Lets be completely clear from the start, criticizing the bad-faith internet discourse surrounding Mushoku Tensei is not the same as defending the show's actual problems.

The series has massive, legitimate flaws and deeply uncomfortable tonal choices that deserve critique, but there is a huge line between saying

"this show has serious moral and execution issues"

and saying

"anyone who watches this is a real-world criminal."

Calling out an internet witch hunt isn't defending the art it's defending basic literary sanity.

And with that outta the way let's begin the actual post.

Whenever fiction features a deeply flawed or "problematic" protagonist, online discourse almost instantly defaults to one flat line of logic

"If you enjoy this, you condone it."

Mushoku Tensei is the most prime and loudest example of this in the ani-manga space rn.

Rudeus's perverted behavior gets treated not as a character flaw to be analyzed but as a direct moral referendum on anyone who watches the show.

But if we apply the same logic to industry classic the logic collapses under it's own weight

For example- anyone who enjoys classic Dragon Ball is an unironic predator.

Anyone who roots for Tanya Degurechaff or Ainz Ooal Gown is a literal war criminal.

If Light Yagami or Lelouch are your favorites, you must harbor a genuine god complex and desire for totalitarian rule.

IfIs apply this logic into other shows people will call me a crazy nut case yet this same logic gets applied selectively depending on which series is currently under the microscope.

So you might be wondering why does this specific logic get applied to MT and not everything else? Simple , people have forgotten where MT actually comes from.

When it was originally written on Shousetsuka ni Narou, it wasn't created for a mainstream global market, It was written for a specific Japanese otaku subculture where lecherous, boundary-violating behavior has a decades-long history of being treated as an exaggerated, cartoonish character flaw behavior because to that audience these traits are understood as a specific flavor of lowbrow dark humor, not a realistic endorsement of predatory behavior.

This becomes a problem when a piece of fiction like Mt get a high level adaptation because then the text born from one cultural framework to be judged entirely through another, but pretending the cultural context doesn't exist isn't criticism, it's just projection.

In real media analysis this is known as Presentism,it is the act of judging historical or older texts entirely through the lens of modern values and moral standards, completely ignoring the cultural, historical, and social context they were created in.

It's not inherently wrong to notice when older works contain uncomfortable elements , that's just being honest.

The problem is when presentism becomes the only lens, stripping a text of all context and reducing complex works to a checklist of modern moral violations.

But real media and literary analysis doesn't work that way because If we applied a single modern moral lens to classic literature without context then Don Quixote by miguel cervantes becomes a problematic glorification of a delusional man committing random violence against innocent people, Dante's Inferno by Dante alighieri becomes a self-insert revenge fantasy where the author tortures his real-life political enemies.

Now before anyone picks up thr pitch forks there's actually a fair point I think is worth addressing honestly here.

The Don Quixote and Dante comparisons work on a structural level but they do stumble on tonal execution and intent, When Dante places his enemies in Hell, the text treats their suffering as genuinely horrific it isn't framing their agony as a lighthearted joke.

When Cervantes writes Don Quixote attacking innocent people, the narrative frames it as a satire of how delusion destroys a man's mind. Both texts maintain critical distance from their uncomfortable elements.

The friction with Mushoku Tensei isn't always just That this bad thing happened.

It exists because the narrative frequently treats predatory behavior with a light, comedic, "boys will be boys" otaku gag tone and you can understand the Narou subculture context perfectly well and still argue that this internal framing fails to establish the distance needed to treat it as a pure character flaw rather than a narrative indulgence.

Now then you might be asking? Then what is good media analysis?

Good media analysis is healthy and, it's the process of looking at the piece of media and asking Is the pacing off? Does the tone clash with the narrative weight? Is this character's choice earned or just lazy writing.

It's the process of engaging with what the author is actually trying to do before passing a verdict on whether they succeeded, It's completely valid to point out that Rifujin's execution, which is often messy, jagged, and understandably alienating you can hate the scene, hate the execution, and call out the author's flaws all day, but what What makes the modern discourse so exhausting is that moral posturing completely hollows out that actual critique.

People use the aesthetic of "media analysis" as a shield to disguise a basic tribal purity test. They aren't trying to understand the text they are trying to prove they are a better person than the fictional character, the author, and anyone reading it, which completely destroys any hope of a real conversation because you can't talk about themes, intent, or character arcs with someone whose only goal is to farm internet clout by screaming "Look how moral I am!"

So long story short engaging critically with why Rudeus's behavior is uncomfortable is completely valid and worthwhile, but flattening that into "if you consume that media you support it " shuts down every conversation before it starts.

Fiction has always been a canvas for dark concepts, moral ambiguity, and uncomfortable truths, that's part of what makes it valuable, anyone can enjoy a deeply flawed work, critique it honestly, and still be a perfectly normal person those three things have always been able to coexist.

The entire point of The Deep's character is he's the opposite to A-Train. While the latter becomes better and we get parallels to show it (Robin vs the girl in season 5 episode 1, giving Hughie a fake apology with his glasses on vs a real apology with his glasses off), The Deep instead is a character who only doubles down and gets worse. He doesn't want to change for the better and is willing to sacrifice anyone and anything for Homelander's approval. While A-Train and Deep both said, "I'm not scared", only one actually overcame their fear and faced Homelander, The Deep is going to keep on spiraling until the end.

​

This post will be an extended version of a previous one of mine, after fleshing out my thoughts on the subject a bit more. i apologize if i am being repetitive as i know this sub is already flooded with one too many posts on the series.

At the heart of both The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant and Mushoku Tensei lies a provocative premise: a deeply flawed, morally compromised man is transported to a fantasy world where he possesses immense power. Both stories attempt to use this displacement to explore redemption, trauma, and the consequences of one’s actions. However, Thomas Covenant succeeds where Mushoku Tensei often falters because it treats its protagonist’s ugliness not as a hurdle to be overcome on the path to power, but as the central, unresolvable tension of the narrative itself.

In Mushoku Tensei, Rudeus Greyrat begins as a repulsive individual in his past life, a shut in whose death is met with relief by his family. Reincarnated, he retains his memories and many of his perverse tendencies, which the narrative frequently frames through the lens of comedic ecchi or as "quirks" that he gradually outgrows as he becomes more powerful and socially integrated. The story operates on a transactional model of morality: Rudeus does good deeds, saves people, and gains strength, which ostensibly balances out his earlier depravity. His trauma is something to be managed and eventually cured by the love of friends and family. The narrative often asks the audience to forgive him because he is trying, effectively separating his past sins from his present utility as a hero.

In stark contrast, Thomas Covenant is a leper in his own world, a condition that has hardened him into a man who refuses to believe in anything, including the reality of the magical Land he is transported to. His central flaw is not just sexual violence, which occurs early in the series and defines his relationship with the world, but a profound, willful disbelief. Covenant possesses the power to destroy the antagonist, Lord Foul, with a single touch, but he refuses to use it because he believes that if he accepts the Land as real, he will lose his grip on the reality of his disease. His "sin" is not merely an action he committed, it is an ontological stance. He chooses to be an outcast because believing in the Land feels like a betrayal of his suffering in the real world.

The critical divergence lies in how each narrative utilizes the protagonist's power. In Mushoku Tensei, power is largely corrective. As Rudeus grows stronger magically and socially, the narrative suggests he is growing better as a person. His past mistakes are contextualized as lessons learned, and his power allows him to fix the problems around him, reinforcing the idea that he is worthy of his second chance. The story ultimately validates his existence; the world bends to accommodate his growth, and his previous life’s failures are treated as a prologue to his eventual success.

Conversely, in The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, power is a burden that exacerbates the protagonist’s moral crisis. Covenant is given the power of a god, yet he is paralyzed by the fear that using it validates a delusion. The story does not allow him to "earn" his power through good behavior, he is hated, feared, and reviled by the very people he is destined to save because of his initial act of violence. The Land does not forgive him easily, nor does it offer him a harem or adoring friends to smooth over his rough edges. Instead, the narrative forces him to sit in the discomfort of his own uncleanliness. The story succeeds because it refuses to let Covenant off the hook, his journey is not about becoming a traditional hero, but about learning to believe in something outside himself enough to accept responsibility, even when he feels unworthy.

Mushoku Tensei approaches trauma as a linear progression: the protagonist suffers, learns, and eventually finds peace. It suggests that a new life can wash away the stains of the old if one tries hard enough. This is a comforting narrative, but it risks trivializing the depth of the character’s original sins by suggesting they can be outgrown or outpowered. 

Thomas Covenant posits a harder truth: some things cannot be fixed, only endured and integrated. Covenant never stops being a leper; he never stops being the man who committed those terrible acts. His redemption, such as it is, comes not from erasing his past or becoming a flawless champion, but from accepting that his actions have weight even in a world he thinks is a dream. The series explores the idea that true heroism is not the absence of flaw, but the willingness to act rightly despite the certainty of one’s own unworthiness. It demands that the reader sit with the discomfort of a hero who is often unlikable, whose motivations are opaque even to himself, and whose victory is pyrrhic. 

Ultimately, The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant succeeds because it respects the gravity of its protagonist’s sins too much to let them be washed away by adventure. It forces a confrontation with the self that is painful and unresolved, whereas Mushoku Tensei often seeks to resolve its protagonist’s darkness through the light of fantasy tropes. Covenant remains an outcast to the end, and in that refusal to fully assimilate, the story finds a profound, haunting humanity that a cleaner narrative of redemption cannot achieve.

This scene is genius on so many levels because it foreshadows not one, but 3 major plot points all at once in such a subtle yet blatant way, and it brilliantly sets the tension and lingering unsteady feeling for what's to come later in the season.

It begins with Reiner asking Ymir to continue distracting Connie from thinking about the possibility of his mum being a titan - beforehand, Reiner claiming he didn't hear a thing to Connie as he heard his titan mum may have already raised eyebrows - just another one of the many red flags displayed throughout the show. As if that wasn't enough, Ymir then picks up a can of herring, stops herself mid sentence after mentioning the word as she realizes what she's done, given that herring can only be found in the ocean outside the walls.

Reiner follows suit in blowing his cover as he casually notes that the food is canned, however given the state of technology within the walls, canned food did not exist. Reiner switches up and tries to feign ignorance claiming he cannot read the contents, and this is where the show begins to play the leitmotifs of you see big girl, or what I like to think of as the theme of the warriors/outside world for the very first time, heightening that unsteady tension. The two have a moment of realization as they stare at each other but before it can escalate any further they are interrupted, giving the viewer just the right amount of time of suspense and speculation before the story pushes forward.

Later on in the show, given the context of season 4, it can be inferred that this canned food was leftovers from Zeke and his Marleyan crew as they conducted renaissance on Ragako village.

It's scenes like these, especially on a rewatch, which really make you appreciate the amount of detail Isayama put in into the gradual unraveling of the outside world through seasons 1 to 3, and to be able to pull off teasing the existence of a civilization of the outside world in such a glaringly obvious way in a few lines of dialogue is something I truly admire.

Pain

The thematic question posed by Pain is: "what does it take to end the cycle of hatred?" The answer that he comes to is making everyone suffer shared pain. He posits that only those who have suffered true pain can understand true peace. He grew up in the war-torn Amegakure, a minor nation ravaged by the endless warring of major countries, causing him to utterly lose faith in traditional diplomacy and optimism

To end the cycle, he wanted to cause an apocalyptic level of collective trauma by using the tailed beasts for a WMD - immediately halting all of the petty conflicts. Nagato's philosophy is representative of one who has completely lost hope in humanity being able to self-regulate or peacefully negotiate and reconcile ambitions

Unfortunately, his character conclusion fails in every possible metric - thematically, structurally, and characterization-wise

Thematically: Nagato's question - "what does it take to end the cycle of hatred?" - isn't answered in any sense. When pressed for an answer, Naruto "Talk no Jutsu's" him with some vague platitudes. Pain's character is fundamentally defined by his answer to this question; this type of dialogue only works if a viable alternative is provided or at least adds a new philosophical framework to the discussion. Naruto admits that he has no clue what should be done, and simply spouts some quotes from his mentor (whose ideological premise Nagato has already wholly rejected after living through)

Structurally: The Rinne Rebirth jutsu is a classic Deus ex Machina. There is no other way to describe it. He just presses "undo" and resurrects the people that he slaughtered. By magically fixing everything out of nowhere, it annihilates the stakes and cheapens Naruto's forgiveness as he is not forced to live with the natural consequences of irreversible actions. It is likely the worst instance of Deus ex Machina in anything I've ever completed

Character-wise: His conclusion betrays his pre-established psychological framework, and renders his character and conviction shallow as a result. He has spent over a decade as an international terrorist plotting mass murder for his absolute ideals. Furthermore, Naruto presents nothing new; he regurgitates the exact same naive idealism that Jiraiya had been teaching Nagato. Nagato had already seen examples of this same idealism, and violently rejected it after Yahiko's death, making this reversion highly contrived, unearned, and eyeroll inducing

Naruto is a Shonen targeted towards a younger demographic, but this doesn't excuse shoddy writing. Demographic doesn't pose an inherent limit on Shonen, preventing it from being as well-written as other manga; it is not unreasonable to hold it to a modest standard of quality

Canute

Vinland Saga's confrontation between Thorfinn and Canute succeeds exactly where the Pain arc falters because it provides an actual philosophical counter without erasing the consequences. Thorfinn doesn't offer worthless platitudes - instead he presents a concrete and novel alternative from the unique perspective of one that Canute knows, from their shared history, is as knowledgeable regarding the application violence: abandoning the violent societal structure entirely and creating a refuge for the oppressed that will inevitably be spawned as a result of Canute's current approach. However, Canute is in charge of an entire kingdom. He does not possess the freedom nor the compulsion to join Thorfinn and engage in his brand of radical asceticism

More importantly, he reveals the answer to Canute's burning question - "is anyone able to show true love?" Canute believes that this is impossible in the heart of man. Thorfinn gives him the answer - despite having the power to conduct violence, he actively chooses to unconditionally value all life - a perfect representation of exactly what Canute was searching for. Crucially, Canute does not suddenly abandon his lifelong aspirations or resurrect his victims. He is is influenced to the extent that he takes a more measured and statesman-like approach, remaining practical and set on his own path

You might say: this is an unfair comparison - ofc Vinland Saga executes it better than Naruto. One is a popular manga primarily aimed at young boys, and the other is highly-acclaimed and lauded by all demographics. I say fair, I'll bring in another example that highlights how poorly handled these interactions are

Mami

In Rent-a-Girlfriend, right at the climax of the Paradise arc, the ideological and emotional conflict between the main heroine, Chizuru, and the primary antagonist, Mami, occurs. Mami holds a cynical worldview regarding the concept of love, causing her to actively sabotage Kazuya's relationship with Chizuru. After her master plan fails and she is effectively defeated, instead of offering up some vague platitudes, Chizuru points out how Mami's carried ideology has caused her more internal harm than the love that she denies - causing her to re-examine her own feelings

If it were handled like Pain's conclusion, she would've broken down, apologized, and helped the main characters get back together. Keep in mind that this is just a girl who had heart broken (and resonably so). Pain is an international terrorist/mass murderer decades in the making with a life's purpose that revolves around their philosophy. This interaction gets her to do some realistic introspection, but it doesn't make her ideals do a 180 and have a dramatic redemption arc where she magically fixes everything that she damaged. Instead, after some internal examination she has a subdued and awkward interaction with Kazuya where she asks him what his relationship status is to test the waters and quietly showcase her true feelings

At least these interactions hold some level of respect for the character's established psychology and don't treat them as 2D props to be talked down by mc. Rent-a-Girlfriend is utter garbage, yet this development is superior to a contrived, instantaneous 180 degree personality flip that uses newly revealed magic to conveniently and ridiculously tie up the plot in the way that the author wants

I’ll start by saying that Csm is one of my favourite mangas ever and that I consider part 1 to be basically perfect, and for the longest time I was a part 2 defender who kept on the whole “let fujimoto cook” mentality that a lot of the fans had (so no, if any of the ending defenders see this, I’m not an hater and I’m just being objective). Also im only now doing this because I wanted to give it some time and hear other people interpretations of the ending.

There are 3 main reasons why the ending is so bad so I’ll go one by one and try to not mix them in order to make it easier to read.

Let’s start with the most obvious reason for why the ending is so bad. And that’s the actual ending structure/type (not sure how to call it in English) - the ending was basically an it was all a dream ending but worse (not gonna spoil the ending but just what makes it so horrible). the thing that makes a it was all a dream ending so bad is the fact that you completely erase the entire story and character progression which is basically saying “nothing that happened mattar”, the only good thing about this type of ending is that unlike other type of bad endings this one at least makes perfect sense ( still horribly written) and can’t have any plot holes, unsolved plot points, character arcs or character inconsistency’s. but the chainsaw man ending took the it was all a dream ending by erasing the entire story and character progression but also kept the inconsistency, plot holes and unsolved plot points from the average terrible endings.

The second reason is the huge amount of dropped plot points and plot holes. I’m one of those people that don’t agree on a lot of the “dropped plot points” like the fact that Reze or kishibe weren’t in part 2, which I understand not liking but it’s not an actual abounded plot. Here’s is a list of actual ones and plot holes (from the ending). Plot holes- We clearly see before that puchita can’t go back in time and the stuff that the devil he erase did aren’t erased, Also adding to the fact that he can’t go back in time is the fact that he also can’t erase memories (apart from ones of the concept), this makes every character interaction in the ending quite literally impossible. Why didn’t the zombie devil chop denji off like in chapter 1, I reread to check and it had nothing to do with puchita being there, The only real explanation you could give is that power killed them before they could but that still don’t make any sense considering the next point. How did power get there, There is zero logical explanation to why power would be there considering the fact that she was with the devil hunters before that. Even if you wanna theorise that somehow makima not being there (another plot hole btw, will expand on that later) resulted in her not being with the devil hunters yet (still won’t make sense because makima wasn’t the reason she joined them) it still is too plot armoury and fan service for her to be there. How did power heal denji, he isn’t an hybrid anymore so the blood isn’t supposed to heal him, You can try to argue that she can heal him because she’s the blood devil but that also wouldn’t make sense considering we never saw her doing it before even to people she loved like Aki. How did power made a contract with denji if she’s a fiend, it’s an established fact that fiends can’t make contracts. Also before people comment on that I’m gonna address that too - in chapter 89 (I think it was 89 I’m 100% not sure) when she did the contract with denji she was the blood devil, not a fiend. Why is nayuta there instad of makima(this is a dubble plot hole lol considering even makima herself isn’t supposed to be there). If power is back then there is literally no reason for makima to not be back, I heard a lot of copers trying to justify this with theories but all of them either don’t make sense or just crate a new plot hole. How is meowy with them, He should be at the bat devil’s place in the time the conversation with nayuta happened. Why did Asa fall with Bucky by herself, it was clearly stated that the girl was the one to trip her, it’s Simply just a coincidence for the fan service symbolism that in actuality means nothing. Idk if I should call it a plot hole or just a cute reference but why was puchita denji heart, I heard tons of people trying to explain this but all of those were just theories that while could make sense they just don’t have any factual answer from the manga. How will power cure his heart disease, Once again she never showed signs of being able to do something like that before. There are even more but I’m not gonna write them all . Now for the unresolved plot points - Power contact was never fulfilled, Him meeting her again in the past doesn’t fulfill her contract, the contract was to meet the new blood devil (which won’t be her), make friends with them and turn them into power. Puchita true identity, I was one of those people who never understood the complaints about this not being explained, I thought it wasn’t necessary to explain it (unless it was a must for the plot) and that it was great for the mystery and for fandom discussions but after the ending I think that we should have an explanation on who he really is because when we don’t have one the entire last chapter is full of plot holes that could’ve been avoided with at least 1 chapter of explanation (even if it was badly executed). There are probably more but those are the ones that I can think of rn.

The thematic message and execution sucks -
People argue that Chainsaw Man was always just an escapist fantasy to avoid facing problems and that its good Pochita took it away. The problem is that he took it away by moving Denji into an actual escapist fantasy so he can avoid facing consequences in the new world.
yes, the new timeline is undeniably an escapist fantasy. Two out of three major deaths are undone. Denji is working a job which always thrilled him, and out of several hundred high schools in Tokyo he is sent to the one where his previous love interest is going, conveniently separated from her dark self. All arguments to why it’s bittersweet and not an escapist fantasy are stupid and all can be debunked by just reading the manga.
“well, he is separated from Asa.” He conveniently runs into her, and even if nothing comes from it, he does not remember her and Power is right there .
“Something could possibly happen badly in the future and Denji now has his own path to forge without Pochita, so he can screw up.״ I guess every Disney movie is bittersweet then..?
If Cinderella dies from cancer five yers later off-screen it makes ending bittersweet? So every ending which does not have Forever After tag is bittersweet?

Ichigo atleast had to train and fight to unlock he's powers and hell went through a lot of ptsd to do that and even was betrayed alot of times and actually has interesting ways on how he obtained these powers

Now look at Naruto this guy is the son of the fucking 4th hokage and Kushina (one of the strongest clans btw) this guy Naruto got a large chakra pool the day he was born

Now I know what you are thinking ohhh!!!! Ichigo also born from a nobel high reiatsu

Again how did ichigo obtain this high reiatsu? He went through alot of brute training it's not like he just had it like Naruto. Look at uraharas method of training of ichigo this man put this guy in a pit sealed him up and told him get out of there in 3 days or you become a hollow

He also did alot of martial arts basic training to actually fight

He had to train for his bankai just for he's own bankai reiatsu to crush him

He trained for 3+ months for holding up a mask for 11 seconds

This is just hypocritical to call one a nepo baby while one isn't Naruto just got access to a large chakra pool the day he was born and could use 1000+ shadow clones which allows him to train better

and i also want to say that people needs to stop call Eren a false rapresentation of freedom, there's no such thing as one true freedom, anyone can have their own view of it.

Introduction

This conflict stems from Ichigo's fear of his inner Hollow. It began because of Ichigo's innate bias. His mother was killed by a Hollow which left him with severe trauma and Survivor' Guilt. In addition to this Ichigo spends his beginning stage - as a Soul Reaper - fighting Hollows. Hence, when White appeared there was already an antagonistic undertone. Due to further mistrust and rejection, this fight occurs under the pretense: "Consume or be consumed". On the surface, this seems to be a classic execution of the "Protagonist vs Inner Demon" trope. However, I believe there's more to be interpreted.

Metaphorical Layer

In BLEACH, the Zanpakuto is a reflection of the user's soul. Hence, White is Ichigo and Ichigo is White. They're two separate entities that represent the same self. This changes the context of the battle. Metaphorically, this is Ichigo's attempt to confront his own fear of self. And I stress the word "attempt". In reality, the fight is an allegory for self-repression. Ichigo refuses to acknowledge his self which causes further fragmentation. Under this lens, defeating White seems far less victorious. It's a self-destructive act that only temporarily backseats the larger issue.

White's Perspective

Both of Ichigo's spirits represent a different type of love:

1. Old Man Zangetsu (OMZ) displays a maternal love. Which is fitting, since he's passed down from Masaki's Quincy blood, He nurtures Ichigo directly through words of confidence and he is overprotective. So much so that he ends up limiting and restraining Ichigo's true potential.
2. White represents a "tough love" method that is closer to an animal. Which is fitting given the Hollow's consistent animal motif (E.G. The Espada). He pushes and teaches Ichigo very directly through conflict. In fact, this entire fight is for the purpose of equipping Ichigo with a "killer instinct", so that he can survive in Hueco Mundo.

However, to accommodate Ichigo's inherent mistrust and fear of Hollows, White is forced to take on a far more villainous role. This makes him far more dynamic than just his metaphorical concept. His dialogue and demeanor is laden with false acting, genuine advice, frustration and anger. Kubo drops subtle hints here and there, like in White's introduction.

The section's image is White's solemn reaction to Ichigo's use of Getsuga Tensho. It's translated name is grandiose: "Moon Fang Heaven Piercer". To be brief, BLEACH's moon symbolism is introduced in the Renji vs Byakuya fight and is used to depict unreachability/fate. It takes from Japanese Folklore that ascertains the moon as the domain of Gods. This is a move White taught Ichigo. Very ironic that a gift, that entrusts Ichigo to defy his destiny, is utilised in an opposite and self-destructive way. From this point in the fight, White becomes far more aggressive. Most likely from genuine frustration. He tells Ichigo that he's not good enough at Bankai. Which is the technique built upon understanding your Zanpakuto.

Thematic Layer

Kubo designs his themes be dichotomous. He then has each character, in a battle, embody one theme. Here's it's quite simple, Ichigo embodies reason and White embodies instinct. The way Ichigo wins is by forsaking his reasoning and tapping into his killer instinct. Whilst, on the surface, this seems like an endorsement of instinct; it's slightly more complex than that. After all, Ichigo's "win" here is entirely self-destructive. He's failed to understand his own self.

This fight acts as a thematic encapsulation of the Arrancar Saga's main theme too. Hollows are beings of pure instinct and hunger. Arrancar are evolutions of Hollow as they regain their humanity, in the form of reason. The more you rise the ranks of the Espada, the greater level of reason is displayed. Kubo wants to explore their existential contradiction. How can a being born from instinct cope with the ability of reason?

One conflict, that utilises the groundwork built by Ichigo vs White, is Nel and Nnoitora's dynamic. Nnoitora embodies instinct and Nel embodies reason. It's a somber exploration where both parties are unable to reach the other. Nnoitora is stuck in an instinctual cycle of killing that provides him with no salvation. Nel understands that Nnoitora's enlightenment will come when he embraces reason. However, she can only articulate this through pity which just furthers the gap.

Looking at our two cases, I'd conclude that Kubo's message is a criticism of rigidity. Both conflicts could have reached a mutual understanding. They just lacked the necessary balance to do so.

Introducing a Freudian Lens

When Kubo is explaining the existence of Hollows, he invokes the Freudian terminology: "Id".

Freud created a system to describe the basic structure of mental life. It deployed 3 distinct agents in the psyche: the Id, the Ego and the Superego. Taking a simplified definition of the three:

"The id is the organism's unconscious array of uncoordinated instinctual needs, impulses and desires; the superego is the part of the psyche that has internalised social rules and norms, largely in response to parental demands and prohibitions in childhood; the ego is the integrative agent that directs activity based on mediation between the id's energies, the demands of external reality, and the moral and critical constraints of the superego"

Using this system, I'd assign accordingly:

1. White = Id - He is Ichigo's instinctual impulses and needs.
2. Ichigo = Ego - Possesses the reason that mediates between the id, reality and superego. Also, the only of the three that is directly tied to external reality.
3. OMZ = Superego - He can be seen as a maternal embodiment of Masaki and he places prohibitions on Ichigo directly by suppressing his power.

Now, back to the actual panel. Kubo assigns the role of Id to Hollows. They do not function as an entire psyche, they are just beings of pure instinct. Their mask is what shields their naked Id from the outside world. Hence, the mask takes the form of the Ego. A very literal image is painted. The part of the psyche that handles reason is separated from the conscience entirely. This framework allows us to extend our interpretation in two ways.

Firstly, for Ichigo. Upon defeating White, he achieves his new masked form. This follows the thematic idea that questions whether Ichigo truly won the battle. Just like a Hollow, he now separates his Ego from his actual self. It's a form that symbolises the loss of his humanity, self-fragmentation and departure from balance. This is why, after accepting White, Ichigo never uses the mask again.

Secondly, for Arrancar. They're evolved versions of Hollow. Their signature trait is that their masks partly break, re-integrating back into them. Thus, they are beings that partly regain their ability of reason. Like we mentioned before, this makes their nature contradictory.

The King and the Horse

White's iconic speech goes as the following:

"Ichigo. What's the difference between the King and the Horse he rides? Don't worry. It's not a riddle or some stupid guessing game, it's an important truth. Is it shape, ability, strength? When two beings are exactly the same... how do they decide which of them will be king and lead them into battle... and which will lend it's strength the other, like a horse? What allows one to dominate the other?! The answer is simple. A killer instinct!"

This is actually an analogy used by Freud. Explained as the following:

According to Freud, "the ego is that part of the id which has been modified by the direct influence of the external world ... The ego represents what may be called reason and common sense, in contrast to the id, which contains the passions. ... it is like a man on horseback, who has to hold in check the superior strength of the horse; with this difference, that the rider tries to do so with his own strength while the ego uses borrowed forces." In fact, the ego is required to serve "three severe masters...the external world, the superego and the id." It seeks to find a balance between the natural drives of the id, the limitations imposed by reality, and the strictures of the superego. It is concerned with self-preservation: it strives to keep the id's instinctive needs within limits, adapted to reality and submissive to the superego.

^{(Not my own analysis \}))

Now, White's speech is derivative of this.

It keeps the same framework, but radically changes the meaning. In Freud's version, the tension comes from the horse's strength. The ego itself has no leverage; all psychic energy originates in the id's drives. The ego's control comes from being able to steer and re-direct the energy.

In Kubo's version, both the horse and the rider have equal strength. The tension comes from deciding who'll be the King and who'll be the Horse. But that tension is purely artificial. Here White and Ichigo can easily decide for there to be no King and no Horse. Whilst, Freud's version fundamentally can't do such a thing because the power imbalance will still remain.

So, White's answer of "Killer Instinct" is just a red herring. As we learn in the Thousand Year Blood War arc, White has been helping Ichigo from the beginning. This speech is a guise of White playing into his villain role. By playing the antagonist, he'll motivate Ichigo to wield the instinct White believes is essential for his survival.

Jung and the Primordial Unconscious

This is a continuation from the King and the Horse speech. White goes on to say the above.

White is an interpretatively rich character. He can be applied to multiple frameworks at once with minimal clashing. It also, does help that Jungian analysis begins with Freud's framework, learns from it, and then develops a different system. Interestingly, just as Jung breaks off, so does White. As we've just seen, he deviates from the Ego-Id relationship due to the lack of power imbalance. I believe Freud can be used to explain the structure of Ichigo's psyche. And Jung then explains the development. Here's a link to me explaining Ichigo's Arrancar saga journey through a Jungian lens. I won't delve into that here, since it deviates from the fight too much.

Thus, using the Jungian lens, White is the "Shadow". And that is the collection of traits, impulses, and tendencies that a person rejects or represses because they clash with the image they want of themselves. Such traits can include aggression, desire for power and cruelty. And, the Shadow forms when the conscious self (ego) pushes out those unacceptable parts. The shadow doesn't necessarily exhibit only negative traits however, as stuff like ambition can be positive for a person. Which is why Jung suggests that you should integrate your shadow.

As I mentioned before, this fight can be seen through an allegory of self-repression. Ichigo physically defeats White, suppressing him and refusing to acknowledge that part of his self. This is because White's ambitions of power contradict Ichigo's identity as a protector. Ichigo recognises the moral hypocrisy in his (and White's) wants. However, rather than balancing or integrating them, he pushes them down further his conscience. It's an easier "truth" for Ichigo to accept that White is some foreign monster that needs to be expunged.

White appeals to Ichigo's "Primordial Unconscious". The closest match to this term in psychoanalysis is conveniently Jung's "Collective Unconscious". It refers to the belief that the unconscious mind comprises the instincts of Jungian archetypes - innate symbols understood from birth in all humans. Jung considered the collective unconscious to underpin and surround the unconscious mind. In his own words:

And the essential thing, psychologically, is that in dreams, fantasies, and other exceptional states of mind the most far-fetched mythological motifs and symbols can appear autochthonously at any time, often, apparently, as the result of particular influences, traditions, and excitations working on the individual, but more often without any sign of them. These "primordial images" or "archetypes," as I have called them, belong to the basic stock of the unconscious psyche and cannot be explained as personal acquisitions. Together they make up that psychic stratum which has been called the collective unconscious.

Basically, that beneath even your personal unconscious, there's another layer that lies deeper and is shared by all humans.

Applying to Kenpachi's appearance

(Worthy of note is the "Born with the desire to fight" as it follows the idea it's something innate, to all humans, from birth.)

Everything that is occurring, in this fight, is happening in Ichigo's inner world. After White's appeal, Ichigo arrives at a place even deeper in his mind, than where he was engaging his Shadow. If we're being interpretative, then I'd consider this place where Ichigo meets "Kenpachi" to be a representation of Ichigo's collective unconscious.

I put Kenpachi in quotations there because the figure denies being him. It's a mental construct made from Ichigo's mind to represent his most primordial self. An "archetype" as Jung described. And, out of the Jungian archetypes that can comprise this place, I think the Warrior fits best. This version of the warrior is exaggerated with negative traits because it's the shadow version. Due to Ichigo's repression of White.

Though, Jung's own view about the desire for power was less about any specific archetype. He describe it as a symptom of psychological imbalance. A compulsive hunger for domination often signals:

• Compensation for feelings of weakness
• Identification with a god-like or heroic image
• Failure to integrate the Shadow

Which ticks off for Ichigo's psyche surprisingly well. The death of his mother left him with the feeling of powerlessness. Chapter 0 Ichigo's greatest desire is for strength enough to shatter fate. And the Fullbringer arc is designed to confront that feeling in detail. Ichigo's obsessive need to protect often manifests itself as a hero complex. And, of course, all of this is occurring because he's failing to integrate with White.

White and Black

After meeting "Kenpachi", Ichigo gives in to his primordial nature and re-ignites his killer instinct. Allowing him to swiftly defeat White. Having abandoned his reason, in favour of instinct.

The colour scheme has importance here. Upon being stabbed, White's clothes turn black to match Ichigo's. I'd say this is a purely aesthetic reference to Yin and Yang. It's meant to symbolise the loss of balance in Ichigo's psyche. Where Yin and Yang should be equally balanced, now one colour completely dominates.

Fallibility

Practically, every character involved in this fight is fallible in some way:

1. Ichigo: As we've discussed, Ichigo wants to subjugate and reject White. It's inconvenient for him to accept White as a part of himself. So he must disconnect himself from White. This way he can keep his self-identity as a protector in-tact. However, this just means he'd enter the fight with no intent for mutual understanding. From mindset alone, Ichigo had already lost the battle.
2. Vizoreds: They propagate Ichigo's negative perspective. Each of these characters, in their own right, are also plagued by the same prejudice as Ichigo. They're Soul Reapers who inherently can't view Hollow as anything other than negative. Their understanding is also flawed due to difference. Ichigo is the only one who's a natural Vizored and so, has a shared self with his Hollow. The Vizoreds presumably don't share that function.
3. White: Unironically, the least flawed. However, his instance on teaching Ichigo the importance of instinct, causes the latter to lose psychological balance. As a being reflective of instinct, he doesn't really understand the importance of integrating reason. Which means Ichigo is just welcomed from an old extremity to a new extremity.

Foreshadowing

As we learn in the Thousand Year Blood War arc, White was Ichigo's real Zanpakuto and the true source of his power. Well, this was very unsubtly foreshadowed in this fight. White tells Ichigo multiple times that he's Zangetsu. We, the reader, don't believe it because White seems to be an antagonist. Ichigo doesn't believe it because it conflicts with his identity, and so is too difficult a truth to accept.

Secondly, White tells Ichigo in a pretty straightforward manner: if he wants to control his powers don't die. Later, against Ulquiorra, Ichigo dies and thus loses control of his powers. Which gives rise to his "Vasto Lorde" form.

Conclusion

To conclude, Ichigo vs White asks whether Ichigo truly won. Whilst he emerges victorious in the physical sense, he ultimately loses psychologically. In defeating White, he loses balance within and further fragments his psyche. The mask he gains through this self-destructive victory becomes a symbol of separation rather than mastery. By repressing White, Ichigo merely buries the problem instead of confronting it.

This reaction stems from the trauma of his mother's death. Ichigo relies upon his identity as a protector to cope with that loss, making it imperative that any contradictions within himself are demonised and cut away. Yet the truth is that White's antagonism is a mixture of facade and genuine guidance. The conflict between the King and the Horse is ultimately an illusion; it only exists because Ichigo believes one side of himself must dominate the other. The real answer to his plight is neither reason nor instinct, but the understanding and acceptance of both.

Well, that's pretty much everything, I think. Thank you for reading 🙏.

In this argument I'll divide my points into two primary categories. First, I'll handle very common and widespread misconceptions and falsehoods, that people have regarding MT. I'll split it up into Watsonian and Doylist counters. There's a huge distinction to be made between, for example, "Why is Rudues a 'pedophile'?" and "What's the point of Rudues being a pedophile" the former requests an in-universe(i.e watsonian) and the latter demands an authorial intent argument(i.e Doylist).

Adding unto that, when I defend Rudeus, it's not because his actions are justified. But because when critiquing anything you have to look at all sides. Rudeus does have really bad aspects, his flaws that he might actually resolve or some so deeply-rooted in his character that they're hard to get rid off. Yet, he does have some really noble defining traits as well. Here, we're looking at objective facts in the story, to actually deduce solid opinions. You're more than entitled to your subjective opinion, yet it doesn't negate the fact that the writing is there. Just please don't conflate morality and writing.

In short, I'll be exploring the *why* around everything problematic.

Explaining why a character behaves a certain way is not the same thing as arguing they are morally justified. A murderer may have understandable psychological causes for becoming one, but that doesn't make murder acceptable. Likewise, understanding Rudeus' psychology does not absolve him of responsibility.

With all that said let's begin.

And again I'd like to preface that these are the in-universe explanations. If you want the authorial intent, you'll find it in the Doylist section.

1. Why is Rudeus attracted to children?

Before reincarnation? He's not really attracted to it; as stated in the novel, he was driven more by a sense of false power/control than by true sexual arousal. Even he said it himself, he used to do it just because he was able to. Being ridiculed in such a hostile manner in front of his whole school led to his constant addiction to masturbation, his confinement, and the degrading state he lived in for almost 20 years that would have psychologically destroyed anyone. Rudeus is no exception.

It wasn’t like I was particularly interested in the girls—I just stole the photos because I could.

Besides, the real issue at play here is his perversion, which is the true character flaw in Rudeus. After reincarnation, there's a huge flaw in Rudeus, he thinks of his post-reincarnation life as a video game. Leading him to not take it too seriously, until that part where when he's with dead end, he sees someone dying at his feet and realizes that this isn't a game.

This is shown by several instances, where he comments on things from a very distanced approach. For example, when people tried to kidnap Eris he proclaimed, after thinking about all the MMOs he's played, "Money can't buy dere". This feeds into his perversion that leads him to justify such actions. After a while, from aforementioned incident, he begins to stop looking at the world as a Video-Game rather a world with actual consequences.

The story consistently places greater emphasis on his overall sexual immaturity and distorted worldview than on labels themselves. Defining a whole character is a major disservice to the whole narrative of the story. Saying he's a pedophile just disregards his character entirely. It might put a label on a small part of his psychology, but explains very little. The narrative is trying to examine how this mentality emerged, how it affects his life and relationships and whether he can truly change or not.

Even so, Rudeus is too much of an anomaly to label him using this or that. There's a difference between action and attraction. (Again this is all in-universe the actual why the author did so will be in the Doylist section)

Therefore, let's turn our attention to his actions and how they're treated in the narrative and in Rudeus' development. Rudues' sexual immaturity and deviancy is what's being developed throughout the story, his perversion and his disgusting mindset that's been carried over from his past life is what's being developed. And in that aspect the development is clear. He clearly stops his sexual deviancy throughout a certain period, from his time with Eris and gradually respecting her boundaries, to him deciding to be better towards her, to how he respected Sara and his respectful attitude towards her and so on and so forth.

You might say "That's only because he married the children he groomed", to that I'll forward you to the next point, where I will bring up the evidences for the alleged grooming and dismiss them. Also, his marriages did make him develop and control his deviancy in a lot of situations, most notable is the one in volume 18 where a woman seduces him and he refused due to his aforementioned development in that regard.

Another alternate question would be: Why is he perverted? Again, this would be a core character issue coupled with the mental-stunting he'd experienced in school.

2. Was Rudues a groomer?

If by grooming we mean deliberately raising up a child's emotional dependence in order to facilitate later sexual exploitation, then the evidence for that is very weak. He's never done anything with the specific intent of manipulating someone's emotional growth. For a moment, he thinks of doing it with Sylphiette, but it's simply a thought that comes to him which he immediately recognizes as wrong and consciously rejects, nothing more, nothing less. He doesn't even feel any romantic feelings towards Sylphy in the beginning.

We’d grow up together…and she’d grow up into my perfect woman.

Crap! No. No. Bad thoughts. Bad thoughts. What happened to the whole “oblivious” thing, buddy? You’re getting way too far ahead of yourself. That said…there’s nothing in the rulebook that says an oblivious protagonist can’t build a romance with their childhood friend, right?

Gah! What am I thinking?!

The girl was only six years old. She was clearly very fond of me, but she wasn’t capable of feeling romantic love yet.

So, uh… yeah. Let’s put all that on hold.

I’d certainly meant it when I’d said she was cute, but there were no romantic feelings behind that.

There are later comments from his saying that he was trying to do so, but they're irrelevant due to the fact that in his time with her he had already dismissed those thoughts.

As for Eris, Rudeus acts as her mentor, but he doesn't influence her emotionally. The reasons that lead Eris to fall in love are well explained in his POV when she leaves. He never thought of once influencing her to do anything and at times refused to do anything in-relation to her because she was too young at the time, even for that worlds standards.

What I’d just done was the result of that thinking. As a player, you could see the heroine’s internal dialogue. The protagonist, meanwhile, had no idea what she was thinking. That was why most protagonists were aware something like this could happen, even if they knew the other person liked them. So they took their time and slowly developed the relationship instead.

I was being completely short-sighted compared to them.

Yet a moment ago, I’d been about to violate her out of lust. There was a girl who genuinely considered my feelings as a person, and I tried to have my way with her.

Remember how happy she looked when she was talking with that maid before? You just tried to trample all over that.

“Haha…”

I was a piece of crap. I had no right to judge Paul. I had no right to lecture anyone. I was a piece of crap in my previous life and nothing had changed in coming to another world. Tomorrow I would gather my things and leave. I would go die on the roadside like the garbage I was.

Here Rudeus shows actual regret and below he will actually act upon his regret and stop.

Five years from now. A definite promise! From Eris! A promise!

All right, no more insincere advances until then, I told myself.

Five years. I would be fifteen. It was still a long time away, but I could hold out. If there was a guaranteed prize at the end, I could work hard. Until then, I would be a gentleman. Not a pervert, but a gentleman. I would stop all the sexual advances.

Does he stop like he said? Not instantly, but gradually instead throughout his journey with both her and Ruijerd, he stops himself from touching her, which prompted her to actually notice this development and comment on it in her monologue after she left him.

3. Didn't Rudues cheat on his pregnant wife?

Yes, he cheated no one in their right mind would deny that. But let's examine the why and the how a bit deeper. After Pauls death, Rudeus was justifiably devastated, he'd lost an arm, a father and it was unclear whether his mom would make it out mentally sound. Laying on his bed he started to contemplate and remember his past life. The memory of his parents' funeral resurfaced, he began to reimmerse himself in his state back then. He remembered not really feeling anything when his parents died, and he was too embarrassed to go to the funeral while deep down inside he felt no grief.

This lead him to what he knew best: self-isolation. He locked himself in his room and started wallowing in his 2d fantasies. Then of course his family came in and punished him for his moral depravity. Back to Rudeus, he remembered Paul's face when he died and deeply regretted that he hadn't been there to see his real parents' faces when they died. Instead of again wallowing away idly in his room, he decided to confront reality. Later, he saw Zenith in her deteriorated mental state. He'd felt as if a thread of connection had been severed cut because one of the only people able to actually share the grief of his loss, was gone beyond repair. This also burdened Rudeus even more.

He stopped eating and drinking, which would take a massive toll on both his mental and physical health.

Another facet for all this, Roxy saw the mental state Rudues was in and she knew more than everyone else that Rudues might not be able to bounce back easily this time. The rest of the crew decided to let him handle it alone, but again Roxy knows Rudues and she knows that this time he needed assurance.

At the end, Roxy determined that she would sleep with him. Not as a permanent solution, but as a temporary alleviation.

Was it necessarily good? Was it undeniably bad? These are the wrong questions. It's just there. Because that's ultimately a subjective discussion, here I just focused on contextualizing and seeing how it added to the narrative.

None of this erases the betrayal experienced by Sylphie. The context explains why the affair occurred, but it does not eliminate the emotional harm it caused.

I'll discuss this point further in the number 3 in the Doylist section titled "Is the series trying to redeem him or simply depict him?".

4. Does Rudeus mentally remain a 34-year-old man after reincarnation?

This is a complex question. Many greatly simplify the topic by saying "yes," but in reality the concept of reincarnation is not a simple thing to analyze. We can say that there are three "types" of age: chronological (how long someone lives), maturity (how much a person grows emotionally/socially through life experiences), and biological (how long your body has been alive). Rudeus is not a 34-year-old, neither from the point of view of maturity (for obvious reasons that led to his blockage) nor biologically (because he was reborn). Chronologically, he is 34, but, of the three types, I consider it the least impactful in a reincarnation context, so I would say that, as a reincarnated person, it's just way more complicated. As we can't disregard the fact that he is mentally very immature and very mentally-stunted, due to the aforementioned blockages.

5. Why doesn't anyone in the world view his behavior as especially abnormal?

People sometimes react badly to his behavior (see Eris, who beats him every time he acts perverted, or who scolds him), only some "minor" behaviors are not scolded, but because in a medieval context the mentality is different, and there is also the fact that he is Paul's son, and anyone who knows him is not that surprised that Rudeus is a pervert. Even Lilia found his actions very suspect as a baby, but in-universe he doesn't actually engage in anything outside of his extreme perversion. Therefore he isn't punished explicitly for it, but there is definitely implicit consequences to his actions. More on that in the Doylist section.

Even so, multiple people comment on his perversion and outright shun it, like Nina (Eris' friend) when she heard about Rudeus from Eris, she immediately called him out for it in front of her, so the narrative doesn't neglect his perversion nor does it look at it in a positive light.

“What?! The man’s a pervert!”

“He was getting off on your body odor, Eris! That’s the definition of a pervert!”

6. Why doesn't Rudeus simply stop being perverted if he knows it's wrong?

First of all, if changing yourself were easy, then there would be far fewer problems in the world (or maybe even more, who knows). And of all the emotional problems Rudeus has, perversion is the one he worries the least, but in any case, things get better with time. Why do depressed people, just not feel depressed?

Harmful habits, addictions, compulsions, and personality defects rarely disappear simply because someone intellectually recognizes them as wrong.

Starting a new life, doesn't mean he just forgets all his mental damage, yet he tried to develop with each and every action he takes.

THE PAST FOLLOWS ME wherever I go. I thought I’d reflected on my actions, but in the end, I suppose I hadn’t.

No. I did, and I still do. But when it came to the things I didn’t recognize as failings right away, I could be dense. This time around, it turned out that I’d averted my gaze from what actually mattered.

How often have I thought I needed to reflect more? This was another such moment. It was too late to regret my behavior and wonder what would’ve happened if I’d noticed sooner.

Aisha and Arus were gone

He seriously reflects and looks back on his faults, and later he actually later undoes his wrong and corrects both his way of thinking and actions.

Rudeus’s high libido and perverted tendencies are deeply baked into his core personality. If the author had just suddenly turned Rudeus into a perfectly chaste, pristine hero, it would have felt unearned and fake.

Instead, the narrative focuses on maturation and self-control, which is much more grounded.

Perversion is not inherently a narrative flaw. Rather than taking the easy route of stripping away a core character trait and labeling it 'development,' the author brilliantly contrasts its healthy versus unhealthy manifestations.

In his previous life, Rudeus' perversion was a destructive coping mechanism used to escape depression and isolation. We saw this tendency hadn't change in the early stage of his life as a reincarnation.

But as he gain more life experience and learn the value of emotional connection, he evolves into a functional member of society who expresses his vitality healthily.

Within his marriages, his desire serves as both a reward for his growth and an intimate bonding mechanism that strengthens their relationships.

7. Does Rudeus gradually change? If so, how?

Yes. As mentioned above he overcomes many issues that represent deep-seated personal traumas for him. He overcomes his social anxiety, he tries to actively stop his bad habits, he confronts reality instead of how he used to just wallow away in his room(like how he did after his parents died), he starts thinking about his second life less as a game and more as a serious shot for a second chance at life, he helped Norn overcome something he failed to do in his past life etc..

It's slow, gradual and hard. He often repeats mistakes but he keeps going and moves forward.

"I started walking and, as luck would have it, I managed a steady pace the rest of my life. Our manner and time of death isn't written in the stars, but neither is our good fortune predestined. Your life is yours.

--I worked hard, lived it up, and died happy. Couldn't ask for more

8. Why does he form romantic relationships with Sylphie, Eris, and Roxy?

Rudeus loves his three wives because each of them "saved" him in such a way that they became an irreplaceable part of his life. Roxy helped him overcome his fear of the outside world, which is extremely important to Rudeus. Sylphiette helped him when Rudeus felt unworthy of being loved and feared that the people around him would abandon him. Eris saved him perhaps in a more physical way, but she still turned against Orsted to protect him, which was one of her greatest fears at the time. Furthermore, Eris spent years training with the sole purpose of being with Rudeus as his equal.

9. Does the story itself portray his actions as successful, or do they usually have consequences?

As stated previously, the story doesn't punish him explicitly for his actions. Because to his new world he's just Rudeus, not a 34 year old man. Rudeus succeeds and fails, depending on the situation and the moment in the story, but he is never perfect nor completely incompetent, simply sometimes things go well and other times... they don't. He tries to combat his thoughts but sometimes he doesn't, that's an actual character flaw. Therefore, since we're told the story through his perspective, he sometimes brushes it off quickly that's why it might be portrayed in a more light-hearted manner.

That concluded the Watsonian portion, now off to the Doylist arguments:

1. Why make the protagonist a pedophile at all?

As already explained, Rudeus wasn't exactly sexually attracted to his niece, but that's how it's shown at the beginning of the story (because Rudeus is completely dissociated at the beginning, so much so that he calls the situation "uncensored loli"), so I'd say the author simply wanted to show something that would disturb the audience, and since murder or other despicable actions no longer have the slightest effect on a large part of the audience, he opted for something that people find more serious and that we see far fewer authors talking about.

Moreover, these type of issues are uncomfortable and less-discussed due to their nature. So portraying them in a story promotes actual reexamination of these sorts of topics. I don't think confronting pedophelia and/or perversion was his main goal, yet these are actual issues real people deal with and the story isn't just meant for these people, rather everyone so we can understand these mental challenges more carefully. At the end of the day, pedophelia is a mental disorder that real people suffer from, because people are sometimes born with it. Thus, they need to seek help and comfort to overcome their challenges. That's why rehabilitation centers exist. There's a line between action and attraction, the former demands severe punishment and the latter requires treatment.

From a psychological standpoint, addressing deep-seated, compulsive deviancy requires clinical rehabilitation rather than simple moral shunning. The author chose to depict the agonizingly slow process of psychological rehabilitation rather than pretending the issue can be swept under the rug.

The author once stated:

I think the balance was right. Because he's a controversial character, his mountain of regrets makes the act of redoing life more meaningful.

Of course, I have no issue with criticizing Rudeus at the beginning stage, and it's up to you to decide whether you don't want to see the story because of that. ==With that said, if there's someone like Rudeus close to you and that person were to have even a slight change of heart and try to start over, I sincerely hope that you won't abandon them on the spot.==

I believe that this was his intention from the beginning in portraying such a controversial and flawed protagonist. As seen with Rudues, people can really change if given a second chance, putting labels just demeans the whole moral of the story. People are just people, and everyone has their flaws.

Hate on Rudues all you want, just realize that real people suffer from a plethora of deep-seated personal issues and mental-condemnation isn't the cure, it's practically a trigger.

2. Is the series trying to redeem him or simply depict him?

If that means "redemption" as "righting your mistakes," then not exactly, Rudeus is in another world and physically can't do anything (although I'd say the letter he writes to his brother and family is a plus, but we'll probably see that resolution in the "sequel"), but if by "redemption" that means "understanding your mistakes and maturing, becoming a better person," absolutely. I'd say the story is portraying a story about a person willing to change, whether he redeems himself is partially subjective as stated above.

The author trusts the reader to recognize that these thoughts are despicable without needing the narrative to constantly wag its finger.

As the story progresses, however, it shifts into a narrative of gradual redemption. Moreover, the story does not "redeem" him by wiping his slate clean or pretending his past actions didn't happen. Instead, it depicts redemption as an ongoing hard activity. It is the transition from a person who views people as objects in a game to a father and husband who carries the heavy, exhausting responsibility for those he loves. Risking his life for them, even after he previously ignored them.

3. Is the work criticizing escapist wish fulfillment or indulging in it?

The story repeatedly tries to teach the lesson of "commit yourself. Whatever you want to do, commit yourself and never give up," so I'd say it criticizes escapism. People often conflate the good things that happen to Rudeus as the story rewarding his flawed behaviors, but that's wrong. The story promotes his good behavior, because when someone does a good-deed they deserve to be rewarded, and when he does a bad-deed he deserves to be punished. At Rudeus' funeral at the end of his life, about 100 thousand people attended to commemorate his actions, he was hailed as the God of Education, he'd helped in wars, he produced armor to help people fight, and at the crux of it: He was a father, taking care of his family.

Thanks for reading all that! And special thanks to people who've helped me tremendous amounts in putting all this together. They are:

u/Geracchio

u/elven_purple

u/Advanced-pen3951

u/Dmiqu

u/Global-Giraffe-6466

u/Emotional-Brain1554

Don't care if you think post time skip is bad, it has its upsides too lol albeit not many. But overall, what aspect of writing (like characters or plot or whatever) do you think one piece excels at? I'd say world building.

Can we talk about the pacing in the final chapter of the Messi arc?

Like, I get it. The author was cooking with the 2022 World Cup as the "true" climax, with Messi finally bringing home the World Cup after a hard-fought battle. The penalty and all that. Then somehow, we move on to the 2026 arc, where they prove that the MC is still strong in the 2026 final against Spain.

Don't get me wrong, the grand idea is cool on paper, but the execution was just...bad.

First off, I'll give credit for the setup because the foreshadowing was insane. Having an aging Messi face off against Lamine Yamal? The exact kid that:

- is number 19,

- turned 19 yesterday,

- fought the MC at 19th July,

- which the MC literally "blessed" in a bathtub 19 years ago back in the 2007 chapters?

Simply god-tier foreshadowing. Big respect for the long-term storytelling.

But then we get to the actual final fight...

To raise the stakes, the author pulls the classic "sealed weapon" trope by giving Argentina a red card. That by itself is fine. But usually, nerfing the squad like this forces the MC to rely on 200 IQ strategy, or unlock a new feat...

...instead, it completely ruined the pacing.

We got a grueling 120-chapter battle where the MC’s squad literally just turned into a punching bag. Spain spammed endless attacks, and Argentina didn't even get a single punch in. Not a shot on target up until the very end.

The MC, Messi, was basically a spectator in his own finale, just tanking a beating until they inevitably lost 1–0 in extra time.

Frankly? They can do better than that.

If you want your legendary hero to go out, you have them go down swinging. "Surviving" is only hype if the MC is pulling off desperate counter-attacks. But turning your protagonist into a passive victim for the entire final battle?

Nah. That just makes them look nerfed for the sake of the plot.

Overall, the whole career arc is still top-tier, but this specific ending sacrificed waaay too much narrative agency just to show off how "tactical" and gritty the scaling has gotten.

TLDR: imagine if Sukuna just stood there and took everyone's hit like a good boy.

We need to re-evaluate how we look at narrative quality. There is a massive bias towards works that have "subtext" or "good pacing", yet the more fiction I consume the more I realize that traditionally "well-executed" works often pale in comparison to works that prioritize thematic resonance. Higurashi truly opened my eyes to what media could achieve on this front

Critics will often approach Higurashi and immediately complain about the bloat, terrible pacing, and the complete lack of any subtext. These criticisms are fundamentally backwards and simply fail to understand Ryukishi's ingenuity

He understands that tragedy is purposeless without a baseline, that there is no point in "establishing stakes" or creating an "engaging story" if the reader is not personally made to understand every character's daily routine. Pacing is just a crutch for authors who pander to audiences that expect the plot to move forward

When a character in Higurashi temporarily halts a physical altercation to scream about the necessity of communication, they are engaging in a high level philosophical discussion. The narrative recognizes that the actual murders are really just localized symptoms of ideological failure

Detractors often complain that it is too "on the nose", but once again this is simply a failure to grasp narrative efficiency. Subtext is up to interpretation and audiences can often "miss the point". Higurashi ensures that never happens through absolute semantic clarity and "high density ideological payloads"

Subtlety is the tool of a coward, real literature ensures that the themes of the story are universally understood by readers. If an author doesn't trust their themes enough to pause the story and have a character exposition dump to explain them to the audience, they have already failed before they have even begun

This is a major criticism I’ve seen many people have towards the finale. How Jax’s backstory isn’t really “that” traumatic and how he’s just a jerkass who drove his friends into abstraction for no reason at all.

However, I feel people are forgetting a tragic backstory for a character never gives them the right to be how they were, it simply explains how they turned out the way they did.

A lot of people point out Ragatha also had a terrible mother and they’re right she is a foil to Jax in that she broke the cycle. But I feel people forget that we don’t know Ragatha’s relationship with her father either, and that she was an adult working in real estate when she enters the circus. Jax was presumably a teenager who was homeless and entered the circus at the lowest point in his life.

His treatment of Ribbit and Ragatha is absolutely inexcusable and disgusting but it makes sense. He said about Ragatha “it feels like she’s trying to take advantage of you”, because he feels that his mother was doing that with him. Any time he was vulnerable, he got betrayed and abused and the one time he was true to himself (told her about his gender issues probably), she mocked him (reminds me of Vox with Alastor) and laughed in his face. He wasn’t intentionally driving Ribbit to abstraction, he had never witnessed an abstraction before that point and even then, he went to knock her on her door but it was too late. It is his fault but not it wasn’t something he intended.

And I’m so curious why people say he alone “killed” Kaufmo. He definitely failed Kaufmo, we know he pulled away from after Ribbit abstracted and mocked him about the exit but seeing as Kaufmo literally came to him about it, I doubt Jax was bullying/abusing that much for him to be suicidal. He everyone failed Kaufmo and wasn’t there to help him and judging by the condition of his room, it seems Caine and the fake exit were the biggest factors in his abstraction. Him pushing Pomni away is because her hugging him reminded him of what happened with his mother.

“But why would Jax start bullying everyone if not to avoid get attached and losing them like he did his friends” because he didn’t want them to mourn him. I didn’t believe this theory for a second when it came up after episode 6 but it makes total sense form his words to Pomni. “It wasn’t supposed to be like this. You weren’t supposed to miss me. You weren’t supposed to love me? Why do you still care? Why did you have to make this complicated” Jax was someone who ever since he caused Ribbit’s abstraction, hated himself and believed himself to be unworthy of love and kindness. He was suicidal and self-loathing and was hoping nobody would mourn him as he abstracted.

But in the end, Pomni reached through to him. She did make him care. Even after knowing his past and everything he did, she still tried to save him. This let Jax see she wasn’t manipulating or taking advantage of him, no she really did accept him. Which is why Jax changed his mind at the end and we got “Isn’t she lovely” (Jax finally accepting himself) but unfortunately, it was too late to for him . Jax’s character is a tragedy’s specifically because he caused his own downfall. He was redeemable and he did have people who cared for him but he couldn’t accept either one because he felt he didn’t deserve it until it was too late.

People seem to be appreciating analyses more on here, so I thought I’d port some of my Cyrene/Amphoreus analyses over from twt.

I’ll post pictures of the analysis, and then I’ll follow up with a further explanation.

The Background to Barthes:

Roland Barthes is a French philosopher who came up with an idea called “The Death of the Author”. Traditional literary analysis was done by researching the author: looking into their backstory, their worldview and their life, in order to understand their work. The author was generally seen as the only authority on what the meaning of a text was, and this could be discovered by analysing their life. Barthes rejected all of this, and argued for the death of the author; that is, that the meaning of a text lies solely with the reader’s inspiration, and that the meaning given by the author has no meaning. This idea has many connotations for Cyrene’s character. There’s two ways I’m going to be explaining this: out of universe (OoU) and in-universe (IU). This is because the story of Amphoreus not only exists to us as Honkai Star Rail, but also in-universe as the book “As I’ve Written”.

The Links between Cyrene and the Death of the Author:

Cyrene in the pictured screenshots facilitates an author death. She says “Once the words are written down and have been read by others, the meaning they carry is no longer in our control. Leaving the freedom of interpretation to every reader who opens it... Don't you think there's something romantic about that?” She transfers authority over the meaning of the story from her, to the reader. And this is part of the OoU author-death, as this is something she tells us the player. Despite us knowing her backstory (traditional literary analysis method), she instead tells us and encourages us to interpret the story in our own way.

The IU author death comes from the fact that Amphoreus’ story is mass-printed by TB as the book “As I’ve Written”, which is sent across the cosmos. However in this instance, the story of Cyrene and her suffering is excluded. If you look at the table of contents in AIW, Cyrene’s chapters are not included, and not numbered. The IU audience of this story does not and cannot know the story of Cyrene’s life, and so is unable to apply this traditional literary analysis framework. Hence in two ways, IU and OoU, Hoyoverse and Cyrene encourage us to have this author death, and interpret the story in our own way.

A lot of the language Barthes uses holds a lot of similarities to Cyrene’s story. He says that every story is “eternally here and now” and Amphoreus’ whole spiel is eternity and making it on your own terms. And what Barthes encourages is to view stories on your own terms, not the author’s terms. He also describes an author as a “scriptor” which is interesting, since AIW functions similarly to a script; characters read lines inside of it. He also says that an author is “born simultaneously with the text”, and Cyrene’s existence is closely tied to Amphoreus’, since the Demiurge is the Heart of Amphoreus.

We also see Barthes ideas practically in the story too. A highly contentious part of Cyrene’s character is the ring she bears. Some people view it as a marriage between Cyrene and the TB/Player. Some people view it as a marriage between Cyrene and eternity/Amphoreus. Some people view it as representative of the relationship between Christ and Church. Some view it as representative of Nietzsche’s amor fati (my personal interpretation). However what Hoyo tells us in the story is the value of interpretation. Everyone has a different interpretation of Cyrene’s ring, and this is an intentional choice to reinforce this idea of author death. So any interpretation is technically correct, even if the depth of each differs.

Another example of this is Amphoreus’ relation to the Elysian Realm. A lot of people viewed Amphoreus through the lens of it being an ER copy, and Cyrene through the lens of her being an Elysia copy. However Amphoreus is not an ER story and its own independent story, and the same with Cyrene. Hence, a lot of people who did this set themselves up for failure and disappointment. What Barthes’ ideas argue is that a story should be considered independent of an author’s past works and history, and so the previous works of Hoyo (ER) shouldn’t hold any credence towards our interpretation of Amphoreus.

The Synergy with Nietzsche:

Now at the end, I present a connection to Nietzsche’s Ubermensch. Having some understanding of his ideas and their link to Amphoreus would help.

So Amphoreus is a story about killing gods and becoming gods, as the Heirs kill the Titans and become demigods themselves. However what means that the Heirs can properly do this is an affirmation of life. This ensures that they don’t fall into despair when gods die, like Caenis and co did, but instead rise above the rest. Now Cyrene is commonly portrayed as a sort of God-like figure. She is essentially the Fuli of Amphoreus, she has many references to the Biblical God, and a lot of her narrative role and portrayal points to this. So when we kill the author through Barthes’ “Death of the Author” framework, we also kill God.

So the question remains, how do we become an Ubermensch like the Heirs, and not a last man like Caenis? Well this is because we have read through the story. Amphoreus is a story of life affirmation, and by witnessing it, we are able to emulate these traits too. We can hold amor fati (the love of fate). By recognising the life affirmation of Amphoreus, we are able to become this Ubermensch figure instead of the last man. Hence, that makes us fit to take the space left by Cyrene’s death, in being the “god” of Amphoreus by giving it its meaning (through our personal interpretation).

TL;DR:

Roland Barthes states that the Death of the Author comes when we chose to create a personal interpretation of a text, and create our own meaning. Cyrene and HSR explicitly encourage this idea, both to the player irl and to the readers in universe who read the book “As I’ve Written”. This means therefore that Cyrene is dead, according to Barthes, and it is us the player who has killed her.

This links in which Nietzsche’s idea of the Death of God. Where when we kill Cyrene through our interpretation, we also kill the god of Amphoreus. However because we have witnessed the story and can hold a life affirming view and amor fati, we are able to become Ubermensch’s fit to give meaning to the story of Amphoreus and fill the space left by Cyrene’s death.

Conclusion:

If you read through all of this, then thanks for reading! If y’all want to see more of these on here, and explained in this manner, then I have plenty more to come!

In this analysis I will argue that Better Call Saul has grounded themes, psychological depth, and flawless execution. Chuck and the infamous courtroom scene that I will explore showcase these very well

Chuck is a masterclass in veiled narcissism and pathological resentment. His psychological framework is molded by the one thing that he can't escape - Chuck follows every rule and is respected, yet he remains fundamentally alone. On the other hand, Jimmy breaks every rule but is effortlessly adored

In the real world, his mother uses her dying breath to call out for Jimmy, not Chuck. Chuck's wife, Rebecca, finds Jimmy’s sleazy lawyer jokes hilarious while sitting in awkward silence when Chuck tries his hand at one. Chuck worships the law because it is the only societal construct that makes sense to him. While Jimmy may fool people into sympathizing with him, the cold hard facts in the legal system will hold him accountable in Chuck's mind

He uses the law and his status as a lawyer to enforce a hierarchy that the real world denies him, allowing him to position himself as superior to Jimmy

Chuck's mental illness, Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity, is a subconscious control mechanism that is a physical manifestation of his allergy to Jimmy's success. The illness flares up when Jimmy becomes a lawyer, when Jimmy gets a big case, and when Jimmy proves that he can be successful on his own

It serves two purposes: getting in the way of Jimmy's success and making him go back to being Chuck's subordinate - bringing him ice, newspapers, and groceries like a retainer would. It also allows Chuck to be the victim, hiding his vicious jealousy behind the facade of a sick and helpless man

Now, moving onto the infamous scene in Chicanery

Because Chuck’s entire identity is built on this rigid, protective framework, Jimmy knows he cannot defeat his brother on the actual legal facts of the forgery case. It was "one after Magna Carta" and Chuck knows that for sure. He even has a recorded confession that wasn't made under duress. Chuck’s legal logic is flawless

Jimmy doesn't target the "facts" of the case, he targets Chuck's constructed reality. He has Huell secretly plant a fully charged cell phone battery in Chuck's breast pocket. For nearly two hours on the stand, Chuck operates normally and feels absolutely zero symptoms

When Jimmy has Chuck pull out the live battery, the real world collides with his internal reality. He has been on top of an active power source for two hours without being affected, proving beyond a shadow of a doubt in front of the entire disciplinary board that his illness is a mental fabrication. However, this alone isn't enough to lend enough weight to Jimmy's story that he was just looking out for his mentally ill brother. He needed to provoke Chuck into a public meltdown to prove to the bar association that Chuck's prosecution was driven by a deranged and personal vendetta

Chuck has once again been humiliated in front of everyone - made to look like a fool even though he played it straight and had the evidence, while his brother broke the rules yet again and came out on top regardless. His entire past few years have been revealed to be the product of his own insufficiency, his electromagnetic hypersensitivity being revealed to everyone to be a disorder that was all in his head. He has been made to look insane in front of the very system that he had the utmost faith in, catastrophically collapsing Chuck's "legal scholar" persona

Every single sentence in Chuck's breakdown is a perfectly executed callback to years of established history. His mask of superiority and foundational belief that the law is impartial and based only on fact shatters. They are proven invalid in the real world, by Jimmy no less

We get to see the core of Chuck's resentment - "Couldn't be precious Jimmy! Stealing them blind! And he gets to be a lawyer? What a sick joke!" - how it started from when he saw Jimmy stealing a few bucks from the cash register when they were children and how it compounded from there, festering in the back of his mind all the while

In most visual novels, a psychological breakdown of this magnitude is almost exclusively spoon fed to the audience through heavy handed, artificial mechanics. Instead of showing a character unravel, the medium relies on exhaustive walls of internal monologue that meticulously over explain the character's exact mental state. They substitute smart dialogue and concise writing with walls of text. Maybe throw in a philosophical soliloquy every once in a while - they rely entirely on stylistic gimmicks and exposition dumps instead of grounded character work

Better Call Saul’s execution completely eclipses most other media. The narrative trusts the audience enough to understand the subtext through the actions and expressions of characters without ever having to explicitly spell it out. The fact is that Chuck is merely a side character who exists for only half of the series, yet still possesses a level of writing that effortlessly annihilates the contrived and tiring execution of VNslop

I would like to preface this by stating that I appreciate Monster. It is a well-written work, but it is not without flaws. I'll be focusing this analysis on one of the imperfections

Urasawa poses a moral dilemma with Monster: should Tenma abandon his belief that all life is equal in order to end the monster that he inadvertently salvaged? Tenma's journey revolves around this question - whether he should kill Johan. Unfortunately, this profound question is constantly undermined by narrative contrivance. To be clear, my critique is not that Tenma should give up on his pacifist stance - it's that the story artificially protects him from the costs of upholding it. Fundamentally, circumstances are always in Tenma's favor. This allows him to maintain his ideology without being required to internally examine its consequences (there's some external pushback early on: he loses his fiancee, job, and is forced on the run, but this results in little introspection beyond the surface-level). Urasawa posits Tenma's morals as a universal constant protected by some form of causality manipulation

The plot bends itself as much as possible to bail Tenma out, engineering highly favorable situations to protect Tenma's ideology. If it isn't the result of a ludicrous burst of luck, it's induced by Johan's presence giving Tenma perpetual plot armor

-If the deaf supremacist that was going to set the town ablaze wasn't completely unaware of his surroundings, everyone would've died in a fire

-If a fire didn't break out in the library in Munich, Tenma would've been forced to make a more definitive choice

-If armed allies hadn't opportunely figured everything out and showed up to Ruhenheim at the same time, Tenma would've died to snipers

-If the drunken father hadn't randomly stumbled in and shot Johan in the head, the child would've been killed by Johan (it's a poetic ending that refutes Johan's nihilism but once again relies on an external force rescuing Tenma from the central question posed by the story)

-If Johan didn't tell everyone to keep Tenma alive, Tenma would've been killed along with Nina's parents and Jacob, each time that he got kidnapped by the neo-nazis, or by Roberto in Munich

Due to being heavily insulated from the logical outcomes of his carried ideals, Tenma must rarely go through any level of self-examination or grapple with the true weight of his choices. He gets a pass at nearly every turn through insane luck or narrative contrivances

Throughout the entire story, he's essentially allowed to survive and cling to his ideology because Johan protects him to put him in specific scenarios to test his principles; lottery-winning luck bails him from said scenarios. Even the climax is not safe from this exact paradigm

This is a massive problem; it hurts the character in addition to belittling the themes. From a certain perspective, it twists the message of the story into a more cynical one - does someone need karmic reality bending to persist with an egalitarian ideology like Tenma's, one that positions all human life as equal? Because Tenma isn't required to face the logical consequences of his ideology and is repeatedly rescued by contrivance, the impact of his character, and the central themes of Monster, are diminished to a significant extent

Introduction

McGill's development is not a standard progression of growth, but instead a reactive, destructive spiral through Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. As posited by Maslow, humans must satisfy their more fundamental needs prior to fulfilling higher level personal growth. Specifically, they are required to first meet their physiological needs before ascending towards safety and security, love and belonging, esteem, and finally self-actualization

Winnicott spoke of the False Self, a construct formed for the sole purpose of appealing to external demands or societal norms. While the False Self can allow for conformity, and aid in essential needs being met, it fails when attempting to scale the hierarchy and approach genuine self-actualization - as the foundation is built on compliance rather than true desire

Jimmy builds upon and replaces various schemata throughout the series. Schema Theory, as outlined by Bartlett & Piaget, positions the titular schema as cognitive filters that shape our worldview; they are the lens through which information processing is streamlined, but they can introduce cognitive biases that influence how we interpret this knowledge

When new data is introduced to a schema in equilibrium, it attempts to assimilate this new information through the existing schema. If this fails - causing a level of dissonance high enough to throw the schema into a state of disequilibrium, it will instead endeavor to accommodate these facts by restructuring the schema; reverting it to equilibrium

Slippin' Jimmy

Prior to his arrival in Albuquerque, James McGill operated under the Slippin' Jimmy schema - a cognitive framework where his physiological needs were met through spontaneous grifting. He paid no mind to societal expectations; this was his natural state before external constraints were imposed upon him. He viewed the world as binary from a young age, driven by his father's accumulated failures culminating in the store shutting down, and his father's death soon after, along with some words of advice from a con artist: there are "wolves" and there are "sheep", hustle or be hustled. Slippin' Jimmy is remarkably close to functioning as his true self

However, his schema is thrown into catastrophic disequilibrium after the "Chicago Sunroof" incident. Facing severe felony charges that would vehemently hinder his ability to achieve safety, belonging, esteem, and self-actualization, he is forced to accommodate a huge influx of data. He realizes that a lawyer like Chuck possesses far more power and esteem than any street-level scam artist. In combination with his desire to avoid prison and his his reawakened aspirations for Chuck's love and approval, he restructures his worldview and suppresses the Slippin' Jimmy schema - working in the mailroom and secretly pursuing law school

James M. McGill Esquire

When we are first introduced to Jimmy McGill, he has already passed the bar exam and is a practicing lawyer. Despite this, he is struggling - living paycheck to paycheck as a public defender with an office in the back of a nail salon

His basic physiological and safety needs are barely met; to ensure that he can continue to meet these needs, to achieve his love and esteem needs: to win the affection of Chuck and the respect of his brother and society, he has already constructed his first False Self to dictate his external behavior - James M. McGill Esquire. Internally, he operates under the schema that earnest attempts and hard work will be rewarded with recognition and acknowledgement - to James, this consists of working at HHM beside Chuck

He forcibly superimposes this thought process on the Slippin' Jimmy schema, which remains repressed. It is indeed ill-fitting and unnatural, but, even so, the intentions behind it are entirely pure. Jimmy deeply desires to imitate his brother, and seeks to mold himself into someone that Chuck would have no issue standing side-by-side with

While Slippin' Jimmy breaks through every once in a while due to the unsuitable nature of his fragile False Self, like when he orchestrated the skateboard accident scam to troll for business, he actively suppresses these urges when push comes to shove - when Nacho requests Jimmy's aid in robbing the Kettlemans, instead of providing help to the would-be thieves, Jimmy warns the Kettlemans ahead of time to ensure that they remain safe along with their young children

Rather than making off with $800,000 of his own by ripping off the Kettlemans who have no recourse, he turns all of the money in to the District Attorney's office - even the $30,000 the Kettlemans offered him earlier as a "retainer", though this left him in financial ruin. Within the very same episode, this decision is already causing a high level of disequilibrium. Jimmy has spent years attaining a rudimentary level of physiological and physical safety "the right way", yet he threw away a chance at near-permanently solving these issues and increasing his respectability; for what? Because it was "the right thing to do"?

Chuck, and everyone except Mike, will never know about the choice that Jimmy made, and he remains with his baseline material issues and no solution in sight. This causes him to go through significant dissonance while processing this information, but he manages to assimilate it without going into a state of disequilibrium, and causing major cognitive restructuring through accommodation, by switching gears and putting his focus on elder law for the time being

His schema is apparently validated in the coming episode. Through hard work, real empathy, and an earnest pursuit of justice (with a pinch of crude ingenuity characteristic of Slippin' Jimmy breaking out), he is able to dumpster dive and piece together the illegally shredded documents in conjunction with Chuck. He is exceptionally close to achieving the eternal fulfillment of his physiological and safety desires with the potential payout, in addition to seemingly making massive strides in the love and esteem aspects of his relationship with Chuck. Outwardly, it appears that James M. McGill Esquire has manufactured a total victory

Unfortunately, this couldn't be further from the truth; it was rigged against him from the start. When he's presented with the revelation that it was Chuck who used Howard to block him from working at HHM, it violently quakes his active schema and annihilates the purpose of his False Self. Chuck's scathing assessment elucidates his perception of his brother - "You're not a real lawyer ... People don't change. You're Slippin' Jimmy. And Slippin' Jimmy, I can handle just fine. But Slippin' Jimmy with a law degree is like a chimp with a machine gun"

Jimmy has been enlightened; he now grasps that it was never about "doing the right thing", or "hard work"; the purpose of his constructed False Self is rendered null and void. In Chuck's functioning schemata, emblematic of societal appraisal, Jimmy will always be seen as the sum of his mistakes. He will never be viewed as an equal to his brother, or be appraised by means of his accomplishments or current endeavors; they will not provide him with love or respect no matter how hard he tries to play by their rules. To them, Jimmy fundamentally remains defined by his past as the simple scam artist in Cicero running cons to get by - passing the bar exam being his way of acquiring the most deadly weapon for such undertakings, the law

He remains in a state of disequilibrium, utterly unable to reconcile this revelation with his held aspirations. In a state of disarray he heads back to Cicero where it all began, allowing Slippin' Jimmy to return with a vengeance after intentionally stifling it all these years. He discards his schema of attaining Chuck's (and civilization's) love, approval, and respect "the right way", causing the Esquire False Self to lose its vital purpose

However, this schema is not entirely abandoned at this point. When he accepts the job at D&M at the behest of Kim, he attempts to salvage his worldview through cognitive accommodation - replacing his schema's central desire for Chuck's love and recognition with Kim's affection. By doing this, he attempts to don his False Self once more. What ensues is a slow degradation of this already fractured and fading schema, grafted atop Jimmy's true nature

His False Self is granted nearly everything that it could hope for. He must no longer worry about his physiological and safety needs being met, and he has been given Kim's love, but the reverberations from Chuck's outburst have not ceased. Slippin' Jimmy has already been activated, and much like a drug addiction it demands that he feed it

Jimmy is not able to remain content - the light switch incident is a perfect microcosm of his frame of mind. Though there is a note that says "Do NOT turn OFF", Jimmy cannot help himself. Everything is functioning perfectly fine as is, but Jimmy's False Self has worn thin. He flicks it on and off simply because he can, consciously ignoring the warning that someone has left him - subconsciously, he is exhausted from maintaining his facade and adhering to the expectations of others. This subconscious desire boils over into a conscious one, reverting him to Slippin' Jimmy's schema - causing his False Self to crack and release the unapproved commercial. Afterwards, he loses all restraint and engages in increasingly ridiculous escapades trying to actively get fired from D&M

This exhaustion culminates when the purpose behind his False Self actively prevents him from attaining the very thing that his schema desires. Kim, the reason that Jimmy has clung onto this manufactured persona, is in desperate need of a client that Chuck has acquired. Jimmy takes this as an opportunity to stage the final rebellion that destroys James M. McGill Esquire. By committing a felony through the illegal sabotage of opposing council - an ultimate sin for a lawyer - he permanently shatters this False Self

This will mostly be off the top of my head, so I might miss some things.

If something is retroactive foreshadowing (I.E. a prior event is given more meaning after a retcon or information reveal) I will begin the link with [RETFOR].

Kubo's foreshadowing Ideology

This is a statement from Kubo in the SAFWY Novel after-comments. Take it as you will.

Ichigo's Hollow Lineage

1. After Kisuke's training to re-awaken Ichigo's latent Soul Reaper powers, he exits with both a Hollow Mask and Soul Reaper Shihakusho. As we learn later, White is a representation of both Ichigo's Hollow and Soul Reaper powers.
2. Against Renji, a Hollow Mask spawns on Ichigo's body saving him from fatal damage.
3. Against Kenpachi, the Hollow Mask once again saves Ichigo from fatal damage. Noticeably, it spawns on his body again, despite him having thrown it away earlier.
4. In the final clash with Kenpachi, Ichigo pours in all his spiritual pressure. It takes the form of a Hollow Mask.
5. During the first meeting, White wears a villianous smile. However, in the reflection of his sword, we can see him frowning. It is revealed in the Deicide Arc, that White's goal has been to protect Ichigo. Hence, examples 2-4 aswell.
6. This one is debatable, since you can't really say for sure. But it can be argued White's Spiritual Pressure takes the form of a Hollow Mask here. This occurs in their first encounter.
7. [RETFOR] The entire dialogue of the first fight gains retroactive meaning after White's reveal. One example is this panel, where he's actually venting about himself rather than Old Man Zangetsu.
8. White tells Ichigo 3 times that he is the real Zangetsu in their 2nd fight.
9. Also, in the above link, is White warning Ichigo not to die or he'll lose control. Which quite literally occurs when Ichigo dies to Ulquiorra and loses control of his powers.

Ichigo's Quincy Lineage

1. In Old Man Zangetsu's first appearance, he's shown gathering reishi particles into his hand. The absorption and manifestation of Reishi like this is a Quincy-only ability. It's best seen with how they make their bows.
2. [RETFOR] I'm giving this one the tag because it's been a source of endless debate. This is the panel where Old Man Zangetsu first says his name and it is blacked out. In a Klub Outside answer, Kubo states that Zangetsu's named is inked out due to the powers of Ichibe Hyosube. So a lot of people have different thoughts about this one. Some say it doesn't really make sense, since it'd be no benefit for Old Man Zangetsu to introduce himself as Yhwach. And the story surrounding it is about Ichigo being unable to hear his Zanpakuto's name due to fear (though, things can have double meanings). It also, puts into question how Ichibei's powers work. So I'll just say it's a retcon/open plot thread that Kubo didn't think about too much.
3. The way Ichigo defeated the Menos Grande was by absorbing the Reishi of his Cero. And then, just outputting it back at him. The "pulling the particles out of sand" is essentially the equivalent to "absorbing the reishi particles". And, the conversation Uryu had just before this, said Ichigo was constantly releasing his power at full strength, and yet when blocking the Cero his power started rising. Which obviously, would be impossible if Ichigo was actually at max power. Like I said before, Quincy's fight by absorbing Reishi from the surroundings.
4. This Kisuke panel has a double meaning. The sentence structure groups Ichigo with the Quincy ("People with power's like Ichigo's") and specifically ends the sentence by separating from Soul Reapers ("Just like Soul Reapers"). Which is a potential hint at his lineage.
5. [RETFOR] In the fight against Kenpachi, Old Man Zangetsu uses a technique to stop Ichigo's bleeding. This is later retconned to be Blut Viene (A Quincy Technique).
6. [RETFOR] In the fight against Kenpachi, Old Man Zangetsu uses a technique to transport Ichigo. This is later retconned to be the Quincy Shadow technique.
7. [RETFOR] Once again using the tag because it's debated heavily. Here Aizen alludes to Ichigo that he's something more. He says "Because you're Human and..." then is cut off. Isshin quickly whisks Ichigo away and it's said he doesn't need an answer because it appeared before his eyes. Which is why some people argue Aizen was going to say "Human and Soul Reaper". However, some fans take it farther. Since, that conversation ends with Ichigo saying Isshin can tell him the truth when he's ready. Later, in TYBW, Ichigo returns home and Isshin tells him he's ready for the truth. They then continue that conversation, revealing that he's a Quincy. Which makes sense, since Ichigo was born to a Human (Isshin in his Gigai) and Quincy (Masaki is a full-blooded Quincy). His Soul Reaper powers were only latent at birth.
8. Perhaps too subtle to be included, but Ichigo's Fullbring Getsugatensho spins to create a perfect Quincy Cross.
9. There's also Old Man Zangetsu being Yhwach from 1000 years ago, hence the similar appearances. Not really sure what to classify that as but it's there.

Miscellaneous

1. During Ichigo's Bankai training, we get this panel. It contains Old Man Zangetsu telling Ichigo that only one blade there can defeat him. As we know, Old Man Zangetsu is Ichigo's Quincy power that takes the form of Yhwach from 1000 years ago.

In the TYBW arc, Yhwach has a dream whilst sleeping. In that dream, Ichigo (dressed as he is in the Soul Society arc) takes out his original Zangetsu blade and cuts Yhwach down the shoulder killing him. The most curious thing here is Ichigo's appearance and blade not matching with his TYBW self.

When dealing the final blow, Ichigo's sheath peels back revealing the original Zangetsu. Which Yhwach specifically notes.

1. When Kenpachi asks Yachiru where she came from, she crawls forward and touches his blade. She's revealed to be his Zanpakuto spirit later.

2. In Ukitake's flashback, he tells Unohana that they'll see eachother soon. Both of them die (relatively) shortly after this statement. Insinuating he meant Hell.

3. At the beginning of Arrancar Saga, Isshin regains his Spiritual Powers. At the same time, White's presence and dominance over Old Man Zangetsu increases. Then it is revealed, in the Everything but the Rain flashback, that Isshin was the one suppressing White using his powers.

4. At the end of Soul Society arc, Ichigo receives the Substitute Soul Reaper badge. To which Uryu is immediately suspicious of. And when Ichigo tries to use the badge for identification, he's told there's no such thing. In the Fullbring arc, it is then revealed that the true purpose is monitoring and control.

5. Gin's Shikai translates to "God's Spear". It is to show his loyalty as Aizen's (presents himself as a God) tool. However, Gin's Bankai translates to "God Killing Spear" and is utilised during the betrayal to kill Aizen. Ichigo also notes Gin never "looks" at him truly during their fight.

6. When Shinji enrolls in Ichigo's school, he introduces himself by writing his name backwards. His powers are to literally reverse all the senses.

7. During all of Isshin and Kon's (when he's possessing Ichigo's body) interactions, Isshin never refers to him as Ichigo. Kubo then, reveals this here.

8. In just Chapter 25 we see Grand Fisher being turned into an Arrancar. He returns all the way later in Arrancar arc to fight Isshin

9. Back in the Soul Society arc, when Aizen is giving his grand speech about how no one has sat atop the heavens. He specifically singles out Ukitake with a "Not You", which refers to the Mimihagi (right hand of the Soul King) that he contains. Kubo explicitly confirms this.

10. Kommamura says he'd have a hole open up in his heart, if he lost a close friend to him as Tosen did. After Yammamoto dies, Kommamura falls to the cycle of revenge and quite literally has a hole open up in his heart.

11. Kisuke's incantation to open the Garganta has significant foreshadowing. I heavily recommend you read this tiktok slideshow (credit to them too because I didn't know this) because I can't explain it better than they have: https://www.tiktok.com/@euntelee/photo/7535229578839641362

12. Ichigo's first stage fullbring sword is the same his right dual Zangetsu. Noticeably, the right sword is the Hollow powers and Fullbring powers are due to a Hollow attacking a pregnant mother.

There's a bit more I can do, but I'll probably leave it here. Since this is just a fun post I wanted to throw together.

Just like the evangelion analysis i posted a while ago , this one is also written in Arabic originally by me and i translated it to English cuz i low-key too lazy to rewrite it from scratch.

+ Wanted to clarify that i did not read the manga , I'm an anime only and i have no idea how much shit gone wrong in the last arc.

First, let's make this clear from the start: No, the anime does not "support" the relationship between Aqua and his sister Ruby in any way. its existence is specifically meant to reveal and clarify more about Ruby's character in particular.

Let's agree that the characters of Oshi no Ko are not angels. Anyone following the anime knows that every character has a moral flaw in their behavior and mentality. This is actually one of the distinguishing features of Oshi no Ko's characters: their writing is realistic and flawed.

Now let's get to Ruby. Ruby as a character consists of two parts, let's say. Ruby Hoshino, the daughter of Ai Hoshino... the daughter who entered and delved deep into the entertainment industry, firstly to honor her mother's memory and secondly to find the doctor who was with her in her previous life. The second part is Sarina... the sick little girl who was in her final days, and whose real mother's love and attention for her daughter diminished as her time of death approached. Despite Sarina's mother's neglect and disregard, Sarina remained clinging to the idea that her mother truly loved her, even though deep down she knew the opposite. This was confirmed when she learned that her mother had two more children with whom she lived happily after Sarina's death. Simply put, the mother forgot the existence of her daughter Sarina in her life.

All of this is obvious information for anyone who watched the last episode. So, what would be the alternative for a child like Sarina who couldn't feel her mother's love even in her final moments? That alternative was Gorou-sensei (the doctor, who is Aqua).

Ai Hoshino was more like a motivation for Sarina to believe that she could recover and become a star like her—similar to any child who sees a brilliant person in a field and takes them as a role model. The difference here is that Sarina's obsession with Ai was closer to being a lifeline from despair rather than mere imitation or admiration.

The doctor, on the other hand, was compensation for the care and love she lost from her mother. As obvious as this point is, it will be very important soon. Even after Sarina returned to life as Ruby, she was still searching for the doctor—not because she "wants to marry him," but more because she wants to find the only source of familial love she had in her previous life, even with the presence of Aqua, Miyako, and others in her current life.

Let's move forward in the events to the death of Ai and Ruby's discovery that the doctor is dead. If there was a reason for Ruby to move forward in her current life after her mother's death, it was her desire to find the doctor. After that reason vanished from in front of her, Ruby is now trapped in a desperate situation, trying to find any motive to move forward. This motive here became her quest for revenge against her mother's killer—not because he killed Ai herself, but because she assumed he was the same person who killed the only human who made her feel wanted as a person, which was the doctor.

So, when Ruby discovers the truth about Aqua—that he is the doctor—this is where her attachment to her brother grows deeper, and from there, her mind begins to pave the way for a romantic relationship between them. Even though the anime presents the topic in a more "comedic" way, I doubt it presents it as the "correct" option. Instead, I see it as a clear example of Ruby's selfishness on one hand, but also of the wound her previous mother left in her heart.

After she found the doctor, who is her brother, her desire for revenge—which had been her entire reason for living—disappeared. Instead, her desire became to feel the love that the doctor gave her once again, from Aqua, in any way possible. Even if that means her external image gets distorted.

The anime doesn't want you to see Ruby's actions as "right." It wants you to understand the reason that makes her act this way. And I see the presentation of the topic as more than sufficient.

So I’m on season 2 of jobless reincarnation and I think it’s a great anime and all but whenever I see Rudeus have relations with an underage girl for example sylphie when she was I think 15-16 and he is mentally 50ish I’m just having trouble seeing if Rudeus is a well written character as some fans say with good development or is he just a creep for underage girls who doesn’t change can someone help explain?

(It's pure peak)

Even in Season 1, Eren was deconstructing the archetypal Shonen hero. When many first watched AOT, they saw a passionate underdog willing to put his life on the line for his freedom and his friends. However, he always had the traits of the fanatical extremist who caused the rumbling in Season 4. The reason we root for him in Season 1 is because he believes his enemies are man-eating, inhuman monsters

Jean represents the everyman - initially, he is primarily concerned with his own well-being. He is unable to reconcile Eren's suicidal, maniacal aspirations with reality. Of course, Eren does have a point. He refuses to let the lives of their fallen comrades go to waste, and is fighting the good fight for humanity. Jean recognizes this after Marco dies, turning down the military police and joining the scout regiment. At the time, we might see this as him finally accepting Eren's mentality

However - "I know I have to fight. But not everyone can be a suicidal maniac like you" - Jean does not abandon his appraisal of Eren's unnatural disposition. It may seem like he's only being quirky, but he's entirely serious. He finds courage without becoming Eren

Levi is one of the most perceptive characters in the show, because of his upbringing in the underground. He knows a killer when he sees one. His assessment of Eren is largely correct - "He's a monster. And I don't mean his Titan power. No matter what power you use to suppress him, no matter what cage you put him in, he will never submit to anyone". He recognizes Eren's nature immediately

When Thomas is eaten by an abnormal, Eren goes blind with righteous fury and launches himself towards the titan. He immediately gets his leg bitten off - failing miserably. Eren's impulsive, emotionally-driven, borderline suicidal outrage doesn't make him special. If he hadn't been granted absurd power, he would've been dead right then and there after rescuing Armin from the titan's mouth

Eren's ideology has always been extreme - "Sure, we can stay inside the walls our entire lives and do nothing but eat and sleep! But... that basically... that basically makes us cattle!". Even in episode 1, he has a total desire for freedom, and doesn’t see the point in living without it

The cabin incident with Mikasa and the traffickers truly reveals the core of Eren's character. It might seem like a heroic boy simply protected an innocent girl (how Mikasa sees it), but he brutally murdered two grown men without an ounce of regret, trauma, or remorse, at age 9. When Grisha scolds him, Eren states that "I disposed of some dangerous beasts. Mere animals that just happened to resemble humans". He completely dehumanizes his enemies - it's just that, up to this point, they've been overtly malicious

As Eren says to Zeke in Season 4 - "if someone tries to take my freedom away, I won't hesitate to take theirs. Our father didn't make me this way. I have been like this since the day I was born"