#What adult actually indulges in a 7 y/o's self sacrifice for your own LUXURY!?!!! my godssssss

[chibimyumi]

What do you think about OCiel and Vincent? What is their relationship? When we see Vincent he is always with RCiel and he hug him and not our earl, and when OCiel talk about Vincent he call him his predecessor and not his father!

Dear Anon,

That is a very good question because that is indeed very hard to tell. The Book of Flashbacks did last for very long in real time, but we actually only saw the interaction between Vincent and O!Ciel sporadically spread across 4 chapters.

Though it had been short, in the very least there is some level of objectivity because the flashbacks are being told by the omniscient storyteller. It could not have been O!Ciel, R!Ciel or Takana’s subjective pov, because in most scenes at least one of them was missing. However, that it was told by the omniscient storyteller doesn’t mean we have seen everything. Yana does leave things out when its unnecessary like a competent storywriter would. We don’t need to know everything. In storytelling often “less is more”.

Now with that caveat established, let us look at whatever interaction we do see. But before we do so, we must first discuss what “parental love” even is.

What is parental love?

In the flashbacks Vincent’s affection is indeed mostly for his firstborn son. Even though we want to believe all parents love all their children equally and naturally, sometimes parents just love one child a little bit more. Even if parents do love all their children equally, it is also nothing weird that they “like” one child more than the other. Not unlike any other relationship, love between parent and child is also something that grows from building and investing in. Parental love is not a magically natural element in our DNA after all, as researched by Prof. Sarah Blaffer Hrdy on the “social construct of parental love”. Don’t worry, no need for moral panic; that parental love is socially constructed doesn’t make it any less deep or real. It’s just that because parental love too needs building, the more positive interaction you have with a child, the stronger the bond often.

Because O!Ciel was so sickly from age five on it hindered him from normal participation in family activities. Therefore it is only normal that Vincent could bond less with him, making his greater closeness with his elder son quite inevitable.

Vincent’s closeness with R!Ciel is in fact more out of the ordinary for their time. At least until early 20th century fathers did not have a parental role as we know it now. They were responsible as the “legal owners” of the child, but “parenting” was not part of their duty. It is not for nothing that when we hear “mothering” most people think of “child-rearing, raising and loving”, but when we hear “fathering”, it’s just... impregnating someone. Because that had been the actual definition for centuries!

Vincent’s parental love?

In chapter 131 I would argue we get the best indication of how far Vincent’s love goes for his second son. They had a family trip planned, but due to illness O!Ciel could not participate. In the back Vincent does look appropriately concerned, but we don’t know about what exactly. Put a pin📌 in there, I will come back to this a bit later.

Rachel judged O!Ciel’s condition too ill to go, and suggested postponing the boat trip, not Vincent. (In Japanese “we can go another time” was spoken in a speech pattern Vincent doesn’t use, so it’s definitely Rachel talking.)

Vincent doesn’t say anything so we don’t know what he thought about his wife’s proposal. Meanwhile, his seven-year-old had already selflessly offered to stay behind as not to spoil the fun of others.

What really caught my attention was how there was so little attempt to include O!Ciel. Rachel only said one “but...” and then immediately gave in to a seven-year-old.

Vincent did not even attempt to not exclude his son. He was like:

That is what I meant earlier by: “we don’t know about what exactly [he is concerned about]”  where I asked you to put the pin📌. It might as well have been:

Vincent and Rachel are rich adults, they should be able to judge that them skipping one boat-trip is something they can get over with. Leaving a young child behind who is regularly excluded from everything and clearly so upset having to be excluded again was apparently a less bigger deal than skipping something they could easily afford again. O!Ciel was so used to being excluded he had normalised that for himself, and was forced to learn selfless sacrifice. That is not healthy for any child that young!

If you can’t tell that this poor child was lying about “everything being fine” you’re actively unseeing it. R!Ciel is but a seven-year-old, so he is blameless. Papa, mama, looking at you though! ( Ò_Ó💢) I mean, dear readers, would any of you have left a sick young child behind to go on a trip??? It could be that Vincent really wanted to bring his recovered wife on a trip and that’s important to him, but to sacrifice your sick child for that?

We have not seen everything to judge whether in total Rachel was more, equally, or less often ill than O!Ciel. However, from what we have seen, every time O!Ciel was excluded, Rachel in the very least was doing better. This really paints a picture that overall, Rachel misses out on stuff less often than O!Ciel had to. And again, unlike young children, as an adult you can rationalise that. In my opinion if you’re unwilling to reschedule a trip to include everyone while it is within your ability, you are selfish parents. R!Ciel wouldn’t have thrown a tantrum, but even if he did, it’s your literal job as parents to rationalise that with him. So doing it for R!Ciel is no excuse.

“Predecessor” instead of “father”?

Yes that is indeed an interesting point you bring up! After O!Ciel returned as the Earl he indeed only referred to his parents as “father and mother” at the graves one last time. Afterwards she has consistently referred to Vincent as “predecessor”.

I however would argue this has nothing to do with his bond (or lack thereof) with Vincent. He also refers to R!Ciel using the formal term for brother (兄・ani) instead of the better-known “niisan” (big bro). And we know for a fact that they did have a deep bond. I would say that O!Ciel calling Vincent “predecessor” is because he does not wish to be seen as childish because he is trying to be taken as an adult.

In Japanese “father” as used by O!Ciel is “otousama” (お父様), which is polite but a bit childish. “Otousama” is vocative, meaning it is a word you use to call your own father; like “papa”. In formal company you won’t say to someone: “my papa said...” That sounds very childish and unprofessional. People nowadays do use the common version “otousan” to refer to their own father to others, but that is generally only acceptable in casual company. To my friends I might say: “my papa (otousan) said”, but to my superiours I would NEVER.

As O!Ciel never again addresses his father (because he is dead), it is only logical that he stopped using the vocative “otousama”. For nobles when talking about their late fathers, using “predecessor” is actually standard in Japanese culture. It is just one of the things that are natural in Japanese but get clunky in translation.

Conclusion

For Victorian standards Vincent’s involvement (or lack thereof) with O!Ciel was actually entirely normal. It was his involvement with his elder son that was quite exceptional. Judging from his lack of attempt to not exclude his sick child however, I would say Vincent didn’t love O!Ciel as much as he did R!Ciel. (Or... he just hated missing out on fun more than he loved O!Ciel, which is possible too). Not saying he did not love O!Ciel, just not as much as he did others.

Vincent was raised in a male-supremacist, ableist society, and was probably unaffected by these problems being an able-bodied, smart man himself. We know Vincent is a terrible exploiter and how he treats others, and therefore it would be unsurprising if he would hold his “disabled” male child in lesser regard than his “able” male eldest child. We don’t know why Vincent married Rachel or why he liked her, but women being frail was in fact considered no problem or even “attractive” in the 19th century (as long as she could get babies). For men though? SHAME!