charlotte-buff - Tumblr blog

charlotte-buff · 7 days ago

Text

My main source of confusion is the assertion that characters in a story reacting to the things happening around them somehow detracts from the nuance or moral ambiguity of the situation. One particular character voicing a certain opinion does not equal the author or the narrative as a whole voicing that opinion.

And even if that were the case: In Leon’s example we’ve got Celeste saying that he is to blame while Makoto says he isn’t to blame. If that counts as “moralising” then it’s moralising from two opposite directions at once, which should have left the situation exactly as ambiguous and morally grey as it was before.

I want characters to have opinions and to share those opinions. Even if I vehemently disagree with their basic premise, even if it’s at an inappropriate time, even if it’s kicking someone who is already down. Because sometimes people are assholes. Sometimes people say the wrong thing at the wrong time, either on purpose or by accident. That’s what makes them human.

What Celeste said to Leon in the final moments before his death was not only the truth but more importantly extremely in character for her. Of course she would rub it in. And if she hadn’t said those things then Byakuya would’ve, at least if he actually gave a shit about the situation.

I’m not gonna make any grand sweeping statements about Celeste’s morality because it’s been a while since I’ve seen her FTEs, but it’s undeniable that like two weeks after the first murder, she too felt it acceptable to kill 8 people she may or may not have considered friends for her own personal gain. “Officially” because of the prospect of a vampire castle, but in any case because she simply wanted to get out even though throughout the game she kept ridiculing the others for wishing the same. Hers is the most morally unambiguous murder motive in the entire first game.

Concerning Grace, I cannot imagine any other reaction towards Eva from her that would’ve been remotely in character. She in particular, but also the other characters, had every reason to be angry and lash out at her in this moment, even if it sucks to see a person on death row being spat on in the last minutes of their life. It’s rough, it’s cruel, it’s unfair, and yet it’s hard to argue that it’s unjustified. That’s what makes the story and these characters so interesting.

I’m really surprised that you even considered the possibility that Grace’s behaviour towards Eva could have been unintentional on the part of the writers. The line of thought that they accidentally made her angry and spiteful towards the person who killed Wolfgang and then was planning to end her life as well – a person whom she already hated beforehand – just contradicts my entire conception of storytelling. The only way the writers could have avoided “moralising” in this scene is if they had made everyone but Diana and Damon leave the room as soon as the trial was over.

I guess what I’m asking is: What should Celeste or Shinigami or Yuma or Grace have said in those moments? “Nothing” is not an acceptable answer to me.

Danganronpa Pet Peeve

So, one thing that bothers me in Danganronpa type games is when victims forced into a Killing Game or people pressured into murder for understandable reasons end up having other character moralize about their choices and actions. Moral ambiguity is a thing in these situations, and it feels patronizing and sometimes even cruel to have it refuted by people on the outside looking in. Ten prime examples stand out, some of them worse than others.

Trigger Happy Havoc - Leon Kuwata:

This one, in the first trial of the franchise, isn't bad in terms of the charges made, since Celeste's point is valid: Leon cannot claim that he killed Sayaka in self-defense since he clearly did not. My issue is that Leon is cut off before he can fully respond or further defend his position, even if he's cut off by Makoto saying he doesn't blame him. In the manga, we see Leon didn't in fact intend to murder Sayaka, and internally he does concede that Celeste is right about him making the wrong choices in the moment but clarifies it was an ego thing instead of a bloodlust thing: he genuinely thought he was the only one fit to deal with the situation rather than getting help since he was the one Sayaka went out of her way to target. For as much of a Sayaka defender as I am, it feels odd for the game to go out of its way to pass the buck from her to Leon concerning "unclouded intent to commit murder", since she was the one who fully premeditated her murder attempt, while Leon's kill was reactive.

Trigger Happy Havoc - Mondo Owada:

So, this example is purely the fault of the English translation (which was especially bad in this chapter for some reason). In the original Japanese, Makoto's line was "And, that weak part of his heart...that bastard... stabbed it so cruelly...That bastard...!!" He was talking about Monokuma's cruelty, not Mondo's. Monokuma's line, meanwhile, was "Take a good look, everyone! That's what you all amount to! Just for the sake of simple memories and hidden pasts...You think nothing of taking another's life!" He wasn't talking about Mondo and what he did specifically, he was using it as a springboard in an attempt to gaslight everyone into thinking their base nature is murderous. The translation makes no sense, because we can clearly see that Mondo didn't kill Chihiro "in cold blood", he killed him in white heat. He literally blacked out while killing him, and was horrified when he came to his senses. To claim that he killed in cold blood would require a level of consciousness that clearly was not there.

Trigger Happy Havoc - Celestia Ludenberg:

Bad localization strikes again! We once more have a line mistranslated in a way that doesn't make sense, with Makoto saying he can't pity Celeste after dying as if he thinks she deserved to be executed, and saying he doesn't consider her a friend anymore after she committed murder which not only goes against his whole philosophy about the Killing Game but directly contradicts him saying "my friends" about Taka and Hifumi even though Taka was murdered by Hifumi. Manipulated or not, Hifumi chose to commit murder, so still considering him a friend and not Celeste is a double standard. In Japanese, Makoto actually said "I can't sympathize with her after she killed two of her friends, but…but nevertheless, she was one of us." So he is saying he can't sympathize with her as a person after what she did which has nothing to do with her death, is still upset about her death because he still considers her a friend ("one of us"), and the line about Taka and Hifumi was meant to say "her friends" (as in Celeste) and not his. It's ridiculous how official translators can botch things up so badly.

Goodbye Despair - Teruteru Hanamura:

I must point to this example because it's one I can actually completely forgive! Not only is Monokuma's point valid, but it is Monokuma who is making it, so stripping any nuance down to make everything boil down to Teruteru being a criminal who thus deserves what he gets is on brand for him. It's also only after this that Teruteru shares the truly heart-wrenching part of his motivation, and he still apologizes when recognizing that it doesn't absolve him of guilt.

Killing Harmony - Kaede Akamatsu:

This one is weird, because I legitimately cannot tell whether it's supposed to be making a moralistic point against Kaede or not. Because on the one hand, there's a certain truth (ironically enough) to what Kokichi says here, a truth that stands even after the later reveal that Kaede didn't actually murder Rantaro. But on the other hand, it is Kokichi who is saying it, and given the other characters' attitudes toward him vs. their attitudes toward Kaede, the narrative slants players' views against him and anything he has to say. Speaking of which....

Killing Harmony - Kokichi Ouma:

Quite possibly the most famous example of what I'm talking about. The fifth case of DRV3 was similar to the fifth case of DR2, but whereas in that case Nagito truly had no firm moral judgement made against him given the complex factors at play regarding what he did, the attempt at ambiguity with Kokichi gets shut down by basically every other character except K1-B0, the Butt Monkey robot that not even the narrative takes seriously. Even Kaito, the one whom Kokichi let kill him so that he could save Maki from being the blackened, dismisses Kokichi's professed hatred of the Killing Game as possibly another lie. He is dehumanized as "the embodiment of a lie" by Shuichi's internal monologue, and then moved on from. Even revelations in the following chapter that back him up on what he claimed go completely unaddressed. I'm not the biggest Kokichi fan by a long shot, but this still frustrates me, especially when it comes at the exact same time Maki's actions are completely glossed over or even justified, with everyone instantly forgiving her. It's such a blatant case of hypocrisy.

Master Detective Archives: Rain Code - Yoshiko, Waruna and Kurane:

This one drives me crazy because it makes no sense for the character who is making the moral judgement! It's fucking Shinigami, a God of DEATH. Someone who has shown multiple times now to be completely detached from any sense of human morality. Why the Hell is she suddenly acting as though she has standards about murder? If anything, she loves murder because she loves solving murder mysteries! She should be singing these girls' praises, not condemning them as "disgusting" and "evil"! Ugh, she and Desuhiko really weighed this chapter down, which is a shame since it's a really clever, spooky and atmospheric murder.

Master Detective Archives: Rain Code - Yakou Furio:

Good lord, we couldn't even avoid this for a character that is otherwise positioned as someone you're meant to like and mourn for! Yuma is thinking about how Yakou said that he couldn't keep repressing his feelings of knowing that his wife was murdered and who was responsible, and that he had to listen to his heart about what to do to seek justice even if it meant murder and suicide. It's fucked up, but it's better left for the player to decide whether they agree with his course of actions or not. Even if it's because he misses him, we didn't need to hear Yuma's take on the matter. It would have been a lot more powerful without it.

The Moon of Hope and Sun of Despair - Void:

LINUJ's take on Void that he reflects in the game is that their tragic life circumstances didn't excuse them from crime and murder, and that they deserved to be brought to ruin for it. My only issue with that is that it kind of feels the opposite of what Danganronpa posits? It didn't treat the Remnants of Despair that way in Goodbye Despair or the Warriors of Hope that way in Ultra Despair Girls; it said that yes their sad backgrounds don't absolve them of their crimes but also said it didn't mean they deserved to be killed for them and that they could have a second chance. I especially think LINUJ crosses the line when talking about Iroha, showing that he knows nothing of basic psychology. With the backstory he saddled her with, it's not a matter of him choosing he doesn't want to validate her actions - they are already validated! You cannot shame someone who was raised in total seclusion and taught only selfishness, to the point of being severely beaten when she attempted suicide in order to force her to consider her life more valuable than anything else, for having a dysfunctional moral compass. Pretending that Iroha should know better and is making a conscious choice to be bad is disingenuous when her backstory shows that would be impossible for her. Yet another reason (aside from the "humans don't change" bs) Chapter 6 of this game was ass.

Project: Eden's Garden - Eva Tsunaka:

The latest example of this and boy does it piss me off. I'm sorry, but I am fully on Eva's side here. Not on the "killing someone and framing someone else for it" part, obviously that was wrong, but on the "you're all hypocrites vilifying me for your own self-commiseration" part. Several of the others are pissed off that someone started up the Killing Game and is now to be executed via their vote, and thus are scapegoating her for everything in order to feel better, insisting that they could never make such bad choices! Grace is the worst, as she is actively calling for Eva's execution and saying she deserves it, all while ignoring that not too long ago she was basically trying to kill an innocent person (and herself and everyone else but Eva, had she succeeded) because she was convinced she was the culprit and refusing to hear her out. Again, it's not like they've forgotten the fact that Eva is about to be executed, so spending some of her last moments alive telling her how much she sucks and how this is all her fault is utterly tasteless. I love Eva, but a lot about her death rubs me the wrong way.

#Danganronpa #Rain Code #Project Eden’s Garden #spoilers for moji

7 notes · View notes

charlotte-buff · 8 days ago

Text

I honestly don’t get this post. Putting the alleged mistranslations aside, which I have no opinion on since I can’t verify them, I’m finding it difficult to parse what some of your complaints even are.

────────

Leon’s reason for killing Sayaka is very understandable. Of course it is. If he had reacted a split second later, he would have been the one with a knife in his stomach. That doesn’t change the fact that he had half a dozen opportunities to stop what he was doing.

It wasn’t a heat of the moment thing. Directly after the initial attack, sure, but once Sayaka had already been incapacitated he went back to his own room, took the toolkit from the drawer, unpacked it, returned to Makoto’s room, unscrewed several screws from the doorknob, and then killed her. I don’t claim to know what goes on inside a fictional character’s head, nor do I know what I myself would have done in the same situation, but if that is not “intent” then I don’t know what is. Those are some very deliberate actions to take.

Yes, he’s trapped in the murder school, and yes, he barely escaped with his life, but ego or bloodlust or whatever his reason was – his thoughts were wrong no matter how genuine they were.

He killed a person when he didn’t need to. He did it as a reaction to an incomprehensibly extreme situation, and maybe he was sincerely convinced that killing Sayaka, who had unambiguously revealed herself to be a threat not just to him but to everyone, was the best option he had available to him at this point, but he was still wrong. Sayaka being the one who had actually planned a murder in advance doesn’t make Leon’s actions following the attack any less intentional.

Plus it’s Celeste talking. The asshole character who hates everyone and can’t wait to be rid of them. Even if everything she said was complete bollocks, it is exactly the type of bollocks she would come up with to kick someone who is already down. And in fact Makoto doesn’t agree with her assessment. He blames neither Sayaka nor Leon for what happened and is very vocal about it, so I’m not sure what the problem is.

I’d argue that this whole situation is actually very similar to Teruteru’s case which you bring up as a positive example later on, so now I’m really confused what it is you’re actually trying to say. Is it just because Ontologically Evil Monokuma says it this time instead of Celeste?

────────

The one with Kokichi and Kaede is confusing as well.

Of course the player as well as the other characters would be more inclined to be on Kaede’s side than Kokichi’s. They actually liked Kaede! They (and we) don’t want to believe that she could be a killer. That’s what makes the fact that she really did design a Rube Goldberg murder machine in secret and set it in motion without even knowing who the target would be so tragic. The fact that what Kokichi said about her was the truth is supposed to piss you off.

A core aspect of Kokichi’s character is that he dishes out uncomfortable truths that the other characters, particularly Kaito, refuse to accept. That’s why chapter 4 happened. And crucially, the player is supposed to feel the same way. You initially want to dismiss Kokichi because he’s annoying and inflammatory, but eventually you are forced to cope with the fact that he actually had a point. Not always, but definitely in regards to Kaede. Monokuma got everything he wanted because she thought that killing was the only way to stop the killing.

────────

Excuse me, but “Nagito truly had no firm moral judgement made against him given the complex factors at play regarding what he did”? Are we talking about the game Danganronpa 2: Goodbye Despair? The one where every single character already hates Nagito because he keeps making their lives worse on purpose, and then they find out he tried to kill them all, and then they find out that if they actually had been killed it would’ve restarted The Tragedy?

Nagito genuinely believed his own bullshit, but that doesn’t make it any less bullshit. I’m sure the surviving Remnants of Despair really would have appreciated being killed off for good instead of getting a last chance at redemption. They directly refute Nagito’s thesis that all despair must be eradicated, which was the sole reason behind his murder-suicide, by choosing to shut down the Neo World Program, forfeit their pre-despair personalities, and continue living.

Of course the factors at play were complex. And the consequence of those complex factors is that if Nagito’s plan hadn’t been foiled by a miracle at the last second, Alter Ego Junko would have taken over the bodies of all 15 Remnants and escaped into the real world.

Nobody except for Junko wanted the same thing Nagito wanted, and once we learn of Junko’s full plan it turns out not even Nagito wanted what Nagito wanted.

Making no moral judgements about Nagito’s actions means thinking that “the Remnants of Despair all get killed” and “the Remnants of Despair get a chance to rehabilitate themselves” are equally favourable outcomes. They made a whole terrible anime about which one of these two is the better option.

────────

Getting back on track with Kokichi in chapter 5: I honestly don’t blame the other characters for distrusting Kokichi’s intentions even at this point. He has been nothing but trouble for them since the very beginning. Maybe it’s unfair to him to accuse him of lying post mortem, but considering that he caused four pointless deaths in a row including his own I can absolutely see why Himiko would refuse to believe a word he says.

Kokichi’s plan for ending the killing game objectively sucked, no matter how useful he was in other regards. To the characters who actually lived through the events he caused instead of just watching them unfold on a screen, the suffering he brought would naturally be on their minds much more prominently than their thoughts on him as a person.

In a way Kokichi dehumanised himself. He never engaged with anyone sincerely except at the very end of his life with Kaito. Even during his free time events he actively resists being understood by Shūichi. To the other characters, he might as well have just been a concept because he refused to be a person to them.

────────

I’d have to watch the end of the third Mystery Labyrinth again, but I never got the impression that Shinigami was condemning the murder. I mean, she’s laughing in that last screenshot. Coming from her, “ruthless” and “disgusting” are compliments.

Plus she kinda has to convince Yuma, who is feeling really fucking conflicted about the fact that he’s about to kill three children, that he did the right thing by unveiling the truth. But being Shinigami she obviously goes about it in the most tactless manner possible. In the end all she cares about is that someone is murdered, the murder is solved, and she gets to reap the murderer’s soul. Nothing about her behaviour here contradicts that.

────────

As to the thing with Yakou: Why is it a bad thing for us to know what Yuma thinks of the situation? As the main character he is the person whose thoughts and opinions I’m interested in the most, because I’m seeing the story unfold through his eyes. I don’t have to agree with every word he says just because I control his movements. After all I’m not playing as myself in this game, I’m playing as a person who already existed in the world the story takes place in before the game started.

Why in the world would I not want to know how the most important person in the story feels about the tragic loss of the most important person in his life? Should he have said nothing at all?

────────

And, oh boy, the Eva thing...

Yes, Tozu hiding the perk behind a math puzzle was targeted at Eva specifically. Yes, everyone treating Eva like shit because of Wolfgang is horrible. Yes, some of the other students might be hypocritical since we don’t know what they would have done under the same circumstances.

And also, Eva chose to accept the perk and use it to try to kill 15 people of her own volition.

Of all people, Grace is the most justified in hating Eva after the trial because Eva assaulted, drugged, and brutally murdered her boyfriend. In fact I am surprised that Grace didn’t physically attack her before the execution.

Eva’s backstory is incredibly tragic, but why the hell would the other characters except for Diana and Damon care in this moment? The first thing Eva did when they met her was lie to them, and then a week later she tries to get them all killed just to save herself. Not only that, she murders Wolfgang, who is liked by almost everyone, makes one of the only people who actually care about her watch him die, and then tries to frame both her and the only other person who can stand her for the murder.

And then once all of that gets revealed, she lashes out at everyone and tells them how much they all suck. Which, once again, is a very understandable reaction, but what emotions do you expect the other characters to feel in this moment exactly? Why would they not vocalise their feelings? Why would they not insult the person who just a few minutes prior almost succeeded at killing them all? And why would they not try to make themselves feel better about the impending execution by positioning themselves as inherently better than Eva? It’s almost like this chapter is about hypocrisy or something.

Nobody is in the right here. We’ve got a traumatised person who committed an atrocity because she thought it was her only way to survive, and several people who just had a near death experience and now get to take revenge against the person who put them through it.

No, I wouldn’t want Eva to be executed even if she had brutally murdered my boyfriend a few hours ago and then tried to kill me as well. But some people would. There’s a reason why we still have the death penalty here in the real world.

I’m sorry, but this is not “bad writing”. This is characters in a story saying things you personally wouldn’t say.

Danganronpa Pet Peeve

Trigger Happy Havoc - Leon Kuwata:

Trigger Happy Havoc - Mondo Owada:

Trigger Happy Havoc - Celestia Ludenberg:

Goodbye Despair - Teruteru Hanamura:

Killing Harmony - Kaede Akamatsu:

Killing Harmony - Kokichi Ouma:

Master Detective Archives: Rain Code - Yoshiko, Waruna and Kurane:

Master Detective Archives: Rain Code - Yakou Furio:

The Moon of Hope and Sun of Despair - Void:

Project: Eden's Garden - Eva Tsunaka: