General & Others Zoro s confirmed to be the deuteragonist.
- Thread starter L57
- Start date
Ace not running away inherited from Roger, still Ace and Roger are different personality.
Zolo sucks at using 1 sword, Ryuma is master at using 1 sword.
Zolo is stoic like Mihawk, Ryuma is goofy like Luffy, Shanks and Teach.
Luffy didn't need Zolo in many arcs, Zolo isn't more important for the story than rest of the Luffy crew.
Zolo's time on Mihawk's island wasn't more focused than the rest of the SH pirates. They all get same screen time, Zolo is not more important than even someone like Nami, Oda says Nami is a core member or Sanji being a wing of Luffy etc.
Zolo sucks at using 1 sword, Ryuma is master at using 1 sword.
Zolo is stoic like Mihawk, Ryuma is goofy like Luffy, Shanks and Teach.
Luffy didn't need Zolo in many arcs, Zolo isn't more important for the story than rest of the Luffy crew.
Zolo's time on Mihawk's island wasn't more focused than the rest of the SH pirates. They all get same screen time, Zolo is not more important than even someone like Nami, Oda says Nami is a core member or Sanji being a wing of Luffy etc.
Oda: I wanted someone to be like Ryuma [my first MC], but as a 2nd MC to Luffy.
*Oda makes Zoro. Compares him to Ryuma in story. Has him meet Ryuma. Gives him Ryuma's sword. Makes him a ddescendent of Ryuma. Makes him look like Ryuma.*
The trio idiots: Oda is not talking about Zoro. Hurr durr sasuke, something something blackbeard, oda is wrong I'm right.
Zoro haters all share a brain cell
*Oda makes Zoro. Compares him to Ryuma in story. Has him meet Ryuma. Gives him Ryuma's sword. Makes him a ddescendent of Ryuma. Makes him look like Ryuma.*
The trio idiots: Oda is not talking about Zoro. Hurr durr sasuke, something something blackbeard, oda is wrong I'm right.
Zoro haters all share a brain cell
Sorry, I was sleeping
So cute
Everytime ?
You are confusing something mate. I only theorized ONE hypothosis : Carrot joining the crew after Wano. But my analysis about One Piece still stand hehe.
I did not "defend how G5 was implemented into the story" I EXPLAINED how G5 was implemented in the story. This was not a debate, not a defense and not an hypothesis, it was simple storytelling analysis mate based on narrative datas :)
I don't remember losing any debate here lol. I don't think you remember the reality quite well
I was proven wrong, but not by people here lol
Yes, that's why most theorist are failing to predict anything.
Again, a deuteragonist is a "second actor", its a word used to describe a specific context (a three actor ancient greek play) and his not pertinent as a storytelling tool for our present narrative world. The narration evolve since then and we have other ways to call characters.
Zoro is the close ally, falling under the archetype of the guardian.
He is not the most important character after Luffy in term of narration and Oda is not saying that either. You guys are projecting.
This is both true and false.
In the sence that, yes, each stories are different because they will be perceived differently. BUT each MODERN stories are following a similar storytelling pattern and similar outline. It can vary of course (for example it varies a lot in One Piece) but the structure remain the same for every story.
So when I say that there are basic foundamentals or Rules or principle, call them whatever you want, I'm not jocking.
No. again, none of them are deuteragonist. Simply because this term is not relevant for our current storytelling era.
Sasuke is the Rival and main antagonist
&
Genos is the sidekick
Both are falling under the category of allies (and then antagonist for Sasuke, back to ally again)
Again, Oda is not even saying that zoro is the deuteragonist. Also, he is talking about Ryuma AND he is talking about the EARLY process of fabrication of his story. A stage where he thought that he would have two protagonists instead of One (something that can sometimes happen in stories, Frozen for Example). He does not say that in the present day Zoro is the most important cahracter after Luffy and he does not use the term of the ancient greece. You guys are projecting your desire.
The reality is that in a story, the second most important character for the narration after the protagonist is the antagonist.
Which is blackbeard in One Piece.
No, i'm just stating the facts.
Yes, like an ally. Also fun fact, Nami was supposed to join first. this is why she is on the color page of chapter 1 and not Zoro.
Not at all no.
In the reality of the story, Zoro's backstory is very thin and only happened once when Luffy had not only the entire first chapter, but the entire marineford Saga + another long flashback. Zoro's arc development is the least interesting out of all the strawhats narratively. (which is logical, it happened first, and Oda didn't want to create an epic setting). The treatment between Luffy and Zoro is NOT comparable. In fact - granted, Zoro has a few cool moments that are important for his characterization and overall story) but - a lot of strawhats have more development than Zoro overall. Sanji, for example, is a character that gets a lot more narrative love that his swordman counterpart.
It doesn't mean that Zoro is not interesting. There is a LOT to say about his story, but its just not on the level of Luffy. Zoro is like all the strawhats, a close ally. Nothing more.
Cool moment yeah, and that's his role. nothing out of the ordinary. Nothing fancy. it doesn't transcend his position as a crewmate.
This is irrelevant. We don't analyse Zoro through another character, that's not how it works.
Yes, logically since Zoro has a strong bounty.
yes, since he is the N°2 of the strawhats. Its logical. Nothing fancy here.
Actually I ask you to do the opposite.
The story = Canon
The words of the author = Not necessarily Canon.
If the words of the author contradict the story, then you must listen the story and not the words of the author.
No. i'm saying that the words "deuteragonist" is not adapted to talk about modern characters since the words is stripped from his contextual meaning (that was a three actors play).
I'm also saying that in a story, the most important character NARRATIVELY after the protagonist, is the antagonist.
Simply because the story is constructed around their battle for a common goal.
If you really want to use the word Deuteragonist in One Piece, its technically possible (even if it would still be non pertinent), BUT you have to use it for All the strawhats and ALL the main arc character. which mean more than 20 characters who became protagonist on parralel to Luffy during their arcs.
Not specifically for Zoro.
No character in present stories are deuteragonist.
The term is CONTEXTUAL to a CERTAIN form of ancient greek play. It is NOT relevant to use it to describe current modern characters in stories. Why ?
Because the way to create stories has evolved in 2 millenia
I will make a thread about this because...REALLY, you guys are butchering terms.
So cute
Everytime ?
You are confusing something mate. I only theorized ONE hypothosis : Carrot joining the crew after Wano. But my analysis about One Piece still stand hehe.
I did not "defend how G5 was implemented into the story" I EXPLAINED how G5 was implemented in the story. This was not a debate, not a defense and not an hypothesis, it was simple storytelling analysis mate based on narrative datas :)
I don't remember losing any debate here lol. I don't think you remember the reality quite well
I was proven wrong, but not by people here lol
Yes, that's why most theorist are failing to predict anything.
Again, a deuteragonist is a "second actor", its a word used to describe a specific context (a three actor ancient greek play) and his not pertinent as a storytelling tool for our present narrative world. The narration evolve since then and we have other ways to call characters.
Zoro is the close ally, falling under the archetype of the guardian.
He is not the most important character after Luffy in term of narration and Oda is not saying that either. You guys are projecting.
This is both true and false.
In the sence that, yes, each stories are different because they will be perceived differently. BUT each MODERN stories are following a similar storytelling pattern and similar outline. It can vary of course (for example it varies a lot in One Piece) but the structure remain the same for every story.
So when I say that there are basic foundamentals or Rules or principle, call them whatever you want, I'm not jocking.
No. again, none of them are deuteragonist. Simply because this term is not relevant for our current storytelling era.
Sasuke is the Rival and main antagonist
&
Genos is the sidekick
Both are falling under the category of allies (and then antagonist for Sasuke, back to ally again)
Again, Oda is not even saying that zoro is the deuteragonist. Also, he is talking about Ryuma AND he is talking about the EARLY process of fabrication of his story. A stage where he thought that he would have two protagonists instead of One (something that can sometimes happen in stories, Frozen for Example). He does not say that in the present day Zoro is the most important cahracter after Luffy and he does not use the term of the ancient greece. You guys are projecting your desire.
The reality is that in a story, the second most important character for the narration after the protagonist is the antagonist.
Which is blackbeard in One Piece.
No, i'm just stating the facts.
Yes, like an ally. Also fun fact, Nami was supposed to join first. this is why she is on the color page of chapter 1 and not Zoro.
Not at all no.
In the reality of the story, Zoro's backstory is very thin and only happened once when Luffy had not only the entire first chapter, but the entire marineford Saga + another long flashback. Zoro's arc development is the least interesting out of all the strawhats narratively. (which is logical, it happened first, and Oda didn't want to create an epic setting). The treatment between Luffy and Zoro is NOT comparable. In fact - granted, Zoro has a few cool moments that are important for his characterization and overall story) but - a lot of strawhats have more development than Zoro overall. Sanji, for example, is a character that gets a lot more narrative love that his swordman counterpart.
It doesn't mean that Zoro is not interesting. There is a LOT to say about his story, but its just not on the level of Luffy. Zoro is like all the strawhats, a close ally. Nothing more.
Cool moment yeah, and that's his role. nothing out of the ordinary. Nothing fancy. it doesn't transcend his position as a crewmate.
This is irrelevant. We don't analyse Zoro through another character, that's not how it works.
Yes, logically since Zoro has a strong bounty.
yes, since he is the N°2 of the strawhats. Its logical. Nothing fancy here.
Actually I ask you to do the opposite.
The story = Canon
The words of the author = Not necessarily Canon.
If the words of the author contradict the story, then you must listen the story and not the words of the author.
No. i'm saying that the words "deuteragonist" is not adapted to talk about modern characters since the words is stripped from his contextual meaning (that was a three actors play).
I'm also saying that in a story, the most important character NARRATIVELY after the protagonist, is the antagonist.
Simply because the story is constructed around their battle for a common goal.
If you really want to use the word Deuteragonist in One Piece, its technically possible (even if it would still be non pertinent), BUT you have to use it for All the strawhats and ALL the main arc character. which mean more than 20 characters who became protagonist on parralel to Luffy during their arcs.
Not specifically for Zoro.
No character in present stories are deuteragonist.
The term is CONTEXTUAL to a CERTAIN form of ancient greek play. It is NOT relevant to use it to describe current modern characters in stories. Why ?
Because the way to create stories has evolved in 2 millenia
I will make a thread about this because...REALLY, you guys are butchering terms.
lol what
Zoro mastered three sword style, that means he mastered, using one sword, and two swords as well.
Nami: if they want to face a yonko, they should at least have Zoro.
so Teach is more Ryuma than Zoro?
Zoro isn’t just stoic.
Zoro is the first mate, the guy everyone looks to when Luffy isn’t around. Zoro was second and Nami third. So Nami is the third mc. This isn’t hard to understand.
Zoro mastered three sword style, that means he mastered, using one sword, and two swords as well.
Nami: if they want to face a yonko, they should at least have Zoro.
so Teach is more Ryuma than Zoro?
Zoro isn’t just stoic.
Zoro is the first mate, the guy everyone looks to when Luffy isn’t around. Zoro was second and Nami third. So Nami is the third mc. This isn’t hard to understand.
It means you need to suck it up, accept it's his story and he can write whatever fuck he wants LMFAO. He could as well introduce a 11-d cosmology of cosmic beings making a mockery out of the entire plot in the world. That's essentially what happened in Magi; turned out, everything was just a game by Ugo and gods on a higher plane of existence.
You have manga stories like Gintama constantly doing things like that, they often even break the 4th wall and the anime and manga often even mocks the author and portrays him as a gorilla.
You have manga stories like Gintama constantly doing things like that, they often even break the 4th wall and the anime and manga often even mocks the author and portrays him as a gorilla.
Okay, but you avoided the question : which one do you choose to follow ?
If Oda is saying that Zoro is mainly a karateka in Sbs WHILE writing in his story that he is only a swordman.
Which vision do you choose to follow ?
Exactly.
The words of Oda are only pertinent when it adds up to the story, NEVER when they contradict the story.
The story is a potential eternal support (on the condition that it published for eternity), the words of Oda are not. They are just words.
The reality of the story ALWAYS prevail.
What is written and drawn is ALWAYS SUPERIOR in term of value to what the author might say about it.
The author can deepens our understanding of it. But UNLESS he chooses to erase what he wrote or drew, he CAN'T override his story as long as it it being published !
If Oda is saying that Zoro is mainly a karateka in Sbs WHILE writing in his story that he is only a swordman.
Which vision do you choose to follow ?
Exactly.
The words of Oda are only pertinent when it adds up to the story, NEVER when they contradict the story.
The story is a potential eternal support (on the condition that it published for eternity), the words of Oda are not. They are just words.
The reality of the story ALWAYS prevail.
What is written and drawn is ALWAYS SUPERIOR in term of value to what the author might say about it.
The author can deepens our understanding of it. But UNLESS he chooses to erase what he wrote or drew, he CAN'T override his story as long as it it being published !
F
Bruh stop before feel bad for bullying a autistic kid.
I'm not as cool as Sentinal. My patience is thin as hair.
You think you're proving a fuckin point , but the point is wrong to begin with.
It's like debating , Biden isn't the president because people don't like him.
But in Actuality bro won the elections and is the president. Now cry about it.
I'm not as cool as Sentinal. My patience is thin as hair.
You think you're proving a fuckin point , but the point is wrong to begin with.
It's like debating , Biden isn't the president because people don't like him.
But in Actuality bro won the elections and is the president. Now cry about it.