Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Aazealh

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 730
Character Cove / Re: The Beast & Dog/Wolf Themes in Berserk
« on: October 02, 2017, 09:45:59 AM »
There is no confirmation bias. Everything Miura has put in Berserk is open to personal interpretation unless he has spoken/written on the matter, himself.

The confirmation bias is on your part, when you look at something in an attempt to prove what you already believe. And no, not everything is open to personal interpretation in the story. In fact there are a lot of things in Berserk that are very clearly established.

There is zero evidence suggesting that Miura wouldve called it the "Wolf of Darkness" if he wanted it to be a wolf. "Wolf" and "beast" are not mutually exclusive to each other. Something can be both a wolf and a beast at the same time.

You seem to be mistaken regarding where the burden of proof lies. The Beast of Darkness clearly does not anatomically represent a wolf. It is also not referred to as such in the story. The one who claims it is meant to represent a specific animal (you) is the one who has to demonstrate what he asserts.

Same way Griffith doesnt look like the falcons you see in nature lol.

Griffith is a human being. "The White Falcon" was his nickname on the battlefield. This is a terrible comparison.

To me this is a big understatement. To me its base is canine, rather than it merely importing some canine traits.

I'm not quite sure where the difference lies or why it should matter. The point is it's not a straight-up wolf, which is what you were saying.

I read Griffith's post. But I still disagree with your opinion that the Beast of Darkness is not canine.

You insisted the Beast of Darkness is meant to specifically depict a wolf. Not a vaguely dog-like entity whose form changes at will, you insisted on a wolf. I merely pointed out to you that it's not the case. Whether you agree or disagree doesn't really matter.

I am almost certain that the Dark Horse translation translates it as "howl."  The Dark Horse translation is the official translation.

Dark Horse's translation is not word of law on anything. It's often inaccurate, sometimes spectacularly so.

On what basis can you say with such certainty that the speech Casca used did not inform the representation of Guts in her mind?

Because there is literally no evidence it is the case, and if the author meant for it to be connected, he would have made it clear. Because it doesn't make sense in the context of the story. Because to think a one time use of a derogatory figure of speech formed the basis for the positive depiction of the character in a way that is the total opposite of said figure of speech is ridiculous. And so on.

At the very least, there does seem to be a motif of Guts and canines. Casca calls him a dog on at least two occasions, Gambino calls him lonely puppy and feral dog, the Beast of Darkness in Guts' mind is suggested to be a canine beast, the Berserker Armor has a lupine design when Guts loses his mind (there is even a volume cover showing Berserker Guts sitting like a wolf in front of a full moon), Guts has pointy ears and pronounced canine teeth, and ultimately Miura straight up decided to portray Guts as a dog in Casca's dream.

See what I said about confirmation bias. That people used common insults or expressions featuring the word "dog" in them doesn't form a motif. Guts' ears and teeth are also not meant to represent a wolf either, and it's pretty funny you'd say so. As for the Berserk's armor, its helmet has taken on the form of the Beast of Darkness. Out of everything you list here, the actual solid dog references are the ones I mentioned to buttonmasher before you even posted in this thread.

This whole argument is curious because I don't think there is much disagreement here, but you're trying to make things more definite, more clear than they actually are, and you're using flimsy evidence to do so.

Anime Asylum / Re: Very Bad Berserk Summary
« on: October 02, 2017, 06:11:16 AM »
That's pretty bad indeed. That being said these kinds of summaries often are (Netflix comes to mind). Maybe you could contact whoever's in charge of that system if you want it updated.

Character Cove / Re: The Beast & Dog/Wolf Themes in Berserk
« on: October 01, 2017, 10:15:31 PM »
"Berserk" is indeed probably derived from "bear" but that doesnt mean that berserkers of antiquity were limited to the "bear form"

Yeah, I'm aware. What I meant is that you shouldn't interpret references through a confirmation bias.

I never said that the God Hand fears Guts. I just said that Guts opposes the God Hand like Fenrir does.

I really don't think there's any relevant parallel to be drawn between Fenrir and Guts.

It looks like a fantastical monstrous wolf to me.

I guess that was your real point to begin with, and that's fine. But that's really just your opinion. For reference, here are actual wolves in Berserk:

I don't think the Beast of Darkness looks like that. And it doesn't have to, because it's not a wolf. It's a fictional beast. If it were a wolf, it'd be called "The Wolf of Darkness". Which isn't to say it doesn't have some canine traits. It sure does. But it's not an actual dog or wolf or any other animal. And it's not meant to represent a specific animal either, it's meant to represent the darkness within Guts. That's why it's called the Beast of Darkness. My feelings about the Beast's design are mostly summed up by Griffith's post above, which I encourage you to read.

It's heavily implied that the beast is of canine origin. One of the chapters involving the beast of darkness is titled "The Howl from the Darkness"

In terms of animal noises, howling is pretty much exclusive to wolves and dogs. That, combined with the appearance of the beast, really suggests that it's some kind of wolf (or dog).

The Beast of Darkness' origin is Guts' trauma during the Eclipse and its aftermath (his life as the Black Swordsman). As for the title of episode 290, it uses the word "咆哮", which can be translated as "yell; roar; howl". We translated it as "Roar from the Darkness" here. Either way, it's not the definitive proof you're looking for, especially since it occurs 17 volumes after the Beast's introduction.

About Casca's dream, Guts being a dog should have some significance. We can only speculate. However, like I said, I think the choice of Guts being what looks like some type of hound is interesting.

I don't see how this has anything to do with what I said, which is: the figure of speech Casca used in volume 5 did not inform the representation of Guts in her mind in volume 39.

Character Cove / Re: The Beast & Dog/Wolf Themes in Berserk
« on: October 01, 2017, 07:17:09 PM »
Berserks (or Berserkers) were old Nordic warriors who fought in a trance-like state of fury, unphased by anything in battle and killing anything in their paths.

I don't doubt this comes out of a good intention but I'm pretty sure everyone here is familiar with the concept of berserkers. That aside I find it odd that you bolded the quote about wolves and not the one about the bear, given that the word "berserk" is derived from "bear" and there is another word specific to wolf-related warriors: úlfhéðnar (which I believe is what your quote about "warriors like mad dogs or wolves" refers to).

Also possibly related to the Nordic influence of Berserk is the mythical beast, Fenrir, which was a monstrous wolf whom even the Norse gods feared (Sound familiar? Guts wishes to challenge the God Hand)

I think that's completely far-fetched and I don't see how it relates to Berserk in any way. Also the God Hand does not fear Guts at all.

In the end, I consider the Beast of Darkness to be a wolf. If it resembles anything, it's a wolf, and it's safe to assume that Miura drew inspiration from at least one of these Nordic concepts.

It doesn't actually resemble a wolf, though. Even in the panels where it exhibits the most canine-like features it's more dog-like than wolf-like. Anyway, I repeat myself, but Miura chose to call it a beast and not something more specific for a reason. Dog, wolf, bear, boar, whatever. It's meant to be a fictional creature, not a specific real life animal. It shifts forms each time we see it in the manga (see Griff's post). Also, to say Miura drew inspiration from the concept of berserks when he called his manga Berserk feels beyond obvious, but I don't see how this relates to your wolf comment.

Sources also refer to this phenomenon as the hamingja ("spirit" or "soul") or fylgja ("spirit form") of the berserker [...]
As for Casca's dream - Dog Guts shouldnt be anything "spiritual" as it is nothing more than within the confines of Casca's mind.

There is also nothing spiritual about the Beast of Darkness, as it is a personification of a part of Guts' psyche. It is not a spirit (and certainly not Guts' soul), merely a storytelling device created to depict the psychological conflict within Guts' mind.

Casca has called Guts a mad dog before, but I found it interesting that Guts was depicted as a hound-like breed. Hounds are the quintessential hunting dog, relentless just like Guts.

That is, among other things, because those two events are unrelated. The figure of speech Casca used in volume 5 did not inform the representation of Guts in her mind in volume 39.

Character Cove / Re: The Beast & Dog/Wolf Themes in Berserk
« on: October 01, 2017, 08:08:07 AM »
the meaning and function of its appearance seems more related to representing how wild and dangerous or relatively "domesticated" the beast is behaving than anything else to do with dogs

Indeed, the big question with the beast to this day is whether or not it can be tamed. Can Guts keep this side of him under control (a proposition made especially tricky by the Berserk's armor)?

Frankly, I'm still more interested in how it manifests externally in its first appearance yet is part of Guts' psyche (did those ghosts in volume 16 read his mind or Incept him? =).

Now that's a good question. I think they were reading his mind. We know they can do that and it would uncharacteristic for them to be able to implant a thought within his mind (they're not that powerful). Regardless, it's interesting that Miura chose to introduce the character through these guys.

Next debate: is Skull Knight a skeleton or is that even a real skull, and are the skulls in the series a reference to him!? :SK:

The keen observer will immediately know that it is a helmet, for it has rivets. :badbone:

Character Cove / Re: The Beast & Dog/Wolf Themes in Berserk
« on: October 01, 2017, 07:29:33 AM »
Jeez, I get it - you hate this idea.  I'm not trying to dumb anything down, I'm trying to point something out that seemed rather obvious to me.  I chose examples off the top of my head and said I could look for more and the thread proceeded from there.

No hatred here, it's just that what you propose doesn't have merit. There's no big mystery regarding why/how the Beast of Darkness came to be. It's explained when it first shows up. The specters tease Guts about the fact he just killed dozens of children, even though they weren't human anymore. The specters do that because they can sense this same guilt within Guts' mind, so they know it rings true. Then they call to his relentless quest for revenge against Griffith, and to what he's become (a lonely man who just lives to kill and who will eventually turn into a monster). This is developed and reinforced in the subsequent appearances of the Beast of Darkness, so that today we have a very clear understanding of what it is and the drive it represents within Guts' mind. And all those explanations directly from the manga simply contradict your argument.

Also, you say you chose examples off the top of your head, but those are really all the examples there are. Had Guts' childhood been rife with dog-related incidents that had formed a motif and informed his future self, I'd be the first to say so. But it's simply not the case. There are just a few isolated events in his childhood that are never shown or hinted to bear any weight when it comes to the Beast of Darkness. They each have clear meanings in their specific context and don't relate to each other at all, and have never been referenced beyond that either. Miura could have chosen to have call backs to specific events from Guts' past if he meant to draw a connection between the Beast and them, but he didn't. Or rather, he did, but they're about the Eclipse and Guts' life as the Black Swordsman.

Just PLEASE consider this for a moment.

Well here's the thing: I have considered it each time it's been mentioned over the past 15 years. You're not the first to say "Casca called Guts a mad dog once [when she was scolding him about what she perceived as his reckless behavior and lack of consideration of his comrades], that must be the genesis of the Beast of Darkness!". But it wasn't true then and it's not true now.

Now let me give you a gift: it's possible to argue there is a dog theme in Berserk regarding Guts. The two solid things you could mention are the Beast of Darkness' dog-like appearances and the fact Guts is represented by a dog in Casca's nightmare in the current episodes of the story. This is admittedly pretty weak for a theme, but at least it has some ground to stand on. However it doesn't change the inception of the Beast of Darkness, which was your original point.

although you think the idea of Gambino's dog having anything to do with the beast is just completely hilarious, are there really no valid points being made in my entire argument?  If you think it's all 100% bullshit then that's fine, we disagree.  I'm not 100% right but I may not be 100% wrong.

I think the idea that Gambino's dog informed the creation of the Beast of Darkness is 100% bullshit, yes. In fact I find it so ridiculous that I once served Walter with a similar theory to make fun of people who said Casca calling Guts a mad dog was foreshadowing for the Beast of Darkness.

It revolves around this panel:

As you can clearly see, Gambino's madness, what drove him to become increasingly aggressive and eventually to attack Guts, was caused by that small dog which followed him. But was it really just a dog...? From what we know of the Beast of Darkness, we can deduce that this parasitic spirit grows over time, feeding upon the deaths its host provokes. When Guts killed Gambino, the parasite was transferred, and it nested inside him, staying dormant for years. Then it emerged in volume 16, and is now eating away at this mind! I hope you don't find this convincing, because it's obviously pure bullshit. But I think it shows well how the most far-fetched idea can be made to seem plausible.

Character Cove / Re: The Beast & Dog/Wolf Themes in Berserk
« on: September 30, 2017, 06:03:14 PM »
I am not just listing pages with dogs on them and saying, "Wow, there sure are a lot of dogs around here, must be important."

That's actually exactly what you did. Taking the 30,000 ft view? Please, what a joke. :schierke:

Lest we forget how this thread started, you said this:

the form of the beast has been foreshadowed throughout the series with the dog/wolf themes so it isn't exactly out of left field.

And then you listed things like the fact Gambino had a dog at some point (absolutely irrelevant to the Beast of Darkness), the fact Guts once fought wolves (absolutely irrelevant to the Beast of Darkness), or that Casca once called him a mad dog, which is a common figure of speech and does not foreshadow the emergence of the Beast of Darkness. Hell, the obvious take here should be that it refers to the whole "berserk" idea, but whatever.

No matter how you try to twist it, these isolated incidents don't form a pattern (or a theme) and they don't foreshadow anything regarding the Beast of Darkness. The Beast of Darkness is the manifestation of Guts' trauma during and after the Eclipse. That is repeatedly made clear throughout the manga by the feelings the Beast represents, by the occasions during which it manifests itself, and by its conversations with Guts inside his mind.

Last but not least, the form of the Beast of Darkness isn't that of a dog or wolf. It's a fictional creature, hence the designation of "beast" the author chose for it. Its form changes at will depending on the situation, but it's never that of a real animal. And it's not meant to be. So, has it been depicted with canine-like properties before? Yes. It's been very dog-like. But is it actually a dog? No. Is it meant to represent a dog? No. Is it Guts' "spirit animal"? No.

What's sad to me is that under the pretense of looking for deeper meaning, of analyzing the series in a "thematic and archetypal way", you're actually trying to dumb it down. To simplify it so that Griffith = bird, Guts = dog. And that's all to justify your original misconception that the Beast of Darkness was foreshadowed by Gambino's dog.

Manga Mausoleum / Re: Volume 39's cover slip
« on: September 29, 2017, 05:41:44 PM »
Sorry if this has been brought up before, but the creature in vol 39's margin looks really weird, it's the size of an elf, but it has white hair and purple skin, and it doesn't seem to have wings

There are various kinds of elves with different looks and sizes. Puck and Ivalera are a specific variety called Piskies. There are similar-looking elves that don't have wings: we can see some in volume 39, but the first one we have been introduced to was Chich. I don't think the one depicted on volume 39's cover slip will have a special role to play.

Movies, TV, Books & Music / Re: What are you watching? (television thread)
« on: September 26, 2017, 10:42:53 AM »
Caught Star Trek: Discovery last night. I'm not 100% behind some of their choices, but it's promising so far.

Berserk Miscellaneous / Re: Berserkian artifacts in museums
« on: September 14, 2017, 06:19:21 AM »
Well since we're posting prosthetic hands, here's a bunch that are displayed at London's Science Museum.

Podcast / Re: Skullknight.NET Podcast: Episode 90
« on: September 14, 2017, 05:41:12 AM »
discrepancies about the names of Guts or Casca. Those used to be so much more prevalent, sad to say.


And Aaz, you cracked me up with "take that, Tolkien!" You sure showed him, bud. :ganishka:

Haha, I did, didn't I? :badbone:

Character Cove / Re: Griffith vs Serpico
« on: September 13, 2017, 06:15:02 AM »
Isn't Griffith always going to win due to causality?

Not in a hypothetical fight that didn't happen in the story (and never will). Of course, by that same token, it's fairly pointless to consider this fictional battle to begin with.

I disagree

Well then you're wrong. Not that I care.

Creation Station / Re: Lith's colors & tutorials
« on: September 11, 2017, 08:18:44 AM »
Looks great Lith, looking forward to the completed piece!

And also, was this particular coloring done digitally or done by hand?

Uhh, I'm pretty sure Lithrael didn't bust out her crayons for this. :schierke:

Shootin' the Breeze / Re: Need help with a tattoo
« on: September 10, 2017, 04:50:42 PM »
Update. Tattoo is done and looks great. Thanks again Aazealh![/url]

Cool! Glad I could help!

Character Cove / Re: Why Does Puck Change Appearance?
« on: September 09, 2017, 01:55:06 PM »
My take on this is that Puck is not actually changing form, but that Miura simply chooses to present him to us in the way that suits the occasion (though I don't have much to back up my opinion).

This pretty much sums it up.

Puck isn't a shape-shifter, Miura simply changes the way he is depicted depending on the situation. This is a well-known type of Japanese caricature called "super deformed". It's typically used to underline comical circumstances.

And it's not limited to Puck in Berserk, it's applied to other characters as well, like Ivalera, Isidro and a bunch of others. Even Guts & Casca have had little caricatural depictions before. Puck is the most recognizable because he's by far the one who's most featured in that way and also because of his unique design (of which both variations are chestnut-themed).

Current Episodes / Re: Episode 346
« on: September 09, 2017, 05:41:19 AM »
Yep, either that initial image was based on canon Elf Knight lore or it's the life in the art imitating the art in the art. My favorite possibility though is Miura just had the same idea twice independently when it came to designing the armor of the Elvin guards. More likely he just couldn't get it out of his head because it's pretty neat, and of course he uses similarly styled "armor" in Gigantomakhia.

My first thought (which I still hold) is that he decided to style them after the original "Puck Knight" picture, just for the reference.

Current Episodes / Re: Episode 351
« on: September 06, 2017, 08:25:43 AM »
That first number could signify the number of years for Animal House (like a "Volume" and a "Number"). That's how newspapers are categorized when they're archived, each year is a volume.  Animal House was started in March 1989, so that'd be year 1. Year 2 is March 1990-Feb 1991, and so on.

Ohh, good find, that would make sense. Still somewhat counterintuitive to not start the year in January and end it in December though. Things like these are why I classify my YAs by issue number, muuuuch simpler.

Also, that thin vertical line next to the 2 in Sareth's post could be a faded 年.

The two issues I checked last night didn't have anything before the number, but I didn't scrutinize it.

Current Episodes / Re: Episode 351
« on: September 05, 2017, 09:07:52 PM »
My December 1990 and January 1991 have "2" but March 1991, November 1991, and February 1992 have "3".

Well your guess is as good as mine! I don't have the time to try to find out what it refers to right now.

Current Episodes / Re: Episode 351
« on: September 05, 2017, 06:56:37 PM »
The issues of Animal House that I own have stamps on the top and bottom that seem to have dates 2 months ahead of the cover date, from the 22nd to the 24th. I may be wrong though, I'm not sure what the first number before 11.22 indicates.

This is from the January 1991 issue.

Ah, good call, mine also do and the dates fit.
No idea about that number "2" though. It doesn't seem to change and obviously doesn't refer to the year... Maybe an indication of how many months separate printing from cover date? :void:

Current Episodes / Re: Episode 351
« on: September 05, 2017, 07:25:18 AM »
Um, cover date isn't the publishing date, though. For a monthly magazine, it wouldn't have been published in the same month as the cover date. The date on a magazine cover is for newsstands to pull unsold issues from their stands.

That's true, although the cover date is what's typically used to refer to these publications in print. I've never seen a site use the date they hit stores as a reference before.

Anyway, I tried to find a source to confirm that August release date. Best I could find is the article for Animal House on the Japanese edition of Wikipedia. Says the first issue was May 1989 and that it was released in March of that year. I guess that's where the info from the US Wikipedia is derived from.

Podcast / Re: Skullknight.NET Podcast: Episode 90
« on: September 03, 2017, 04:47:59 PM »
What sort of being is the demon child?  I always imagined the demon child as a spirit that can appear in the corporeal world when near the brands.  It must be true that the child actually possesses a physical aspect since Femto steals it, but where is this body 99% of the time when the child isn't appearing to Guts or Casca to intervene?

He is a human being who has been corrupted by evil power while he was a mere embryo. That resulted in a misshapen body and a birth-through-miscarriage that he survived because of his supernatural abilities. He does have a corporeal body, but the corruption is such that he can't stay materialized during daylight. Like common specters, he has to hide in the shadows. Otherwise he's invisible to the corporeal world, only present in the astral world. Like his parents, he resides in the Interstice between the two worlds, but while they're only "ankle-deep" in the astral world, he's "neck-deep" in it.

Furthermore, was the demon child chosen for the incarnation precisely because it possess a strange hybrid form?

Not as far as we know. The Beherit Apostle chances upon him as he lays dying and swallows him so they can "die together". Of course, we're not privy to the machinations of the Idea of Evil, but considering the side effects this has engendered, it's not unthinkable that this was not how things were supposed to go.

Podcast / Re: Skullknight.NET Podcast: Episode 90
« on: September 02, 2017, 05:40:38 PM »
Hope you guys enjoy it! :SK:

Current Episodes / Re: Episode 351
« on: August 26, 2017, 03:16:44 PM »
Pretty sure it's October 1989, with no known date. Source:

Animal House was released on the 25th of each month, so it was October 25, 1989. They at least got that right!

Well... I think its intersesting to see what would have happened in their rematch if Griffith's sabre didn't snap in two in the first second. But I think the reason why Guts undoubtedly won was that while Griffith was utterly livid at that moment, Guts was unnaturally calm; Just like how in their first duel, Griffith was very calm while Guts was very angry.

Guts won because he was a better swordsman at that point.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 730