tsudecimo said: ashfrliebert said: UH, The point is they're both idiots(if to different extents), but the bigger point is that being dumb isn't alone a bad thing, well..unless he elaborates. They are comically dumb, but they aren't braindead, UH. UH, The point with Goku is good though, perhaps the comparsion is unwarranted. But the point is they all have common sense, to an extent, UH. No, Luffy isn't just comically dumb, being an idiot is an actual character trait for him. Braindead or not. There aren't many situations where Luffy proved he was a bright individual. No he doesn't have common sense. Part of the appeal of Luffy or Goku is that they don't have the common sense of normal people. They do what they want even if it doesn't make sense to others. Can you provide examples that Luffy dd anything notable in terms of using his brain? like Goku? It feels like you are just dismissing the points made against him and saying he is in the same level of Goku and Naruto, while he clearly isn't especially in comparison to Naruto. Like for example Gon is also inspired heavily by Goku but there have been plenty of times where he proved to be caculating and able to use his brain. Characters like Gon and Naruto are the ones who are comically dumb, not Luffy when that all he does 24/7. The "dumb" characteristic being a Goku influenced trait in manga and anime is one of the most stupid arguments ever made. First, dumb is to general an adjective, there is such a big range of different characteristics that make characters being dumb. It is something that existed way before Goku, and most of popular series don't use the kind of "dumb" that corresponds to Goku. Goku kind of dumb, is basically the type of Main Character that Akira Toriyama likes to do, the country bumpkin that comes to the city and so commits a ton of stupid errors, dumb by ignorance. In the beginning Goku main thing was that he didn't know what a girl was. Goku isn't even the first main character that Toriyama made like that, Arale from Dr. Slump is. Is also interesting to understand that Toriyama himself was a country boy that went to the big city(Tokyo). That must be one of the reasons why he likes to do that kind of characters. Naruto kind of dumb, is the punk/gangster that doesn't like to study, makes a ton of noise and causes tons of problems. That archetype has basically nothing to do with Goku. Goku isn't noisy, doesn't causes tons of problems and he never objected into learning something new, though he never went to school due to his upbringing. A better comparison of Naruto, isn't Goku, but Sakuragi Hanamichi from Slam Dunk. Both of them are punk/gangsters that don't like to study, make a ton of noise and cause tons of problems, them both even have a catchphrase(In reality Slam Dunk popularized that, Dragon Ball doesn't have it, and One Piece has). They have the exact character archetype of each other. Luffy kind of dumb, is the reckless kid that is always playing and exploring, and so doesn't have time to pay attention to boring things. Goku archetype also has little to do with Luffy. The only really thing that they have in common is the eating, but if we go for that Luffy also has Sakuragi catchphrase in common, in fact the catchphrase is way more important and used than the eating gimmick. Goku most of the time is a composed and calm person, Luffy is always smiling and having fun. Luffy is the type of person that doesn't have respect when addressing to others, the type of person that have selective levels of attention: big to things he like and almost none to things he doesn't care, basically Hyperactive disorder. One of his things is getting an explanation that would need some effort and time to understand and he rapidly labels it as Miracle/Mysterious and goes to the next thing. A good comparison about Luffy character archetype is Toriyama's Arale, not Goku. Arale is somebody that doesn't understand much of the world, like Goku, but her personality is like Luffy in that she is always, mentally, in the playground playing. Luffy would be a thieving kid from Charles Dickens' Oliver Twist story: In fact when he was a kid Luffy was exactly that, with Ace and Sabo(In fact I believe Oda took inspiration from that). Goku would be a Country bumpkin going to the city from Edgar Burroughs' Tarzan stories or Remus and Romulus Roman legend. Both characters you describe as Dumb or Stupid, but their type of stupid is totally different from one another. It seems like to you it only exist Dumb and Smart. Because it has to be something "Notable in terms of using his brain" to not being Dumb. Also Luffy has a ton of those moments. In fact you say that in his fights he doesn't have anything like that, but that is a huge big lie, or misconception. The thing that Luffy, and in One Piece in general, don't have, or rarely don't have, is monologues about what he is thinking and a second more in depth explanation of what just happened. Take away from Naruto and HunterxHunter the monologues and the second explanation of events, and see if they "look that smart". Let's give examples of times Luffy used his brain: - Starting in the beginning of the story, talking of Coby about his dream, what it means to him and that he is ready to sacrifice everything. He had a well defined plan and he took even in consideration the consequences and how he would deal with them. That is the reason why he inspired Coby. - When he rescues Zoro and Coby. And the fact that he took 3 swords to give to Zoro when he didn't knew which one was his. - When Luffy helps Coby to enter into the Marine. By telling Coby past with Alvida and feigning antagonism against Coby. - When Luffy Knock out the Mayor of Orange Town, to avoid further problems during Buggy confrontation. - When he told the people of Orange Town that he was a Pirate and when he let a bag with treasure to them, to rebuild the city. - When he noticed that Ussop must be Yassop son. - In multiple instances during Kuro fight. He only defeated Kuro because of that in fact. Also talking of fights. Luffy fighting style is one that use a high level of creativity, tons of combination attacks in sequence. Because of this fighting style he needs a good sense of what to do right now to enable him into a favorable situation, and be wary of what he does because it can allow a great number of openings. In fact the difficulty of not allowing an opening and being able to reach the wanted result is something that is in Luffy since the beginning. ... - In Marineford when every pirate was trapped and he asked Jimbei to throw him using is water attack. He wasn't thrown with empty hands, no he took a ship mast that he later used to distract the Admirals. ... There are uncountable times Luffy thought about stuff! What you call dumb, when talking of Luffy character trait, in reality you're talking of playful and carefree, or as what other people call as being childish. Not dumb! Also if a character is dumb, it is automatically a character trait! |
bigivelfhqDec 11, 2015 2:10 PM
| 90% of your post had nothing do with what I said at all. 1/ I never said the dumb characteristic was influenced by Goku lol. I said Luffy as a whole is heavily inspired/a rip off of Goku. They are fundamentally the same. 2/ I didn't imply that dumb = not doing smart stuff or whatever you are going on about. I didn't call Luffy dumb because he was reckless or w/e. I called him dumb because I think he is dumb. As he does stupid stuff, is incompetent in anything requiring him to think and has a complete lack of insight and awareness 3/ How does any of these moments prove anything? you act like I said Luffy is mentally challenged. Basic functional human thoughts does not make him smart which is all of your examples. Grasping at straws to say the least. Kuro? I have very poor recollection of the beginning episodes. If you wanna give examples limit them to from Arlong to Water 7. You are going with the broad meanings of 'smart' to support your agenda. I'm not really interested in a semantic debate. The common perception of smart is in logic and planning. That's the usual way it's presented in battle manga. That's how the characters are identified within the manga (i.e Shikamaru). Which Luffy severely lacks, as well as the series as a whole when it comes to it's action. > Also if a character is dumb, it is automatically a character trait! That's what I said. I was not referring to him being a childish, yet you made that assumption out of nowhere and preceded to write an irrelevant paragraph about it. As if you are arguing with yourself like wth. |
 |
tsudecimo said: 90% of your post had nothing do with what I said at all. 1/ I never said the dumb characteristic was influenced by Goku lol. I said Luffy as a whole is heavily inspired/a rip off of Goku. They are fundamentally the same. 2/ I didn't imply that dumb = not doing smart stuff or whatever you are going on about. I didn't call Luffy dumb because he was reckless or w/e. I called him dumb because I think he is dumb. As he does stupid stuff, is incompetent in anything requiring him to think and has a complete lack of insight and awareness 3/ How does any of these moments prove anything? you act like I said Luffy is mentally challenged. Basic functional human thoughts does not make him smart which is all of your examples. Grasping at straws to say the least. Kuro? I have very poor recollection of the beginning episodes. If you wanna give examples limit them to from Arlong to Water 7. You are going with the broad meanings of 'smart' to support your agenda. I'm not really interested in a semantic debate. The common perception of smart is in logic and planning. That's the usual way it's presented in battle manga. That's how the characters are identified within the manga (i.e Shikamaru). Which Luffy severely lacks, as well as the series as a whole when it comes to it's action. > Also if a character is dumb, it is automatically a character trait! That's what I said. I was not referring to him being a childish, yet you made that assumption out of nowhere and preceded to write an irrelevant paragraph about it. As if you are arguing with yourself like wth. If logic and Planning "like Shikamaru" is what you talk when thinking of smart(In reality you only talked of using his brain), basically 90% of characters aren't it! Logic and Planning you're talking is also made by Luffy. You just don't see his internal thoughts nor a second explanation of what just happened. A simple example is Luffy bringing a barrel with water in the 2nd confrontation against Crocodile, and the Water Luffy stunt. |
RealTheAbsurdist said: It's been years since I last watched One Piece, but I think I have a decent memory of Luffy. Which is to say, I hate him. People like me say that Subaru from Re: Zero's obnoxious, but at least Subaru was more layered: he had flaws (egotism, hot-headed), Subaru actually engaged in dialogue with other characters, and he actually grew. Luffy is always just yelling. He has no meaningful dialogue or conversations with other characters. Actually, I don't recall any characters engaging in meaningful dialogue with each other, especially after Digibro said in his One Piece video how 90% of the dialogue is just characters yelling. I don't expect philosophical dialogue or anything, but have the character have a conversation about something, anything: like how they feel, their views, why they want to achieve their goals, argue. What you said reminds me of this nice little conversation that happened in the Alabasta arc. |
 |
| I dont know why I love Luffy so much He is so simple yet he stands out from the other typical MCs. |
| I don't know but I really don't like him, he's my one of least characters from the show and this is one of the reasons why my one piece score is a 7 |
 |
| One of the GOAT shounen protagonists. I'm glad he gets love of it |
 ManWild |
| Quite honestly, I'm surprised this is still a discussion XD I'm glad it's garnered so much attention over the years. TBH there is a lot of contention over his character and its supposed "simplicity" but just because you can predict what a character will do in a given situation doesn't mean he's poorly written... It just means he feels real! I think Luffy's perfect as the main character of the masterpiece series of One Piece --he embodies its themes knick for knack! He is not perfect as a character, but there has been a lot of work put into him and I appreciate that of Oda. I like him more than Goku for example because Goku had no turning points past the transition between Dragon Ball and Dragon Ball Z; meanwhile Luffy keeps learning and growing as a person :) |
 |
| Luffy is great I don't care what other people think about him. ManWild said: One of the GOAT shounen protagonists. I'm glad he gets love of it For sure |
 |
Sekaiou said: So today, knowing I love Luffy as he's one of my most favorite characters, a couple of friends of mine ripped on Luffy on a whole new level. One watches One Piece (upto Fishman Island Arc, so he's pretty far in), the other one doesn't watch One Piece (watched upto Loguetown like 7 years back I think) and can be an asshole and kind of close minded when it comes to characters, so he might've been a bit serious. HOWEVER, trolling as they were, I didn't go serious about the debates. But you know, they were saying some really annoying things. Their critiques: - Sanji and Zoro are exponentially better because of their "feeling human." (friend who watches One Piece went deeper on this) - Luffy can't swim (lol, the one who doesn't watch) - Luffy doesn't love, and is restricted to very simple emotions. - Yamcha can beat him (sigh, I hate cross comparing characters, but just lmfao) - He is hardly developed. - His premise is too generic and there manages to be no reality behind him - ... the list goes on. I'd like to hear your thoughts on this. Why do you hate Luffy if you do? And, you know, I have so many counterexamples if you wanna get serious, but I have a feeling the majority of responses will be trolling cause of how idiotically half serious I am about this. But it's so painful to hear hate towards one of your tops :'( Probably the most overrated character in fiction beside naruto and gon, LOL. Luffy is one dimensional and boring. People actually thought this clown of a character was on the level of Johan from Monster. Just LOL. There are way better shonen protagonists, Kenshin Himura, Inuyasha, Sosuke Sagara, Yato, Allen Walker, Eijun Sawamura, Ippo, Moriarity, and a few others who would totally destroy Luffy the clown as a characters. These guys are leagues above Luffy. |
Allen-DeltaG said: Sekaiou said: So today, knowing I love Luffy as he's one of my most favorite characters, a couple of friends of mine ripped on Luffy on a whole new level. One watches One Piece (upto Fishman Island Arc, so he's pretty far in), the other one doesn't watch One Piece (watched upto Loguetown like 7 years back I think) and can be an asshole and kind of close minded when it comes to characters, so he might've been a bit serious. HOWEVER, trolling as they were, I didn't go serious about the debates. But you know, they were saying some really annoying things. Their critiques: - Sanji and Zoro are exponentially better because of their "feeling human." (friend who watches One Piece went deeper on this) - Luffy can't swim (lol, the one who doesn't watch) - Luffy doesn't love, and is restricted to very simple emotions. - Yamcha can beat him (sigh, I hate cross comparing characters, but just lmfao) - He is hardly developed. - His premise is too generic and there manages to be no reality behind him - ... the list goes on. I'd like to hear your thoughts on this. Why do you hate Luffy if you do? And, you know, I have so many counterexamples if you wanna get serious, but I have a feeling the majority of responses will be trolling cause of how idiotically half serious I am about this. But it's so painful to hear hate towards one of your tops :'( Probably the most overrated character in fiction beside naruto and gon, LOL. Luffy is one dimensional and boring. People actually thought this clown of a character was on the level of Johan from Monster. Just LOL. There are way better shonen protagonists, Kenshin Himura, Inuyasha, Sosuke Sagara, Yato, Allen Walker, Eijun Sawamura, Ippo, Moriarity, and a few others who would totally destroy Luffy the clown as a characters. These guys are leagues above Luffy. You realize everything you said is subjective right. He might be "boring" for you, but clearly he isn't "boring" for most anime watchers on MAL given his high rating. You say there's "better" shonen protagonists, but "better" is criteria specific. Maybe list out the criteria you are using? As for me, I think Luffy is one of the most *fun* characters in anime, and one of the funniest anime characters in that he matches my type of humor the best. In that sense, Luffy is definitely "better" than most other characters in that respect. |
ManWild said: One of the GOAT shounen protagonists. I'm glad he gets love of it One of the best Shounen protagonist Can't decide between luffy or gintoki |
 |
DarkAngelz said: Allen-DeltaG said: Probably the most overrated character in fiction beside naruto and gon, LOL. Luffy is one dimensional and boring. People actually thought this clown of a character was on the level of Johan from Monster. Just LOL. There are way better shonen protagonists, Kenshin Himura, Inuyasha, Sosuke Sagara, Yato, Allen Walker, Eijun Sawamura, Ippo, Moriarity, and a few others who would totally destroy Luffy the clown as a characters. These guys are leagues above Luffy. You realize everything you said is subjective right. He might be "boring" for you, but clearly he isn't "boring" for most anime watchers on MAL given his high rating. You say there's "better" shonen protagonists, but "better" is criteria specific. Maybe list out the criteria you are using? As for me, I think Luffy is one of the most *fun* characters in anime, and one of the funniest anime characters in that he matches my type of humor the best. In that sense, Luffy is definitely "better" than most other characters in that respect. Using popularity as an argument is simply an argument that isn't accurate as to which character is not "boring" and which is, this an argumentum ad populum fallacy that many one piece fans love to abuse. Many One Piece fans will create excuses about Luffy being a fun character. But then will turn the other way to rag on Natsu, being generic and all. This also gives them some area where they will start hating on FT for the same reasons they love One Piece. Its hypocrisy. I assure you that if FT is seen as a terrible piece of writing, then I don't see why one piece isn't either. As for a criteria, I like characters who portray a narrative, someone who could change the industry in a positive light. Characters like Archer, Kirei Kotomine, Shirou Emiya, Kamille Bidan, Amuro Ray, Char Aznable, Lena (86), Touma Kamijou, Accelerator, Hamazura (index), Railgun, Rintaro Okabe, Takumi (Chaos Head), etc are all characters I find to be stellar and mind blowingly amazing. I consider Luffy to be negative for the industry, because since one piece's inspiration is large, we will get more clones of him screaming "namaka" 24/7. And its worse considering that Luffy is just a blatant clone of Goku except that he screams "namaka", which is annoying. Luffy is hardly a fun character, I consider characters like Sachi Sugimoto, Kira Yoshikage, etc. A character I consider versatile is Allen Walker from D.Gray-Man, he is fun but he also manages to be taken seriously as well, due to his childhood trauma. Luffy is just annoying, comedy may be subjective, but all I see is a child who hasn't had a change in character since the release of one piece. Everytime he screams "meat" or picks his nose, this is hardly something I would call funny. Its just annoying. |
Allen-DeltaG said: DarkAngelz said: You realize everything you said is subjective right. He might be "boring" for you, but clearly he isn't "boring" for most anime watchers on MAL given his high rating. You say there's "better" shonen protagonists, but "better" is criteria specific. Maybe list out the criteria you are using? As for me, I think Luffy is one of the most *fun* characters in anime, and one of the funniest anime characters in that he matches my type of humor the best. In that sense, Luffy is definitely "better" than most other characters in that respect. Using popularity as an argument is simply an argument that isn't accurate as to which character is not "boring" and which is, this an argumentum ad populum fallacy that many one piece fans love to abuse. Many One Piece fans will create excuses about Luffy being a fun character. But then will turn the other way to rag on Natsu, being generic and all. This also gives them some area where they will start hating on FT for the same reasons they love One Piece. Its hypocrisy. I assure you that if FT is seen as a terrible piece of writing, then I don't see why one piece isn't either. As for a criteria, I like characters who portray a narrative, someone who could change the industry in a positive light. Characters like Archer, Kirei Kotomine, Shirou Emiya, Kamille Bidan, Amuro Ray, Char Aznable, Lena (86), Touma Kamijou, Accelerator, Hamazura (index), Railgun, Rintaro Okabe, Takumi (Chaos Head), etc are all characters I find to be stellar and mind blowingly amazing. I consider Luffy to be negative for the industry, because since one piece's inspiration is large, we will get more clones of him screaming "namaka" 24/7. And its worse considering that Luffy is just a blatant clone of Goku except that he screams "namaka", which is annoying. Luffy is hardly a fun character, I consider characters like Sachi Sugimoto, Kira Yoshikage, etc. A character I consider versatile is Allen Walker from D.Gray-Man, he is fun but he also manages to be taken seriously as well, due to his childhood trauma. Luffy is just annoying, comedy may be subjective, but all I see is a child who hasn't had a change in character since the release of one piece. Everytime he screams "meat" or picks his nose, this is hardly something I would call funny. Its just annoying. Allen-DeltaG said: "Using popularity as an argument is simply an argument that isn't accurate as to which character is not "boring" and which is, this an argumentum ad populum fallacy that many one piece fans love to abuse. " Yes, but when did I ever say popularity was an accurate metric? Allen-DeltaG said: "Many One Piece fans will create excuses about Luffy being a fun character. But then will turn the other way to rag on Natsu, being generic and all. This also gives them some area where they will start hating on FT for the same reasons they love One Piece." This is relevant to our conversation how? You are talking to *me* and I said that I find Luffy to be a fun and funny character. Did *I* bring up FT or Natsu? No. If you want to have a conversation with someone, maybe refer to what that person is saying instead of irrelevant stuff *other* people are saying. Allen-DeltaG said: " Its hypocrisy. I assure you that if FT is seen as a terrible piece of writing, then I don't see why one piece isn't either." When did we start talking about the general writing of One Piece? This thread is specifically on the *character* writing for Luffy. Please tell me HOW Luffy's writing is terrible or what metrics you are using to define terrible. Using Natsu and FT as a foil doesn't explain anything at all. Allen-DeltaG said: "As for a criteria, I like characters who portray a narrative, someone who could change the industry in a positive light." So basically, you think a character is good if it moves the industry in the way *you* want it to move. Listing characters doesn't actually tell me what that means. Can you articulate what way you want the industry to me? Right that's great, but how are they mind blowingly amazing? You didn't explain anything here. Please elaborate or your current argument will hold no weight. Allen-DeltaG said: " I consider Luffy to be negative for the industry, because since one piece's inspiration is large, we will get more clones of him screaming "namaka" 24/7. And its worse considering that Luffy is just a blatant clone of Goku except that he screams "namaka", which is annoying." Uhh. it's "nakama" not "namaka", and this is a huge reduction of his character and the THEME that he embodies. It's perfectly valid to find the emphasis on friendship annoying, but it's also something to note that this theme has taken a backseat in the second half of the series (last 10 years pretty much) where the focus instead has been developing their strengths to survive in a dog eat dog world. And yes, Luffy is definitely based off and is a derivative to Goku, however, derivative work doesn't equal bad. Most of fantasy these days is a derivative to Lord of the Rings, and that's OKay. It's about adding more to the ideas at play. Boku No Hero and Demon Slayer, as well as most shounen today, is heavily inspired by the works that came before it. If you're not a fan of shounen that's okay. And if you are, then I think it's a bit simple for you to say that derivative = bad. How do you define fun? Also, you're still writing an opinion piece here. Nothing you've said so far has been factual or objective. It's fine to have an opinion and be subjective about stuff, so alls good, but please acknowledge that it is indeed an opinion you have and not a hard factual categorization or analysis you're doing. Allen-DeltaG said: ", I consider characters like Sachi Sugimoto, Kira Yoshikage, etc. A character I consider versatile is Allen Walker from D.Gray-Man, he is fun but he also manages to be taken seriously as well, due to his childhood trauma." Luffy and all the straw hats have had childhood trauma, and all the characters have fun and serious sides. I'm not really sure how you're differentiating these characters because your articulation has been slim. Allen-DeltaG said: " Luffy is just annoying, comedy may be subjective, but all I see is a child who hasn't had a change in character since the release of one piece. Everytime he screams "meat" or picks his nose, this is hardly something I would call funny. Its just annoying." Yes, there's redundancy and yes a lot of this can come off annoying. These are gags. It's fair that you don't find Luffy fun or funny when these gags are so in your face all the time. However, there's more to One Piece and the character writing than the gags, and while that can definitely detract from the character writing most definitely, that doesn't entirely invalidate the depth the character has aside from that. Basically, I completely understand where you're coming from and your feelings are 100% justified. However I think it's a bit unfair to act like your opinion is the gold standard when it's so minimally supported/explained. The reason some people bring up popularity, is because that's a quantifiable metric we can use, opposed to just opinions like yours. For modeling something like this, one would have to define what "fun" means, and how to measure "funny". Is it the amount of people that laugh? The amount of jokes in an episode? The hit ratio of how many jokes land? Will we say that characters picking their nose and other instances tick up to determine whether a character is fun? The *easiest* method is using popularity and tags. Oh and last thing. Ad populum fallacy is the fallacy that something is factually true just because something is widely (popularly) believed to be true. Like God is real because so many people believe he is real, or Jesus is white skinned because so many people believe him to be. However, determining whether a fictional character is funny.... the number of people that find him to be funny..... kinda... matters... So actually yes, the more people that find him funny definitely... matters... and so it's not a fallacy.... According to : https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fallacies/ 10. The fallacy ad populum is similar to the ad verecundiam, the difference being that the source appealed to is popular opinion, or common knowledge, rather than a specified authority. So, for example: These days everyone (except you) has a car and knows how to drive; So, you too should have a car and know how to drive. This is indicating that the fallacy would be if I were convincing you to find Luffy as funny, and saying you should find him funny because everyone else does. And that's not the argument that's being made. We aren't trying to convince you to find him funny. We are trying to convince you (?) that he is widely considered to be a funny character. That nuance here matters :) |
DarkAngelzAug 2, 2021 1:24 PM
| Okay OP, I love OP. Without saying Luffy also. |
| "When they're alive, you can enjoy watching them struggle. When they're dead, you can enjoy tearing out their guts. Tales are things you get to enjoy twice." |
DarkAngelz said: Allen-DeltaG said: Using popularity as an argument is simply an argument that isn't accurate as to which character is not "boring" and which is, this an argumentum ad populum fallacy that many one piece fans love to abuse. Many One Piece fans will create excuses about Luffy being a fun character. But then will turn the other way to rag on Natsu, being generic and all. This also gives them some area where they will start hating on FT for the same reasons they love One Piece. Its hypocrisy. I assure you that if FT is seen as a terrible piece of writing, then I don't see why one piece isn't either. As for a criteria, I like characters who portray a narrative, someone who could change the industry in a positive light. Characters like Archer, Kirei Kotomine, Shirou Emiya, Kamille Bidan, Amuro Ray, Char Aznable, Lena (86), Touma Kamijou, Accelerator, Hamazura (index), Railgun, Rintaro Okabe, Takumi (Chaos Head), etc are all characters I find to be stellar and mind blowingly amazing. I consider Luffy to be negative for the industry, because since one piece's inspiration is large, we will get more clones of him screaming "namaka" 24/7. And its worse considering that Luffy is just a blatant clone of Goku except that he screams "namaka", which is annoying. Luffy is hardly a fun character, I consider characters like Sachi Sugimoto, Kira Yoshikage, etc. A character I consider versatile is Allen Walker from D.Gray-Man, he is fun but he also manages to be taken seriously as well, due to his childhood trauma. Luffy is just annoying, comedy may be subjective, but all I see is a child who hasn't had a change in character since the release of one piece. Everytime he screams "meat" or picks his nose, this is hardly something I would call funny. Its just annoying. Allen-DeltaG said: "Using popularity as an argument is simply an argument that isn't accurate as to which character is not "boring" and which is, this an argumentum ad populum fallacy that many one piece fans love to abuse. " Yes, but when did I ever say popularity was an accurate metric? Allen-DeltaG said: "Many One Piece fans will create excuses about Luffy being a fun character. But then will turn the other way to rag on Natsu, being generic and all. This also gives them some area where they will start hating on FT for the same reasons they love One Piece." This is relevant to our conversation how? You are talking to *me* and I said that I find Luffy to be a fun and funny character. Did *I* bring up FT or Natsu? No. If you want to have a conversation with someone, maybe refer to what that person is saying instead of irrelevant stuff *other* people are saying. Allen-DeltaG said: " Its hypocrisy. I assure you that if FT is seen as a terrible piece of writing, then I don't see why one piece isn't either." When did we start talking about the general writing of One Piece? This thread is specifically on the *character* writing for Luffy. Please tell me HOW Luffy's writing is terrible or what metrics you are using to define terrible. Using Natsu and FT as a foil doesn't explain anything at all. Allen-DeltaG said: "As for a criteria, I like characters who portray a narrative, someone who could change the industry in a positive light." So basically, you think a character is good if it moves the industry in the way *you* want it to move. Listing characters doesn't actually tell me what that means. Can you articulate what way you want the industry to me? Right that's great, but how are they mind blowingly amazing? You didn't explain anything here. Please elaborate or your current argument will hold no weight. Allen-DeltaG said: " I consider Luffy to be negative for the industry, because since one piece's inspiration is large, we will get more clones of him screaming "namaka" 24/7. And its worse considering that Luffy is just a blatant clone of Goku except that he screams "namaka", which is annoying." Uhh. it's "nakama" not "namaka", and this is a huge reduction of his character and the THEME that he embodies. It's perfectly valid to find the emphasis on friendship annoying, but it's also something to note that this theme has taken a backseat in the second half of the series (last 10 years pretty much) where the focus instead has been developing their strengths to survive in a dog eat dog world. And yes, Luffy is definitely based off and is a derivative to Goku, however, derivative work doesn't equal bad. Most of fantasy these days is a derivative to Lord of the Rings, and that's OKay. It's about adding more to the ideas at play. Boku No Hero and Demon Slayer, as well as most shounen today, is heavily inspired by the works that came before it. If you're not a fan of shounen that's okay. And if you are, then I think it's a bit simple for you to say that derivative = bad. How do you define fun? Also, you're still writing an opinion piece here. Nothing you've said so far has been factual or objective. It's fine to have an opinion and be subjective about stuff, so alls good, but please acknowledge that it is indeed an opinion you have and not a hard factual categorization or analysis you're doing. Allen-DeltaG said: ", I consider characters like Sachi Sugimoto, Kira Yoshikage, etc. A character I consider versatile is Allen Walker from D.Gray-Man, he is fun but he also manages to be taken seriously as well, due to his childhood trauma." Luffy and all the straw hats have had childhood trauma, and all the characters have fun and serious sides. I'm not really sure how you're differentiating these characters because your articulation has been slim. Allen-DeltaG said: " Luffy is just annoying, comedy may be subjective, but all I see is a child who hasn't had a change in character since the release of one piece. Everytime he screams "meat" or picks his nose, this is hardly something I would call funny. Its just annoying." Yes, there's redundancy and yes a lot of this can come off annoying. These are gags. It's fair that you don't find Luffy fun or funny when these gags are so in your face all the time. However, there's more to One Piece and the character writing than the gags, and while that can definitely detract from the character writing most definitely, that doesn't entirely invalidate the depth the character has aside from that. Basically, I completely understand where you're coming from and your feelings are 100% justified. However I think it's a bit unfair to act like your opinion is the gold standard when it's so minimally supported/explained. The reason some people bring up popularity, is because that's a quantifiable metric we can use, opposed to just opinions like yours. For modeling something like this, one would have to define what "fun" means, and how to measure "funny". Is it the amount of people that laugh? The amount of jokes in an episode? The hit ratio of how many jokes land? Will we say that characters picking their nose and other instances tick up to determine whether a character is fun? The *easiest* method is using popularity and tags. Oh and last thing. Ad populum fallacy is the fallacy that something is factually true just because something is widely (popularly) believed to be true. Like God is real because so many people believe he is real, or Jesus is white skinned because so many people believe him to be. However, determining whether a fictional character is funny.... the number of people that find him to be funny..... kinda... matters... So actually yes, the more people that find him funny definitely... matters... and so it's not a fallacy.... According to : https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fallacies/ 10. The fallacy ad populum is similar to the ad verecundiam, the difference being that the source appealed to is popular opinion, or common knowledge, rather than a specified authority. So, for example: These days everyone (except you) has a car and knows how to drive; So, you too should have a car and know how to drive. This is indicating that the fallacy would be if I were convincing you to find Luffy as funny, and saying you should find him funny because everyone else does. And that's not the argument that's being made. We aren't trying to convince you to find him funny. We are trying to convince you (?) that he is widely considered to be a funny character. That nuance here matters :) I brought up popularity, just in case one piece fans would bring up it in a later post, it wasn't meant "specifically" for you, but as a safety net in discussions. Okay, so if bringing up natsu was irrelevant, then you telling me Luffy is a "fun" character is also irrelevant because I never brought up anything about characters "being fun". Luffy is a bad character due to his many instances of plot armour, his lack of change in his character, The horrible execution of how his flashback during post-war was protrayed (execution matters how I judge a character), and he is always ruining to tone shift of the story, with his awful gags. There is no tonal consistency with luffy at all. Giving childhood trauma doesn't mean they have a "multifaceted" persona nor does it mean they are good characters. Characters don't need to be tragic such as dr. Tenma, who has had no tough life until the beginning of monster. Instead throughout monster he was explored how he would react in different situations. Luffy is never explored, hence why he fails as a static character, it's also another reason why I think post war arc flashback should've been more spread out to "promote" this idea of "exploring Luffy"s" character. Yes, the Strawhats can be serious? And? You can have characters act seriously occasionally, however when you have children like luffy, who have these "comedic gags" 90% of the time, that hardly fits the tone of specific situationsl. It was if he was written by a kingergartener. I know what Argumentum ad Populum is. thanks. |
| I have only watched four epsiodes of one piece but i am not really liked luffy that much, i find him a bit annoying but that goes for almost every shouene protagonist so i think he is not a bad character but not for me, yourbfriends ate probably the same but they are just polemic, i am open to my opinion to change about luffy if i keep reading one piece but i doubt i will since i am not really liking withe luffy or zoro for the moment |
More topics from this board
Poll: » One Piece Chapter 924 Discussion ( 1 2 )Stark700 - Nov 8, 2018 |
72 |
by Ranxomare
»»
5 hours ago |
|
» The Worldstrawhatlucas - Oct 10 |
8 |
by BasedHappy
»»
7 hours ago |
|
Poll: » One Piece Chapter 1162 Discussion28012001 - Oct 6 |
42 |
by Niwaka-Samurai
»»
8 hours ago |
|
Poll: » One Piece Chapter 1122 Discussion ( 1 2 )FMmatron - Jul 30, 2024 |
65 |
by Cosmicon
»»
Yesterday, 1:21 PM |
|
Poll: » One Piece Chapter 1161 DiscussionFMmatron - Sep 23 |
36 |
by ReaperCreeper
»»
Yesterday, 2:23 AM |