No, you didn't understand. What goes against her characterization would be a return to zou without enough evidence of a change of mind. And I say thisbecause of this:
(copy paste of the article"development inertia" of my blog
We need an allegorie
What I'll say here is my own take on a storytelling theory, but bear with me, I'm sure you will understand.
As a writer, one of the many ways to picture a character in a story is to put it through allegories, so here is one of them:
Imagine a Spaceship, we will call it Odyssey. Odyssey is the representation of your Character. For our example, Odyssey is a girl who can't trust anyone, making her quite encline to hurt the one she loves and reject everyone. You could say that Odyssey is like a broken spaceship.. a spaceship that just left a planet A and keeps on accelerating toward a planet B.
In our story, if Odyssey doesn't change, she will face a life of misery which is represented simply in our allegory by a Crash on planet B.
Avoid the crash
Your goal as a writer is simple. In this allegorie, it is to avoid a crash and land your Odyssey safely on planet B and in our story, it is to make your character change.
Now, this is where the allegory is important: In space, when you throw something, it doesn't stop, it continues to move by shear inertia.. unless an equal opposite force is applied. So in our allegory, Odyssey needs to encounter an opposite force along the way or at least find a way to creates more fuel and opposite force, not to crash.
The same happens in our story and in real life. We are human, and like spaceships, us and our characters have "inertia": We can't change the direction of our mindsets in the blink of an eye.
So like the spaceship, Odyssey as a character will have to pass through steps, encounters opposite forces along the way, obstacles, meet peoples who will change her, and finally make multiple choices that will put her on a different pass.
Change takes time
This is why development inertia is important when we analyse a story. To understand or predict a character's future.. It's important to analyse the Inertia of the characters in their own character arc.
For exemple, you can't expect Usopp to be a brave Warrior in every situation in the next chapter.. when all the clues are pointing toward the opposite. To evolve, Usopp needs to be put under high pressure repeatedly and even then, he evolves VERY slowly.
Another exemple: Robin. Wouldn' it be odd for her character to suddenly start cheerring like Luffy or Chopper? That because we would need a transition between those two states. For that, Oda would need to give us clues of potential change. By the way, Robin, already passed through such a change, it was just very subtle.
So how does it work for Odyssey in the story ? .. Well first she will encounter some fellow who accept her, but her "inertia" will make her first reject this person or at least doubt them. Then, with time passing this person might grow on Odyssey and she may even get attach to them.. but of course she is still in her inertia.. Here might come a choice, a choice for her to choose between two evil: ask for help from that person risking to put them in danger or face another bad situation alone.. And here is the pivot moment.. this is the moment where we know if Odyssey has what it needs to slow down completely and not crash.. This is the moment where the character makes a step toward change: Odyssey will call for help!
Remember, humans are like spaceships, they have inertia, they don't change overnight. In a story, you will always need to look toward that inertia:
- Is the character ready to change ?
- Does the character needs another push ?
Understand the development inertia of the characters in a story and you will be able to find out if they are ready to change or not.
THIS.. is why Carrot return to Zou would be in contradiction with her characterization. Carrot was characterized as wanting more and more wonder and appreciating them more and more. I make this metaphor often: A change of mind for Carrot here would be the same as seeing a kid with the choice of going in a roller coaster, wanting to turn back and go home for no reasons. This just wouldn't make any sence.
Carrot turning back to Zou without hints, would litterally be an characterization ERROR from Oda's part. (and I would stand by it)
Well.. with all respect.. the official translation is not really trustworthy either. So I might be able to agree with you here, but we would need a actual japanese translation.
but wait.. I did verify it and:
It's not that different in fact. Perospero is still talking about potential victory and luck.So the point still stand.
An arc revolving around reponsibility would implied the presence of other person. Carrot is alone in her arc. it's not about someone else but her own vision of the sea and life in general.
A recklessness on the other hand.. might be a good option for an potential grow up yes I agree.
Oh don't get me wrong.. if I say that Carrot must prove Perospero wrong..
Perospero is completely right there !
i do agree with you here. Carrot really thought she could just have a nice pic nic.. The thing is.. even if that's true, now Carrot must show that this is not how she will apprehend life from now on.
On the contrary, this potential arc of character doesn't negate the fact that carrot must stowaway again, but this time this will not be for the same reason. Yes Carrot will stowaway again because of the wonder of the sea, but I expect Carrto to have change her mind about the reason why she do that BEFORE she stowaway.
And even more so.. Oda's cahracter are known to be a little bit more human than humans.. meaning that they sometimes make the same mistakes
twice (sanji was a good exemple of that). That why, even if Carrot doesn't change her mind, she is bound to stowaway again. and in that case, she would be reminded of her mistakes post Wano. (i expect also Carrot to do something bad in Elbaf.. like going over alimit or something)
No, getting on sea (at this point of the characterization of Yamato) would only go in the side of Yamato's train of thoughts. it would only confirms her own belief and not challenge them.. And that what we don't want when we create a cahracter are ! Belief must be challenged, and even if Yamato still ends up on the sea with the strawhats, it won't be AT ALL in the same state of mind and same intention. Again I repeat: in a good cahracter arc, the character must be challenged to a point when his intention are changed. The result can be the same, but not the train of thoughts.
The reason I always say that yamato is bound to be on Wano, is because of that 180° change that will most likely happen (andalso because every chapter are depicting Yamato as a protector and not a strawhat)
Remember Onigashima is the place were yamato was imprisonned, not Wano. Wano is like a new world for her, she didn't get there since she was little. in a way, she was forbidden to go there.
You are the only one here I can't really call a bias personn, you actually understand the argument, even if you debate them
I explained that just ealier to
@JoSeungHun7335
Here is the text:
Backstories are storytelling tools. Like foreshadowing, like Subversion dialogues, like Milking, Like dialogues etc.. It means that when you analyse a story, the important part is not the backstory in itself but HOW this tool was or is used to tell a story.
In One Piece bacstories are used (with the strawhats) to give us three major elements:
1- The character that is the core moral pillar of the strawhat (Hillulukà
2- The need of the strawhat (what the character will have to overcome in the present storyline), with Chopper, it was the need to trust the humans and therefore being able to overcome his own bad self confidence.
3- The purpose of the strawhat and the reason behind this purpose (for Chopper the reason he is so fierce with his dream his because of the teachings of Hilluluk
But like I said, backstory are just a tool. Odamostly used backstories because it's the most easiest pass to give us those elements. It's efficiant, it's fast, in other word, it's the best tool to give us those three things.
But!
It doesn't meant that backstories are the ONLY tools and way to give us those three elements. in fact, there are a lot of way to do that.
For carrot, Oda couldn't really use the backstory (Carrot being mostly happy before Zo and her arc being centered around the discovery of the sea..) so Oda used others technics.. two strong introductions, a steady construction, a swift characterization, a tragedy, a defeat etc..
By doing that, oda managed to give us:
1- The moral pillar :Pedro
2- The HINTS of a need :The need to understand the danger of the sees
3 - The HINTS of a purpose: Fighting for the minks, Pedro and a wish to see the world.
Now as you can see with Carrot here (but also with Yamato, because it's pretty much the same case) we don't have everything fully yet. We have HINTS of the needs and purpose, but those could change (unlikely), it's because the characterization of Carrot (and Yamato) is still ungoing. We need the very last part, (that happens inpretty much all the flashbacks) : the determination promise. This is the moment when the character promise something to themself (For Chopper, it's when he move the flag at the end of th FB)
But.. again... it's not something that needs to be placed in the flashback. For Carrot (and for Yamato, because she will have to do the same) it will most likely happen at the very end of Wano.
So here is why a backstory is not needed.. I don't need panels to do that, just the storytellings rules and the storytelling principles of One Piece. Of course I could give you examples of everything for each characters, but it would take hours... so yeah.. this is the next best thing. In short, the reason why all the strawhat has it, it's because it was "easy" for them and not so much for Carrot.. because that story is different.
Concerning the "where is Luffy defeating the main villain, check the
conclusion I made a twist. ;)
The reason I put it in the conclusion and not in the big ten. (is first because I like round numbers) is because this point is very debatable. Like I explain to someone this week, the antagonist are not always delt with by Luffy. Plus, Luffy is not always "saving the character" most of the time, the cahracter are saving themself, Luffy is just helping them.
But I put it here anyway.. 'cause you know.. I wanted to be as fair as possible.. and seeing the gap between yamato and Carrot, I wished not to give Yamato fan a reason to bully me lol
The cahracter centric arc is litterally the section called "a strong cahracter arc" I explained in detail previously why yamato had only 2 point here. (- it's the sixth PIllar), and the "outcast" point is part of the symbolic reach of the character as being an outcast is more relevant in that section. (And both Yamato and Carrot have the point here ;) )
