General & Others Zoro s confirmed to be the deuteragonist.
- Thread starter L57
- Start date
Also your lie about ''instantly'' got exposed, it was an old edit.
So, you have nothing? Aokiji is an underling and ZKK didn't happen.
Lol, you are cute
Well, you don't really pay much attention so...
It objectively is. This is a technical statement, not a simple opinion.
To give you an analogy, its like me saying that the sacrada familia is an amazing work of architecture. This is objectively true on a technical standpoint.
You are simply not understanding the technicity that goes behind the craft, that's all.
You can "lmao" how many time you want. I never lost a debate here lol (mainly because no one can keep up with my obstination)
No, just a fact mate.
He didn't even used the term bra. humble yourself.
And even if he had his own definition, he would not make the concept pertinent yet. The concept is contextual, it is not pertinent in our current modern storytelling age. No matter how many time people are trying to use it.
Because the reality of the story is not what you believe it to be. That's all.
Its funny because you think that I'm coping here and that I'm somehow trying to devalue Zoro. But I don't have ANY agenda here beside storytelling.
I don't care on a agenda basis if Oda were to make Zoro the antagonist and therefore the second most important narrative character in the story. I would appreciate it if it was done godly enough but I'm not here to defend or attack Zoro.
I only care about people speaking about storytelling WITHOUT buchering storytelling concepts. That's all.
And here, Zoro is a simple Ally, I love him as a character, maybe even more than other strawhats, but I can't call him the second most important character because that's just not the case in the story.
No. Lol. He does not even disagree.
What Oda said is that he thought about Zoro as a potential secondary main character. Not that he created Zoro in the story as one.
We are arguing here about the statement of people calling Zoro a deuteragonist and naming him the second most important character after Luffy. Its simple, that YOUR argumentation.
Mine is clear: Zoro is not the most important character after Luffy in the story, Blackbeard is.
Yes. Modern days have different meaning, and in modern days, we do not use this term anymore, simply because its not pertinent anymore and it reduces the spectrum of the grid of characters.
NOT the deuteragonist. People who uses this term are trying to fit a definition that has no meaning. Also popular Modern literaturre analysis is OFTEN wrong when it comes to analysing storytelling concepts. This is the case here.
The term deuteragonist can ONLY work if there is a contextual situation where it can apply : a three actors play.
Aside from that, its simply not pertinent. In modern days, we call Zoro the ally, the close ally OR the guardian. And if you really want to call someone a deuteragonist in One Piece, then you need to call ALL the strawhats and ALL the main arc character of the story like that.
Not just Zoro. Simply because Zoro's treatment in the story is not special in comparison to those characters.
Never forget that a deuteragonist - in the correct context of a three actors play - is the most important character NOT for the story but FOR THE PROTAGONIST.
No. A deuteragonist is the SECOND ACTOR in a three actor play that helps the protagonist. it just happen that people are trying to apply a old non pertinent storytelling concept on much more complexe modern characters.
THe point is that the strawhat are EQUAL in term of importance in the story.
There is not one that is much more important than the others aside from Luffy himself.
The balance of character is an equilibrium based around all their value systems (each strawhat has a different set of value system). Each one of them are here to create contrast to one another.
Zoro is not more important than Sanji and Nami is not more important than Zoro, they are ALL equal in the balance of character. Oda just happens to have his favorites, that's all.
Yes, every stories are different, but they are all the same. (that's a common saying among storytellers)
Every story are aiming to create something different, and some do. But their skeleton is the same. Just like you and me, our bone structure is the same, but the probability of having a different number of bones is very low.
Stories are the same. They appear as different, but they ALL have the same basic structure and outlines. Simply because without this outline, you would not be able to create a engaging story.
Nop:
Genos : Sidekick and Ally
Sasuke : Rival and Ally transformed into false antagonist
Vegeta : Direct antagonist transformed into Ally and Rival
Lucy: Sidekick, ally and narrator (can also be considered the second protagonist of the story)
Megumi : I don't read this one
Watson : Sidekick, ally and narrator. Can become the protagonist if in different stories
Etc.
"Deuteragonist" is a "holdall" concept that is meaningless to analyze modern day characters. Its not pertinent and not at all accurate to analyse correctly the grids of characters of stories.
What do you mean by "damaging them" ? Zoro's position is not damaging anyone.
Well, you don't have to believe me bra.
Again, this term is not pertinent in our modern age.
Its actually debatable.
And this would be an interesting conversation but not for now.
For now I consider Kaguya as the main antagonist of the final war. But the main antagonist of the story is and has always been Sasuke. (although I'm working here on the memories I have of the story, I could be wrong on the reread. )
It means nothing mate. Deuteragonist means "second actor"
If you want to label Genos, label him correctly : The sidekick and closest ally of the protagonis, Saitama. No need to use a word coming from the ancient greece.
Yes, I can get behind those definitions (even tho I believe them to be not really pertinent as they are just confusing the grids of characters more than clarifying it)
But as I explained, if you want to use the term to describe One Piece characters. You need to talk about ALL the strawhats. Simply because they have the SAME importance in term of narration.
So if Zoro is a deuteragonist, then Nami and Usopp are too. And this doesn't mean that they are the most important character after Luffy. It means that they are the most important characters FOR Luffy.
Because Zoro is not the second MC
This doesn't change anything. You are talking here about status in the story. Not in term of narration.
Because Blackbeard is the most important character for the story of One Piece after Luffy, not Zoro. Simple.
No, i'm simply talking to someone that does not understand what I'm talking about. But I'm used to it don't worry :)
Nop. He simply choosed to make Nami appear later bra
You can cry all you want, it won't make your statement true mate
No, just very simple and lacking the nuances of later flashbacks.
In Sbs mate, not in the story.
I love it. I see nothing wrong with Zoro's development.
But we need to observe that his development pale in comparison to the one like Sanji.
I could make similar comparison between Luffy and Chopper mate. Come on..
Because that's his role in the crew. Just like its the role of Nami to direct the ship or the role of Carrot to be the look out or the role of Sanji to be a cook.
That's their ROLE/POST.
Zoro is not more important because he is the vice-captain. He is like the other, his roles is simply to be this.
You are doing it yourself lol.
I'm not comparing them on my own. Zoro is an ally and Luffy is the protagonist. It doesn't need to be more complicated than that. This thread is pure agenda.
Again, that's his role. He is the guardian. It doesn't make him more important than the others, he is equal to them, his role is simply to protect them.
Nop, completely irrelevant in the matter here.
Yes, because he is the second strongest strawhat. Duh..
Why do you seek to complicate things that don't need to be complicated ?
And you still don't understand
But NOoooo. Oda does not even use the term mate !!
And he does not even say that currently Zoro is the most important character after Luffy.
You guys are simply inventing stuff because (of agenda) he said that he created Zoro has a second main protagonist. But the story clearly shows that its NOT the case now.
If you want to call someone a second protagonist, call EVERY strawhats and ALL the main arc characters (Vivi, Momo, Rebecca etc) secondary main protagonist because that's what they ALL were in very specific moments of the story.
But overall, there is only one main protagonist, not two, and its Luffy.
You still haven't answer my main question BTW:
Who said that ?
No, the same mate, just made it simpler so you can understand :)
Again, thought experiment. I'm asking you to project yourself.
If you are capable of doing that of course...
You will be hehe
You are still avoiding to answer it lol...
This does not matter. I'm asking you to project yourself in the potentiality that Oda says something similar.
You don't even have to think about Zoro being a karateka. Just think about Y and X
Are you sure about that ?
Because that's what you guys are pushing right now.
You are literally trying to make Oda says X=Y when in reality he clearly shows narratively that X=/=Y
So that's what I said, you would prefer the statement of Oda in an SBS about the story rather than this:
And its HIGHLY problematic. SImply because it renders the story valueless. The author could say everything about his story, and his words would be the golden rule..
But that's not how reality works. You don't get to build a building that is shaped like a penis and say that it is not shaped like a penis. (that's an analogy of course)
The rule is simple :
ONCE THE STORY IS OUT, ITS THE REALITY OF THE STORY THAT PREVAILS.
THE ONLY WAY TO RESHAPE THIS REALITY OF THE STORY IS TO ERASE THE STORY ITSELF
So,
If the story shows that Sanji is a sexist. The ONLY way to say that he is not is to erase the parts where he is sexist. Simple as that.
Its works for everything else. And in our case it works for Zoro too.
Zoro is written as a close ally of the protagonist and NOT AT ALL as a secondary protagonist, therefore the only way for Zoro to be the most important character after Luffy in the story, would be to erease and recreate his story OR to transform him into the main antagonist of the story.
Well, you don't really pay much attention so...
It objectively is. This is a technical statement, not a simple opinion.
To give you an analogy, its like me saying that the sacrada familia is an amazing work of architecture. This is objectively true on a technical standpoint.
You are simply not understanding the technicity that goes behind the craft, that's all.
You can "lmao" how many time you want. I never lost a debate here lol (mainly because no one can keep up with my obstination)
No, just a fact mate.
He didn't even used the term bra. humble yourself.
And even if he had his own definition, he would not make the concept pertinent yet. The concept is contextual, it is not pertinent in our current modern storytelling age. No matter how many time people are trying to use it.
Because the reality of the story is not what you believe it to be. That's all.
Its funny because you think that I'm coping here and that I'm somehow trying to devalue Zoro. But I don't have ANY agenda here beside storytelling.
I don't care on a agenda basis if Oda were to make Zoro the antagonist and therefore the second most important narrative character in the story. I would appreciate it if it was done godly enough but I'm not here to defend or attack Zoro.
I only care about people speaking about storytelling WITHOUT buchering storytelling concepts. That's all.
And here, Zoro is a simple Ally, I love him as a character, maybe even more than other strawhats, but I can't call him the second most important character because that's just not the case in the story.
No. Lol. He does not even disagree.
What Oda said is that he thought about Zoro as a potential secondary main character. Not that he created Zoro in the story as one.
We are arguing here about the statement of people calling Zoro a deuteragonist and naming him the second most important character after Luffy. Its simple, that YOUR argumentation.
Mine is clear: Zoro is not the most important character after Luffy in the story, Blackbeard is.
Yes. Modern days have different meaning, and in modern days, we do not use this term anymore, simply because its not pertinent anymore and it reduces the spectrum of the grid of characters.
NOT the deuteragonist. People who uses this term are trying to fit a definition that has no meaning. Also popular Modern literaturre analysis is OFTEN wrong when it comes to analysing storytelling concepts. This is the case here.
The term deuteragonist can ONLY work if there is a contextual situation where it can apply : a three actors play.
Aside from that, its simply not pertinent. In modern days, we call Zoro the ally, the close ally OR the guardian. And if you really want to call someone a deuteragonist in One Piece, then you need to call ALL the strawhats and ALL the main arc character of the story like that.
Not just Zoro. Simply because Zoro's treatment in the story is not special in comparison to those characters.
Never forget that a deuteragonist - in the correct context of a three actors play - is the most important character NOT for the story but FOR THE PROTAGONIST.
No. A deuteragonist is the SECOND ACTOR in a three actor play that helps the protagonist. it just happen that people are trying to apply a old non pertinent storytelling concept on much more complexe modern characters.
THe point is that the strawhat are EQUAL in term of importance in the story.
There is not one that is much more important than the others aside from Luffy himself.
The balance of character is an equilibrium based around all their value systems (each strawhat has a different set of value system). Each one of them are here to create contrast to one another.
Zoro is not more important than Sanji and Nami is not more important than Zoro, they are ALL equal in the balance of character. Oda just happens to have his favorites, that's all.
Yes, every stories are different, but they are all the same. (that's a common saying among storytellers)
Every story are aiming to create something different, and some do. But their skeleton is the same. Just like you and me, our bone structure is the same, but the probability of having a different number of bones is very low.
Stories are the same. They appear as different, but they ALL have the same basic structure and outlines. Simply because without this outline, you would not be able to create a engaging story.
Nop:
Genos : Sidekick and Ally
Sasuke : Rival and Ally transformed into false antagonist
Vegeta : Direct antagonist transformed into Ally and Rival
Lucy: Sidekick, ally and narrator (can also be considered the second protagonist of the story)
Megumi : I don't read this one
Watson : Sidekick, ally and narrator. Can become the protagonist if in different stories
Etc.
"Deuteragonist" is a "holdall" concept that is meaningless to analyze modern day characters. Its not pertinent and not at all accurate to analyse correctly the grids of characters of stories.
What do you mean by "damaging them" ? Zoro's position is not damaging anyone.
Well, you don't have to believe me bra.
Again, this term is not pertinent in our modern age.
Its actually debatable.
And this would be an interesting conversation but not for now.
For now I consider Kaguya as the main antagonist of the final war. But the main antagonist of the story is and has always been Sasuke. (although I'm working here on the memories I have of the story, I could be wrong on the reread. )
It means nothing mate. Deuteragonist means "second actor"
If you want to label Genos, label him correctly : The sidekick and closest ally of the protagonis, Saitama. No need to use a word coming from the ancient greece.
Yes, I can get behind those definitions (even tho I believe them to be not really pertinent as they are just confusing the grids of characters more than clarifying it)
But as I explained, if you want to use the term to describe One Piece characters. You need to talk about ALL the strawhats. Simply because they have the SAME importance in term of narration.
So if Zoro is a deuteragonist, then Nami and Usopp are too. And this doesn't mean that they are the most important character after Luffy. It means that they are the most important characters FOR Luffy.
Because Zoro is not the second MC
This doesn't change anything. You are talking here about status in the story. Not in term of narration.
Because Blackbeard is the most important character for the story of One Piece after Luffy, not Zoro. Simple.
No, i'm simply talking to someone that does not understand what I'm talking about. But I'm used to it don't worry :)
Nop. He simply choosed to make Nami appear later bra
You can cry all you want, it won't make your statement true mate
No, just very simple and lacking the nuances of later flashbacks.
In Sbs mate, not in the story.
I love it. I see nothing wrong with Zoro's development.
But we need to observe that his development pale in comparison to the one like Sanji.
I could make similar comparison between Luffy and Chopper mate. Come on..
Because that's his role in the crew. Just like its the role of Nami to direct the ship or the role of Carrot to be the look out or the role of Sanji to be a cook.
That's their ROLE/POST.
Zoro is not more important because he is the vice-captain. He is like the other, his roles is simply to be this.
You are doing it yourself lol.
I'm not comparing them on my own. Zoro is an ally and Luffy is the protagonist. It doesn't need to be more complicated than that. This thread is pure agenda.
Again, that's his role. He is the guardian. It doesn't make him more important than the others, he is equal to them, his role is simply to protect them.
Nop, completely irrelevant in the matter here.
Yes, because he is the second strongest strawhat. Duh..
Why do you seek to complicate things that don't need to be complicated ?
And you still don't understand
But NOoooo. Oda does not even use the term mate !!
And he does not even say that currently Zoro is the most important character after Luffy.
You guys are simply inventing stuff because (of agenda) he said that he created Zoro has a second main protagonist. But the story clearly shows that its NOT the case now.
If you want to call someone a second protagonist, call EVERY strawhats and ALL the main arc characters (Vivi, Momo, Rebecca etc) secondary main protagonist because that's what they ALL were in very specific moments of the story.
But overall, there is only one main protagonist, not two, and its Luffy.
You still haven't answer my main question BTW:
Who said that ?
No, the same mate, just made it simpler so you can understand :)
Again, thought experiment. I'm asking you to project yourself.
If you are capable of doing that of course...
You will be hehe
You are still avoiding to answer it lol...
This does not matter. I'm asking you to project yourself in the potentiality that Oda says something similar.
You don't even have to think about Zoro being a karateka. Just think about Y and X
Are you sure about that ?
Because that's what you guys are pushing right now.
You are literally trying to make Oda says X=Y when in reality he clearly shows narratively that X=/=Y
So that's what I said, you would prefer the statement of Oda in an SBS about the story rather than this:
And its HIGHLY problematic. SImply because it renders the story valueless. The author could say everything about his story, and his words would be the golden rule..
But that's not how reality works. You don't get to build a building that is shaped like a penis and say that it is not shaped like a penis. (that's an analogy of course)
The rule is simple :
ONCE THE STORY IS OUT, ITS THE REALITY OF THE STORY THAT PREVAILS.
THE ONLY WAY TO RESHAPE THIS REALITY OF THE STORY IS TO ERASE THE STORY ITSELF
So,
If the story shows that Sanji is a sexist. The ONLY way to say that he is not is to erase the parts where he is sexist. Simple as that.
Its works for everything else. And in our case it works for Zoro too.
Zoro is written as a close ally of the protagonist and NOT AT ALL as a secondary protagonist, therefore the only way for Zoro to be the most important character after Luffy in the story, would be to erease and recreate his story OR to transform him into the main antagonist of the story.
Lol, you are cute
Well, you don't really pay much attention so...
It objectively is. This is a technical statement, not a simple opinion.
To give you an analogy, its like me saying that the sacrada familia is an amazing work of architecture. This is objectively true on a technical standpoint.
You are simply not understanding the technicity that goes behind the craft, that's all.
You can "lmao" how many time you want. I never lost a debate here lol (mainly because no one can keep up with my obstination)
No, just a fact mate.
He didn't even used the term bra. humble yourself.
And even if he had his own definition, he would not make the concept pertinent yet. The concept is contextual, it is not pertinent in our current modern storytelling age. No matter how many time people are trying to use it.
Because the reality of the story is not what you believe it to be. That's all.
Its funny because you think that I'm coping here and that I'm somehow trying to devalue Zoro. But I don't have ANY agenda here beside storytelling.
I don't care on a agenda basis if Oda were to make Zoro the antagonist and therefore the second most important narrative character in the story. I would appreciate it if it was done godly enough but I'm not here to defend or attack Zoro.
I only care about people speaking about storytelling WITHOUT buchering storytelling concepts. That's all.
And here, Zoro is a simple Ally, I love him as a character, maybe even more than other strawhats, but I can't call him the second most important character because that's just not the case in the story.
No. Lol. He does not even disagree.
What Oda said is that he thought about Zoro as a potential secondary main character. Not that he created Zoro in the story as one.
We are arguing here about the statement of people calling Zoro a deuteragonist and naming him the second most important character after Luffy. Its simple, that YOUR argumentation.
Mine is clear: Zoro is not the most important character after Luffy in the story, Blackbeard is.
Yes. Modern days have different meaning, and in modern days, we do not use this term anymore, simply because its not pertinent anymore and it reduces the spectrum of the grid of characters.
NOT the deuteragonist. People who uses this term are trying to fit a definition that has no meaning. Also popular Modern literaturre analysis is OFTEN wrong when it comes to analysing storytelling concepts. This is the case here.
The term deuteragonist can ONLY work if there is a contextual situation where it can apply : a three actors play.
Aside from that, its simply not pertinent. In modern days, we call Zoro the ally, the close ally OR the guardian. And if you really want to call someone a deuteragonist in One Piece, then you need to call ALL the strawhats and ALL the main arc character of the story like that.
Not just Zoro. Simply because Zoro's treatment in the story is not special in comparison to those characters.
Never forget that a deuteragonist - in the correct context of a three actors play - is the most important character NOT for the story but FOR THE PROTAGONIST.
No. A deuteragonist is the SECOND ACTOR in a three actor play that helps the protagonist. it just happen that people are trying to apply a old non pertinent storytelling concept on much more complexe modern characters.
THe point is that the strawhat are EQUAL in term of importance in the story.
There is not one that is much more important than the others aside from Luffy himself.
The balance of character is an equilibrium based around all their value systems (each strawhat has a different set of value system). Each one of them are here to create contrast to one another.
Zoro is not more important than Sanji and Nami is not more important than Zoro, they are ALL equal in the balance of character. Oda just happens to have his favorites, that's all.
Yes, every stories are different, but they are all the same. (that's a common saying among storytellers)
Every story are aiming to create something different, and some do. But their skeleton is the same. Just like you and me, our bone structure is the same, but the probability of having a different number of bones is very low.
Stories are the same. They appear as different, but they ALL have the same basic structure and outlines. Simply because without this outline, you would not be able to create a engaging story.
Nop:
Genos : Sidekick and Ally
Sasuke : Rival and Ally transformed into false antagonist
Vegeta : Direct antagonist transformed into Ally and Rival
Lucy: Sidekick, ally and narrator (can also be considered the second protagonist of the story)
Megumi : I don't read this one
Watson : Sidekick, ally and narrator. Can become the protagonist if in different stories
Etc.
"Deuteragonist" is a "holdall" concept that is meaningless to analyze modern day characters. Its not pertinent and not at all accurate to analyse correctly the grids of characters of stories.
What do you mean by "damaging them" ? Zoro's position is not damaging anyone.
Well, you don't have to believe me bra.
Again, this term is not pertinent in our modern age.
Its actually debatable.
And this would be an interesting conversation but not for now.
For now I consider Kaguya as the main antagonist of the final war. But the main antagonist of the story is and has always been Sasuke. (although I'm working here on the memories I have of the story, I could be wrong on the reread. )
It means nothing mate. Deuteragonist means "second actor"
If you want to label Genos, label him correctly : The sidekick and closest ally of the protagonis, Saitama. No need to use a word coming from the ancient greece.
Yes, I can get behind those definitions (even tho I believe them to be not really pertinent as they are just confusing the grids of characters more than clarifying it)
But as I explained, if you want to use the term to describe One Piece characters. You need to talk about ALL the strawhats. Simply because they have the SAME importance in term of narration.
So if Zoro is a deuteragonist, then Nami and Usopp are too. And this doesn't mean that they are the most important character after Luffy. It means that they are the most important characters FOR Luffy.
Because Zoro is not the second MC
This doesn't change anything. You are talking here about status in the story. Not in term of narration.
Because Blackbeard is the most important character for the story of One Piece after Luffy, not Zoro. Simple.
No, i'm simply talking to someone that does not understand what I'm talking about. But I'm used to it don't worry :)
Nop. He simply choosed to make Nami appear later bra
You can cry all you want, it won't make your statement true mate
No, just very simple and lacking the nuances of later flashbacks.
In Sbs mate, not in the story.
I love it. I see nothing wrong with Zoro's development.
But we need to observe that his development pale in comparison to the one like Sanji.
I could make similar comparison between Luffy and Chopper mate. Come on..
Because that's his role in the crew. Just like its the role of Nami to direct the ship or the role of Carrot to be the look out or the role of Sanji to be a cook.
That's their ROLE/POST.
Zoro is not more important because he is the vice-captain. He is like the other, his roles is simply to be this.
You are doing it yourself lol.
I'm not comparing them on my own. Zoro is an ally and Luffy is the protagonist. It doesn't need to be more complicated than that. This thread is pure agenda.
Again, that's his role. He is the guardian. It doesn't make him more important than the others, he is equal to them, his role is simply to protect them.
Nop, completely irrelevant in the matter here.
Yes, because he is the second strongest strawhat. Duh..
Why do you seek to complicate things that don't need to be complicated ?
And you still don't understand
But NOoooo. Oda does not even use the term mate !!
And he does not even say that currently Zoro is the most important character after Luffy.
You guys are simply inventing stuff because (of agenda) he said that he created Zoro has a second main protagonist. But the story clearly shows that its NOT the case now.
If you want to call someone a second protagonist, call EVERY strawhats and ALL the main arc characters (Vivi, Momo, Rebecca etc) secondary main protagonist because that's what they ALL were in very specific moments of the story.
But overall, there is only one main protagonist, not two, and its Luffy.
You still haven't answer my main question BTW:
Who said that ?
No, the same mate, just made it simpler so you can understand :)
Again, thought experiment. I'm asking you to project yourself.
If you are capable of doing that of course...
You will be hehe
You are still avoiding to answer it lol...
This does not matter. I'm asking you to project yourself in the potentiality that Oda says something similar.
You don't even have to think about Zoro being a karateka. Just think about Y and X
Are you sure about that ?
Because that's what you guys are pushing right now.
You are literally trying to make Oda says X=Y when in reality he clearly shows narratively that X=/=Y
So that's what I said, you would prefer the statement of Oda in an SBS about the story rather than this:
And its HIGHLY problematic. SImply because it renders the story valueless. The author could say everything about his story, and his words would be the golden rule..
But that's not how reality works. You don't get to build a building that is shaped like a penis and say that it is not shaped like a penis. (that's an analogy of course)
The rule is simple :
ONCE THE STORY IS OUT, ITS THE REALITY OF THE STORY THAT PREVAILS.
THE ONLY WAY TO RESHAPE THIS REALITY OF THE STORY IS TO ERASE THE STORY ITSELF
So,
If the story shows that Sanji is a sexist. The ONLY way to say that he is not is to erase the parts where he is sexist. Simple as that.
Its works for everything else. And in our case it works for Zoro too.
Zoro is written as a close ally of the protagonist and NOT AT ALL as a secondary protagonist, therefore the only way for Zoro to be the most important character after Luffy in the story, would be to erease and recreate his story OR to transform him into the main antagonist of the story.
Well, you don't really pay much attention so...
It objectively is. This is a technical statement, not a simple opinion.
To give you an analogy, its like me saying that the sacrada familia is an amazing work of architecture. This is objectively true on a technical standpoint.
You are simply not understanding the technicity that goes behind the craft, that's all.
You can "lmao" how many time you want. I never lost a debate here lol (mainly because no one can keep up with my obstination)
No, just a fact mate.
He didn't even used the term bra. humble yourself.
And even if he had his own definition, he would not make the concept pertinent yet. The concept is contextual, it is not pertinent in our current modern storytelling age. No matter how many time people are trying to use it.
Because the reality of the story is not what you believe it to be. That's all.
Its funny because you think that I'm coping here and that I'm somehow trying to devalue Zoro. But I don't have ANY agenda here beside storytelling.
I don't care on a agenda basis if Oda were to make Zoro the antagonist and therefore the second most important narrative character in the story. I would appreciate it if it was done godly enough but I'm not here to defend or attack Zoro.
I only care about people speaking about storytelling WITHOUT buchering storytelling concepts. That's all.
And here, Zoro is a simple Ally, I love him as a character, maybe even more than other strawhats, but I can't call him the second most important character because that's just not the case in the story.
No. Lol. He does not even disagree.
What Oda said is that he thought about Zoro as a potential secondary main character. Not that he created Zoro in the story as one.
We are arguing here about the statement of people calling Zoro a deuteragonist and naming him the second most important character after Luffy. Its simple, that YOUR argumentation.
Mine is clear: Zoro is not the most important character after Luffy in the story, Blackbeard is.
Yes. Modern days have different meaning, and in modern days, we do not use this term anymore, simply because its not pertinent anymore and it reduces the spectrum of the grid of characters.
NOT the deuteragonist. People who uses this term are trying to fit a definition that has no meaning. Also popular Modern literaturre analysis is OFTEN wrong when it comes to analysing storytelling concepts. This is the case here.
The term deuteragonist can ONLY work if there is a contextual situation where it can apply : a three actors play.
Aside from that, its simply not pertinent. In modern days, we call Zoro the ally, the close ally OR the guardian. And if you really want to call someone a deuteragonist in One Piece, then you need to call ALL the strawhats and ALL the main arc character of the story like that.
Not just Zoro. Simply because Zoro's treatment in the story is not special in comparison to those characters.
Never forget that a deuteragonist - in the correct context of a three actors play - is the most important character NOT for the story but FOR THE PROTAGONIST.
No. A deuteragonist is the SECOND ACTOR in a three actor play that helps the protagonist. it just happen that people are trying to apply a old non pertinent storytelling concept on much more complexe modern characters.
THe point is that the strawhat are EQUAL in term of importance in the story.
There is not one that is much more important than the others aside from Luffy himself.
The balance of character is an equilibrium based around all their value systems (each strawhat has a different set of value system). Each one of them are here to create contrast to one another.
Zoro is not more important than Sanji and Nami is not more important than Zoro, they are ALL equal in the balance of character. Oda just happens to have his favorites, that's all.
Yes, every stories are different, but they are all the same. (that's a common saying among storytellers)
Every story are aiming to create something different, and some do. But their skeleton is the same. Just like you and me, our bone structure is the same, but the probability of having a different number of bones is very low.
Stories are the same. They appear as different, but they ALL have the same basic structure and outlines. Simply because without this outline, you would not be able to create a engaging story.
Nop:
Genos : Sidekick and Ally
Sasuke : Rival and Ally transformed into false antagonist
Vegeta : Direct antagonist transformed into Ally and Rival
Lucy: Sidekick, ally and narrator (can also be considered the second protagonist of the story)
Megumi : I don't read this one
Watson : Sidekick, ally and narrator. Can become the protagonist if in different stories
Etc.
"Deuteragonist" is a "holdall" concept that is meaningless to analyze modern day characters. Its not pertinent and not at all accurate to analyse correctly the grids of characters of stories.
What do you mean by "damaging them" ? Zoro's position is not damaging anyone.
Well, you don't have to believe me bra.
Again, this term is not pertinent in our modern age.
Its actually debatable.
And this would be an interesting conversation but not for now.
For now I consider Kaguya as the main antagonist of the final war. But the main antagonist of the story is and has always been Sasuke. (although I'm working here on the memories I have of the story, I could be wrong on the reread. )
It means nothing mate. Deuteragonist means "second actor"
If you want to label Genos, label him correctly : The sidekick and closest ally of the protagonis, Saitama. No need to use a word coming from the ancient greece.
Yes, I can get behind those definitions (even tho I believe them to be not really pertinent as they are just confusing the grids of characters more than clarifying it)
But as I explained, if you want to use the term to describe One Piece characters. You need to talk about ALL the strawhats. Simply because they have the SAME importance in term of narration.
So if Zoro is a deuteragonist, then Nami and Usopp are too. And this doesn't mean that they are the most important character after Luffy. It means that they are the most important characters FOR Luffy.
Because Zoro is not the second MC
This doesn't change anything. You are talking here about status in the story. Not in term of narration.
Because Blackbeard is the most important character for the story of One Piece after Luffy, not Zoro. Simple.
No, i'm simply talking to someone that does not understand what I'm talking about. But I'm used to it don't worry :)
Nop. He simply choosed to make Nami appear later bra
You can cry all you want, it won't make your statement true mate
No, just very simple and lacking the nuances of later flashbacks.
In Sbs mate, not in the story.
I love it. I see nothing wrong with Zoro's development.
But we need to observe that his development pale in comparison to the one like Sanji.
I could make similar comparison between Luffy and Chopper mate. Come on..
Because that's his role in the crew. Just like its the role of Nami to direct the ship or the role of Carrot to be the look out or the role of Sanji to be a cook.
That's their ROLE/POST.
Zoro is not more important because he is the vice-captain. He is like the other, his roles is simply to be this.
You are doing it yourself lol.
I'm not comparing them on my own. Zoro is an ally and Luffy is the protagonist. It doesn't need to be more complicated than that. This thread is pure agenda.
Again, that's his role. He is the guardian. It doesn't make him more important than the others, he is equal to them, his role is simply to protect them.
Nop, completely irrelevant in the matter here.
Yes, because he is the second strongest strawhat. Duh..
Why do you seek to complicate things that don't need to be complicated ?
And you still don't understand
But NOoooo. Oda does not even use the term mate !!
And he does not even say that currently Zoro is the most important character after Luffy.
You guys are simply inventing stuff because (of agenda) he said that he created Zoro has a second main protagonist. But the story clearly shows that its NOT the case now.
If you want to call someone a second protagonist, call EVERY strawhats and ALL the main arc characters (Vivi, Momo, Rebecca etc) secondary main protagonist because that's what they ALL were in very specific moments of the story.
But overall, there is only one main protagonist, not two, and its Luffy.
You still haven't answer my main question BTW:
Who said that ?
No, the same mate, just made it simpler so you can understand :)
Again, thought experiment. I'm asking you to project yourself.
If you are capable of doing that of course...
You will be hehe
You are still avoiding to answer it lol...
This does not matter. I'm asking you to project yourself in the potentiality that Oda says something similar.
You don't even have to think about Zoro being a karateka. Just think about Y and X
Are you sure about that ?
Because that's what you guys are pushing right now.
You are literally trying to make Oda says X=Y when in reality he clearly shows narratively that X=/=Y
So that's what I said, you would prefer the statement of Oda in an SBS about the story rather than this:
And its HIGHLY problematic. SImply because it renders the story valueless. The author could say everything about his story, and his words would be the golden rule..
But that's not how reality works. You don't get to build a building that is shaped like a penis and say that it is not shaped like a penis. (that's an analogy of course)
The rule is simple :
ONCE THE STORY IS OUT, ITS THE REALITY OF THE STORY THAT PREVAILS.
THE ONLY WAY TO RESHAPE THIS REALITY OF THE STORY IS TO ERASE THE STORY ITSELF
So,
If the story shows that Sanji is a sexist. The ONLY way to say that he is not is to erase the parts where he is sexist. Simple as that.
Its works for everything else. And in our case it works for Zoro too.
Zoro is written as a close ally of the protagonist and NOT AT ALL as a secondary protagonist, therefore the only way for Zoro to be the most important character after Luffy in the story, would be to erease and recreate his story OR to transform him into the main antagonist of the story.
How are people denying this? Zoro is 100% the second most focused SHP in the story, ever since chapter 4. Oda has said many times about his high aspirations for the character, and it's reflected well in the story in his fights and other key moments. I mean sure, there's a conversation to be had about how he compares to other shounen deuteragonists like Sauce or Vegeta, but denying that Oda didn't try to make him the second most focused protagonist? Come the fuck on. You can say that he doesn't influence the plot as much as others in different series or whatever, but trying to stay blind to his development and treatment Oda has given him throughout the series as a second only to the main character (in a story with a billion characters) is delusional. Oda even said it himself!
Well put. Even though I think Zoro has more plot relevance than most of his detractors make him out to have, it doesn't change the fact that he was created as a "2nd main character" as per Oda's own words.
Well put. Even though I think Zoro has more plot relevance than most of his detractors make him out to have, it doesn't change the fact that he was created as a "2nd main character" as per Oda's own words.
