General & Others What Arc Has Hurt One Piece The Most?
- Thread starter pg13
- Start date
There is nothing repetitive in the negative sense in the previousely mentionned pivotal point.
A story is so much more than these outlining bullet points. It's like saying "I don't like these painting, they are using the same colors". Well of course, but the interesting part are not these parameters. Which are inherent to the structure. It's how these parameters are crafted and intertwined
A story is so much more than these outlining bullet points. It's like saying "I don't like these painting, they are using the same colors". Well of course, but the interesting part are not these parameters. Which are inherent to the structure. It's how these parameters are crafted and intertwined
This question ? >>
I felt like skipping the parts where I tell you :
- "no I'm not acting dumb"
Replied by : - "I'm asking you if you are so dumb that you are trying to tell us that One Piece is not predictible?"
To which I would have replied : - "No I don't think it is predictible"
To which you would have replied - "bullshit"
I skipped directly to the conclusion : "Can you predict what will happen in 30 chapters ?" If you can't it means that all this talk about the predictability of One Piece is a big performative and self-rationnalizing talk passing as literacy, but instead failing to see the subtilities of the actual heart of the story.
Do you prefer this answer ?
I felt like skipping the parts where I tell you :
- "no I'm not acting dumb"
Replied by : - "I'm asking you if you are so dumb that you are trying to tell us that One Piece is not predictible?"
To which I would have replied : - "No I don't think it is predictible"
To which you would have replied - "bullshit"
I skipped directly to the conclusion : "Can you predict what will happen in 30 chapters ?" If you can't it means that all this talk about the predictability of One Piece is a big performative and self-rationnalizing talk passing as literacy, but instead failing to see the subtilities of the actual heart of the story.
Do you prefer this answer ?
You know what the irony is?
You’re so hellbent on proving that an arc formula doesn’t exist that you’ve completely missed how fucking brilliant that formula was in the first place. It was elegant. Pre-timeskip is built on it, and it never once prevented the larger narrative from moving forward. If anything, it was one of Oda’s greatest strengths. He had essentially created a micro container for the stories he wanted to tell on the way to telling the bigger story.
The formula was never the problem.
The problem is that Oda stopped caring about the connective tissue. Now he’s writing from bullet point to bullet point: “This has to happen so that can happen, therefore this other thing happens.” Even in Elbaf stuff exists because it needs to trigger the next thing, which needs to trigger the thing after that. The story keeps moving, but it barely lives anymore.
And that’s the real tragedy: the formula didn’t kill the heart of One Piece.
Oda stopped putting the heart into the formula.
You’re so hellbent on proving that an arc formula doesn’t exist that you’ve completely missed how fucking brilliant that formula was in the first place. It was elegant. Pre-timeskip is built on it, and it never once prevented the larger narrative from moving forward. If anything, it was one of Oda’s greatest strengths. He had essentially created a micro container for the stories he wanted to tell on the way to telling the bigger story.
The formula was never the problem.
The problem is that Oda stopped caring about the connective tissue. Now he’s writing from bullet point to bullet point: “This has to happen so that can happen, therefore this other thing happens.” Even in Elbaf stuff exists because it needs to trigger the next thing, which needs to trigger the thing after that. The story keeps moving, but it barely lives anymore.
And that’s the real tragedy: the formula didn’t kill the heart of One Piece.
Oda stopped putting the heart into the formula.
I think you do not understand. I not only told you that the outlining bullet point that you are mentionning are existing but also showed you that they are present all over pre-timeskip. As such, the action of using these bullet point to prove that somehow Post TS is bad is perfectly fallacious.
On top of that I also told you one thing : these bullet points are just a fraction of what each arcs and stories in OP actually are.
Still is
So there is no reason to mention the formula then. Gotcha
Go on, in what way?
Not my impression. Sorry.
That's called a story. The question is : do these trigger have thematic and narrative meanings?
Yes they do.
Do not confuse the way you are consuming the story and its current state. Trust me, the story has never been so alive and well.
A lot of big words out of your own appreciation of the story. As usual, you mention no story point, no thematics that would be a problem, no failure in term of character writing, no elements that would contradict the internal logic of the story, no narrative data really.
It's just "I feel like it's not good therefore it's not good".
Well I can say the same in reverse. But I will go farther. The story has been on a roll thematically for 6 arcs straights. Like literally each arcs : Dressrosa, Zou, Whole Cake, Wano, Egghead and Elbaph have been thematic gems and pure character development pleasure.
I could talk about the way Oda treats the thematics of self-sacrifices with Sanji, Kuma, Pedro, Loki. I could talk about the way he completely integrated a discussion about the relationship between children and parents (I already analyzed that many times before, and as usual, ignored). I could talk about the amazing narration of Wano, the tools, the details, the worldbuilding, the panels, I could talk about Oda manage to create a bitter sweet ending for Whole cake in the literal sense and how it ties back to the entire thematic of the yonko saga, I could talk about the character of Oden, of Yamato, of Momo, how they echoes eachothers, how they create contrast to one another, I could talk about the way Luffy was treated like a gem of clarity in whole cake or the way Oda has been focusing more and more on the psyche of both Zoro and Sanji on a personal and subtle level. How each strawhats have been shining on their own while facing their own shadow. How Oda created side characters that have a so much to tell on their own. How he managed to still create a form of mysticism about the bigger story despite keeping the story very focused on these arcs, how he wonderfully created emotions through diversions and shadowing and of course, how he crafted the best revelation of his story:
And so many more....
You have you own reason, the basic understanding of structure and your illegitimate expectations.
I have years of analysis to support my appreciation.
---
It's crazy how people keep making the mistake of confusing me with "Oda's angels" because I enjoy this story so much, not seeing that on top of having some issues with some simplistic choices sometimes, I'm the one creating massive political critics of fishmen Island, Egghead, or the simple liberalism of One Piece as a whole. Things that are not even conceivable for the random One Piece fan here.
I have a library of book of reasons to find this story interesting where you have a scrap note on which all your critics are condensed into one single sentence :
"It's not what I expected"
On top of that I also told you one thing : these bullet points are just a fraction of what each arcs and stories in OP actually are.
Still is
So there is no reason to mention the formula then. Gotcha
Go on, in what way?
Not my impression. Sorry.
That's called a story. The question is : do these trigger have thematic and narrative meanings?
Yes they do.
Do not confuse the way you are consuming the story and its current state. Trust me, the story has never been so alive and well.
A lot of big words out of your own appreciation of the story. As usual, you mention no story point, no thematics that would be a problem, no failure in term of character writing, no elements that would contradict the internal logic of the story, no narrative data really.
It's just "I feel like it's not good therefore it's not good".
Well I can say the same in reverse. But I will go farther. The story has been on a roll thematically for 6 arcs straights. Like literally each arcs : Dressrosa, Zou, Whole Cake, Wano, Egghead and Elbaph have been thematic gems and pure character development pleasure.
I could talk about the way Oda treats the thematics of self-sacrifices with Sanji, Kuma, Pedro, Loki. I could talk about the way he completely integrated a discussion about the relationship between children and parents (I already analyzed that many times before, and as usual, ignored). I could talk about the amazing narration of Wano, the tools, the details, the worldbuilding, the panels, I could talk about Oda manage to create a bitter sweet ending for Whole cake in the literal sense and how it ties back to the entire thematic of the yonko saga, I could talk about the character of Oden, of Yamato, of Momo, how they echoes eachothers, how they create contrast to one another, I could talk about the way Luffy was treated like a gem of clarity in whole cake or the way Oda has been focusing more and more on the psyche of both Zoro and Sanji on a personal and subtle level. How each strawhats have been shining on their own while facing their own shadow. How Oda created side characters that have a so much to tell on their own. How he managed to still create a form of mysticism about the bigger story despite keeping the story very focused on these arcs, how he wonderfully created emotions through diversions and shadowing and of course, how he crafted the best revelation of his story:
You have you own reason, the basic understanding of structure and your illegitimate expectations.
I have years of analysis to support my appreciation.
---
It's crazy how people keep making the mistake of confusing me with "Oda's angels" because I enjoy this story so much, not seeing that on top of having some issues with some simplistic choices sometimes, I'm the one creating massive political critics of fishmen Island, Egghead, or the simple liberalism of One Piece as a whole. Things that are not even conceivable for the random One Piece fan here.
I have a library of book of reasons to find this story interesting where you have a scrap note on which all your critics are condensed into one single sentence :
"It's not what I expected"
This will have to be my last post on the topic because I am not above telling you to kys when you hit me with so much self-oblivious obnoxious snobbery.
* * *
You’re still arguing against a point I never made.
Nobody said the existence of those bullet points is what makes Post-TS bad. I explicitly said the opposite: the formula is GOOD. It was one of the things that made pre-timeskip work so well. The fact that you keep responding to “the formula is no longer carrying the same connective tissue” with “the formula still exists” is not a rebuttal. It’s just answering a different argument.
And “the bullet points are only a fraction of what One Piece is” is equally beside the point. Of course they are. The entire argument is precisely about what Oda does between those points. That’s what “connective tissue” means. Nobody is claiming an arc can be reduced to a checklist.
Then you hit me with “So there is no reason to mention the formula then. Gotcha,” which is especially funny, because the whole point is that the formula was never the problem. You’re pretending that identifying a structural tool necessarily means blaming the tool for the decline in execution. It doesn’t. A hammer can be excellent and the person using it can still build a worse house.
Your response to “things exist because they need to trigger the next thing” is basically “That’s called a story.”
No.
Fucking.
Shit.
The issue is whether those causal links feel organically developed, character-driven, thematically resonant, and properly set up, or whether they feel like the author moving pieces into position because the next plot beat needs to happen. “X causes Y” is the most elementary possible definition of narrative causality. It says absolutely nothing about the quality of that causality.
And “not my impression” isn't an argument either. Neither is “Trust me, the story has never been so alive and well.” You are literally doing the exact thing you're accusing me of: asserting your conclusion and treating your personal reading of the work as though it settles the matter. You demand
story points,
thematics,
character writing,
internal logic,
narrative data,
as if listing categories automatically proves your case.
You say Dressrosa, Zou, Whole Cake, Wano, Egghead and Elbaph aren't thematic gems just because they contain themes. Having something is not the same as properly executing it.
“Self-sacrifice exists.”
“Parent-child relationships are explored.”
“Oden and Momo echo each other.”
“Luffy has clarity.”
“Zoro and Sanji get psychological focus.”
“There’s mysticism.”
“There are side characters.”
Okay. And?
You haven’t actually demonstrated that these things are integrated with the same structural elegance, dramatic economy, characterization, or cumulative payoff that made the pre-timeskip formula so effective. You’ve just demonstrated that themes exist.
Great job, Sherlock.
And “I have years of analysis to support my appreciation” is possibly the most obnoxious argument in the entire post. Your years of analysis establish that you have spent years analyzing One Piece. Wasted them, even, since you seem to have learned nothing in the way of communicating a sympathetic perspective. Waste years that do not magically transform your interpretation into objective evidence. I could spend ten years writing essays about a story and still be wrong about why it does or doesn’t work.
The “Oda’s angels” paragraph is another dodge. Nobody cares how nuanced you are compared to “the random OP fan here.” You can have (but don't) sophisticated political criticisms of FMI, EH and the liberalism of OP while still having an enormous blind spot when it comes to narrative execution. Those things are not mutually exclusive.
And the “I have a library of reasons, you have a scrap note saying ‘it’s not what I expected’” line is just self-congratulation masquerading as rebuttal. The length of your bibliography is irrelevant if you haven’t actually answered the criticism being made.
What you’re ultimately doing here is collapsing two completely different claims into one:
“Does One Piece still contain themes, character development, symbolism and structural repetition?”
Fucking duh.
“Does Oda still use those tools with the same connective tissue and narrative texture that made the earlier material work so well?”
That is the actual argument.
And your response to that has mostly been: “I don’t perceive the problem,” followed by a list of things you like about the story and a declaration that you have more analysis than the other person.
That isn’t a refutation.
You're just saying that you still like it.
You're pretending that your appreciation settles the criticism. You're blind and fine with eating shit. Keep eating shit all you want: none of us will stop you. But don't tell us it's cake when we can clearly smell it from where we sit.
* * *
You’re still arguing against a point I never made.
Nobody said the existence of those bullet points is what makes Post-TS bad. I explicitly said the opposite: the formula is GOOD. It was one of the things that made pre-timeskip work so well. The fact that you keep responding to “the formula is no longer carrying the same connective tissue” with “the formula still exists” is not a rebuttal. It’s just answering a different argument.
And “the bullet points are only a fraction of what One Piece is” is equally beside the point. Of course they are. The entire argument is precisely about what Oda does between those points. That’s what “connective tissue” means. Nobody is claiming an arc can be reduced to a checklist.
Then you hit me with “So there is no reason to mention the formula then. Gotcha,” which is especially funny, because the whole point is that the formula was never the problem. You’re pretending that identifying a structural tool necessarily means blaming the tool for the decline in execution. It doesn’t. A hammer can be excellent and the person using it can still build a worse house.
Your response to “things exist because they need to trigger the next thing” is basically “That’s called a story.”
No.
Fucking.
Shit.
The issue is whether those causal links feel organically developed, character-driven, thematically resonant, and properly set up, or whether they feel like the author moving pieces into position because the next plot beat needs to happen. “X causes Y” is the most elementary possible definition of narrative causality. It says absolutely nothing about the quality of that causality.
And “not my impression” isn't an argument either. Neither is “Trust me, the story has never been so alive and well.” You are literally doing the exact thing you're accusing me of: asserting your conclusion and treating your personal reading of the work as though it settles the matter. You demand
story points,
thematics,
character writing,
internal logic,
narrative data,
as if listing categories automatically proves your case.
You say Dressrosa, Zou, Whole Cake, Wano, Egghead and Elbaph aren't thematic gems just because they contain themes. Having something is not the same as properly executing it.
“Self-sacrifice exists.”
“Parent-child relationships are explored.”
“Oden and Momo echo each other.”
“Luffy has clarity.”
“Zoro and Sanji get psychological focus.”
“There’s mysticism.”
“There are side characters.”
Okay. And?
You haven’t actually demonstrated that these things are integrated with the same structural elegance, dramatic economy, characterization, or cumulative payoff that made the pre-timeskip formula so effective. You’ve just demonstrated that themes exist.
Great job, Sherlock.
And “I have years of analysis to support my appreciation” is possibly the most obnoxious argument in the entire post. Your years of analysis establish that you have spent years analyzing One Piece. Wasted them, even, since you seem to have learned nothing in the way of communicating a sympathetic perspective. Waste years that do not magically transform your interpretation into objective evidence. I could spend ten years writing essays about a story and still be wrong about why it does or doesn’t work.
The “Oda’s angels” paragraph is another dodge. Nobody cares how nuanced you are compared to “the random OP fan here.” You can have (but don't) sophisticated political criticisms of FMI, EH and the liberalism of OP while still having an enormous blind spot when it comes to narrative execution. Those things are not mutually exclusive.
And the “I have a library of reasons, you have a scrap note saying ‘it’s not what I expected’” line is just self-congratulation masquerading as rebuttal. The length of your bibliography is irrelevant if you haven’t actually answered the criticism being made.
What you’re ultimately doing here is collapsing two completely different claims into one:
“Does One Piece still contain themes, character development, symbolism and structural repetition?”
Fucking duh.
“Does Oda still use those tools with the same connective tissue and narrative texture that made the earlier material work so well?”
That is the actual argument.
And your response to that has mostly been: “I don’t perceive the problem,” followed by a list of things you like about the story and a declaration that you have more analysis than the other person.
That isn’t a refutation.
You're just saying that you still like it.
You're pretending that your appreciation settles the criticism. You're blind and fine with eating shit. Keep eating shit all you want: none of us will stop you. But don't tell us it's cake when we can clearly smell it from where we sit.
We are a handful to defend One Piece actively on this forsaken place in front of a mass of people who keep shoving their disdain over us for loving the story and ruining or experience each week because we do not agree with their writing 101 take. So you will excuse me if I'm not rubbing you the right way. I don't have the patience.
I don't need you to make it. I know how the hatred of the One Piece story is constructed. I've been dealing with that for almost 2 decades.
Excatly, then there are no reason to use them if you are not gonna go farther than this:
>>
..to analyze how they are used in the current story.
I explained to you : they are used well. If you want to argue, you gonna have to do better than just giving me "the formula is not used well". And something that can be analyzed narratively, not just your own appreciation.
Not the arcs indeed, but your critics can completely be reduced to one simple simple sentence:
"It's not what I expected therefore I don't like it".
EACH critics of One Piece in the last 15 years have started that way.
Yeah, precisely why I'm telling you that it is dumb to even talk about the structural tools in the first place when they are being used the exact same way as they were pre-timsekip.
What changed in the focus, not the structure.
My point exactly. The house is still beautiful, you simply stopped enjoying it.
They do :)
Same :)
Dressrosa, Whole Cake, Wano and Egghead have been among the most thematically revelant arcs of the story.
It's their main strenghts in fact as I explained IN DETAILS on this forum multiple times over.
Well, that's also one of their main strengh. The setups are literally out of this world.
Exactly. It's not. You are starting to understand what I'm telling you.
I will reply with your weapon. If you give me arguments, I will answer on the argumentations. If you give me your impression, I will show you mine. Simple as that.
Give me arguments and we will talk. But you better be ready to back that up. I'm not the average "Oda angel".
Exactly. And I find them executed beautifuly.
Indeed. It's not my goal here as I told you. I'm not interested in giving you an analyzis, I've done that multiple times over, I only do it when I feel they will be listened to or when I'm in a good mood.
Right now, I only mirroring shot by shot your own argumentation.
Give me more and maybe, maybe we will dive deeper.
Again, I don't have the patience to be always gentle Watson.
Sometimes, I need to make my point through conflictuality. It comes with the political package. You guyz can't ask the handfull of us to be nice when all we see is a torrent of experience ruining disdain for us fans and the story we enjoy.
You want to keep the dogpiling and the hate flowing ? You will also have to deal with the consequences. And don't bother trying to get rid of me. I don't know how to give up.
Oh... Nothing has been wasted
Characters in One Piece are not always supposed to be nice. Especially when someone try to ruin their experience or attack the things they love, their opponent will often see the fist before they see the smile.
Amazing! Have fun! It's such a cool thing to do.
Completely true. Which is why I never stop trying to decipher the story. I overcame a lot of blindspot by working on them. I never take my knowledge as a given as I'm biased like anyone else. Only as a tool to fight the cynicism that we can find here.
My interpretation has evolved a lot over the years, sometimes I noticed I went too far, sometimes I notice that I went not far enough (mostly the second frankly), but I always keep myself in check and I constantly remind myself that I read One Piece at all time with my own personnal lens and therefore.. story.
This is how media literacy should always work.
See.. for example, here, you didn't understand that what I was telling you was not something to take at face value, but a metaphor and a play of words, mostly because I write threads, replies essays the size of books.
The same is happening for this forum in regards to this story. They read something they think is simple and stop the work there. One Piece is never simple.
Exactly. This is the right argument to have. But as I told you : Not a problem in One Piece.
It is, a simple mirror to your own rebutal. Do not expect more if you are not gonna give more.
This is the mirror that we hold.
See above.
Well, I love this cake, but I'm not the one trying to force you to eat it
And I'm not telling you to eat it if you don't want to because you smell the stink of shit either, what I'm telling you, is to check your pants.
I'm always pretencious based on a strategic setting. I don't like being like that. I wish I could speak with you guyz the way I speak with Blax for ex. The problem is that conflict it is the only thing this forum understands : the balance of power. So to counter negativity, I need to fight fire with fire and I make myself big enough to take a similar space and this is proven to work
If you realized just how much hatred this forum is distributing for no reason on One Piece, you would understand the necessity to counter it. As literacy based hatred breeds conservatism.
I don't drink. Don't like the taste.
I missed that
And I'm the problem?
I don't need you to make it. I know how the hatred of the One Piece story is constructed. I've been dealing with that for almost 2 decades.
Excatly, then there are no reason to use them if you are not gonna go farther than this:
>>
..to analyze how they are used in the current story.
I explained to you : they are used well. If you want to argue, you gonna have to do better than just giving me "the formula is not used well". And something that can be analyzed narratively, not just your own appreciation.
Not the arcs indeed, but your critics can completely be reduced to one simple simple sentence:
"It's not what I expected therefore I don't like it".
EACH critics of One Piece in the last 15 years have started that way.
Yeah, precisely why I'm telling you that it is dumb to even talk about the structural tools in the first place when they are being used the exact same way as they were pre-timsekip.
What changed in the focus, not the structure.
My point exactly. The house is still beautiful, you simply stopped enjoying it.
They do :)
Same :)
Dressrosa, Whole Cake, Wano and Egghead have been among the most thematically revelant arcs of the story.
It's their main strenghts in fact as I explained IN DETAILS on this forum multiple times over.
Well, that's also one of their main strengh. The setups are literally out of this world.
Exactly. It's not. You are starting to understand what I'm telling you.
I will reply with your weapon. If you give me arguments, I will answer on the argumentations. If you give me your impression, I will show you mine. Simple as that.
Give me arguments and we will talk. But you better be ready to back that up. I'm not the average "Oda angel".
Exactly. And I find them executed beautifuly.
Indeed. It's not my goal here as I told you. I'm not interested in giving you an analyzis, I've done that multiple times over, I only do it when I feel they will be listened to or when I'm in a good mood.
Right now, I only mirroring shot by shot your own argumentation.
Give me more and maybe, maybe we will dive deeper.
Again, I don't have the patience to be always gentle Watson.
Sometimes, I need to make my point through conflictuality. It comes with the political package. You guyz can't ask the handfull of us to be nice when all we see is a torrent of experience ruining disdain for us fans and the story we enjoy.
You want to keep the dogpiling and the hate flowing ? You will also have to deal with the consequences. And don't bother trying to get rid of me. I don't know how to give up.
Oh... Nothing has been wasted
Characters in One Piece are not always supposed to be nice. Especially when someone try to ruin their experience or attack the things they love, their opponent will often see the fist before they see the smile.
Amazing! Have fun! It's such a cool thing to do.
Completely true. Which is why I never stop trying to decipher the story. I overcame a lot of blindspot by working on them. I never take my knowledge as a given as I'm biased like anyone else. Only as a tool to fight the cynicism that we can find here.
My interpretation has evolved a lot over the years, sometimes I noticed I went too far, sometimes I notice that I went not far enough (mostly the second frankly), but I always keep myself in check and I constantly remind myself that I read One Piece at all time with my own personnal lens and therefore.. story.
This is how media literacy should always work.
See.. for example, here, you didn't understand that what I was telling you was not something to take at face value, but a metaphor and a play of words, mostly because I write threads, replies essays the size of books.
The same is happening for this forum in regards to this story. They read something they think is simple and stop the work there. One Piece is never simple.
Exactly. This is the right argument to have. But as I told you : Not a problem in One Piece.
It is, a simple mirror to your own rebutal. Do not expect more if you are not gonna give more.
This is the mirror that we hold.
See above.
Well, I love this cake, but I'm not the one trying to force you to eat it
And I'm not telling you to eat it if you don't want to because you smell the stink of shit either, what I'm telling you, is to check your pants.
I'm always pretencious based on a strategic setting. I don't like being like that. I wish I could speak with you guyz the way I speak with Blax for ex. The problem is that conflict it is the only thing this forum understands : the balance of power. So to counter negativity, I need to fight fire with fire and I make myself big enough to take a similar space and this is proven to work
If you realized just how much hatred this forum is distributing for no reason on One Piece, you would understand the necessity to counter it. As literacy based hatred breeds conservatism.
Neither does an alcoholic when you Tell him about it
I missed that
And I'm the problem?
