General & Others Is Marineford the worst aged arc in Shonen history?
- Thread starter dirtyLarry
- Start date
You as in "you guys", not "you specifically".
At the time, some (few) people felt like Thriller Bark was boring, they didn't like Brook, they thought the arc was ridiculous, useless, I think the word bad paced was used too. We were starting to become adults at the time. There was a thing for edgyness. Already, the same arguments and processes as we have been seeing for years now:
- Illegitimate expectations
- Alack of interest for the arc because of impatience
- Parasocial bonds and powerscaling
- The inability to just enjoy just having a fun time
- The necessity to have lore and then complain when said lore does not fit expectations etc.
Sabaody shut people up, but it came back during impel down and exploded during FMI. Critics are cool and all, but when hate grows that much despite the obvious quality of the arcs... this is not normal. After that I spend years trying to understand why people were disliking
I spent years trying to undersntand where this hate comes from. This is my conclusion for now:
At the time, some (few) people felt like Thriller Bark was boring, they didn't like Brook, they thought the arc was ridiculous, useless, I think the word bad paced was used too. We were starting to become adults at the time. There was a thing for edgyness. Already, the same arguments and processes as we have been seeing for years now:
- Illegitimate expectations
- Alack of interest for the arc because of impatience
- Parasocial bonds and powerscaling
- The inability to just enjoy just having a fun time
- The necessity to have lore and then complain when said lore does not fit expectations etc.
Sabaody shut people up, but it came back during impel down and exploded during FMI. Critics are cool and all, but when hate grows that much despite the obvious quality of the arcs... this is not normal. After that I spend years trying to understand why people were disliking
I spent years trying to undersntand where this hate comes from. This is my conclusion for now:
When you bases your premisse or mindset with the idea that an arc has hurt One Piece, you only create the conditions for people to find the arc they dislike the most and diss on it.
It's how the hatred and conservatism (in the sense, "I want to keep things the way they were") spreads within a fandom. It happens that said hatred reached such a threadshold in the One Piece fanbase that the movement spreaded almost instantly in a large part of the community where said conservatism had the most seed planted :
- Agendas
- Fandom created narrative stones (either real or not) territories
Agendas : People in fandom are by nature forming parasocial bonds with their favorite characters, which creates the necessity for the personnal agenda of fans to be reached. When the parasocial bond is so strong and the agenda is not reached, a LARGE partof the fanbase associated to said character will mechanically start blaming the author. This is the first form of conservatism that is based on the need to see the example of the desires of our characters. Examples like :
- Luke in the last jedi
- Doctor Who in the new serie
- Zoro in Wano, Big Mom in Whole Cake, Luffy in G5 etc.
Fandom created narrative stones : This are different and the opposite of agendas. They are the narrative outlook on a narrative element that is stoned and freezed in time and canon by the fanbase. This can take two shapes :
> The real "narrative stone" :The author establishes A and the audience understands A
> A fake "narrative stone" : The author establishes A and the audience understands B. While the author freezes A, the audience will freezes B creating a clash between the author and the audience when a contradiction appears:
- In One Piece, for example, this is the idea that Sanji is a warrior and therefore must have a fight in whole cake. When said fight never happened the contradiction between A (Whole cake is centered around the fact that Sanji is more than a warrior) and B (Sanji should have a fight) clashes together and create a division between the author and the audience.
When we talk about legitimate expectations, we talk about this friction which in essence is a conservatism. For the story first, that can spread outward.
To counter this friction there are three ways :
- Either the author follow what they think the fan wants (this is what created the failure that is The Rise of Skywalker)
- Either the author clarify its storytelling, but in said action removes the subtilities and challenging part that makes the works such a great piece of art (this is what Hollywood does with Marvel, something usually bland, unchallenging)
- Either the author makes the bet that their audience is smarter and will seek answer and analyzis if needed and keep the flow of their art going. (this is what Oda does with One Piece)
Narrative based conservatism can therefore become a direct product of fandoms, often when they either do not align with the author or when they do not let the authors challenge their preconceptions. Said conservatism can then expand outward depending on the state of the story, the agent of the creation, the state of the fandom, the political and social context, etc.
What I'm doing here, is try to push people to let themselves be challenged in order to prevent this conservatism to expand and:
It's how the hatred and conservatism (in the sense, "I want to keep things the way they were") spreads within a fandom. It happens that said hatred reached such a threadshold in the One Piece fanbase that the movement spreaded almost instantly in a large part of the community where said conservatism had the most seed planted :
- Agendas
- Fandom created narrative stones (either real or not) territories
Agendas : People in fandom are by nature forming parasocial bonds with their favorite characters, which creates the necessity for the personnal agenda of fans to be reached. When the parasocial bond is so strong and the agenda is not reached, a LARGE partof the fanbase associated to said character will mechanically start blaming the author. This is the first form of conservatism that is based on the need to see the example of the desires of our characters. Examples like :
- Luke in the last jedi
- Doctor Who in the new serie
- Zoro in Wano, Big Mom in Whole Cake, Luffy in G5 etc.
Fandom created narrative stones : This are different and the opposite of agendas. They are the narrative outlook on a narrative element that is stoned and freezed in time and canon by the fanbase. This can take two shapes :
> The real "narrative stone" :The author establishes A and the audience understands A
> A fake "narrative stone" : The author establishes A and the audience understands B. While the author freezes A, the audience will freezes B creating a clash between the author and the audience when a contradiction appears:
- In One Piece, for example, this is the idea that Sanji is a warrior and therefore must have a fight in whole cake. When said fight never happened the contradiction between A (Whole cake is centered around the fact that Sanji is more than a warrior) and B (Sanji should have a fight) clashes together and create a division between the author and the audience.
When we talk about legitimate expectations, we talk about this friction which in essence is a conservatism. For the story first, that can spread outward.
To counter this friction there are three ways :
- Either the author follow what they think the fan wants (this is what created the failure that is The Rise of Skywalker)
- Either the author clarify its storytelling, but in said action removes the subtilities and challenging part that makes the works such a great piece of art (this is what Hollywood does with Marvel, something usually bland, unchallenging)
- Either the author makes the bet that their audience is smarter and will seek answer and analyzis if needed and keep the flow of their art going. (this is what Oda does with One Piece)
Narrative based conservatism can therefore become a direct product of fandoms, often when they either do not align with the author or when they do not let the authors challenge their preconceptions. Said conservatism can then expand outward depending on the state of the story, the agent of the creation, the state of the fandom, the political and social context, etc.
What I'm doing here, is try to push people to let themselves be challenged in order to prevent this conservatism to expand and:
I haven't re-watched MF but i loved it back then. That arc had feel.. I'd not be wrong to say majority connected with Luffy feeling of saving Ace and that scene where he yells Ace and Ace yells back sends Goosebumps.
Powerscaling wise- Onepiece had never been consistent. You could pick major characters, and you'd see the flaw. MF is no different.
Also, we all have grown up now- we won't like the same shit we liked as kids- not to same intensity atleast. You'd not connect with Arlong arc like you did back then, or water 7 arc.
Powerscaling wise- Onepiece had never been consistent. You could pick major characters, and you'd see the flaw. MF is no different.
Also, we all have grown up now- we won't like the same shit we liked as kids- not to same intensity atleast. You'd not connect with Arlong arc like you did back then, or water 7 arc.
This mere hakiless casual swing is, considering what boost advcoa and advcoc give, really really terrifying.
Same for the gura gura I suppose.
Also we should accept that the admiral DFs are merely island level, considering what aftermath an extreme diff (imo draw) fight with haki between Kuzan and Sakazuki created.
No wonder they shat their pants when Shanks arrived. Nobody wanted moon-halving slashes flying around on marineford
Mihawk leaving the place was actually Advanced Color of Mercy
Same for the gura gura I suppose.
Also we should accept that the admiral DFs are merely island level, considering what aftermath an extreme diff (imo draw) fight with haki between Kuzan and Sakazuki created.
No wonder they shat their pants when Shanks arrived. Nobody wanted moon-halving slashes flying around on marineford
Mihawk leaving the place was actually Advanced Color of Mercy
Which is why I can't take anyone who praises Oda's storywriting seriously.
It's one illogical mess with so many plot holes and inconsistencies, it's maddening if you view it under the lense/expectations of an actual "great story".
If you view it for what it is - a mere standard shonen story (fun, but not deep in the slightest) - we're fine again.
It's one illogical mess with so many plot holes and inconsistencies, it's maddening if you view it under the lense/expectations of an actual "great story".
If you view it for what it is - a mere standard shonen story (fun, but not deep in the slightest) - we're fine again.
Keeping in mind, of course, that a lack of active disdain isn't praise.
With this specific Haki idea: in a real war there's a mutual understanding of catastrophic means. You wouldn't use a nuke for fear of pushing the other side to do the same, and you likely wouldn't count on a mere chance of them losing more than you as a reward when the opposite could be true. But there's no cost to use this Haki, and by definition the losses are minimal... the least effective units of manpower.
And even if there was something like a gentleman's agreement, it would have been broken by Luffy using his baby Haki to change the face of the situation. There was no reason for someone trying to save Ace to not do it, and no reason for someone like Sengoku to not use it and lessen the Pacifista workload.
It's not good. But... it's also something I can just shrug off for the sake of the real story. The funny thing is looking at one plot hole that seems to have started at a specific point, CoC Haki at Marineford, and seeing how Oda is still doing random shit to adjust how the story worked before that. Like inventing a new reason for Shanks to have lost his arm due to another plot hole that was created a while before Marineford, when his angry glare became more than a glare
With this specific Haki idea: in a real war there's a mutual understanding of catastrophic means. You wouldn't use a nuke for fear of pushing the other side to do the same, and you likely wouldn't count on a mere chance of them losing more than you as a reward when the opposite could be true. But there's no cost to use this Haki, and by definition the losses are minimal... the least effective units of manpower.
And even if there was something like a gentleman's agreement, it would have been broken by Luffy using his baby Haki to change the face of the situation. There was no reason for someone trying to save Ace to not do it, and no reason for someone like Sengoku to not use it and lessen the Pacifista workload.
It's not good. But... it's also something I can just shrug off for the sake of the real story. The funny thing is looking at one plot hole that seems to have started at a specific point, CoC Haki at Marineford, and seeing how Oda is still doing random shit to adjust how the story worked before that. Like inventing a new reason for Shanks to have lost his arm due to another plot hole that was created a while before Marineford, when his angry glare became more than a glare
In retrospect, it's pretty funny how big of a deal is made of Whitebeard being stabbed by Squardo as if it's proof that his observation Haki has declined. Now to be fair, it could be technically be true for Whitebeard in specific, but it's pretty easy to imagine any top tier getting taken off guard in their primes, even future sight users.
