So I'm Not Going To Start Like An Anti-Chiron Tag Because I Don't Find That Enjoyable Personally, But

So I'm not going to start like an Anti-Chiron tag because I don't find that enjoyable personally, but every so often people ask why I dislike him so here's essentially a "masterpost" of my thoughts on that situation for when anyone asks, just so I have it to explain some...

This isn't nearly a full list, and there's many more "incidents" that make me less than fond of Chiron, I don't hate the old man but he leaves a bad taste in my mouth and I'm not a fan of that. He's a very twisted character.

- The Lightning Thief

This quote is literally just after Percy's mom "dies", they're all sitting on the porch of the Big House right after he's finally woken up after days of sleeping, and that's the line Chiron pulls out on him.

That's straight up emotional manipulation which was entirely unnecessary in the context of what Chiron was trying to explain. There wasn't a single reason for that, in the slightest.

Immediately following that, and Percy, who canonically has anger issues, does his best to remain calm, he is immediately threatened by Dionysus, and Chiron doesn't even tell Dionysus off for doing that; Chiron just let's it happen. It's Grover who has to speak up to tell Dionysus off...

The only reason Chiron comes out looking like a old guy in this scene is because Dionysus was so much worse in his behavior, at one point intimidating Percy with his power over madness.

- The Titan's Curse

This is the aftermath of when Nico ran away upon confirmation of Bianca's death. When Percy is telling Chiron about the situation, Chiron wishes Nico had been eaten alive rather than recruited into an army.

He'd rather a child be dead than fight against him, and he openly tells this to other children he's in charge of. If Percy went missing would he have said "I hope he was eaten <3" as well?

I don't blame Perry for not delivering the truth here, it was done in an effort to protect Nico; which wasn't something Annabeth had planned on doing... I don't blame Annabeth for that though either, she's been beneath Chiron so long that she probably doesn't realize the shady stuff he does, and to her "going to tell" probably was the "right" move because she was a child...

But the fact that Chiron believes Nico truly would be better off eaten than alive :/

- Tower of Nero

This quote from Tower of Nero shows that Chiron lied to a bunch of young children (most of them were young because the older campers are largely dead because of the war or too old for camp now). It wasn't just a little white lie that adults sometimes tell kids either; they were walking into battle and he told them it was a field trip.

Did he even begin to explain the danger he was putting these kids in? Did the children understand their situation? And how dangerous it was?

Kayla has been blindsided over the years into thinking that telling children they're going on a field trip instead of fighting a battle is something to make a joke of and not be questioned... (Again, I don't blame her she's only like 12 in the book, but still)

Apollo also agrees, which isn't on Chiron but it's a whole mother reason why I can't stand Rick's interpretation of Apollo...

<><><><><>

This isn't me being like "oh Chiron is the worst most evil character ever" I just think that he has numerous flaws which are largely ignored in favor of the "perfect wise teacher" narrative when in fact Chiron and Dumbledore share a lot of.. Offputting qualities.

I do think that some of the situation is simply a result of Chiron having his hands tied behind his back by the gods some. And he even goes so far as to confirm this in a scene of TLT

However many of the scenes in which he exhibits behaviors like that in my first three screenshots are not related to anything the gods require and are, in fact, of Chiron's own free will.

Some things I would blame Zeus and the council for, such as how he withholds information from Percy to an excessive amount for long periods of time even when Percy straight up asks about things. I could easily see that being Zeus trying to prevent Percy from claiming the prophecy as his own, and I could see reasoning that maybe Chiron had sworn over the River Styx or something similar.

But those things don't apply to Chiron making such an unnecessary comment about Percy's mother so close to her "death". It doesn't explain why he would say he hoped Nico had been eaten out loud, and it doesn't cover the fact that he led children into a battlefield without telling them that's what was happening.

I think the context of Chiron's choices and comments would be different if the campers were older. If they were in their late teens or early twenties for the most part, I wouldn't really have much to say about how Chiron handled the situation.

But this man is in charge of children and extremely young teenagers, Percy is only 12 in TLT, maybe if he would have been 16 or 17 then I could give Chiron a pass, but he wasn't. Within the context of the comment he made in the Titan's Curse, Percy is only 14 and Nico is 10 at the beginning of the book... You don't wish a 10 year old had been eaten alive by a monster no matter how bad you think the alternative is, and if you do wish that you don't say it out loud to a group of other children. In the battle from Tower of Nero we get a quick look at the battlefield, and although Ben's age, and the age of another girl fighting alongside him are never confirmed they are implied to be fairly young, and we know Kayla is only 12 at the time too; yet Chiron told them it was a field trip instead of a battle, limiting the time they would have to mentally prepare themselves for what was coming.

On top of that, the nods the reader gets to the fact that Chiron can't act out against the gods depletes over the course of the series. After TLT the amount of times the situation involves the gods interfering with what Chiron is allowed to say lessens, and by the time the Heroes of Olympus series comes around, these limitations on his speech is almost entirely gone. Yet as seen in Tower of Nero he still does morally questionable things in regards to how he treats the campers.

Like I said, I recognize that in many scenes Chiron's hands are tied behind his back because of the gods.. But there are undeniably things he does of his own free will that are, in the nicest manner, very :/

This also isn't a full list of comparisons just a few notable scenes. I don't think Chiron is equally as bad as Dumbledore, but I think it undeniable that Chiron has some significant flaws built into his character design.

A good character has flaws, and there's nothing wrong with having a character that doesn't always conduct themselves properly or have good intentions- it's actually good writing, and I can appreciate that, but for some reason I find myself personally rubbed the wrong way by Chiron. This doesn't make Chiron badly written, or poorly designed, in fact I would say Rick's Chiron is very well designed in lots of ways, but I just don't like how it's never acknowledged by anyone in the series.

Like I said, I'm not starting an anti-Chiron situation, I just think little events like those mentioned, the way he's built a child army, and how he doesn't even try to plead with the gods over raising the ages on campers being allowed to battle is a little sus. But it more so bothers me that there's no attention payed to this problem anywhere in the books, not even by a side character or Luke, nowhere.

I don't actually care that much and this isn't that important to me, but sometimes people ask why I don't like Chiron and this is basically just my explanation to hand off to them... It's not even so much that I dislike Chiron entirely, he's well written and has his "good" moments, I just don't like the way other characters interact with him and his actions.

It's more a personal beef with him rather than an aspect of poor writing or him "being bad"... PJO in general (and HoO/ToA to a much lesser extent) shows that there's not such an inherent good vs bad in the world, and that sometimes people are victims of circumstances in some situations, or they're horribly misguided in their actions, but the series does a good job of showing those people as human still, and I applaud that.

I don't really know how to tie this up in its entirety, but there's nothing wrong with having a morally grey character who does questionable things and in many aspects it is good writing. I think Chiron is a result of Rick not thinking through the implications what he's doing in lots of situations, and I can see a fairly consistent drop in Chiron's characterization from PJO-ToA which is consistent with most other aspects of Rick's work.

I also want to clarify that if you like Chiron and disagree with me, that's absolutely 110% okay, I just personally dislike Chiron and that's on me. Like my problem with many of Rick's other immortal characters, I think he missed important aspects of them in some manner and slightly (or entirely in some cases) mischaracterized them in comparison to their original myths.. Some of these characters he came around on and fixed their character in many aspects to their more "correct" characterization (like Hera), while others (like Chiron and Apollo) he never quite figured them out. Which is a running complaint I have with Rick so I'm just adding this to his tab.

But yeah, I don't hate Chiron I just dislike him and those are different things, and I don't think it's a bad thing to have a morally questionable character, Chiron just personally rubs me the wrong way and I just wanted to explain that more fully because I've been asked about it multiple times.

Also I apologize for not adding a [read more] to this, it's a complaint of mine often when scrolling through the tags but I'm on mobile currently and don't have immediate access to a computer so~

Near and L are not “basically the same character.”

So the opinion that Near is basically a cheap rip off of L has made me headtilt for years. As someone who adored both L and Near for different reasons, seeing people dismiss Near for apparently being “the same” just never sat well with me. While I do personally consider the criticism that Near’s story arc was weaker than L’s valid, I don’t think the criticism that Near is a “bad character” because he’s basically L is. As an anon asked me on my old blog what my opinions were on this, I decided to re-post my observations here for consideration. 

Outward Expressivity

Near is much more open about his sarcasm and taunting

L tends to be offensive in backhanded ways.

Near is also more visually expressive. Near often  looks disdainful, irritated, exasperated or smug.

L, while also expressive, tends to be more consistently deadpan and he talks more with his body language (clenched fists/grit teeth) than he does with his facial expressions

Near’s body language is distinctive and he tends to carry himself in defensive postures. This appears to be entirely genuine as we see his body language has not changed from when we see him at the Wammy’s house flashback

L’s characteristic slouched posture is entirely feigned as evidenced by his early appearances in the manga and his mannerisms tend to appear calibrated to prompt very specific responses.

Near often uses toys to help communicate his ideas

L does not use any props to communicate

Attitude towards Teamwork

L makes it quite clear as the most intelligent person in the room, what he says goes. He is authoritarian in his approach to teamwork. He issues orders and expects his team members to obey.

Near is team player. While he clearly wields ultimate authority, Near makes a point to seek out the opinions of his team before proceeding with his decisions.

L will belittle team members who are trying to help him. His response upon finding out Matsuda has chosen to infiltrate the Yotsuba Group on his own is to immediately belittle him in front of the entire team by calling him stupid.

Near, while blunt, does not belittle those who are on his team. Notably, he finds out Lidner undermines his plan to keep everything as normal as possible before Jan28th 2010 by allowing Mello to kidnap Kiyomi. He does not immediately belittle her for ineptitude.

Morality

L states in Chapter 109 that he does not care about morality and that the only thing that matters to him is winning by any means.

Near places greater value on a moral compass and stresses that he opposes Kira because he had determined for himself that it was the right thing to do.

L will take drastic actions that violate human rights in order to secure evidence. L will keep people in detention for as long as necessary to force them to confess if he believes they are guilty.

Near does not take drastic action until he has more evidence to back up his own theories.

(That said I will concede this could be due to the confounding effect of Near not having the same political power as L does by the time he rises to prominence in 2009).

L wishes to turn Kira over to the authorities and personally see to it that he is executed.

Near determines that he would rather have Kira imprisoned in a secret facility for life.

(Though the confounder here may be that the political climate of the world of DN in 2009 is more hostile to the idea of giving Kira a criminal trial than it was in 2004).

L wanted every Kira caught and convicted.

Near, despite having confirmation that Misa is the second Kira, does not press for her arrest at the conclusion of the series.

Self Reflection / Thought Processes

L will literally sulk for months over being wrong about his pet theories

Near is able to accept when he is wrong and will adjust accordingly without turning it into a personal tragedy.

L views the playing field like a dynamic chess board with an opponent who will react and respond to his actions.

Near views the field more like putting together a static puzzle

Hi. What's your take on people saying that ladrien is toxic because they only view each other as their "perfect" selves?

*Watches Ladrien mutually trip all over themselves trying to appear smooth in front of their crush*

*Watches how Ladrien scenes seem to almost always highlight the similarities between Adrien and Marinette in these moments*

*Sees how Ladrien scenes are Cat Noir facing his crush without the shield of his secret identity*

*Sees how Ladrien scenes are Marinette facing her crush with a shield of a secret identity*

So, hot take: Ladrien is actually just Adrinette from Marinette's perspective and Ladynoir from Adrien's perspective. "Ladrinette" doesn't exist by itself, so how could it possibly have traits that the other corners of the lovesquare don't?

Also, if anyone tries to come at me with that "Marinette idolizes Adrien" and "Adrien idolizes Ladybug" stuff I'll just say: they saw each other at their most awkward before they ever fell in love with the other, they romanticize each other now because they fell in love with those imperfect selves first and decided that they could love those less perfect parts of them as well.

Marinette decided that the Adrien who let somebody accuse him of bullying just to take the flack for a childhood friend was kind rather than a pathetic doormat. Adrien decided that the Ladybug who wanted to quit at the slightest difficulty but still managed to pick herself up again was caring rather than a pathetic flake. They saw the most pathetic parts of each other and, rather than pitying them, they fell in love.

athenasolives asked: Do you have any thoughts on meaning behind characters’ Japanese  pronouns (ie. Light using “boku”)? 

Yes!! I think the pronouns characters use are really interesting. As a disclaimer, I’m not a native Japanese speaker and have never lived in Japan myself, so my opinions are largely based on picking the brains of native-speaker friends and research. Unlike English, Japanese tends to omit “I” from sentences. Leaving in personal pronouns comes off as really odd and a sign that whoever is speaking that way is not a native speaker or that they’re on the arrogant/self important side. All of which is to say that personal pronoun choice is important and also interesting because they don’t usually come up in conversation unless for emphasis. As you mentioned Light, I’ll go over my thoughts on him specifically, but the subject of patterns of speech in DN in general could really just be its own tl;dr post, haha.

Continuar lendo

Do you believe her now Alya lol

VOTE 1

Talking to Sasuke wasn't going to change his decision at that moment and Naruto punches him because it was the only form of communication he knew how to do in that situation. They can understand each other only by clenching their fists and hitting hard. Sasuke never broke his eye contact with Naruto when receiving each punch and he never tried to dodge his punches. And also, Sasuke spat blood in Naruto's face, not breaking his eye contact, he's like: 'Are you done, does that make you feel better?'. Eye contact is a very emotional thing, and when you're already in an emotional situation, eye contact can amplify those feelings. That's why Naruto was also shocked & wondering: why didn't you avoid it? Why? Because It hurts him too.

Sasuke was so close underneath him that he could see Naruto's pained expression as he told Sasuke that the fight he always wanted wasn't the (hospital) fight, which was why his pain was reflected in Sasuke's eyes as well. Because Naruto doesn't want to hurt him. This wasn't the kind of fight he wanted with Sasuke. He says he doesn't want to hurt him even at that moment, but Sasuke doesn't let him finish what he was about to say. Because Sasuke knows. He knows. Naruto's pain has a great effect on him. So he started hitting him back.

VOTE 2

[That's hell of a powerful scream... Sasuke]

In the vote2, Sasuke avoids eye contact with Naruto while screaming (loudly) and punching him hard. He can't bear the thought of hurting Naruto. He doesn't want to see emotional pain (or sadness) in his eyes because he caused it. [[Oi Oii, don't say anything bad about Sasuke bcz Naruto accepted Sasuke as Sasuke, declaring that he was the only one who could carry his burden and die with him. It was his own responsibility and no one else's]]. You can see that Sasuke is in pain from his facial expressions of lowering his eyebrows, raising his cheeks, tightening his eyelids, screaming, and closing his eyes. And Naruto doesn't break eye contact from him. As if he saying 'Does that make you feel better, Sasuke?'. Because of that, in the next panel, Sasuke doesn't look directly at him, just closes his eyes and aims a punch with a scream. One reason he had closed his eyes was to escape the pain. Another thing is that Naruto knows Sasuke better than anyone, when Sasuke punches Naruto, he can clearly see Sasuke's face when he's underneath him, so he knows what emotions are reflected in his eyes. Even if he closes his eyes, he knows. He is in pain. Hurting each other doesn't make either of them feel better.