General & Others which Series had bigger Retcons? One Piece or Naruto

[cuerdelyon]

Naruto was not great because he was a reincarnate of Asura though. None of that affects why he befriended the Bijuu. That was all Naruto, with all of the Bijuu saying he resembles Hagoromo in stature and attitude. Not Asura.

Asura only pertains to Sasuke

Kishimoto said in his interview with Kobayashi that he wanted the series to end with a Naruto vs Sasuke fight. So the point of making Naruto and Sasuke reincarnations was solely for the purpose of making their final fight have greater significance. To end the spiritual rivalry between brothers.

That's also the reason I believe Blackbeard is to be the final antagonist, since Oda continues to connect him to the story (Davy, Rocks, Etc...) event though he has introduced Imcel.

If Oda was truly all in on making Imcel the final antagonist why bother adding more lore towards another villain and making them relevant this far into the story?

 

[Logiko]

If Oda was truly all in on making Imcel the final antagonist why bother adding more lore towards another villain and making them relevant this far into the story?

To blur the lines and make us debate on the nature of the final antagonist. It's not often that we can gaze upon multiple foe while being aware of the incoming threats. Both Blackbeard and Imu have thematic relevancy to become "the big bad".

Could be Imu, could be Blackbeard. We don't know, that is why it's cool.

 

[cuerdelyon]

To blur the lines and make us debate on the nature of the final antagonist. It's not often that we can gaze upon multiple foe while being aware of the incoming threats. Both Blackbeard and Imu have thematic relevancy to become "the big bad".

Could be Imu, could be Blackbeard. We don't know, that is why it's cool.

I agree, but Oda wouldn't need to give Blackbeard all this new lore that connects him to the past if he wasn't the true antagonist.

Just as Kishimoto added the reincarnation element in his story, I believe that Oda has injected a similar idea.

Oda has added more & more characters and ideologies as the series has progressed, so any of his initial plans for the ending have to be revamped. That's why Luffy has went from the successor to Roger, to having become the new Joyboy and now Nika.

The same is idea is seen in the character of Blackbeard where Oda has created a Roger equivalent in Xebec, a Joyboy equivalent in Davy Jones, and a Nika equivalent in the "Earth god" who seemingly has darkness powers.

Reader mistakenly assume the core story is just about "Luffy vs the world government" but as we know that's a storyline originating within the void century or "the second world", but we also know that there is a "first world" where the core story will find it's closure.

I just don't see us getting a first world flashback (Nika and Earth god) before a second world one (Imu, Joyboy, Davy), it thematically makes no sense. The second world is built off of the story of the first.

The storyline involving the gods seems to serve a more important purpose within the story. Nika is more important than Joyboy. Infact Joyboy is just a failed Nika.

Both Joyboy and Luffy have the Nika fruit but only Luffy will have succeeded as his true successor.

Imu's story will only truly provide closure for him and Joyboy, and would be anticlimactic to end the series on.

 

[Logiko]

Just as Kishimoto added the reincarnation element in his story, I believe that Oda has injected a similar idea.

I don't know... I feel llike Oda has a very materialist (in the physical sense) approach of the physical phenomenon in his worldbuilding. It's like he understand that some metaphysical barriers can't really be stepped on without breaking the world. For example, the time travel effect is quite realistic. People can go toward the future, but they can't go back to the past. This is pretty similar how things work in real life (we can go to the future easily with enough energy, but going backward creates a lot of paradoxes)

Similarily I don't feel like he really intend to use reincarnation outside of the one example of Brook (which is more like a survival mechanism than anything else really). I'm not saying it's impossible and I'm openned to the idea, but that would be going a bit outside the limits of his world building I feel..

The same is idea is seen in the character of Blackbeard where Oda has created a Roger equivalent in Xebec, a Joyboy equivalent in Davy Jones, and a Nika equivalent in the "Earth god" who seemingly has darkness powers.

True, I also believe Blackbeard fit the main antagonist criteria far more than Imu does.

Infact Joyboy is just a failed Nika

I wouldn't call it a "failed" NNika, but I agree with the overall sentiment.

 

[cuerdelyon]

I don't know... I feel llike Oda has a very materialist (in the physical sense) approach of the physical phenomenon in his worldbuilding. It's like he understand that some metaphysical barriers can't really be stepped on without breaking the world. For example, the time travel effect is quite realistic. People can go toward the future, but they can't go back to the past. This is pretty similar how things work in real life (we can go to the future easily with enough energy, but going backward creates a lot of paradoxes)

Similarily I don't feel like he really intend to use reincarnation outside of the one example of Brook (which is more like a survival mechanism than anything else really). I'm not saying it's impossible and I'm openned to the idea, but that would be going a bit outside the limits of his world building I feel..


True, I also believe Blackbeard fit the main antagonist criteria far more than Imu does.


I wouldn't call it a "failed" NNika, but I agree with the overall sentiment.

I don't necessarily mean a literal reincarnation but more of a spiritual successor.

Spiritual succession appears as a core component within the story.

From the story's inception we see this with Luffy and Roger, and as Oda incorporated more elements, Joyboy and Nika.

And as I have already mention Oda decided to mirror Blackbeard and Luffy, creating a sort of duality by introducing another spiritual lineage, Davy.

I believe next arc will be focused solely on Imu as the central antagonist where will get all of the second world and void century history.

After that we will have more focus on Blackbeard and the first world, where Luffy should be faced with the idea of Nika and himself as a savior. This plot point of whether he accepts or rejects that notion could add more to his character.

Is Luffy a savior or just a pirate? Would he accept the role of Nika?

 

[Logiko]

After that we will have more focus on Blackbeard and the first world, where Luffy should be faced with the idea of Nika and himself as a savior. This plot point of whether he accepts or rejects that notion could add more to his character.

Oh I think we won't have to wait long for that. My guess is that Luffy is about to meet Joy Boy or at least understand who he is real fast. Like in the next 10 chapters.

I believe it is one of the only ways for him to become really "stronger".

 

[Reborn]

Luffy is portrayed as the central underdog through most of the story, arguably he’s never not been the underdog in most arcs he’s in.

despite inherenting CoC, befriending a celestial dragon Yonko, having two legendary relatives in Garp and dragon, Ace too technically.

he’s an underdog with every advantage including a mythical zoan fruit with its own will that he ate as a child.

Naruto was portrayed as an outcast that won over most of his peers by the end of part 1 & that theme isn’t really hard addressed again until the Pein arc. Woulda been nice sure but the focus of the story drifted from Naruto’s loneliness and struggle to Naruto’s bond with Sasuke

Again, it's about the contrast.

Naruto was portrayed as an underdog + talentless + failure in comparison to his peers who had talents due to Lineage.

He was portrayed as someone who has grit to work hard to overcome lack of innate talent due to fate or lineage and will create his own destiny.

First few arcs of Naruto was gold because of this.

So when we got all those lineage and destiny stuff later on, it just ruined entire Naruto character because he always had lineage and fate working for him like others. Infact, way more than others.

Luffy did get portray as underdog but not in comparison to his peers (he literally shits on them - kidd, urogue, bonney and so on). His underdog persona kicked in against villains.

And then Luffy was always portrayed as talented, someone who can achieve which no one did. We began one piece with Shanks entrusting strawhat to Luffy and Luffy calling himself strong. He had that bravdo feel about himself from the get go. So when later on lineage came into picture, people were like "oh that explains his bottomless will power".


One piece has it's retcon moments but it never really deviated from it's core theme around MC and manga. Naruto did.

Infact, most of the disappointments of one piece is due to haki and PL inconsistencies + oda build the world so massively that by the time an end of an arc nears, he hardly do justice to all the sub plots he laid ..

One piece theme and story have always being going linear. In case of Naruto, core theme in itself got 180 degree turn along with other stuffs which didn't go well with readers.

 

[Album]

So the Nika fruit wasn't a retcon? lol

If you accept that the fruit was retconned then you have to accept that Luffy himself was retconned because he's the new Nika/Joyboy, which was never implied at any point during the earlier part of the story.

No it wasn’t a retcon he has always been thematically the sun to everyone he meets
And do you remember the skypeia arc where we see the flashback on the 4 gods and themes of story.

And let’s be realize people for years suspected joyboy had luffys fruit

 

[Logiko]

Technically, G5 is a retcon. But ONLY if you look at it narratively. If your definition of retcon is "retcon are rewrittings scrapping the story therefore bad stuff" it's incomplete and not what G5 Nika is.

 

[Yomi]

For some reason, only a scant few recognize the real theme of Naruto Part 1;

If I had one page to point to, I would use this one;

Spoiler: Image

Solitude, bonds, and its relationship to power. People yap about the chunin exams all day but the climax of that arc isn't Rock Lee vs Gaara or Naruto vs Neji; it's Naruto vs Gaara.

Most people just watch one lazy video essay, and their entire point of view is colored by it like mindless sheep. Ashura/Indra's destiny isn't to become Hokage, it's to kill eachother in an endless cycle;

Spoiler: Image

;but more importantly, Neji's wrong about Naruto Uzumaki. He thought Naruto was a talentless loser, which is far from the truth. Naruto is portrayed as very gifted;

Spoiler: a few examples

Can we please stop pretending that Naruto was a rock lee clone?

 

[cuerdelyon]

Technically, G5 is a retcon. But ONLY if you look at it narratively. If your definition of retcon is "retcon are rewrittings scrapping the story therefore bad stuff" it's incomplete and not what G5 Nika is.

The problem is that people assume that retcon = bad writing, when that's not the case.

There are examples of retcons that are well received and considered great writing such as Goku being revealed as an alien.

A retcon by itself is not an indication of poor writing, and a majority of people will only point out a retcon in a negative light if it's something they do not like.

The reception of a retcon relies on the execution.

There is a lot of my favorite stories where I go through them wondering what concepts where planned or were retconned but I wouldn't consider either or as an implication of good or bad writing.

No it wasn’t a retcon he has always been thematically the sun to everyone he meets
And do you remember the skypeia arc where we see the flashback on the 4 gods and themes of story.

And let’s be realize people for years suspected joyboy had luffys fruit

Nika IS a retcon... and that's okay because that doesn't meaning anything by itself since only you can decide whether you enjoy it or not.

 

[SakazOuki]

Naruto has no retcons

 

[soupongo]

Rock Lee vs Gaara was a good fight, but Kishi dropping his character after part 1 is pretty justified. His gimmick would have gotten old pretty fast

Neji on the other hand was an actual Goat, and could have had pretty consistently good fights if he got the chance

 

[Logiko]

The problem is that people assume that retcon = bad writing, when that's not the case.

Exactly!!

There are examples of retcons that are well received and considered great writing such as Goku being revealed as an alien.

Indeed. That's a great example.

The reception of a retcon relies on the execution.

A lot indeed, but not only. In the case of Gear 5 for ex, it also relied on the opinion people think a power up should have (as someone said - "stoic"). In Luffy's case, Oda chose to challenge the mold, which is why we ended up with such a split in the fanbase despite an objectively amazing technicall feet.

Naruto has no retcons

Oh there must be some, I don't remember exactly but I'm sure I could find them.