Evil Genius

Istvan wrote:

True, I had forgotten that. It would make a strong motivation. But maybe Elfheim can do something about that, too?

Again, possible, but after the way that Flora talked about the magic of the brand, it seems unlikely, and again, to me it would just seem like such a cop out for it to be solved so easily, after all the build up its recieved.

It does seem that only the god-hand should be able to undo the brand, or maybe not even them.

Brainpiercing wrote:

Istvan wrote:

True, I had forgotten that. It would make a strong motivation. But maybe Elfheim can do something about that, too?

Again, possible, but after the way that Flora talked about the magic of the brand, it seems unlikely, and again, to me it would just seem like such a cop out for it to be solved so easily, after all the build up its recieved.

It does seem that only the god-hand should be able to undo the brand, or maybe not even them.

Maybe it should be more along the lines of there are 2 possible ways of getting it removed. One is the god hand the cheap way or two elfheim has another way but require a lot more work.

It seems Flora's magic doesn't touch upon the area that the idea touches upon so there might be a way for them to remove it without going to the god hands.

I don't see why at this point he would want the brand removed.

Grahf wrote:I don't see why at this point he would want the brand removed.

Because...if it isn't, then when he dies his soul will be cast into Hell? Seems like a pretty good reason to me.

OO I thought you had a good reason. Once he is dead he is dead. I'm sure he would need a more immediate effect to want it removed right now. But last time I checked he is able to have nights where he can sleep without worrying about spirits attacking en masse. As of right now he has the ability to fight against things that most normal people can't because of the brand. So as of right now the rewards outweigh the risk.

Istvan wrote:

Grahf wrote:I don't see why at this point he would want the brand removed.

Because...if it isn't, then when he dies his soul will be cast into Hell? Seems like a pretty good reason to me.

Who said he wasn't going to hell to begin with? 100 man slayer, raised from childhood as a mercenary, Guts isn't exactly a good guy, with or without the brand.

The brand does not help him in his fight with the apostles. Perhaps it puts him just a bit closer into the twilight realm of demons, but that's just a side effect. It does however have immediate effects on his fighting power, especially in a prospective fight with Griffith, because the brand nearly paralyzes him when Griffith is near, at least it brings him a lot of pain. This is by design, so that the sacrificy can't fight against the person who sacrificed him.

(It didn't seem to be so bad for Caska, for some reason, and also not during the meeting on the graveyard hill, perhaps it only reacts to Femto's true form, and not to Griffith?)

To me that seems like a good reason to want to get rid of it. Also, he definitely will want to rid Caska of hers, and if that is possible, then his will be next.

I just don't think it will be possible.

Well with that said and seeing how Griffith effects normal people. I don't really dont' see how its to his benefit having the brand removed. Everyone seems to throw themselves at Griffith's feet last I checked. I think "a little bit" of pain would easily counter that little trick of his.

I don't really have the time to dig up the exact quote but doesn't SK say he is the only one since he travels the border? Of course that could be interpreted any number of ways.

Wow, you made it so interesting that I actually read the whole thing, with my short attention span and all. You are one dedicated Berserk fan. I give you props for making the best berserk theory I've ever read.

Creatine wrote:Berserk is among (if not the most) compelling, thought provoking pieces of literature I have ever read; and I have read A LOT.

This still makes the topic entirely too laughable to be read.

^ And why is that?

I agree with a number of things and drew a lot of the same conclusions, except for maybe things that might have required some of the prior knowledge about Gnostic or Kabbalah as far as mythology.

I personally think the main and most important point, is the relationship of Gatts and Griffth to the rest of the world, and to each other.

Saying Griffith is a savior or messianic figure, is totally accurate to me. Again and again he's seen as someone, from his very introduction, who is a savior and leader. Gatts on the other hand is very much an antagonist to Griffith, and although told from his point of view, if the story weren't following Gatts as a protagonist and we lived in the world of Berserk, we'd all more than likely see Gatts as the "bad guy" and Griffth as the Hero of the tale. He's a hero with flaws to be sure, but that's what makes him real, makes him a full personality, and makes us all hate him so much.

Facade19 wrote:^ And why is that?

Because berserk isn't literature per say, more like a picture book with a lot more words than other picture books. I mean seriously, who would put Berserk up there with Gatsby or Mice and Men... It's just a very silly statement.

Crono454 wrote:Saying Griffith is a savior or messianic figure, is totally accurate to me. Again and again he's seen as someone, from his very introduction, who is a savior and leader. Gatts on the other hand is very much an antagonist to Griffith, and although told from his point of view, if the story weren't following Gatts as a protagonist and we lived in the world of Berserk, we'd all more than likely see Gatts as the "bad guy" and Griffth as the Hero of the tale. He's a hero with flaws to be sure, but that's what makes him real, makes him a full personality, and makes us all hate him so much.

The only reason that we'd think Griffith a hero if we lived in the world of Berserk, is because we would have information that was too limited to let us draw a correct conclusion (a.k.a. he has a great PR campaign). Anyone human who has knowledge of the Eclipse would see him as anything but a hero.

FightClub wrote:

Facade19 wrote:^ And why is that?

Because berserk isn't literature per say, more like a picture book with a lot more words than other picture books. I mean seriously, who would put Berserk up there with Gatsby or Mice and Men... It's just a very silly statement.

If you honestly think that Berserk is just a picture book with a lot more words, then I'm left to conclude that you're missing almost everything about the story. Speaking as one who has read both The Great Gatsby and Of Mice and Men for school, I can honestly say that Berserk has provoked far more thought for me than either of them ever did.

Istvan wrote:If you honestly think that Berserk is just a picture book with a lot more words, then I'm left to conclude that you're missing almost everything about the story. Speaking as one who has read both The Great Gatsby and Of Mice and Men for school, I can honestly say that Berserk has provoked far more thought for me than either of them ever did.

That doesn't make it literature, it makes it thought provoking manga, or thought provoking illustrations. Great literature for me is something that can weave a picture with words, since Berserk cannot do that, and does not need to do that, I do not feel it is literature. I'm not debating Berserk's thought provoking imagery, rather calling berserk literature.

Wiki wrote:The term has generally come to identify a collection of texts or works of art, which in Western culture are mainly prose, both fiction and non-fiction, drama and poetry. In much, if not all of the world, texts can be oral as well, and include such genres as epic, legend, myth, ballad, plus other forms of oral poetry, and folktale.

That said, I hardly feel that Guts going AARHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHGGGGGGGGG with sixteen action symbols over his head can hardly be called a work of art, or literature.

FightClub wrote:

Facade19 wrote:^ And why is that?

Because berserk isn't literature per say, more like a picture book with a lot more words than other picture books. I mean seriously, who would put Berserk up there with Gatsby or Mice and Men... It's just a very silly statement.

Berserk far surpasses the Great Gastpy and Mice and Men in terms of almost everything you can look at and study.
If you view Berserk as nothing more than a picture book then IMO you have sadly missed important facets of the narrative that is being transmitted to the reader.
For certain reasons I believe you are devaluing Berserk by viewing it as a picture book and are in peculiar aspects discrimincating against the work itself.
First and foremost why do you consider the Great Gatspy and Mice and Men per say to be in the canon of literature and yet dismiss Berserk?
Just because the presentation of the narrative is in a format that is contradistinct to the two texts you have given as examples?
Please reconsider the value of Berserk in its form. Besides the aesthetic pleasure that is obtained through its anatomy, the impact of its ontology is the key source IMO of the discourse itself. If anything I take it into account that Berserk's influence and power comes through its narrative structure that is presented to the reader through its form. Your given reasoning however on as to why you decenter the argument of the OP is in my perspective unplausible.

FightClub wrote:

Istvan wrote: Great literature for me is something that can weave a picture with words, since Berserk cannot do that, and does not need to do that, I do not feel it is literature. I'm not debating Berserk's thought provoking imagery, rather calling berserk literature.

We can never know whether Berserk could have achieved your standards of literature or not since it was never tried and if it would occur it would not equal your definition of literature, since the manga has already preceded the "if" text itself. The argument you are given as to why Berserk is not literature is one that is very unsound to me.

Facade19 wrote:

FightClub wrote:

Facade19 wrote:^ And why is that?

Because berserk isn't literature per say, more like a picture book with a lot more words than other picture books. I mean seriously, who would put Berserk up there with Gatsby or Mice and Men... It's just a very silly statement.

Berserk far surpasses the Great Gastpy and Mice and Men in terms of almost everything you can look at and study.
If you view Berserk as nothing more than a picture book then IMO you have sadly missed important facets of the narrative that is being transmitted to the reader.
For certain reasons I believe you are devaluing Berserk by viewing it as a picture book and are in peculiar aspects discrimincating against the work itself.
First and foremost why do you consider the Great Gatspy and Mice and Men per say to be in the canon of literature and yet dismiss Berserk?
Just because the presentation of the narrative is in a format that is contradistinct to the two texts you have given as examples?
Please reconsider the value of Berserk in its form. Besides the aesthetic pleasure that is obtained through its anatomy, the impact of its ontology is the key source IMO of the discourse itself. If anything I take it into account that Berserk's influence and power comes through its narrative structure that is presented to the reader through its form. Your given reasoning however on as to why you decenter the argument of the OP is in my perspective unplausible.

Look up?

Look up for my response to your idea of what makes a literary piece literature.

Facade19 wrote:We can never know whether Berserk could have achieved your standards of literature or not since it was never tried and if it would occur it would not equal your definition of literature, since the manga has already preceded the "if" text itself. The argument you are given as to why Berserk is not literature is one that is very unsound to me.

Show me an instance of berserk's dialogue which is literature, by definition, and I'll concede. I'm simply stating that berserk in essence is not literature, point blank, there should be no arguement here. It is not a novel, it is a graphic novel, it is not a folk song, or anything that is mainly comprised of text. It is not literature. It is an astounding piece of graphic genius, it is beautifully drawn and constructed, but that does not, and never will make it literature. Saying my arguement is unsound really presents the notion to me that you, yourself do not know what literature is.

Dictionary.com wrote: 1. writings in which expression and form, in connection with ideas of permanent and universal interest, are characteristic or essential features, as poetry, novels, history, biography, and essays.
2. the entire body of writings of a specific language, period, people, etc.: the literature of England.
3. the writings dealing with a particular subject: the literature of ornithology.
4. the profession of a writer or author.
5. literary work or production.
6. any kind of printed material, as circulars, leaflets, or handbills: literature describing company products.
7. Archaic. polite learning; literary culture; appreciation of letters and books.

Fightclub perhaps you don't seem to understand. You have complete tunnel vision on this topic. In a traditional sense it wouldn't be classified as literature. But its also not like we are just looking at just pictures every chapter. The author usually gives the reader discriptive words and settings so they could form their own pictures. Instead here you're getting what the author wants you to see.

I think of it being a book thats also a movie at the same time if that makes sense. So I would say it is and it isn't.





yeah great post

FightClub wrote:

Facade19 wrote:We can never know whether Berserk could have achieved your standards of literature or not since it was never tried and if it would occur it would not equal your definition of literature, since the manga has already preceded the "if" text itself. The argument you are given as to why Berserk is not literature is one that is very unsound to me.

Show me an instance of berserk's dialogue which is literature, by definition, and I'll concede. I'm simply stating that berserk in essence is not literature, point blank, there should be no arguement here. It is not a novel, it is a graphic novel, it is not a folk song, or anything that is mainly comprised of text. It is not literature. It is an astounding piece of graphic genius, it is beautifully drawn and constructed, but that does not, and never will make it literature. Saying my arguement is unsound really presents the notion to me that you, yourself do not know what literature is.

Dictionary.com wrote: 1. writings in which expression and form, in connection with ideas of permanent and universal interest, are characteristic or essential features, as poetry, novels, history, biography, and essays.
2. the entire body of writings of a specific language, period, people, etc.: the literature of England.
3. the writings dealing with a particular subject: the literature of ornithology.
4. the profession of a writer or author.
5. literary work or production.
6. any kind of printed material, as circulars, leaflets, or handbills: literature describing company products.
7. Archaic. polite learning; literary culture; appreciation of letters and books.

And who defined that which you have quoted?
Who defined what is to be considered literature?
The same people who 100 years ago only considered white, upper class, male literary texts as literature?
Are these the same small group of individuals that decide what is literature and what is not?
Are these the same people who have a monopoly on the canon of literature?
Just like times back then forced the idea and defintion of literature to change, so will this whole constructed idea of literary canon be changed with new mediums of narrative telling. If you reside yourself in the lines of small dogmatic ideas of literature then by all means do so. However I for one will not let myself be subjugated to definitions of others on what is to be understood as literature.

You want to turn mangas into literature? Fine, but be careful what you wish for. Don't forget Douglas Adams' immortal words:

Having been an English literary graduate, I've been trying to avoid the idea of doing art ever since. I think the idea of art kills creativity. I think media are at their most interesting before anybody's thought of calling them art, when people still think they're just a load of junk.

See? Imagine truing to turn Berserk into piece of art? Or any other manga? Result would most certainly suck ass especially when you see what's considered to be art these days. I want mangakas to have freedom to do things their way and to put whatever they fell like putting in their work not to worry if this or that part is aesthetically pleasing or whatever. Art is for pussies

42ndEndOfTheWorld wrote:You want to turn mangas into literature? Fine, but be careful what you wish for. Don't forget Douglas Adams' immortal words:

Having been an English literary graduate, I've been trying to avoid the idea of doing art ever since. I think the idea of art kills creativity. I think media are at their most interesting before anybody's thought of calling them art, when people still think they're just a load of junk.

See? Imagine truing to turn Berserk into piece of art? Or any other manga? Result would most certainly suck ass especially when you see what's considered to be art these days. I want mangakas to have freedom to do things their way and to put whatever they fell like putting in their work not to worry if this or that part is aesthetically pleasing or whatever. Art is for pussies

First and foremost my gripe with FightClub was (is) that he disregards(ed) the OP's entire thread because the OP referred(s) to Berserk as literature.
That to me is very ignoble and unconsidered. For the sake of making the case that Berserk can be thought of literature (and I certainly believe that as the audience we should have a particular degree of freedom) I took the stance that Berserk can be "phenomenized" as literature.
Secondly art, at least the way I see it, is meant to be about freedom of expression and the freedom of interpretation. I think the aesthetic value from an art piece comes from the freedom of both the artist and the audience to 1) create the art work they see fit and 2) for the audience to dissimanate the art piece the way they like. Now regardless what one or the other considers to be aesthetically pleasing, the importance here is that there is an unrestricted space of playfullness.
Thridly I think literature is art. Manga to me is art. The Form of manga is, but what the artist does with the medium is another thing.
So while the likes of Berserk are highly valued (at least here) compared to lets say another manga of lesser known quality, each individual context operates within the channel of the form. Likewise I do not know what your definition of art is, but making a claim that art is for Pu....s makes me really wonder what you conceive as art.

Are you certified to be a professional bullshitter, or is it something you just do in your spare time?

Facade19 wrote:First and foremost my gripe with FightClub was (is) that he disregards(ed) the OP's entire thread because the OP referred(s) to Berserk as literature. That to me is very ignoble and unconsidered.

And thank you, that's the most beautiful thing i've heard all day. FightClub the ignoble, fucking tight la.

FightClub wrote:Are you certified to be a professional bullshitter, or is it something you just do in your spare time?

Facade19 wrote:First and foremost my gripe with FightClub was (is) that he disregards(ed) the OP's entire thread because the OP referred(s) to Berserk as literature. That to me is very ignoble and unconsidered.

And thank you, that's the most beautiful thing i've heard all day. FightClub the ignoble, fucking tight la.

ignoble \ig-NOH-bul\, adjective:
1. Of low birth or family; not noble; not illustrious; plebeian; common; humble.
2. Not noble in quality, character, or purpose; characterized by baseness, lowness, or meanness.

HAHAHA... I get to refer to FightClub as a pleb, oh, that is rich. Killfile should read this.

Berserk falls under a fiction genre of literature. Graphic novels and comic books present stories told in a combination of sequential artwork, dialogs and text. As such, they constitute a related narrative form of literature. Because of this, it is a literary work.