I've been wondering about the whole spirited away element.
So apparently, there's been multiple people who have been spirited away at this point. But at some point, wouldn't there be some kind of major news or something surrounding this phenomenon, if a significant enough individual disappears? It could be that this is a rare phenomenon, but if that's the case then it seems odd that suddenly there's a bunch of people who've experienced it all in the same place (if they have, indeed, also been spirited away).
Alternatively, the phenomenon only occurs in this town...but if that's the case, you would think that a trend of people disappearing on tanabata would be noticed by someone.
Hmm.

I've been wondering about the whole spirited away element.
So apparently, there's been multiple people who have been spirited away at this point. But at some point, wouldn't there be some kind of major news or something surrounding this phenomenon, if a significant enough individual disappears? It could be that this is a rare phenomenon, but if that's the case then it seems odd that suddenly there's a bunch of people who've experienced it all in the same place (if they have, indeed, also been spirited away).
Alternatively, the phenomenon only occurs in this town...but if that's the case, you would think that a trend of people disappearing on tanabata would be noticed by someone.
Hmm.

Kamagaya's question to Aya is the first indication that anybody in this entire storyworld besides the people who know Aya's exact situation believes in the supernatural "spirited away" phenomenon at all. (And even Aya's outer circle of friends are more like "Hmm, weird" rather than positively believing in the supernatural.) So the upshot of her question remains to be seen (besides the strong hint that it also happened to her brother).

I do agree that it's been rather an odd (but as others have said, not completely inexplicable) note up to this point that nobody seems too amazed by what happened with Aya (no journalistic interest in her return, say) while at the same time there's no evidence that such Tanabata disappearances are a known and accepted thing.

last edited at Dec 29, 2024 11:24AM

Aya's maturity and self-assurance is a facade. She is a broken girl with deep-set abandonment issues who (in the past) literally -- albeit semi-unconsciously -- tested Koto on whether or not she would continue to love her despite being rejected, and fell in love with her only because she became convinced that Koto will love her no matter what.

Wow, you almost got exact the same character analysis as me. I'm surprised, just WOW. Glad there are more people understand her actually having the most distorted mindset out of the trio.

She is a 14-year-old who was forced to mature way faster than she should have due to the failures of the adults in her life, but that doesn't mean she's actually mature, it means she pathologically hides her vulnerabilities and weaknesses because she fundamentally lacks faith that anyone could possibly love the real her.

However, chapter 15 is Aya's first time (lol) showing her vulnerabilities and weaknesses towards Koto. She wants Koto (only Koto) to see the real her while Erika can be as usual. I believe she does have changed as she said.

Don't want to talk about Erika this time. Not like l care about her anyways.

I don’t disagree with the main character-analysis points you make, but I don’t see the necessity, or even the utility, of putting those ideas in terms of “attacking or defending Erika” (or any of the other characters).

I once knew a therapist whose litany when people would voice their view of a situation, often in an aggrieved tone, would be to say, “Try that again without the judgement.” Readers here often seem to assume that it’s a given how someone should behave ethically in a situation where a close friend is spirited away in adolescence and then returns unchanged when the rest of their cohort has become adults. But, as I have been saying, one substantial point of the whole supernatural element here seems to be to put these characters into an ambiguous relation to one another that is both familiar and unprecedented. So much of this business about how the characters “should” feel or act seems to ignore the very founding premise of the story.

I agree with this. That analysis was going completely fine until it hit the dumb factionalism stuff. I think it's worth exploring one idea in particular there, that Erika's biggest weakness is not about her feelings or relationship to Koto, but her feelings or relationship to Aya. I feel like this last chapter has made it pretty clear if it wasn't already that Erika's handling her long-term unrequited love about as healthy as anyone could reasonably expect from a person. Even back at 14, her negative emotions wrt Koto and Aya were fairly subdued and mostly just sad, compared to her competition with Unbeatable Rival Aya, which would get Erika doing things like childishly racing up the stairs and shouting swears in the middle of club meetings. She's obviously gotten much better at keeping a lid on those outbursts now as an adult, but obviously it requires more emotional work than her interactions with Koto, based on how it's once again getting under her skin with the acting. And yet, she's still supportive of Aya acting. She's still inviting Koto to come see them both, with Aya's permission. She still wants Aya and Koto to be together to some degree because she cares about them and knows they care about each other, even though them continuing contact risks romance reappearing. Living with Aya and taking care of her changed her image of Aya from Unbeatable Rival Aya to Hard Life Aya to some degree, even if Erika doesn't know the details she could tell Aya was in a vulnerable place. As Aya gets into acting and Erika's insecurities flare up, she's still completely fine with Aya as a friend. Erika's problem is, as it has always been, with herself. Erika's flaws hurt herself, not her friends. In this way you could say she's very similar to Aya, her external presentation a front that's far more mature and healthy, covering a lot of swallowed pain and anxiety in a way that's probably long-term not in her best interests. Two characters defined by their desperate unmet need for therapy, lmao. The primary difference between them and Koto, of course, is that Koto is just not good at masking the pain like Erika and Aya are. She's still in desperate need of therapy lol.
I think their dynamic is super interesting, and I'm rooting for all three to end up happy, however that looks in the end. :)

last edited at Dec 29, 2024 12:41PM

which would get Erika doing things like childishly racing up the stairs and shouting swears in the middle of club meetings. 

@Gabinomicon
LOL
In fact, Erika had never shouted swears in the middle of club meetings. Though l can somehow speculate a bit why translator chose to translate that word the way he had.
Remember this, we are not even equal in discussing this manga considering you eventually have to rely on other people to translate it for you. It's a good example now.

Just like any number of people in real life have said something in anger to someone and then regretted it when something happened to that person.

Or people who didn't do even that much but feel guilty simply for surviving when others didn't: "survivor's guilt".

Is it just me or does it seem like if Koto and Erika was planned to be a couple, that they made it too obvious, such that it may seem unlikely that they actually end up together? Like Aya if the final boss for them and it is laid up somewhat clearly for Erika to take the place by Koto's side, but is that really all there is to conquer her past traumas regarding Aya and get with the one she loves?

which would get Erika doing things like childishly racing up the stairs and shouting swears in the middle of club meetings. 

@Gabinomicon
LOL
In fact, Erika had never shouted swears in the middle of club meetings. Though l can somehow speculate a bit why translator chose to translate that word the way he had.
Remember this, we are not even equal in discussing this manga considering you eventually have to rely on other people to translate it for you. It's a good example now.

Pretty sure my being a well adjusted adult with romantic experience and an earnest interest in discussing the fiction she likes with other like-minded people trumps your knowledge that she yelled "kuso" instead of literally "bullshit" that one time. :)

I don’t disagree with the main character-analysis points you make, but I don’t see the necessity, or even the utility, of putting those ideas in terms of “attacking or defending Erika” (or any of the other characters).

I once knew a therapist whose litany when people would voice their view of a situation, often in an aggrieved tone, would be to say, “Try that again without the judgement.” Readers here often seem to assume that it’s a given how someone should behave ethically in a situation where a close friend is spirited away in adolescence and then returns unchanged when the rest of their cohort has become adults. But, as I have been saying, one substantial point of the whole supernatural element here seems to be to put these characters into an ambiguous relation to one another that is both familiar and unprecedented. So much of this business about how the characters “should” feel or act seems to ignore the very founding premise of the story.

I think this is an overly literal way to look at stories. This story is utilizing its supernatural premise in order to put its major themes -- objectification through over-idealization, children growing up too fast, how a refusal to deal with the past damages your ability to act in the present, etc -- in stark relief. The upshot of the story isn't just "wouldn't it suck if someone got spirited away for seven years." It's saying something about humans and their relationships in the real world. And if you're going to seriously engage with those themes, that will necessarily include making moral judgments on the characters' actions.

Now, this does not mean dividing the characters into "the good one(s)" and "the bad one(s)." I have no interest in doing that, which is why I didn't do it in my post. All three major characters have significant flaws that cause them to hurt those closest to them. The story is exploring how those flaws corrupt the characters' relationships with each other despite the genuine care they all have (I do think Erika cares deeply for Aya, she just can't admit it to herself because of her pathological guilt complex). But if you refuse to judge anything the characters do at all, you can't even describe their flaws as flaws, just as neutral character descriptors or something. I think that would be missing something important.

Wow, you almost got exact the same character analysis as me. I'm surprised, just WOW. Glad there are more people understand her actually having the most distorted mindset out of the trio.

Well, I think they all have an extremely distorted mindset. I don't really rank any of them as being better or worse.

I think it's worth exploring one idea in particular there, that Erika's biggest weakness is not about her feelings or relationship to Koto, but her feelings or relationship to Aya. I feel like this last chapter has made it pretty clear if it wasn't already that Erika's handling her long-term unrequited love about as healthy as anyone could reasonably expect from a person. . . . As Aya gets into acting and Erika's insecurities flare up, she's still completely fine with Aya as a friend. Erika's problem is, as it has always been, with herself. Erika's flaws hurt herself, not her friends.

You criticized me for getting into "dumb factionalism stuff," but what I meant is that the dumb factionalism stuff is causing some people (like Genevieve) to interpret Erika unfairly, while also causing others to interpret her more charitably than the text supports. And I think you're doing that in this post.

Erika's feelings for Koto are not separate from her feelings toward Aya. They are intimately tied together. In Erika's mind, "dating Koto" and "beating Aya" are, effectively, the same thing. That's why she turned Koto down as high schoolers, because dating Koto would be meaningless unless it meant she would be winning over Aya in the process. (Ignore the spirited away stuff and imagine Aya just died -- which is, of course, what Erika had actually believed at the time -- and you'll see just how fucked up this attitude is.) That's why now, even though there is literally nothing stopping her from actually telling Koto her feelings, she's still focused on winning against Aya. She is just as obsessed with Aya as Koto is, just in a different way.

And this is precisely why Erika's flaws hurt her friends as well as herself. As I've argued, it's causing her to neglect Aya's emotional needs at a time when Aya is intensely vulnerable. As for Koto, it's causing her to refuse to actually be honest with her, and well, put yourself in Koto's shoes for a second. Imagine learning that your closest friend has been in love with you for effectively your entire life, that even as you've relied on them for advice about your relationships, the entire time they've been secretly wishing for you to break up and date them instead. Wouldn't you feel betrayed? I sure would!

which would get Erika doing things like childishly racing up the stairs and shouting swears in the middle of club meetings. 

@Gabinomicon
LOL
In fact, Erika had never shouted swears in the middle of club meetings. Though l can somehow speculate a bit why translator chose to translate that word the way he had.
Remember this, we are not even equal in discussing this manga considering you eventually have to rely on other people to translate it for you. It's a good example now.

Pretty sure my being a well adjusted adult with romantic experience and an earnest interest in discussing the fiction she likes with other like-minded people trumps your knowledge that she yelled "kuso" instead of literally "bullshit" that one time. :)

She just yelled なんでよwhich is just "why?".

I found it a bit bland, when she seems to be really pissed off, so I adjusted a bit. I don't think "bullshit" is a very strong swear, just something an irritated 14yo could say.

While I was always be the #1 white knight of Erikasama and ever ready to rush to m'lady's defence*, I would like to point out that this is how I described Aya back on page 39.

The reading of Aya as remarkable and selfless doesn't totally fit to me. She made Koto confess multiple times before giving an answer, she seems to have been testing Koto to see if Koto would still love her (even later thinking, this isn't the love I was looking for or something like that, rather than that being in a relationship like that would be bad for Koto), she was relieved her only surviving family member was dead, and she may have had some role in her disappearance.

This to me reads like someone who is afraid of commitment and emotionally stunted in some ways. This makes sense if we think of her as someone who had to 'grow up fast' to meet her responsibilities and never got to have a typical childhood. A child like that will seem mature relative to other kids who are goofing off, but they can only meet those obligations by neglecting other areas of their life. This would explain her past desire to escape and be free, as she would have felt burdened by all the expectations she had to meet.

The reason I said I think she needs less emotional support is because I have more faith in her ability to work out her issues on her own over time with a regular amount of support, whereas Koto and Erika seem to be digging their hole deeper at every opportunity. I'm not very invested in ranking them, however, nor am I very invested in the idea of Aya needing less.

I do think it's exceedingly unlikely they need exactly the same amount of support in the same way it's unlikely for three people to need exactly the same size living space. This doesn't mean I think any of them don't need emotional support or a decent living environment, but the specifics vary with time and circumstance.

@Blastaar

I don’t mean this dismissively, but I have always thought that we can take everything you say here for granted. As I have said before, it’s theoretically possible that this story will later morph into a Qualia the Purple-type “Erika alters the fabric of the entire universe with her Tanabata-wish powers” fantasy, but there’s absolutely no indication at this point that the author has any interest in doing that.

That might be unlikely, but Erika having inherited latent spiritual powers that could be activated under the right circumstances would be as good an explanation for what’s happened as any.

I think won't be the case because of the part about the couple who broke up despite making tanabata wishes to be together, only to end up together 7 years later. There was some reason for the author to include this information about fringe characters. In the lack of other explanation (eg, spirits and more magic could be introduced later and that would be fine), I think the tanabata works when two people very strongly and sincerely combine their wishes, meaning Aya also wished that she would disappear. This would seem more interesting for a psychological drama, given that we won’t likely be getting any cool exorcism scenes from Erika.

*This too is a joke.

last edited at Dec 29, 2024 3:47PM

I don’t view what I’m talking about as being “literal” as much as “neutral”—the idea that readers necessarily must make running moral evaluations of the behavior of characters in serial storytelling in order to “engage” with the themes of a story itself strikes me as excessively reductive.

There's a difference between having a "running moral evaluation" and judging the impact the characters' actions (and inactions) have on each other and how that impact related to the series' themes. Your objection appeared to be that I was judging the characters at all. While I agree with you that some people judge stories too moralistically, I think your stands swings way too hard in the other direction. Like I said, if we can't just the characters at all, we can't even call their flaws "flaws," as that's an inherently moralistic term.

And to dismiss the supernatural premise in this story as simply a tool for facilitating such moralism seems equally tendentious. If that were the case, why put these characters in a mysterious and unprecedented situation rather than just sending Aya away for 7 years (as many other stories have used unexplained but non-supernatural disappearances to create conflict)?

Because by doing it this way Aya has been literally (and not just figuratively) forced to grow up before she's ready, while Koto and Erika have been forced to literally confront their past relationships with her. The supernatural premise is used to literalize the themes in order to make them stand out more. And for extra drama of course.

The reason I said I think she needs less emotional support is because I have more faith in her ability to work out her issues on her own over time with a regular amount of support, whereas Koto and Erika seem to be digging their hole deeper at every opportunity. I'm not very invested in ranking them, however, nor am I very invested in the idea of Aya needing less.

I don't intend to pick on you, but it just stood out to me that you think (or at least thought at one point) that the 14 year old needs less emotional support than the 21 year olds. I just used it in my post because I think Erika (and Koto but I wasn't talking about her) clearly thinks the same way, and that helps show what her real flaws are.

What I quoted was from earlier than what you quoted - or in another words, this was already my opinion when you quoted me. You were taking a different message from my post than what I intended.

That said, I don't have a problem with the idea of an individual 14 year old needing less emotional support than an individual 21 year old. You may think it doesn't apply here, but it's not an unthinkable proposition in general. If you think that I am wrong and that there is no 14 year who needs less emotional support than even a single 21 year old, regardless of their respective circumstances, then I wouldn't mind responding to that idea if you explained more.

Still, in terms of this story, I never commented on the degree any of them need support in absolute (rather than relative) terms, always believed they were all struggling, and have never said otherwise in any post. Aya would appear to be doing the best emotionally to me, but we also know she is good at hiding her suffering. Having a debate that hinges on hidden, yet to be revealed information would be very annoying, so I'd rather say my mind isn't made up and leave it at that.

last edited at Dec 29, 2024 6:40PM

I really really like Erika, i dont event know anymore i want aya koto or erika koto

It's kinda funny to me in all the talk of potential moral flaws and good person vs bad person and theorizing why Aya disappeared, nobody ever really mentions that scene from the end of volume 1 where Koto appears to be writing How To Break A Triangle as a script, planning what Aya does before she does it. And I think honestly it's understandable to shelf that because it's still so wildly inconsistent feeling with every other scene of the manga so far. I wouldn't be particularly surprised if we found out that was retconned out and replaced with something nowhere near as sinister looking for the volume lol. It's so disconnected tonally and thematically from everything else, and it clashes so hard with Koto being a) mostly passive and b) getting dumped by Aya anyway, that even if I want to analyze it all I can really do is throw some wild curveballs and hope I get lucky with my guesses rather than actually build a theory based on the story.

It's kinda funny to me in all the talk of potential moral flaws and good person vs bad person and theorizing why Aya disappeared, nobody ever really mentions that scene from the end of volume 1 where Koto appears to be writing How To Break A Triangle as a script, planning what Aya does before she does it. And I think honestly it's understandable to shelf that because it's still so wildly inconsistent feeling with every other scene of the manga so far. I wouldn't be particularly surprised if we found out that was retconned out and replaced with something nowhere near as sinister looking for the volume lol. It's so disconnected tonally and thematically from everything else, and it clashes so hard with Koto being a) mostly passive and b) getting dumped by Aya anyway, that even if I want to analyze it all I can really do is throw some wild curveballs and hope I get lucky with my guesses rather than actually build a theory based on the story.

That’s pretty much it—I think about that scene a good bit, but the more I do the less I know what to say about it.

Since we’ve mentioned principles of interpretation, the simplest way to think about the process is “pattern recognition + so what?” That is, perceiving patterns of repetition and variation, then considering the question, “what is the significance of the pattern?”

In this case, as you say, there aren’t very many other examples of purely symbolic/figurative representation, and the scene doesn’t really fit with other aspects of Koto’s character development. It clearly relates to the theatre/stage/acting theme in the series, but other than that, I got nothin’.

What I quoted was from earlier than what you quoted - or in another words, this was already my opinion when you quoted me. You were taking a different message from my post than what I intended.

That said, I don't have a problem with the idea of an individual 14 year old needing less emotional support than an individual 21 year old. You may think it doesn't apply here, but it's not an unthinkable proposition in general. If you think that I am wrong and that there is no 14 year who needs less emotional support than even a single 21 year old, regardless of their respective circumstances, then I wouldn't mind responding to that idea if you explained more.

Still, in terms of this story, I never commented on the degree any of them need support in absolute (rather than relative) terms, always believed they were all struggling, and have never said otherwise in any post. Aya would appear to be doing the best emotionally to me, but we also know she is good at hiding her suffering. Having a debate that hinges on hidden, yet to be revealed information would be very annoying, so I'd rather say my mind isn't made up and leave it at that.

When Aya learns her grandfather is dead, her first reaction is relief. Her parents abandoned her, her old friends stopped talking to her, and her grandmother told her (a middle schooler!) to take care of her grandfather by herself as he becomes riddled with dementia. When she comes back she has no family, no support system, no high school education. The only people she can rely on are Koto -- her much older girlfriend who ends up emotionally abusing her -- and Erika.

You don't need hidden, yet to be revealed information to see that her strong front is entirely a front and that on the inside she's at least as broken as Koto and Erika. It's all already there.

I suppose I just don’t see identifying character “flaws” in an ongoing story to be a particularly salient activity, and as we see again and again in Dynasty forums threads, it is one that is prone to categorical assertions based on personal and often highly incomplete readings of an already incomplete text.

So when I read Koto emotionally abusing Aya due to her intense trauma-induced abandonment anxiety, am I not supposed to view that as a "flaw" of hers? Even though it ends up deeply hurting Aya and herself, is it merely a neutral character trait that we should passively observe without judgment? I frankly don't believe you actually believe that.

As others have argued, and as Erika herself suggests, an even more immediate cause of her refusal is Erika’s belief that there’s no chance of the two of them having a real relationship as long as Koto is still carrying a torch for Aya.

Except, immediately beforehand, Erika thought "that place is nothing more than Aya's place" and compared it to when she acted in the play after Aya's disappearance, and speculated that everyone thought "if only Aya were here." And when she learned Koto and Aya started dating after Aya's reappearance, she said to herself, "Aya. With this, things are fair." Not to mention the ending to the most recent chapter, when she thinks she can only move forward if she can "stand on stage with Aya." With all this in mind, I think it's more likely that "I just need to wait for her to get over Aya" is merely another excuse. Especially because...

But Erika saying “Koto needs to resolve her feelings for Aya before she and I can have a solid romantic relationship” wouldn’t be a “fucked up” attitude at all, but rather pretty darned mature one.

At the time Erika turned Koto down, Aya was for all intents and purposes dead. Koto was trying to resolve her feelings for her by dating additional people. In a non supernatural story, that would pretty much be the only way to do it. But Erika didn't want to aid Koto in this process, because it meant she'd have to live in Aya's shadow. Instead she makes a wish that Aya comes back. That this wish somehow comes true doesn't change the fact that, at the time, it was effectively Erika giving up. So yeah I'd call that fucked up.

To be clear, I don't think Erika or even Koto are "bad people." I think they generally try to do the right thing and their flaws (as well as Aya's) are what makes them interesting characters. I like analyzing flawed characters. And if you disagree with my analysis, that's fine. But saying that I shouldn't even make the analysis in the first place -- or that if I should I shouldn't judge the characters' actions at all (even though you just judged Erika positively as "mature") isn't a discussion, it's a meta argument about whether or not we should have a discussion at all.

It's kinda funny to me in all the talk of potential moral flaws and good person vs bad person and theorizing why Aya disappeared, nobody ever really mentions that scene from the end of volume 1 where Koto appears to be writing How To Break A Triangle as a script, planning what Aya does before she does it. And I think honestly it's understandable to shelf that because it's still so wildly inconsistent feeling with every other scene of the manga so far. I wouldn't be particularly surprised if we found out that was retconned out and replaced with something nowhere near as sinister looking for the volume lol. It's so disconnected tonally and thematically from everything else, and it clashes so hard with Koto being a) mostly passive and b) getting dumped by Aya anyway, that even if I want to analyze it all I can really do is throw some wild curveballs and hope I get lucky with my guesses rather than actually build a theory based on the story.

Thank you for totally ignoring Koto's character in the entire manga which make fucking sense cause you are a Koto hater.

The end of the volume 1 is not even something hard to predict. Koto really not a reactive character as everyone here (lol) seems to believe, she is very active. She is the kind of girl who wouldn't hold back when it comes to her love. She tried everything she can to just by the side of the girl she loved. And she always managed to find her. She even confessed to Aya twice while her first confession was totally ignored. How many people actually have half courage of Koto? To think Erika never dare telling Koto how she feels lol.
And I never deny l do have bias against Erika. But she caused (it doesn't matter if she has intention) a ton of trauma on my girl and made her cry. At least Aya can make up for it (healing Koto etc). Erika is useless and can't help thinking of when she can have her goddamn shot, which is not even what Koto wants.

What exactly makes you think Koto being passive? That's a fucking insult towards her fascinating personality. Just like (some people on reddit) calling her a pedo it's reducing the complexity of her character.

@Gabinomicon

trumps your knowledge that she yelled "kuso" instead of literally "bullshit" that one time. :)

LOL
Where does this one even come from?
As much as l hate Erika, l will not frame her on something she never did.

@Eukene
I never think you are one of Erika defenders. But l got to admit l hope everyone turn on her because what she had done seven years ago (fought Aya and wished her away) is so unforgivable.

I'm starting to understand the dislike of moral arguments. I relate to getting very invested in stories, but this lens in discussions seems to lead to interpersonal conflicts more reliably than meaningful discussion.

In any case, my position is as stated: Aya as a character in a story has demonstrated more ability to confront her issues and adapt, rather than digging her hole deeper. This may not be the whole truth as we learn more about Aya, who is presented mysteriously, or I could be insane and have bad judgement, but then everyone will have to accept one of those existing and having internet access.

I never think you are one of Erika defenders. But l got to admit l hope everyone turn on her because what she had done seven years ago (fought Aya and wished her away) is so unforgivable.

It seems likely to me that wishing Aya away was a de facto an attempt to vent her feelings in a less harmful way. She couldn't talk to Koto and talking to Aya led to her and Aya both feeling worse. Telling someone she couldn't trust as much would be likely to lead to her secret getting out. Making a tanabata wish was like a level above venting on her instagram, except it actually happened. She regrets it from that point on.

I understand your position to be that a proper friend wouldn't have found themselves wishing harm on their friend in the first place, so that won't change anything for you. To me it's rather relatable, as most of us have likely found ourselves with negative emotions we didn't know what do with at some point.

In any case, my position is as stated: Aya as a character in a story has demonstrated more ability to confront her issues and adapt, rather than digging her hole deeper. This may not be the whole truth as we learn more about Aya, who is presented mysteriously, or I could be insane and have bad judgement, but then everyone will have to accept one of those existing and having internet access.

She had a mental breakdown because Koto introduced her as her relative, despite knowing Koto had no choice in the matter. As Erika observed, this happened because Aya views herself as a child, and hates herself for it. Aya then proceeded to put her strong front right back on and has never even attempted to deal with this.

I don't think you're insane or have bad judgment. I'm sorry if my posts have come across as aggressive, but I don't ever intend to personally attack anyone. I enjoy fictional analysis. I just disagree with your analysis of this particular fictional character.

That’s good, because you’ve misapplied the terms I was using. I don’t think Koto’s emotional abuse itself is neutral, but I see it as a situational negative action, rather than as a “character flaw” that defines her character’s essence. My “neutrality” is in leaving open the possibility that she will learn from her experience, at least to the extent of not repeating it.

I mean, have I ever once talked about a character's "essence"? Or said that both Koto and Erika are doomed forever to never learn or improve? It kind of feels like you're putting words in my mouth here.

But most examples of moral evaluation are for far less obviously egregious and far more ambiguous instances of character behavior. As one example off the top of my head, there was Erika telling Koto that Aya seemed “fine” after Aya had fled to Erika’s apartment. We see clearly that Erika strongly suspects that Aya must be hurting, and even characterizes Aya to herself as someone who may well have always hidden her own suffering.

A fair number of readers evaluated this scene negatively as Erika being duplicitous as part of her “get with Koto” plot, even though a “neutral” reading would be that Erika had no evidence that Aya was anything other than “fine,” and (as Aya’s friend as well as Koto’s) she had every reason to believe that the answer she gave Koto is precisely what Aya would want her to say.

My issue with what you're saying here isn't necessarily your analysis (I kind of disagree with it but I don't care too much), but in how you frame your position as the "neutral" reading while the people who disagree with you are (presumably) "non-neutral." Your position is not neutral; it is a particular, semi-subjective way of interpreting the text. There's no such thing as a "neutral" reading.

My issue with what you're saying here isn't necessarily your analysis (I kind of disagree with it but I don't care too much), but in how you frame your position as the "neutral" reading while the people who disagree with you are (presumably) "non-neutral." Your position is not neutral; it is a particular, semi-subjective way of interpreting the text. There's no such thing as a "neutral" reading.

If you somehow believe that “neutral” means the same thing as “objective,” we’d best end this conversation here. You concentrate on what you find most important in texts, and I’ll do the same.

I said "semi-subjective" lol. Presumably by "neutral" you meant something like "unbiased," but your interpretation is absolutely biased in that it's influenced by your point of view, just like everyone else's. It doesn't have privileged position over someone else's interpretation, even if that other person's interpretation is negative toward a character and yours is positive toward that character.

And my point is that what you find important in texts is not really any different from me. You are also applying moral judgments as you interpret a text, because you have to. You just insist that you aren't because, I suspect, your understandable frustration with people who sort fictional characters into "the good ones" and "the bad ones" has negatively polarized you into asserting that the very act of applying one's morality to fiction at all is inherently suspect. So even when you morally judge characters, such as when you praise Erika for being mature, you have to claim you're somehow being "neutral."

You criticized me for getting into "dumb factionalism stuff," but what I meant is that the dumb factionalism stuff is causing some people (like Genevieve) to interpret Erika unfairly,

It's not like l wouldn't accept your accusation of my analysis of Erika is unfair due to "dumb factionalism stuff". But you have to point out which part of it you think is wrong and explain why makes you consider it truly unfair. I'm excited to have a debate with someone who seems like more clever than most of the people on this forum. Tbh, as clever person like the translator nearly never participate in the discussion is kinda boring.

And l notice Blastaar deleted his comment once again. Sigh. Just reminding me one of the reasons l don't want to discuss with him before.

Also, my take about erika feeling like she had no right to confess was because she had ulterior goals for aya and koto getting back together. She knew it wouldn't work out between the two, and she was hoping it would finally get koto to move on so she could confess. 

Another Erika's defender trying to find a way to excuse the terrible thing she had done back in middle school lol.
Let me remind you. Erika has been tormented by her guilt in the past seven years. You can see in chapter 8 she also didn't think she has the right to confess when she and Koto were high school students.

the only 'terrible thing' erika did in the past was make a wish that someone they are jealous of/angry at disappears lol. What angsty teen hasn't wished someone would disappear. If your whole argument is based on the outline of her possibly yelling at aya and that wish, then there is a million different things that could mean, and each have just as much validity. Maybe she went to confront aya first, got in an argument, then in anger made the wish after, and the argument kept aya from going to tanabata who then gets whisked away. maybe erika made the wish, went to confront aya, then a pack of controlled dinosaurs time hopped and grabbed aya and time hopped again with her. maybe erika is secretly part of some magical galactic task force and enlisted aya who then left to fight space crime.

Point being, there is literally not enough information yet available to know what really happened. Erika was not acting like a guilty assailant/murderer when aya returned. in fact, erika was not acting guilty at all at aya's return. why would she ask her dad to let aya stay with them her first night back or say "i was convinced that she was still alive" if she had anything to do with aya's disappearance/murder? followed by asking where aya went after their conversation, an obvious reference to the confrontation aya doesn't want to remember.

Just because there's no evidence something DIDN'T happen, doesn't mean it did. You need to include all context clues that are there leading to other conclusions first. Putting something in that had 0 clues, foreshadowing, context, that goes against all previously established personalities just for the sake of having a hidden twist is terrible writing. Show me exactly where erika's murderous bloodlust was established then i'll consider it. An accidental murder? MAYBE. But for accidentally murdering someone erika sure seems oblivious to having done it in both her thoughts and actions. You'd think she'd be a BIT more panicked that a person she murdered, whether by accident or not, suddenly comes back and might out her.

Sometimes a horse is just a horse.

the only 'terrible thing' erika did in the past was make a wish that someone they are jealous of/angry at disappears lol. What angsty teen hasn't wished someone would disappear.

Yeah. Typical "What angsty teen hasn't done or said something" defense lol.
I can understand as a immature teen couldn't help her thought like"My life would have been much better without that fucker". But actually act on it, especially when "that fucker" is one of your best friends, for the stupidest reason ever like "oh, she steal my crush who l like first even though she has no way of knowing it cause my cowardice", is a totally different story.
Don't misinterpret my words, l know this type of selfish teens actually exist irl. It's still terrible.
To think Koto or Aya would never do such things towards Erika. She is really suck as their friends.

If your whole argument is based on the outline of her possibly yelling at aya and that wish, then there is a million different things that could mean, and each have just as much validity.

You are right. So my whole argument is only trying to point out your reading of her guilt (she had ulterior goals for aya and koto getting back together) is wrong. Erika feels like she has no right to confess even before Aya comes back. That guilt must have been from another horrible thing Erika had done seven years ago.

last edited at Dec 30, 2024 5:52AM