Okay, this is very interesting information. I was NOT aware of a Anchor being called a "piece" or even a "one piece" before.
...As long as it turns out to be true. Just google searching online comes up with VERY little about anchors in general being called a "piece". If it IS actually a term, I don't think it's very commonly used.
...But, it kind of "reads" as being true, to me. It has a air of "truthiness" to me. A anchor's just a large lump of metal you use to slow down your boat. I can see people calling it a "piece", for short.
Plus, looking into it, there are plenty of examples of "3 Piece" anchors. Herreshoff Anchors and Luke Storm Anchors both break down into 3 pieces for easy storage. And there are examples of "One Piece" anchors that are just one, solid piece of metal that you can't break down. The ones I can find don't look like the One Piece logo anchor, but I'm not sure if that matters or not.
https://www.toplicht.de/en/anchorin...ssories/anchors/2096/herreshoff-dinghy-anchor
http://www.peluke.com/marine-hardware/boat-anchors/
https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256805386866249.html?gatewayAdapt=glo2usa4itemAdapt
So, it's possible that "One Piece" is referring to a type of anchor that's one solid piece of metal. The more traditional kind of anchor that most people think of, instead of the more modern versions of anchors that can break down into pieces for easier storage.
So, if that WERE true, what would that mean?
Well, we've just seen Joyboy infuse his Haki into a knot that could be released centuries later. Chances are, a One Piece Anchor would be a similar thing. A Haki-infused Anchor that's used to do...something.
It kind of depends on if the "Anchor" being active is a good thing or a bad thing? Are we supposed to "drop" the Anchor, or are we supposed to "raise" the Anchor?
A Anchor can provide support and stability. It can help you stay home and not get blown away in the middle of a storm. But, it can also drag you down with it. And I could see a Anchor being used as a metaphor for "stagnation", and not being able to move forward. And with the entire world sinking, as we've learned, I'm going to guess the Anchor is more of a "bad" thing.
Maybe this Anchor is partially responsible for the world sinking? I could see this theoretical Haki Anchor going out of control and causing the world to sink, somehow.
Personally, I've had a theory that the One Piece World is actually a alien world that got terraformed in order to support human life. It's a LONG story, okay? You can read more about that if you want, here:
https://worstgen.alwaysdata.net/for...message-will-be-the-dragons-are-coming.55673/
But, if we assume the terraforming theory could be true (which I know is a big ask), then it could mean that this Haki Anchor could be what helped change the planet's gravity to make it more suitable for human life. Maybe this Haki Anchor is actually at the center of this world, regulating it's gravity from the planet's core. Maybe this Haki Anchor is being used to make the gravity on this planet more Earth-like?
Maybe the holes in the ocean that Imu is using Uranos to make is causing this Haki Anchor to release more "gravitons" or gravity particles into the world? Changing the gravity of the world, and causing the islands to sink into the ocean due to the change in their weight. So, maybe the Strawhats have to "raise" this Haki Anchor, and return the world's gravity to what it used to be naturally, in order to stop this Haki Anchor from going out of control and crushing everything?
https://www.britannica.com/science/graviton
The problem with this line of thought is that, if the gravity of the entire world was actually changing, it would effect more than just the islands. People would be able to feel themselves get heavier and it'd be harder for them to move.
So....this line of thought was probably a big waste of time. Sorry about that. But, maybe the general idea can lead someone else to another similar path. I'm keeping it in.
Unless, of course, if this Haki Anchor can "target" and effect only the water or the land. Like how the Haki Knot can tell the different factions apart, somehow. If the Haki Anchor is "programmed" to only keep the water concentrated around itself, the Anchor weakening might be why the water levels are rising. The Haki Anchor might actually need to be "recharged" after 800 years in order to keep the water levels at a reasonable level, maybe.
But, as others have already brought up, there is the other definition of "anchor" to think about. A "anchor" as definied as someone who can't swim.
Now, as far as I can tell, the more common term for that in Japanese is actually "hammer" or "karazuchi". But...chances are "anchor" is also a acceptable term for it.
reddit.com/r/LearnJapanese/comments/3c5vtx/the_meaning_of_%E3%82%AB%E3%83%8A%E3%82%B8%E3%83%81/
https://zokugo--dict-com.translate....l=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp
Luffy is a "anchor". In fact, all Devil Fruit users are "anchors" in this way. And "hammer" also works for Luffy, since he uses a lot of punching attacks, that could be described as "hammering blows".
So, could Luffy himself BE the "Anchor"? Could he need to eventually journey down to the ocean's bottom in order to achieve something? Could Luffy NEED to let himself sink into the ocean in order to find the One Piece?
Maybe. It's possible that the One Piece Treasure is actually on Laugh Tale. Just not on it's current surface. Maybe the treasure is where the surface level used to be, before the sea levels rose. You might need to journey down below the ocean, in order to find the One Piece Treasure. Or maybe even beyond the old surface, into the very core of the planet itself! (I'm not giving up on the idea that the Strawhats will eventually journey into the literal Underworld, yet!)
Also, apparently, ancient people used to use anchors as tributes to the gods in order to gain their favor.
https://www.ancient-origins.net/news-history-archaeology/goddess-love-0013789
They'd throw a anchor overboard in order for it to act as a offering to a god, especially for luck getting out of a storm.
So, it'd be kind of interesting, if at some point in the future, Luffy himself gets "offered" to the Sea Goddess or Mother Ocean in order to quell her wrath. Luffy might get offered up in order to reverse the Devil Fruit Curse, or something. I could see it happening. The anchor in the One Piece logo is tied to a skull, kind of hinting at some sort of human sacrifice, after all.
The Anchor is also sometimes used a symbol of love. Which is interesting if any of the Imu loving Lili/Vivi theories turn out to be true.
https://thomassabo.com.au/blogs/mag...WAZmnL29Hylz2LTKDbUDWWnfryB3omsey_LK5bq_jfxnh
Unless Imu's actually planning on using Vivi as the human sacrifice instead of Luffy. Lili did die at sea, after all. I'm just going to put that out there.
There's also the Anchored Cross, or Mariner's Cross. Which is seen as a symbol of hope. Fitting for the symbol of a “savior” like Nika or Luffy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Clement's_Cross
This is very very similar to St Clement's Cross. And notably, St Clement died from being tied to a anchor and drowned. Leading a bit more credence that this is probably symbolizing Luffy getting sacrificed to the sea.
There's also Maui's Fish Hook, from Polynesian mythology. It's called Manaiakalani (meaning "The Chief's Fishline"). And notably, it was used to drag up the Hawaiian islands from the ocean's floor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Māui_(Hawaiian_mythology)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manaiakalani
https://danielshawaii.com/what-does-the-fish-hook-symbolize/
So, maybe this special magic Anchor was what was used to create the Red Line? We still don't know what did that. And maybe it will be used again to create more land for the surface?
Notably, Maui also used his hook to capture the Sun. So, maybe the Anchor we're looking for ALSO has some way to "seal away" Nika?
So, it's a very interesting idea. I might need to think about it a little more, to get a better idea how to use it, though.
Let me explain the meaning of the One Piece logo, which was designed by Oda himself. It represents the Grand Line surrounded by Calm Belts. The "O," with a skull in it, with crossed "X" represents Reverse Mountain, "NEP" is Paradise, the red "I" is Luffy, obviously the Red Line, "ECE" is the New World. And above and below everything are 2 blue lines, which are 2 Calm Belts. Notice how the last "E" is in the shape of an anchor? That is because that's where the adventure ends, where they'll put their anchor. And notice how the skull at the beginning is biting on the rope that is tied to the anchor... it's as if the Straw Hats were destined to reach the end. They were tied to it.
I just want to say, this is VERY well described. The idea of the logo, itself, being a map of the world isn't one I've really thought about, but it's so obvious now that you mention it. Good job!
But, that being said...
The One Piece is DRUM ROLLS.............. a comic book. And Nika is a character from that said comic book. He was a "God" only in a comic book.
Personally, I tend to disagree with the whole "Comic Book of Nika" idea.
It's not a bad idea, really. It's cute. Artur's been pushing it a lot recently, and I respect his opinion on most theories. And if it turns out to be true, I won't be too mad about it. And if this were another kind of story, I could see it working. But, I personally just don't think that it fits in with the rest of what Oda is doing in the story.
For one thing, it just feels a little too self-congratulatory for Oda? "My story is the key to bringing peace and happiness all throughout the world!" It just feels like you'd need a pretty big ego to even consider something like that? Making the treasure a manga like the One Piece manga just feels like it'd be too much of a way to stroke his own ego and self-importance. And I really don't think it serves the story itself very well.
As amusing as it would be to end the series with the Strawhats sitting around reading manga, that's really something that'd be used more for a cover page, rather than the conclusion to a 30 year old epic saga. I, personally, don't feel like it'd be the most satisfying conclusion. There are ways to make it "acceptable", but I feel like it wouldn't be the best way to end things.
Second, I think it just feels a little too meta for Oda? There are a lot of authors out there who go capital-M Meta ALL the time. Grant Morrison is a perfect example of this. And in those kind of stories, it works. Because the entire story is really about playing with tropes, and cliches, and story structure, and stories and the medium they're in, themselves. The story is built from the ground up to accommodate that.
But, One Piece doesn't really get that meta. Even when we have the perfect chance to do that with the Nika Fruit. Luffy COULD be going around trapping people in the gutters of the pages. Or reaching through panels in order to grab something from a future panel. But, he hasn't, yet.
We have social commentary. And we have references to the real world. But, most of the "meta" stuff is stuck in the cover pages, which can be....loosely canonical at times.
Oda hasn't really built up going that meta in the story so far. I don't think he'll end up throwing it in last minute.
Thirdly, and the most important point in my book, I think making Nika fictional would actually undermine a lot of the themes that Oda HAS been sprinkling into the story.
Here's the thing. Oda has basically been going out of his way to show us, all throughout this story, that EVERYTHING is real (from a certain point of view).
Everything that the Strawhats have assumed may just be mythical or just a story BEFORE they began their journey, has turned out to be real. Mermaids. Dragons. Sky Islands. The Germa 66. The legendary One Piece Treasure, itself. EVERYTHING in this world has some basis in fact.
This seems to be Oda's way of saying "Your dreams CAN come true, because EVERYTHING you dream can be real".
So, why would Nika, one of the most important "mythological" figures in this entire story, turn out to be fictional? It just feels....arbitrary to me. It doesn't make sense to me for THIS to be the lone exception. What, "fairies" like the Tontatta can be real, but we're drawing the line at Gods, for some reason? Why? What purpose does that serve in the story?
It would feel like a twist for the sake of having a twist. I don't feel like it serves the deeper lessons that the story is trying to convey.
Now, I'm not saying that Nika HAS to be a literal God. Oda has also been pointing out that not everything is true, either. Everything can have a grain of truth...but not ALL of it has to be the truth. There are examples of there being exaggerations or alterations to the stories, as they happened. Like Liar Nolan's story.
But, if this World DOES turn out to be a terraformed alien world, he could still be this world's "Creator" in a different way. Nika could just be one of the original astronauts that helped shape this world into the form we know today. That way, we kind of have our cake and eat it, too. Nika is still a "creator", without being a all-powerful "God". Personally, I'd be fine if we brought literal Gods into the story, but I know some people get annoyed at that. So, make them "ancient aliens" instead.
To me, the "Ancient"'/"Mythical" Zoan difference is a non-issue. We just saw that Devil Fruits can be misnamed or mislabeled with the Nika Fruit, so this could just be another case. And this might not be a case of "mythical" meaning "fictional", but instead just meaning "legendary".
As for what Roger is looking down at....that's actually a good point. And I don't have a good retort for it.
It's possible it's just a translation of the last Poneglyph etching, a scroll or parchment he's reading the story off of. Or it could be his knee if he was sitting down. But, those are both boring answers. And I'll admit, they're pretty weak.
So, whatever Roger's looking at could be a good catch. That could be something important later on. But, I don't think that alone proves that Nika is a comic book character.
As for Kaido saying Nika's like something out of a comic strip....well, he's right! It's right out of "Sora Warrior of the Sea".
If you remember, Sora had a pet bird (possibly representing Uranos)...and a Giant Robot who fought alongside him against the Germa 66. A lot like Nika and Emeth fought together during the Void Century.
The Germa 66 (in the comic strip) were a group of 5 warriors lead by their shadowy overlord. Which pretty nicely parallels Imu and the Gorosei.
It seems like the World Government changed the story of Joyboy into the story of a righteous Marine upholding the ideals of the World Government. "Sora" is Joyboy. They just changed the story of a righteous pirate rebelling against the government into the story of a Marine defending the laws of The World Government. They altered Joyboy's story into World Government propaganda FOR them!
The Germa 66 that WE know from One Piece's story, Sanji's entire family, are basically Imu and Gorosei cosplayers!
I'll admit, it's a little odd for the Gorosei to let themselves be seen as the bad guys. If they WERE the original Germa 66. But, they seem pretty content to just stay in the shadows. They might not care about what the stories paint them as, as long as the story they create ends up recruiting people into the Marines.