Juries, the reason why they keep an eye of them. It's no spirit hosted in Oswald's body or some such but Oswald himself that cast Lacie into the Abyss.

Why I stress this again is because—Oswald could have stopped her execution. Just like that, he could have given the command: 'As the new Glen, I have decided that we are no longer executing Lacie, does anyone have a problem with it?' Yeah. Just like that. Like, who'd dare challenge his decision? The previous Glen? Levi? A guy left with a broken body and no chain? The rest of the Baskervilles? The same people who obey his every order without a question?

No, the only ones who could and would veto his decision are the Juries. Because they know that only a Child of Misfortune has the power to affect their tales in an unpredictable way since this child was birthed directly by the Abyss (Retrace 91)

However, this aside, I want to point out that Levi, who was the Glen at least three generations before Leo, did not know the actual reason for casting a Child of Misfortune back into the Abyss up until this moment. I am honestly appalled.

So, my first point of this section: i.) severe lack of knowledge about the Abyss/little knowledge is dangerous—

—since even the Glen, who is supposed to be the protector of the Abyss, the origin of all Life, does not know the exact reasons for why things happen as they do; they simply take things for granted. Levi does speculate that the chains are what hold up the world from being swallowed up by the Abyss. Although proven wrong in Retrace 91/92, ig there is some truth to his speculations after all—Jack, believing his words, goes about cancelling the chains and succeeds in sinking Sablier into the Abyss before Oswald and Alice manage to stop him.

The reason for this practice of taking things for granted is my second point. ii.): Every Glen was raised as a valet to the previous Glen.

The Glens are valets before they become the next head; they are practically raised to be good servants, not good leaders. They don't even think of questioning anything their master/Jury tells them.

Truth be told, they are probably programmed from a young age to be subservient to their Master, to kill all of their Master's enemies etc. etc., by either brainwashing, intensive training or torture. See here, Retrace 38:

Think of only your master. Serve only your master.

In fact, as early as Retrace 13, Break questions this extreme devotion of Gilbert's, bordering on obsession.... and wonders if it is not abnormal (although he, as well as Gilbert, think his loyalty is for Oz):

Since Gil had lost all his memories of his past, there was no way for them to know that he had been brainwashed into absolute obedience and this was not natural. (more on this in part 2)

Plus, we don't know what else they have been conditioned to accept as the indisputable truth.

As I said earlier, Oswald was already Glen at the point. Why did he not deliberate if he really wanted to cast Lacie into the Abyss? He had become the sole absolute command there; he had all the powers of the Abyss. Why did he not question the whole point of it? Why did he not even make an attempt to save Lacie?

Well, this is the reason. The Glens were never meant to be someone strong enough to decisively change the story. The Juries needed someone to make wrong decisions so that the 'tale' can be brought to an end. They were waiting for the Glens to mess up. And it was passed down from Glen to Glen, and taken for granted that if they were to become the next head, they had to take in five chains and cast their red-eyed sibling into the Abyss.

In fact, what Levi says about the Children of the Ill-Omen born with the to-be Glen isn't the truth either, just some hearsay (Retrace 69)—

Because you're supposed to properly dispose of what you have created.

I don't think any of this is necessarily true. Because Kevin Legnard (Break), a Child of Misfortune, lived in an age around 10+ years since the Tragedy of Sablier. He served in the Sinclair family since a young age where, yes, a massive tragedy did occur, but it was only in his adulthood and due to political complications, more or less. So really, I wonder if the whole story of Children of Misfortune —the only threat to the Juries—attracting "misfortune" is not one cooked up by the Juries themselves, then accepted as such by generations of Glen? And even spread to the locals because both Lacie and Vince were bullied for their red eyes. Perhaps, so that such children, even if they might not become Baskervilles, will be tortured and eventually killed/take their own lives, and the tales of the Juries will not be interrupted.

This is why the first panel of Leo ordering Levi is so important to me. It's about the choice of your free will (which Oswald never had, he simply went with whatever was asked of him,, more on this in part 3). Leo started to actively fight for what he felt was right and even commands the previous Glen to obey his orders because "I am the current Glen! When I tell you to do something, you shut up and do it, you droopy eyed jerk!"

Oswald could have done this at the Succession Ceremony. I am pretty sure Levi would be more amused than angry at the rebellion against the status quo.

Because, even here, amused by Leo's words, Levi spurs into action only after this exchange: (Retrace 103)

Finally, it's Leo who puts an end to the ostracism of the Children of Ill-Omen—

—and discussed the problem of the Core of the Abyss learning and knowing what it is like to be lonely instead of merely looking upon her as something dangerous and to be untouched by anyone including the Glens.

I don't think he could have brought about such a major change without facing some kind of major uproar from the Juries, yes? In spite of that, Leo (with the rest of the Baskervilles) decided to stand by what he thought was the right thing to do and not condemn his first true follower, Vincent, for no reason but for being born with a red eye.

[ Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4]

75 notes · View notes

patchworkprince · 2 years

Text

pandora hearts by jun mochizuki retrace: LXVII | retrace: CIII

#pandora hearts #lacie baskerville #jack vessalius #the intention of the abyss #mangacap #mangaedit #scythe.edit #☕︎.i queue you good waves

99 notes · View notes

kokkuri3 · 4 years

Note

I think VnC’s treatment of female characters is better than in PH, where most of them were props, tools to further the development of males, *coughLacieyoudeservedbetter*, tools to humanise the males *coughAdayoucan’tfixhimwithlove, endlessly forgiving and impossibly saintly *coughreallyAlyssyou’rejustgonnaforgiveJacklikethatyouarenotangryatall??*, amongst other problematic tropes.

VnC’s treatment of female characters is absolutely better than PH’s-- in fact, I’d say VnC was one of the few shounen manga to consistently treat its female characters with the same passion and respect as its male ones. One thing I say often is that VnC feels as thought it was written with Mochizuki having acknowledged PH’s problems (the complete lack of nonwhite characters, the continual mistreatment of female characters, the at times facetious treatment of issues such as incest or pedophilia which is... Not A Fan) and to that effect, I think she is making a deliberate effort to make multiple female characters with their own arcs which exist outside of men, who have important relationships with other women, who are capable of agency in the same capacity as their male counterparts.

This post isn’t really about VnC though so I’m not gonna sing its praises much anymore. I’ve talked before about how, despite being written by a woman, despite clearly acknowledging misogyny as a chronic problem among violent men PH is... not especially self aware when it comes to the misogyny of its own narrative.

I’ve made my thoughts on Lacie clear before (see here) and particularly how I believe her treatment was one of the times where PH’s treatment of women was particularly remarkable in that it’s good, despite her arc being drenched in misogynistic abuse and violence. I absolutely wish that the atrocities pinned on Lacie being not her fault was made more clear (aside from what I said in the post, and Oz saying that Lacie would never desire for the destruction of the world she loved) but I don’t think her writing itself was misogynistic-- I’d even go as far as to say it was feminist, though, obviously, I’m open to disagreement.

What most certainly does piss me off, however, is the writing of Ada’s arc. Yesterday I joked about Ada being the ‘anti-Lacie,’ and while it was a joke, I still intended some seriousness with it. Unlike Lacie, who was forced to constantly reevaluate her morals and the positions of her and her loved ones as a person whose existence was an inherent sin and who was abused throughout her life, Ada’s arc is built around the fact that she has never had to question anything. Similarly, while Lacie’s arc is about how she sought her own agency despite being surrounded by and allowed only those who were at best complacent in her suffering, Ada’s arc is about how... she continually sought out and apologized for a misogynistic predator despite being surrounded by better options.

The gender of the Core of the Abyss is something which I think warrants a separate post, but the official translation refers to the Core as being female, and for nearly the entire story she takes the form of a girl. Lacie reached out to an entity referred to and most often perceived as female, sought to understand her, and was abused as a specific consequence of this. Ada, meanwhile, made no real attempts at sympathy for her female counterparts. She never sought to question the circumstances of Noise, or Echo, or their relationship with Vincent. She gave forgiveness for crimes she had not been affected by nor did she even understand; her defense of Vincent was done not out of concern for Noise’s psyche but out of unquestioned pity for her abuser.

Ada’s arc bothers me for its utter lack of agency. She was a teenaged girl, expected to fix a predatory, abusive man in his twenties, and throughout her arc she is given no real means of choosing other options nor protecting herself. Her decision to defend a predator was not even an educated one; she simply did not know. Nor did she ever really come to understand anything about Vincent, aside from brief glimpses into his past. Ada is dragged around by the plot, pursuing an abuser she did not know was an abuser yet still felt sure she could heal, being forbidden from choice-- where she was not denied choice in the sense that she lacked the knowledge to make one, she was denied choice via other characters forbidding her. She was not allowed to protect Vincent though she wanted to because Vincent felt it was too dangerous to allow her to, she was not allowed to remain beside her friends and family though she wanted to because they felt it was too dangerous to allow her to, she wasn’t allowed to stay with Vincent because it was too dangerous, she wasn’t allowed to see him again because it was too dangerous... and she’s never given the choice to do anything but go along with it.

Alyss’s forgiveness of Jack is... a more complicated issue. That Ada “forgive” Vincent-- along with many of their other interactions, I might add-- felt utterly meaningless to me. Ada had never really perceived Vincent as performing a slight against her, being perfectly willing to assign any violence he committed against her as either her own fault, or part of his mental illness, thus Not His Fault. That Alyss forgive Jack, who was violent towards her, who she understood as victimizing her and others... I don’t like it, exactly, but at least it’s not the same.

I’m not sure “forgive” is even the correct word for what she did-- she acknowledged him, and she was gentle, but she never told Jack that she forgave him. Vincent’s dialogue during Retrace CIII supplements this in saying he suspects that Alyss’s feelings for Jack are the same as his own.

Vincent feels unable to either forgive Jack nor reject him entirely, feeling that he had done too much good for him to ever really hate him. Alyss, similarly, felt too strong a love for Jack to reject him outright. She never expressed sympathy for his actions, nor did she make any attempts to defend him. There was no misunderstanding on Alyss’s part on whether her love for Jack was unhealthy, but she loved him nonetheless. When she finally “finds” him, she offers no words of kindness. She simply expressed her gratitude in having done so before calling him a hopelessly lonely man, making no further attempts at even acknowledging him.

Of course, there is the inherent misogyny of a character arc about a young girl infatuated with an adult man, to the point of destroying her other relationships in pursuit of it. That Alyss was deliberately isolated and that Jack be the only person aside from the other Alice and the Core of Abyss-- two entities that cannot be meaningfully separated from herself-- is an obvious contributor, but that does not erase the problematic aspects of her arc. Then there’s the matter of Alyss’s wish to die being the only one treated as though it was a necessary evil, as opposed to a reflection of the individual’s personal instability that should be addressed through supporting them as opposed to killing them. It’s sort of an unfair double standard, and that the plot make Alyss’s death a necessary evil is a matter of author choice, not something inherent to the work.

On the topic of other instances of misogynistic writing in PH as a whole, there’s the matter of Alice and Sharon’s arc. While I don’t think either arc is in itself misogynistic, both characters are totally ignored in favor of their male counterparts. Despite Alice being one of the most important characters in the series, she has almost no narration and is frequently characterized as, to quote a friend of mine, a “feral animal.” She’s not given the same emotional or psychological depth as Oz or Gil, despite having around the same number of appearances and being the plot’s catalyst. Sharon has her own arc, theoretically, but we only ever see it within the context of Break or Reim despite being more of a main character than the latter. That Sharon spend entire volumes not appearing a single time is a recurring joke. A major part of her characterization-- that she feel insecure in relationships due to her halted aging-- is not revealed until the last chapter of the comic. Her arc ends with her marrying to a character who... I wouldn’t have been upset if the two of them had had any real interactions outside of Break, but they didn’t. There’s no inherent problem with their relationship except it’s boring and rushed.

Then there’s the matter of the sheer number of female versus male characters whose purpose in the plot is to die violently-- the Flower Girl, Vanessa Nightray, Bernice Nightray, Miranda Barma, Mary, etc. All of these characters did little or nothing to actually progress the plot, and all are murdered by a male character with the exception of the Flower Girl (who is a sex worker in the anime adaptation, and while I don’t know the canonicity of that, I feel it worth mentioning).

Ultimately, PH suffers a lot for Mochizuki’s internalized misogyny. Her narrative seems over eager to forgive perpetrators of misogynistic violence, and in many ways over eager to characterize sympathetic men as misogynists. A Pandora Hearts without its themes of misogyny seems... nearly incomprehensible, though that’s in large part because of how meticulous the narrative as a whole is. The improvements Mochizuki has made subsequently, though, are noticeable and greatly appreciated.

#pandora hearts #answers #gisellehexen89 #OP I am you #ph spoilers #abuse ment #This is REALLY long so I put it under a readmore #Pandora Hearts huh..........#ph #mochijun #animanga

18 notes · View notes

ghoulify · 9 years

Photo

Retrace CIII - Call Your Name

“I didn’t know what you really looked like, Jack. I was so scared. Because I loved you, and yet I didn’t know the first thing about you. It’s weird. In spite of the pain knowing that you’ve been lying to me all along, I feel...strangely relieved. Stark white and pitch black, a hopelessly lonely person.”

#mine #pandora hearts #retrace ciii #jun mochizuki #ph #ph edit #ph colouring #oz vessalius #oz bezarius #alice baskerville #the will of the abyss #The Intention of the Abyss #alice pandora hearts #Gilbert Nightray #Vincent Nightray #oz the b-rabbit #leo baskerville #Sharon Rainsworth #jack vessalius

70 notes · View notes

llazypotat · 9 years

Photo

#pandora hearts #retrace ciii #retrace 103 #will of abyss #core of abyss #manga #mangacap #monochrome #crying #sad #lonely

37 notes · View notes

fivekrystalpetals · 1 year

Text

PH MASTERLIST

(aka I wrote a lot of stuff about this series now trying to put all of it in one place so I find Things when I search for it)

CHAPTERS

some Serious posts: may-reads-ph | some Fun Posts: ph musings

MY ANALYSIS POSTS

1.] Lottie | (add: re: real reason why Lottie changed sides in the last arc)

2.] Noise | (add)

3.] Alice(s)

4.] Lacie

5.] Glen, Children of Misfortune, Juries and the Baskervilles | (Part 1 : Glen, Jury and Knowledge of Abyss) | (Part 2 : Choosing a side) | (Part 3 : Oswald and his sin of passivity) | (Part 4 : Oswald and Lacie)

6.] Core of the Abyss and "her" Children of "Misfortune"

#ph masterlist #may-reads-ph #gotta go thro my may-reads-ph tag to see why i completely skipped over some chapters 🤔#will write more analysis on other characters then i will add those links here #for now i am in semi-hiatus anyway too much rl stuff to handle 😭#my q keeps running with no tags plus i have no idea what is saved in my drafts either lol

9 notes · View notes