Author Topic: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card  (Read 3618 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Sado

Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« on: August 26, 2016, 05:22:31 PM »
Dear Berserk fans, I've been writing a 50-page analysis of Guts for the past few days. While writing it, I've been analyzing other characters as well (esp Casca and Griffith) but the more I read Berserk and analyze it the more I can't help feel how integral to the story Farnese really is. Below is an excerpt from my analysis of Farnese. Please share your thoughts and I'd appreciate any and all feedback :)

Farnese is the true wild card of the group and one of the most fascinating characters in Berserk. Pre-Albion Farnese was a foil to Guts in her religious zeal, her deference to God and her upper-class snobbery. Her sadism and pyromaniac tendency also seem to be a transmogrification of Guts, who whilst a violent man, is by no means a sadist. Both are abandoned, neglected children who keep indulge in one form of sublimation to keep their inner demons and insecurities in-check. Farnese gains a measure of acceptance by using the prosecution of pagans to satisfy her sadism and pyromaniac tendencies while Guts indulges his innate desire for violence through the more socially acceptable art of warfare. Her innate desire for violence and finding solace in it also mirrors Guts’ battle against the Beast of Darkness; both struggling mightily to hold onto what little is left of their humanity. A crucial difference is that without her faith, Farnese appears to have little purpose or drive in life, relying on the authority of God—a stark contract to Guts who carves through life on his own strength and conviction. That is, Farnese externalises her strength while Guts internalizes it, a dynamic best captured when in the heart of battle against a deluge of demonic spirits Farnese attempts to pray only for Guts to shout at her to use her arms for action instead of meaningless gestures. Seeing Guts stand alone against a sea of monsters is what inspires her to follow him, his self-reliance and courage inspiring her.

Post-Albion Farnese remained in a kind of non-man’s land for some time. While some criticize this aspect of her, it makes perfect sense thematically. She appears to be in no-man’s land because she is in no-man’s land. Having given up on God and turning her life around is completely new territory for Farnese who spent a lifetime torturing and burning things that she didn’t approve of. On top of that, she is dealing with mythic creatures that she didn’t even realize existed as much as a few months ago. While all other members of the New Party have set tasks they must excel at, post-Albion Farnese spends a long time with little direction besides being around Guts and being an impromptu nanny for Casca. She finds a measure of direction in being Casca’s protector but remains lost in the shuffle for the most part. Her attempts at learning magic grant her a purpose in the New Party but she’s still not an expert like Schierke. Her main character thrust so far is how much she is trying to turn her life around in a positive direction and her role in a love triangle between herself, Guts and Casca.

That said, however, a more sinister thrust seems to be brewing because of her feelings towards Guts and how, slowly, they seem to be ebbing away at the new persona she has created for herself.

Central to Berserk is the idea that our personal demons turn us into real monsters and that the proverbial road to hell is indeed paved with good intentions. Griffith’s ambitions were inherently noble but succumbing to his inner demons turned it into a grotesque, all-consuming beast. Guts, similarly, wages a heroic battle against demonic entities besetting the world but as the carnage grows, he finds himself at the crossroads of his inner demons that seek endless bloodshed i.e. the Beast of Darkness. The Beherit is, if nothing else, symbolic of our inner demons and a moment of weakness where the floodgates are opened and the last shred of our humanity is ripped away. Farnese, like Guts and Griffith, is at war against her inner demons. While her love for Guts has clearly made her a nobler, compassionate person, she harbors a visible jealousy towards Casca. When further examined, we realize that on each occasion that her jealousy manifested, Farnese unravelled on a level deeper than the previous one. Although Farnese undertakes Casca’s protection with selfless courage, her feelings towards the regressed Amazon grow more and more ambivalent the closer they get towards finding a cure.

The first time we see Post-Albion Farnese visibly bothered is when Guts and Casca cradle the Moon Child together. It is the first time she has shown negative emotions since the events of the Conviction Arc and it’s no coincidence that it’s a moment where Guts, Casca and the Moon Child form the picture perfect image of a happy family. It’s only a panel but her reaction says it all being so palpable that Serpico noticed it.
The second time, her spirit inexplicably retreats back from an astral flight after she overhears Guts explain what Casca means to him. Again, for someone who has been keeping herself under-wraps for so long she ends up losing her grip in an instant. The scene is brief but this time she is self-aware, pondering aloud over her confusion and mixed feelings.

Things take a more ominous turn from that point onwards. The third time, is after a severely wounded Guts falls into the ocean trying to save Casca from drowning. With his scars reopening and aggravated by the salt, a distraught Farnese lashes out at Casca for not even understanding how much pain Guts endures for her. Crucially, she laments how despite Casca’s enmity, Guts remains devoted to her. This is the first time Farnese is candid about her jealousy, lashing out at Casca for her indifference to Guts plight. Arguably it’s Guts’ indifference to Farnese that is the source of her pain. For a brief moment, she relapses into Pre-Albion Farnese: volatile and conflicted. Spent and in tears, Farnese calls Casca a “cunning bitch,” a curious word choice given the latter’s childlike state.

Shades of the old Farnese seep through again when Guts is healing from his battle against the Sea God. Using her nascent magical powers, Farnese begins pouring her “warmth” into Guts to soothe the wounded warrior. It’s a genuinely tender moment that is ruined when Guts notices Casca ambling about. Farnese quickly leads Casca away on the pretense that his presence agitates her. Again, it’s a curious (and cruel) choice of words, given how much Guts agonizes over Casca’s acrimony towards him. In reminding Guts of this fact, Farnese appears to germinate the idea that Casca is no longer the woman Guts once loved and what they once shared is perhaps unsalvageable—an underhanded attempt to slowly wean him off her. Cruelty and guile, again, are shades of the old Farnese.

Lastly, when Master Archmage hints that the Elf King can indeed cure Casca, Farnese can only watch dejectedly as Guts smiles for the first time in several volumes. Again, her jealousy and ambivalence towards Casca comes to the forefront where the happiness of the man she loves takes a back seat to her own feelings. Selfishness is another facet of the old Farnese.

This brings me back to her calling Casca a “cunning bitch.” If we consider the hand Farnese has been dealt by Fate, “cunning bitch” is perhaps apt. For one, Casca unwittingly holds Guts in the palm of her hand where the warrior would lay down his life for her without a second thought, much to Farnese’s chagrin. Yet, Casca is also utterly dependent on her, earning her sympathy and pity. To make things worse, Casca’s protection was entrusted to Farnese by none other than Guts himself. It’s an emotional dead-end for Farnese: she hates Casca which makes her feel guilty, which makes her hate herself which in turn makes her hate Casca even more.

Why this is relevant is because Farnese’s jealousy of Casca mirrors Casca’s jealousy of Guts during the Golden Age. Farnese worships Guts in much the same way Casca worshipped Griffith. She too views him as an ideal, a man who saved her and gave her a new lease on life. Her life earned a purpose through the act of following him to his destination. Above all, both Casca and Farnese love(d) a man who didn’t reciprocate their feelings and was with another woman instead. This in turn made them bitter as the purpose of their life seemed to diminish right before their eyes. Casca was lucky enough to find Guts always there by her side in the confusion but Farnese is utterly alone.

There is more though.

We have to remember that Griffith and Casca’s roles reversed following his being crippled. Where once he had been quite literally her knight in shining armor, he now needed her to save him and look after him. Where once his hand could make protect her, he was now an invalid whom she had to look after. Where Casca worshipped him once, she now pitied him. Where she once would’ve died for him without a second thought, she now ached over whether to stay with him or leave with Guts—that she stayed out of pity didn’t help matters. Above all, for the first time ever, Griffith viewed her as a woman he could spend a (painfully ordinary) life with. Much like Casca, who found the purpose of her life diminishing before her very eyes, Griffith too needed someone by his side in the confusion. But he was alone. And the rest is bloody history.

Farnese is reminiscent of Griffith in numerous other ways. She is an extremely beautiful and charming but harbors a malicious, vindictive side. Her blonde hair, blue eyes, her rapier-like sword and ornate silver armor is also reminiscent of Griffith. Even her armor’s color scheme is the same as Griffith at times i.e. silver, white and purple. Coincidentally, the first time she crosses paths with Guts, she is also able to take him down with a single sword strike—although in her case it is sheer dumb luck (and a timely interference from Serpico). In fact, her sociopathic tendencies match Griffith by being prone to cruelty, manipulation, violence and selfishness. She even mirrors his penchant for self-harm, repeatedly flogging herself or asking Guts to cleave her with his sword, puns intended. Her first encounter with Serpico is very similar to Griffith’s first encounter with Guts, down to the line “you belong to me now.” She routinely tortured Serpico and even drank his blood much the same way Griffith “fed” on Guts and the Falcons. She and Serpico being siblings also mirrors Griffith and Guts relationship as that of brothers-in-arms and very close friends. That there have been hints of romantic love between Farnese and Serpico also serves as a parallel to the homoeroticism between Griffith and Guts.

With all the above in mind, it is highly likely that just as Griffith unravelled in the end, Guts-Casca-Farnese may be a retread of the Griffith-Guts-Casca dynamic. Farnese’s good intentions may very well pave the way to hell and what started out as benign emotions end up becoming a storm of demons. One need only remember how in Chapter 185 when Farnese was little she burnt a bird alive. Why? As she says herself, “this bird had not grown to love me.” If we compare her words to those of Griffith’s prior to his second fight with Guts i.e. “if he will not be mine then his life is forfeit” then their already numerous parallels become all the more foreboding.

Farnese’s parallels to Casca are also fascinating since she too was once a woman at the helm of soldiers. In fact both are women warriors from opposite ends of the social (and racial) strata. While Farnese was a noblewoman who was essentially handed the command over a squadron of rich boy soldiers, Casca was an Arab/African/Indian peasant girl who joined a very blue-color band of mercenaries and climbed her way up the ranks based on her own merit. They also seem jettisoned once taken away from their position of authority with Casca reduced to an infantile mental state and Farnese lacking any particular goal in sight besides Guts.

There most important parallel, however, is when it comes to the idea of “faith”. Like Casca, Farnese harbors an unflinching, unquestioning loyalty to God, taking no prisoners in her faith and willing to go to any and all lengths for said idea. In the end, the ideas they worshipped so devoutly turn out to be monstrous, damning them to a life path that is as precarious as it is uncertain i.e. Farnese in her new role with the New Party and Casca in her ruined mental state.

~Sado22

Offline Aazealh

  • 髑髏の騎士
  • Administrator
  • Of Terror
  • *****
  • Posts: 18420
  • Karma: 629
  • Gender: Male
  • そうはいかぬ
Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #1 on: August 26, 2016, 06:22:52 PM »
Hi Sado,

I've skimmed your post, and I'm sorry to say that it's severely misguided on a number of crucial points, and therefore is of little worth.
When you consider yourself a fan of a series, the first thing you should do is purchase the volumes of said series, so that your attempts at an analysis don't revolve around shitty, incorrect translations.
Those warp your perception of the story and characters to the point where you make no sense.
In this context, you definitely should put your 50 pages essay on hold, because I can guarantee you that you're wasting your time.

Offline Sado

Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #2 on: August 27, 2016, 04:13:53 AM »
maybe not skim a post before forming opinions...?

In either case, I'd be happy to discuss things with you. While translation are not reliable, my analysis has little to do with the dialogues and more to do with the actions and choices that Farnese has made.

Offline favole

Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #3 on: August 27, 2016, 07:14:25 AM »
While translation are not reliable, my analysis has little to do with the dialogues and more to do with the actions and choices that Farnese has made.

Hello there, sorry, just passing by to say that I also think you should seek the official translation for your essay (it will be actually reliable in comparison to what you've been reading) because from the moment you're quoting something that was mistranslated and are using it for interpretation... Well, I'm sure you understand that it can't convey accurate thoughts.

A simple example: Farnese never ever called Casca a cunning bitch, not even anything remotely close to that. So all the parts in your essay coming from this mistranslation will all be wrong in the first place and... you do spend a long time talking about Farnese hating Casca, something that is beyond misinterpretation in my opinion.

I also think you are misinterpreting panels because you're relying on false assumptions (then again because the translation you're using is not accurate). Still on the example of Farnese "hating Casca" (which, again, I think is not true at all)...
Quote
Lastly, when Master Archmage hints that the Elf King can indeed cure Casca, Farnese can only watch dejectedly as Guts smiles for the first time in several volumes.

Nothing like that happened, in fact it's completely the opposite: Schierke got the confirmation (not from a guru but from Cucca, an apprentice) that it was possible to cure Casca so she turned to Guts all happy and he smiled back at her, before immediately looking stern again, which is why Farnese looked at him surprised (look again if you have the episode, he is not smiling at all).
And the reason for her surprise is easy to understand, it was Guts' goal for a long time to bring Casca on Skellig Island in order to cure her, and yet now that they arrived he doesn't seem so happy anymore about the prospect (because he is worried that, according to the Skull Knight's words, Casca and him will have different wishes once she's cured); that's what Farnese is seeing and that's why she's surprised.

I don't really have the time right now to point out more parts that you should work on again but I agree with Aazealh that you might be wasting your time if you're not relying on a more accurate translation.

Being very new in the forums, I hope I didn't outstep my boundaries by answering you like I did (if anything because my knowledge on all this could be called questionable as I haven't been around for long), so if I should have let an older member answer, please just let me know. 

Offline Aazealh

  • 髑髏の騎士
  • Administrator
  • Of Terror
  • *****
  • Posts: 18420
  • Karma: 629
  • Gender: Male
  • そうはいかぬ
Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #4 on: August 27, 2016, 08:28:50 AM »
maybe not skim a post before forming opinions...?

Don't worry, I have read enough of your post. And I'm sorry if I offended you, but you did say you welcomed any and all feedback, so I'm giving it to you straight.

In either case, I'd be happy to discuss things with you. While translation are not reliable, my analysis has little to do with the dialogues and more to do with the actions and choices that Farnese has made.

Unfortunately writing down detailed responses is very time consuming, and I don't feel like it is worth my time to do so at present. I will be more than happy to oblige once you've purchased the books (which is our only duty as fans) and corrected your misconceptions.

I also think you should seek the official translation for your essay (it will be actually reliable in comparison to what you've been reading) because from the moment you're quoting something that was mistranslated and are using it for interpretation... Well, I'm sure you understand that it can't convey accurate thoughts. A simple example: Farnese never ever called Casca a cunning bitch, not even anything remotely close to that. So all the parts in your essay coming from this mistranslation will all be wrong in the first place and... you do spend a long time talking about Farnese hating Casca, something that is beyond misinterpretation in my opinion. I also think you are misinterpreting panels because you're relying on false assumptions (then again because the translation you're using is not accurate). Still on the example of Farnese "hating Casca" (which, again, I think is not true at all)...

That is all correct.

Schierke got the confirmation (not from a guru but from Cucca, an apprentice) that it was possible to cure Casca so she turned to Guts all happy and he smiled back at her, before immediately looking stern again, which is why Farnese looked at him surprised (look again if you have the episode, he is not smiling at all). And the reason for her surprise is easy to understand, it was Guts' goal for a long time to bring Casca on Skellig Island in order to cure her, and yet now that they arrived he doesn't seem so happy anymore about the prospect (because he is worried that, according to the Skull Knight's words, Casca and him will have different wishes once she's cured); that's what Farnese is seeing and that's why she's surprised.

I disagree with that interpretation. Farnese is in love with Guts, and so she is jealous of Casca to some extent. That's something the story has made clear several times. Her feelings about the current developments are therefore mixed, because she wants to have Guts for herself, and still hopes that she will. Of course, that doesn't mean she hates Casca. She clearly has a lot of affection for her. But the heart wants what it wants. Dealing with those unrequited feelings (and with the "new" Casca) will be the next big development for her character.

In the specific scene you refer to, I interpret Farnese's facial expression as being worried and maybe a bit disheartened after watching the exchange between Cucca, Schierke & Guts. I think you give too much importance to that panel of Guts looking stern. He has many reasons to not relax yet at that point, mostly because nothing is sure. Yet remember how impatient he was to meet the Sovereign of the Flower Storm once they got to the village. He can't wait to bring her back. What the Skull Knight warned him about will come to bear, but it hasn't yet.

Offline favole

Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #5 on: August 27, 2016, 09:29:03 AM »
I disagree with that interpretation. Farnese is in love with Guts, and so she is jealous of Casca to some extent. That's something the story has made clear several times. Her feelings about the current developments are therefore mixed, because she wants to have Guts for herself, and still hopes that she will. Of course, that doesn't mean she hates Casca. She clearly has a lot of affection for her. But the heart wants what it wants. Dealing with those unrequited feelings (and with the "new" Casca) will be the next big development for her character.

In the specific scene you refer to, I interpret Farnese's facial expression as being worried and maybe a bit disheartened after watching the exchange between Cucca, Schierke & Guts. I think you give too much importance to that panel of Guts looking stern. He has many reasons to not relax yet at that point, mostly because nothing is sure. Yet remember how impatient he was to meet the Sovereign of the Flower Storm once they got to the village. He can't wait to bring her back. What the Skull Knight warned him about will come to bear, but it hasn't yet.

Ah I agree about Farnese's feelings for Guts, without a doubt, so I do think that she has mixed feelings about Casca being cured, but I just meant she might have been surprised by Guts' reaction in that scene in particular (since she never really was privy to Guts' worries), although your interpretation makes complete sense as well and fits with her being jealous.
And my bad you're right, it's true Guts was really eager to meet with the Sovereign of the Flower Storm in episode 345.

Offline Walter

  • 賢者
  • Administrator
  • Of the Abyss
  • *****
  • Posts: 15884
  • Karma: 470
  • Gender: Male
  • Chapter ≠ Episode
Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #6 on: August 27, 2016, 06:08:43 PM »
Welcome! I love hearing character analysis. I've made a few points about your assessment below.

Farnese is the true wild card of the group and one of the most fascinating characters in Berserk. Pre-Albion Farnese was a foil to Guts in her religious zeal, her deference to God and her upper-class snobbery. Her sadism and pyromaniac tendency also seem to be a transmogrification of Guts, who whilst a violent man, is by no means a sadist. Both are abandoned, neglected children who keep indulge in one form of sublimation to keep their inner demons and insecurities in-check.

I don't think there's much value in comparing these two. You could make the same parallels of every Berserk character, if you'd like, because it all stems from Miura's ability to make his main characters multifaceted, each with a seed of violence or evil within them.

Quote
Farnese gains a measure of acceptance by using the prosecution of pagans to satisfy her sadism and pyromaniac tendencies while Guts indulges his innate desire for violence through the more socially acceptable art of warfare.


That's not a very appropriate comparison. Guts didn't have an "innate desire for violence." Gambino forced him into battle, and it then became part of his identity and his path for survival. Farnese didn't have those pyromaniac tendencies as a child, and her survival didn't depend on it either. She pursued it because she was urged to, and she was accepted for it. Either way, both were "socially acceptable" forms of violence.

Quote
Farnese attempts to pray only for Guts to shout at her to use her arms for action instead of meaningless gestures. Seeing Guts stand alone against a sea of monsters is what inspires her to follow him, his self-reliance and courage inspiring her.

That's correct, but I think that's all there is to it. She's lived her live in fear, and being faced with these supernatural things caused her to be stunned into inaction. Then she looks at Guts and sees his determination, and force of will against overwhelming forces, and it inspires her. You touch on it later, but she finds a form of this strength herself as Casca's protector.

Quote
That said, however, a more sinister thrust seems to be brewing because of her feelings towards Guts and how, slowly, they seem to be ebbing away at the new persona she has created for herself.

I haven't seen any evidence of that. She expressed frustration at Casca, because of her jealousy over Guts' feelings. But there's nothing indicating that it's awakened anything sinister in her. Rather, it just leaves us wondering how she'll react to a restored Casca. Anyway, this isn't even a real love triangle, because Guts is only dedicated to Casca. He's never expressed anything toward Farnese except gratitude in her role to the group.

Quote
Central to Berserk is the idea that our personal demons turn us into real monsters and that the proverbial road to hell is indeed paved with good intentions. Griffith’s ambitions were inherently noble


Which part was noble? He wanted to overthrow the old order of nobles and establish his own kingdom. And he did so through murderous means. It sounded noble, but in truth he was a radical.

Quote
Farnese, like Guts and Griffith, is at war against her inner demons. While her love for Guts has clearly made her a nobler, compassionate person, she harbors a visible jealousy towards Casca. When further examined, we realize that on each occasion that her jealousy manifested, Farnese unravelled on a level deeper than the previous one. Although Farnese undertakes Casca’s protection with selfless courage, her feelings towards the regressed Amazon grow more and more ambivalent the closer they get towards finding a cure.

She's had one minor breakdown (on the ship), and it wasn't an irrational unraveling.

Quote
The first time we see Post-Albion Farnese visibly bothered is when Guts and Casca cradle the Moon Child together. It is the first time she has shown negative emotions since the events of the Conviction Arc and it’s no coincidence that it’s a moment where Guts, Casca and the Moon Child form the picture perfect image of a happy family

I'm not sure how you can characterize that expression as a negative emotion. It looks more like she saw for a brief moment (and quickly discards) the reality that she probably doesn't have a place next to Guts' side.

Quote
It’s only a panel but her reaction says it all being so palpable that Serpico noticed it.

Serpico notices everything though, and it doesn't always mean it's the end of the world.

Quote
The second time, her spirit inexplicably retreats back from an astral flight after she overhears Guts explain what Casca means to him. Again, for someone who has been keeping herself under-wraps for so long she ends up losing her grip in an instant. The scene is brief but this time she is self-aware, pondering aloud over her confusion and mixed feelings.

It's perfectly explicable. She lost focus realizing Guts was about to declare how he felt about Casca, and she didn't want to hear it. Schierke stuck around to hear it though, and she makes her peace with it. Farnese hasn't yet come to terms with it, but we're almost there.

Quote
Things take a more ominous turn from that point onwards. The third time, is after a severely wounded Guts falls into the ocean trying to save Casca from drowning. With his scars reopening and aggravated by the salt, a distraught Farnese lashes out at Casca for not even understanding how much pain Guts endures for her. Crucially, she laments how despite Casca’s enmity, Guts remains devoted to her. This is the first time Farnese is candid about her jealousy, lashing out at Casca for her indifference to Guts plight. Arguably it’s Guts’ indifference to Farnese that is the source of her pain. For a brief moment, she relapses into Pre-Albion Farnese: volatile and conflicted.

She was blaming Casca for her ignorance at Guts' total devotion to her, while at the same time grappling with her feelings of jealousy. Yet her feelings of devotion for Casca have not wavered. SHe ends that scene by embracing her. And to characterize her reaction as "pre-albion Farnese" is far too specific for what is actually shown. She has an emotional moment. There's no hollow, cool look in her eyes; she's not wearing a sadistic expression -- the things that compose the old Farnese.

Quote
Spent and in tears, Farnese calls Casca a “cunning bitch,” a curious word choice given the latter’s childlike state.

Welp... that's exactly what Aazealh was referring to when he said your reliance on bad translations colors your perceptions of things. Farnese says no such thing.  She says that it's "not fair." But I can see how if you took "cunning bitch" at face value, you might have different conclusions about her state of mind. But it's just wrong.

Quote
Farnese quickly leads Casca away on the pretense that his presence agitates her. Again, it’s a curious (and cruel) choice of words, given how much Guts agonizes over Casca’s acrimony towards him. In reminding Guts of this fact, Farnese appears to germinate the idea that Casca is no longer the woman Guts once loved and what they once shared is perhaps unsalvageable—an underhanded attempt to slowly wean him off her. Cruelty and guile, again, are shades of the old Farnese.

Are you implying that Farnese let that line slip intentionally? That's interesting, but I'm not exactly sure how you arrived there. She appears surprised (and embarrassed) at the wording she chose. I think you might be getting thrown off by the previous panel, where she has a curious expression on her face. But that's because she's touching Guts' chest, and of course, she was previously ruminating filling his body with warmth. Then she felt it, and it made her smile. Then she catches herself, and moves to get Casca out the door. And in her haste, says something awkward about the scenario.

Quote
Lastly, when Master Archmage hints that the Elf King can indeed cure Casca, Farnese can only watch dejectedly as Guts smiles for the first time in several volumes. Again, her jealousy and ambivalence towards Casca comes to the forefront where the happiness of the man she loves takes a back seat to her own feelings. Selfishness is another facet of the old Farnese.

Archmage isn't correct. Guru is more accurate. Anyway, you're reading a lot into that little panel where Farnese merely goes "..."

Quote
This brings me back to her calling Casca a “cunning bitch.” If we consider the hand Farnese has been dealt by Fate, “cunning bitch” is perhaps apt. ... It’s an emotional dead-end for Farnese: she hates Casca which makes her feel guilty, which makes her hate herself which in turn makes her hate Casca even more.

None of this is true.

Quote
Why this is relevant is because Farnese’s jealousy of Casca mirrors Casca’s jealousy of Guts during the Golden Age.

I don't think any of this character discussion needs a parallel to the Golden Age to make it relevant. 

Quote
Farnese worships Guts in much the same way Casca worshipped Griffith. She too views him as an ideal, a man who saved her and gave her a new lease on life. Her life earned a purpose through the act of following him to his destination. Above all, both Casca and Farnese love(d) a man who didn’t reciprocate their feelings and was with another woman instead. This in turn made them bitter as the purpose of their life seemed to diminish right before their eyes. Casca was lucky enough to find Guts always there by her side in the confusion but Farnese is utterly alone.

Farnese chooses to be "alone." She has Serpico's dedication and Roderick's affections. Honestly I think these Golden Age parallels are only confusing your points, and they're restricting you in perceiving what's actually happening with her character.

Quote
There most important parallel, however, is when it comes to the idea of “faith”. Like Casca, Farnese harbors an unflinching, unquestioning loyalty to God, taking no prisoners in her faith and willing to go to any and all lengths for said idea.

Farnese harbors plenty of doubts and flinches and questions about her devotion to God. The Conviction Arc is riddled with them.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2016, 01:55:28 AM by Walter »
:femto: :slan: :ubik:

Offline Sado

Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #7 on: August 28, 2016, 12:55:11 AM »
Quote
A simple example: Farnese never ever called Casca a cunning bitch, not even anything remotely close to that. So all the parts in your essay coming from this mistranslation will all be wrong in the first place and... you do spend a long time talking about Farnese hating Casca, something that is beyond misinterpretation in my opinion.

She actually called her "cruel". My analysis is not complete and this is just a draft I posted here to get people's opinions. When I do finalize it I will be using the proper translations (since, believe it or not, I do own the manga and have been reading and re-reading Berserk for the last decade of my life and first saw the anime when I was in my teens).

I just feel "cunning bitch" or "sly" or "cruel" doesn't change anything about my analysis of it since my point was:
a) calling Casca "cruel" is strange to say the least given her current mental state
b) it shows Farnese acting like her previous self by being volatile and rash

Whether it's "cunning bitch", "sly" or "cruel", it does little to negate what I'm saying.

As for hating Casca, I think you're over-simplifying what my original point is

Quote
Nothing like that happened, in fact it's completely the opposite: Schierke got the confirmation (not from a guru but from Cucca, an apprentice) that it was possible to cure Casca so she turned to Guts all happy and he smiled back at her, before immediately looking stern again, which is why Farnese looked at him surprised (look again if you have the episode, he is not smiling at all).
And the reason for her surprise is easy to understand, it was Guts' goal for a long time to bring Casca on Skellig Island in order to cure her, and yet now that they arrived he doesn't seem so happy anymore about the prospect (because he is worried that, according to the Skull Knight's words, Casca and him will have different wishes once she's cured); that's what Farnese is seeing and that's why she's surprised.
That's a fair point.

To me, there are a few things to consider in this situation.
1) Guts doesn't smile for a long length of time
2) We actually don't see Farnese smile so it's still only speculation
3) Her becoming "despondent" at his smile matches how she's been acting regarding him and Casca as far back as the Moon Child's first appearance. As such, I don't think my interpretation is that far off.
4) In fact, I feel her smiling at him at this point would be inconsistent with how she's been acting all this time in regards to Guts/Casca.

But that's just my two cents.

I appreciate your feedback either way. No need to worry about offending me :)

Offline Walter

  • 賢者
  • Administrator
  • Of the Abyss
  • *****
  • Posts: 15884
  • Karma: 470
  • Gender: Male
  • Chapter ≠ Episode
Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #8 on: August 28, 2016, 02:02:57 AM »
She actually called her "cruel".


No, she doesn't. Again, check your translations, otherwise you're just wasting time here.

Quote
Whether it's "cunning bitch", "sly" or "cruel", it does little to negate what I'm saying.

What if it's none of the above...? She says: "It's not fair."
:femto: :slan: :ubik:

Offline Sado

Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #9 on: August 28, 2016, 02:09:45 AM »
"It's not fair" is doesn't change anything either. If anything, it points at what I'm saying even more.

Offline Walter

  • 賢者
  • Administrator
  • Of the Abyss
  • *****
  • Posts: 15884
  • Karma: 470
  • Gender: Male
  • Chapter ≠ Episode
Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #10 on: August 28, 2016, 02:14:18 AM »
"It's not fair" is doesn't change anything either. If anything, it points at what I'm saying even more.

...What? Earlier your point was that this line indicated Farnese was "acting like her previous self by being volatile and rash" and that her language in this scene was "strange to say the least, given (Casca's) current mental state." What about "It's not fair" backs up either of those statements?

This line is Farnese expressing her frustration at the circumstance. It's really that simple. And if  you'll read my (numerous) comments to your post, you may see how you're overembellishing her reaction into some kind of mental breakdown. Chiefly:

She was blaming Casca for her ignorance at Guts' total devotion to her, while at the same time grappling with her feelings of jealousy. Yet her feelings of devotion for Casca have not wavered. SHe ends that scene by embracing her. And to characterize her reaction as "pre-albion Farnese" is far too specific for what is actually shown. She has an emotional moment. There's no hollow, cool look in her eyes; she's not wearing a sadistic expression -- the things that compose the old Farnese.
:femto: :slan: :ubik:

Offline Sado

Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #11 on: August 28, 2016, 04:47:06 AM »
I don't know about you, but if I saw someone on her knees, crying and muttering "it's not fair" at a mentally retarded person...I'll call that being volatile and rash. But that's just me.

Quote
SHe ends that scene by embracing her. And to characterize her reaction as "pre-albion Farnese" is far too specific for what is actually shown. She has an emotional moment. There's no hollow, cool look in her eyes; she's not wearing a sadistic expression -- the things that compose the old Farnese.
Yes, she has a meltdown and then ends up embracing Casca. Any of that look like a person who's in control of her feelings?
Volatile and conflicted. That was my point about post-albion Farnse is that she is more in control of her feelings (or pretends to be), is an overall nicer person and isn't the impetuous bitch that she used to be. In this scene, she's lashing out at a mentally retarded Casca and breaks down in tears. Something we didn't see her do since the Tower of Albion.

Quote
Welcome! I love hearing character analysis. I've made a few points about your assessment below.
Honestly, I really do appreciate your feedback. I hope I haven't been coming across as a douche because that isn't my intention at all. I've just been replying as quickly as I can in those rare moments where I can be online.

Quote
I don't think there's much value in comparing these two. You could make the same parallels of every Berserk character, if you'd like, because it all stems from Miura's ability to make his main characters multifaceted, each with a seed of violence or evil within them.
I disagree actually. Miura tells a very tightly knit story where every character reflects something or the other with another character. Farnese is in Guts new party. That alone invites parallels and comparisons.
 

Quote
That's not a very appropriate comparison. Guts didn't have an "innate desire for violence." Gambino forced him into battle, and it then became part of his identity and his path for survival. Farnese didn't have those pyromaniac tendencies as a child, and her survival didn't depend on it either. She pursued it because she was urged to, and she was accepted for it. Either way, both were "socially acceptable" forms of violence.
Guts has shown to have a mean-streak from very early in life. Gambino did force him into battle but Guts has completely internalized the life of a warrior. Gambino died when he was about 12 years old. If he wanted, he could've done something else with his life since he was just a boy. But he chose to fight on as a mercenary. Of course, it's not like he knew anything else but he was a mere boy at the time. If Rickert could pick up becoming a blacksmith at his young age, Guts could've done the same.
I'm not sure about your analysis of Farnese either but you're free to look at it how you want.

Quote
I haven't seen any evidence of that. She expressed frustration at Casca, because of her jealousy over Guts' feelings. But there's nothing indicating that it's awakened anything sinister in her. Rather, it just leaves us wondering how she'll react to a restored Casca. Anyway, this isn't even a real love triangle, because Guts is only dedicated to Casca. He's never expressed anything toward Farnese except gratitude in her role to the group.
It's a love triangle because Farnese loves him. Two women love the same man (assuming Casca loves Guts after she's cured).
Farnese loves Guts. Guts loves Casca. That's about as love triangle-like as it gets.
 
Quote
Which part was noble? He wanted to overthrow the old order of nobles and establish his own kingdom. And he did so through murderous means. It sounded noble, but in truth he was a radical.
His wanted to become a king based on his own merits. That's noble.
As for the bloodshed, all the assassinations Griffith committed were in self-defense. He killed people who had conspired to kill him or were conspiring to kill him.

Quote
She's had one minor breakdown (on the ship), and it wasn't an irrational unraveling.
You're free to look at it how you want ;)

Quote
I'm not sure how you can characterize that expression as a negative emotion. It looks more like she saw for a brief moment (and quickly discards) the reality that she probably doesn't have a place next to Guts' side.
what I said above.

Quote
Serpico notices everything though, and it doesn't always mean it's the end of the world.
what I said above.

Quote
It's perfectly explicable. She lost focus realizing Guts was about to declare how he felt about Casca, and she didn't want to hear it. Schierke stuck around to hear it though, and she makes her peace with it. Farnese hasn't yet come to terms with it, but we're almost there.
iirc she didn't control coming back from her projection. She ended up losing control when Guts began talking about Casca and woke up to everyone and her own surprise.

Quote
Are you implying that Farnese let that line slip intentionally? That's interesting, but I'm not exactly sure how you arrived there. She appears surprised (and embarrassed) at the wording she chose. I think you might be getting thrown off by the previous panel, where she has a curious expression on her face. But that's because she's touching Guts' chest, and of course, she was previously ruminating filling his body with warmth. Then she felt it, and it made her smile. Then she catches herself, and moves to get Casca out the door. And in her haste, says something awkward about the scenario.
honestly, I think you take Berserk at face value too much. Who knows, maybe you're right but I don't think something like this is just a trivial event. Not with the kind of writer Miura is.

Quote
I don't think any of this character discussion needs a parallel to the Golden Age to make it relevant.
Ok. I do :)
We've already seen Miura foreshadow events and hint at events in the past. It's a literary device and Miura uses it frequently.

Quote
Farnese chooses to be "alone." She has Serpico's dedication and Roderick's affections. Honestly I think these Golden Age parallels are only confusing your points, and they're restricting you in perceiving what's actually happening with her character.
What I said above.

Quote
Farnese harbors plenty of doubts and flinches and questions about her devotion to God. The Conviction Arc is riddled with them.
Only after meeting Guts. Guts is the one who distorts her world and brings it tumbling down.

Offline favole

Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #12 on: August 28, 2016, 08:04:41 AM »
To me, there are a few things to consider in this situation.
1) Guts doesn't smile for a long length of time
2) We actually don't see Farnese smile so it's still only speculation
3) Her becoming "despondent" at his smile matches how she's been acting regarding him and Casca as far back as the Moon Child's first appearance. As such, I don't think my interpretation is that far off.
4) In fact, I feel her smiling at him at this point would be inconsistent with how she's been acting all this time in regards to Guts/Casca.

Ah I'm sorry but there is a misunderstanding: Schierke is the one who was smiling in that scene, I just said that only Farnese noticed that Guts stopped to smiling, that's all. My interpretation was that she was surprised by his reaction, but as Aazealh explained, it could also be seen differently.

iirc she didn't control coming back from her projection. She ended up losing control when Guts began talking about Casca and woke up to everyone and her own surprise.

That is also slightly incorrect. She indeed lost control when Guts started to talk about Casca but that's because she didn't want to know Guts' answer to Roderick, something she admits inwardly after waking up (if you want to reread that part, it's the very first episode of volume 33).
« Last Edit: August 28, 2016, 08:44:25 AM by favole »

Offline Walter

  • 賢者
  • Administrator
  • Of the Abyss
  • *****
  • Posts: 15884
  • Karma: 470
  • Gender: Male
  • Chapter ≠ Episode
Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #13 on: August 28, 2016, 01:18:44 PM »
believe it or not, I do own the manga and have been reading and re-reading Berserk for the last decade of my life and first saw the anime when I was in my teens).

I hope you can understand my skepticism after you've consistently used bad translations, creating misunderstandings about scenes. And after you were initially called out on the "cunning bitch" line, you didn't check and post the correct translation, you doubled down on "cruel," instead. So while you may have the books, you clearly aren't using them as a reference, hence the misunderstanding we're having here.

I don't know about you, but if I saw someone on her knees, crying and muttering "it's not fair" at a mentally retarded person...I'll call that being volatile and rash. But that's just me.

It seems that way. She was muttering it to herself, anyway. I think you're seriously going overboard with her little outburst. Because she expressed some emotion that means she's lapsing back into the person she was in the Conviction Arc? That's a bit much... And for someone who has focused so much on Farnese, I think you're giving her far too little credit in her own growth. She has one outburst, and BOOM!

Quote
In this scene, she's lashing out at a mentally retarded Casca

She's really not "lashing out." She grabs her by the shoulder. The rest of the scene may as well be her talking to herself. I think your perception of this scene is still colored by the mistranslated "cunning bitch" line, and then the "cruel" line, and then the "sly" line, all of which have been disproven.

Quote
I hope I haven't been coming across as a douche because that isn't my intention at all.

Not a douche, but quite obstinate, given everything that we've said here.

Quote
I disagree actually. Miura tells a very tightly knit story where every character reflects something or the other with another character.

Then we fundamentally disagree. Miura is a smart writer, and he does often make parallels (and when he does, he usually highlights these), but again I think you're taking that concept a bit far. I feel like that's a very constrained way to view characters. Griffith had a sword -- so did Roderick. You could make a parallel there, if you wanted. Does it have meaning? No.
 
Quote
Guts has shown to have a mean-streak from very early in life.


I thought it was an "innate desire for violence?" You're writing Guts out to be some kind of violent asshole, even as a child. In truth, he was a kid who was tossed into warfare from the age of 5, endured trauma after trauma, and still, amazingly, turned out to be a decent person. You took all of these things and concluded: "boy what a mean guy, just look at his innate desire for violence." He killed that poor black man in cold blood!

Quote
If Rickert could pick up becoming a blacksmith at his young age, Guts could've done the same.

Rickert was a mercenary too... But to survive, Guts had to rely on himself, because of the trauma that he had endured. He didn't have someone like Godot to watch over and teach him like Rickert did later in his life.

Quote
It's a love triangle because Farnese loves him. Two women love the same man (assuming Casca loves Guts after she's cured). Farnese loves Guts. Guts loves Casca. That's about as love triangle-like as it gets.

No, it's more like a love line right now. Guts and Casca are a couple. Just because Farnese expresses feelings of jealousy over that doesn't mean she has a role in that relationship's dynamics.

Quote
His wanted to become a king based on his own merits. That's noble. As for the bloodshed, all the assassinations Griffith committed were in self-defense. He killed people who had conspired to kill him or were conspiring to kill him.

That's naive, particularly given how Miura characterized Griffith's path, as a mountain of corpses piled up to reach his dream. There is nothing noble about sending an assassin in the night to kill a man, and then, of course, to smile over the extra corpse of his adolescent son. While (most) of those killings were retaliatory, they served to pave his road to the throne. But do you think he would have sat idly by and let the king live out his life happily if things hadn't gone awry for Griffith? He wasn't going to stop climbing.

Quote
iirc she didn't control coming back from her projection. She ended up losing control when Guts began talking about Casca and woke up to everyone and her own surprise.

I said she lost focus because she didn't want to hear the truth. She astrally put her head in the sand.

Quote
honestly, I think you take Berserk at face value too much. Who knows, maybe you're right but I don't think something like this is just a trivial event. Not with the kind of writer Miura is.

I don't think it's trivial either, but I think you're blowing it out of proportion, shaping things how you want them to be, despite the evidence.
:femto: :slan: :ubik:

Offline Sado

Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #14 on: August 28, 2016, 05:13:39 PM »
Quote
I hope you can understand my skepticism after you've consistently used bad translations, creating misunderstandings about scenes. And after you were initially called out on the "cunning bitch" line, you didn't check and post the correct translation, you doubled down on "cruel," instead. So while you may have the books, you clearly aren't using them as a reference, hence the misunderstanding we're having here.
I didn't double down on it. I incorrectly said "cruel" but since then I've been saying "it's not fair".

Quote
It seems that way. She was muttering it to herself, anyway. I think you're seriously going overboard with her little outburst. Because she expressed some emotion that means she's lapsing back into the person she was in the Conviction Arc? That's a bit much... And for someone who has focused so much on Farnese, I think you're giving her far too little credit in her own growth. She has one outburst, and BOOM!
I didn't say she's become pre-albion Farnese. I said we get shades of the old farnese for a brief moment. Clearly, there is a distinction.
And again, you can view it however you like. This is my interpretation. If you don't agree with you, you don't agree with me. Since neither of us actually wrote Berserk, personal interpretation is all we have to go on. Unless you're going to argue that somehow your interpretation is the correct one...in which case there is no point in discussing this any further with you.

Quote
She's really not "lashing out." She grabs her by the shoulder. The rest of the scene may as well be her talking to herself. I think your perception of this scene is still colored by the mistranslated "cunning bitch" line, and then the "cruel" line, and then the "sly" line, all of which have been disproven.
What I said above.

Quote
Then we fundamentally disagree. Miura is a smart writer, and he does often make parallels (and when he does, he usually highlights these), but again I think you're taking that concept a bit far. I feel like that's a very constrained way to view characters. Griffith had a sword -- so did Roderick. You could make a parallel there, if you wanted. Does it have meaning? No.
Firstly, I don't make such absurd claims.
Secondly, I'm not passing off what I'm saying as fact but as my interpretation. I look at certain things as having relevance. You don't. Good for you.
Thirdly, even if I did, how can you, as simply another reader, state that it has no meaning like it's a fact? Don't pass off what you "think" is going on as if it's fact. You're not the writer. Your opinion is just that: opinion.

Oh, and Roderick and Griffith having a sword may not mean much. But if they had a similar sword, of fought in the same fighting style...would that mean something? Maybe. Maybe not. But as long as there is a "maybe" then there's room for literary analysis.

Quote
I thought it was an "innate desire for violence?" You're writing Guts out to be some kind of violent asshole, even as a child. In truth, he was a kid who was tossed into warfare from the age of 5, endured trauma after trauma, and still, amazingly, turned out to be a decent person. You took all of these things and concluded: "boy what a mean guy, just look at his innate desire for violence." He killed that poor black man in cold blood!
...wow. Okay, so ignore everything else I said why don't you? lol

Honestly, I stopped reading after this point on wards. You call me obstinate but I can't help but feel that for someone who hasn't written the manga you act like you have all the answers. I was content in politely disagreeing with you but it seems you just want to pass off your opinion as if it's word of god. Maybe I'm wrong but that's just how it comes across.

There is this thing called "death of the author" in literature. Basically it means that once a writer is done writing his book/novel/story/poem he no longer controls how the readers will conceive its "meaning". I've read Berserk for a long time and as a reader am free to interpret it how I see fit. You're welcome to agree or disagree. But as reader (and even as the writer) you're in no position to tell me what the story is about just as I'm in no position to tell you.

Peace out.

Offline Walter

  • 賢者
  • Administrator
  • Of the Abyss
  • *****
  • Posts: 15884
  • Karma: 470
  • Gender: Male
  • Chapter ≠ Episode
Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #15 on: August 28, 2016, 05:52:13 PM »
Honestly, I stopped reading after this point on wards.

:femto: :slan: :ubik:

Offline Aazealh

  • 髑髏の騎士
  • Administrator
  • Of Terror
  • *****
  • Posts: 18420
  • Karma: 629
  • Gender: Male
  • そうはいかぬ
Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #16 on: August 28, 2016, 06:17:34 PM »
Ahhh, a classic case of:

"I just read the whole story in two days on some website but I understand it way better than you, who've been following and discussing it for almost 20 years. And also better than the author. So what if I'm basing my reasoning on mistranslations and misconceptions? I'm doing a literary analysis here you peasant, these things don't matter! You can't control me, it's my interpretation! You're not my dad!"

Can't wait for the inevitable denouement: "Pfff, I never liked this stupid manga anyway! Keep jerking off on your lame comic book, nerd!"
Or will it be: "I should have known not to come to this place. You're all arrogant losers!"

Offline Lawliet

  • Of the Interstice
  • **
  • Posts: 83
  • Karma: 32
  • Gender: Male
  • Awkward Artist
Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #17 on: August 28, 2016, 06:28:35 PM »
I'm sorry man, but the statement that you can interpret the story "as you see fit" doesn't sit well by me. There are ground rules that must be laid out before interpreting any work, such as context and (preferably) reading the work in its original language for example. Then, interpretation comes in. If anyone can interpret any work as they see fit, ignoring things such as context or language or decent translations, then no work would have any meaning at all.

And as other members said above, dialogue will color your perception of actions and choices. So, dialogue in a bad translation will therefore put you in danger of misinterpreting things.

Ahhh, a classic case of:

"I just read the whole story in two days on some website but I understand it way better than you, who've been following and discussing it for almost 20 years. And also better than the author. So what if I'm basing my reasoning on mistranslations and misconceptions? I'm doing a literary analysis here you peasant, these things don't matter! You can't control me, it's my interpretation! You're not my dad!"

Can't wait for the inevitable denouement: "Pfff, I never liked this stupid manga anyway! Keep jerking off on your lame comic book, nerd!"
Or will it be: "I should have known not to come to this place. You're all arrogant losers!"

 :ganishka:

Yeah, I can't stand the "it's my opinion" cop out. Ugh.
"There are no pacts between men and lions. Wolves and lambs cannot enjoy a meeting of the minds." ~ Achilles, the Iliad of Homer

Offline Pink-Dark-Boy

Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #18 on: August 28, 2016, 07:13:23 PM »
Quote
You're welcome to agree or disagree. But as reader (and even as the writer) you're in no position to tell me what the story is about just as I'm in no position to tell you.

Then what was the point in creating a thread whose purpose was for the analyzation of Farnese, in an attempt to enlighten people about Berserk?

Offline Sado

Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #19 on: August 28, 2016, 07:56:32 PM »
Quote
I'm sorry man, but the statement that you can interpret the story "as you see fit" doesn't sit well by me. There are ground rules that must be laid out before interpreting any work, such as context and (preferably) reading the work in its original language for example. Then, interpretation comes in. If anyone can interpret any work as they see fit, ignoring things such as context or language or decent translations, then no work would have any meaning at all.
And as other members said above, dialogue will color your perception of actions and choices. So, dialogue in a bad translation will therefore put you in danger of misinterpreting things.

Interesting. I don't recall saying that you can ignore context or language for the sake of interpretation.

Quote
Then what was the point in creating a thread whose purpose was for the analyzation of Farnese, in an attempt to enlighten people about Berserk?
haha :D
the purpose of "analyzation" was to share my thoughts on Farnese with you guys not to enlighten anyone.

Quote
"I just read the whole story in two days on some website but I understand it way better than you, who've been following and discussing it for almost 20 years. And also better than the author. So what if I'm basing my reasoning on mistranslations and misconceptions? I'm doing a literary analysis here you peasant, these things don't matter! You can't control me, it's my interpretation! You're not my dad!"
It's a work in progress and far from being done. Don't know why you don't understand that.
And you've been following Berserk for 20 years, have you? Wow. I guess that automatically makes your opinion of what's going on superior to anyone else's. Silly me. Who knew that the appearance and actions of characters (which is the main thing I'm analyzing) also become different in shitty translations. If only I'd been following Berserk for the last 20 years. also then I could pretend I wrote the damn thing too :p
« Last Edit: August 28, 2016, 08:07:49 PM by Sado »

Offline Aazealh

  • 髑髏の騎士
  • Administrator
  • Of Terror
  • *****
  • Posts: 18420
  • Karma: 629
  • Gender: Male
  • そうはいかぬ
Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #20 on: August 28, 2016, 08:48:33 PM »
It's a work in progress and far from being done. Don't know why you don't understand that.

Oh so it's a work-in-progress now, which means... what, that people should be more lenient? Since it's the first time you mention that, I don't see how anyone could have known. Especially since none of the feedback you were given seems to matter to you, as if your essay was in fact already done and set in stone. And please note that I did tell you right away that your "analysis" was critically flawed and needed to be rewritten from the ground up with proper references. But you ignored it, just as you've ignored everything else anyone else has told you.

And you've been following Berserk for 20 years, have you? Wow. I guess that automatically makes your opinion of what's going on superior to anyone else's. Silly me. Who knew that the appearance and actions of characters (which is the main thing I'm analyzing) also become different in shitty translations. If only I'd been following Berserk for the last 20 years. also then I could pretend I wrote the damn thing too :p

Uhhh, you don't seem to realize that I'm not the one you were arguing with. I wasn't talking about myself either. I've only been following Berserk for 15 years.
Either way, you really should just buy the manga and read a proper version of it instead of embarrassing yourself like this. You won't achieve anything by refusing to listen to people.

Offline Nothingwillbewong

Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #21 on: August 28, 2016, 08:54:18 PM »
Sado, the thing that's most perplexing here is your failure to acknowledge getting a situation or a character wrong based on a mistranlation, the art (amazing as it is) can not convey alone a character, there I think you gotta give some wiggle room and admit to making a mistake. Walter may seem arrogant and is maybe not the kindest most understanding talker, but these interpretations come often and most times it's a person having fun using their imagination and personal feelings with the book they just read, and I commend that, but some things really are objective and the arguement that ''its just an opinion'' is a safe way to get yourself out of understanding something objectively

Offline Nothingwillbewong

Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #22 on: August 28, 2016, 08:59:47 PM »
BTW I'm probably putting my nose where it's not called(in my language this expression kinda sounds better), but for some reason felt I had to give my 2 cents on it

Offline Lawliet

  • Of the Interstice
  • **
  • Posts: 83
  • Karma: 32
  • Gender: Male
  • Awkward Artist
Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #23 on: August 28, 2016, 09:12:08 PM »
Interesting. I don't recall saying that you can ignore context or language for the sake of interpretation.


You didn't say it, but it's what you're doing by relying on bad translations.
"There are no pacts between men and lions. Wolves and lambs cannot enjoy a meeting of the minds." ~ Achilles, the Iliad of Homer

Offline Salem

Re: Farnese Analysis: The Wild Card
« Reply #24 on: August 28, 2016, 10:04:20 PM »
Phew, what a storm.

Sado, one thing you need to keep in mind is not taking this personal.  I completely understand where you're coming from, but the people on this site have a deep passion for this series.  If you come in and throw a theory that is infact baseless on the foundation you read it from, expect this result. 

It's easy to quickly draw fire and all that.  Keep in mind that what Walter and Az are stating isn't against you personally in the extent you think.  Bullshit, even my own when I first discovered skullknight, will be eradicated. 

If you can keep an open mind then sooner or later you'll sit back and enjoy the forums even if you don't agree with every point made.