I'm sorry if this post seems detrimental to yours, and i really apologize for that. But believe me that i was not really directing this to you, your interpretation of Blackbeard's past is pretty much similar to that of everyone else, much more detailed and well thought i must compliment you, but i just wanted to let this out, and i caught your post as an excuse to write all this, which it's still not all i had to say about Blackbeard. I don't pretend to be an expert of One Piece, but about Blackbeard i do, i read all of his scenes so many times in all their details, so many fan theories, so much time thinking on it, that i can't come to any other conclusion, for the sake of coherence of the story and its themes, that Blackbeard is just pure causeless evil.
I don't mind at all lol. A response that actually takes the time to analyze and respond to separate parts of my mini-dissertation is way something I always mud more appreciative of than just saying "Oh, that's pretty cool and insightful. I agree." Not that I ever shame people for saying short responses like that and you can't always contribute anything notable to a discussion despite agreeing with someone's perspective. But being able to argue, and not to mention rile up passion (but respectful), about a fictional concept that is very entertaining and complex is always fun to debate with. Surely you don't think I type up these long messages because I believe that even if I might not be wrong, my superficial length intimidates people from trying to believe or even fools them into thinking I'm automatically correct because have a lot to say. Because, very often on forums, people are capable of being able to spew out a lot of, well, garbage that they claim to be competent and tolerant conversation.
And to be honest, I found YOUR post to be an excuse to let loose a bunch of lingering thoughts I've had about Blackbeard's character for a while lol. Although I am genuinely curious about your reasoning behind Blackbeard's characterization and his symbolic connection to Adam and Eve. So I guess I'll indulge myself below then.
Thank you for moving this conversation over to the Blackbeard thread, by the way. I was thinking of doing the same on the off-chance you replied to me in the initial One Piece World thread.
@Dr.:
I agree on Akainu having a backstory oppressed by pirates and outlaws, and i'm unsure of many things in One Piece, being so unpredictable, as a matter of fact all my predictions are just suppositions and i don't pretend to be right about them, but if there's one single thing i'm 100% sure of it's that Blackbeard is not what he is because of a tragic backstory, he is not what he is for some complex backstory that induced on him some complex character development and drove him to embrace some ideals and succumb to sin. I regret using the word "ideologies" in one of my post in The great new world thread. Blackbeard is not driven by any ideology, any pain that he endured, he's only driven by his instinct to obtain more and more and by his big huge stupidity that makes him blind to concepts like empathy, morals, and any form of code of conduct even the most twisted ones, and i also think he's the most evil character ever appeared in the manga, more than Ener and Doflamingo.
I think somebody who is able to give speeches about dreams and morality like in Mock Town and Impel Down, as well as being willing to wait decades to seize the chance to rise in power, along with talking about a concept as abstract as fate all of the time, has some sort of ideology motivating in. I just can't think as some random dog that wants to find any excuse to cause random chaos like the Joker in DC Comics or the likes of Doflamingo (ironically also called the Joker lol) and Kaido. I feel like we shouldn't judge his motivations so quickly because Oda is VERY good at hiding details about character motivations and pasts.
Just look at Luffy and how his past was gradually revealed in general, and revelations like knowing that Ace is the son of Roger all along. We didn't even know Teach wanted to be Pirate King until the end of Water 7. And we still don't even know what he means by "Pirate King". Because it's only a title, a title with a definition fluid enough to vastly change depending on who aspires to achieve it, such as Shiki believing that being Pirate King meant you had the largest and strongest army and amount of power as a ruler. And if an idiot like Luffy has an ideology of Pirate King in how he vaguely describes how he wants to be the freest man in all of the seas, then I definitely bet that Teach has his own profound definition of being Pirate King.
Which would mean he has an ideology. Just the fact that, like I already said, he gives speeches on dreams and morality (just like Doflamingo by the way, a VERY ideological character) already gives substantial evidence for that. And judging from how as a Yonko he's amassing weapons and stealing Devil Fruits, as well as the likelihood of him getting an Ancient Weapon (probably Pluton, which is said to be capable to destroying whole islands (I personally bet that's how Fishman Island gets destroyed. Not by Big Mom or Kaido, who are mere stepping stone Yonkos, but by the one and only Teach)), I think it's safe to say he wants to be some sort of power mogul like Shiki. But I'm totally game a curveball that is much more unique and different. Just not something as generic as him being an embodiment of all evil and causing chaos just for the sake of greed without any depth behind it. If Teach didn't have any ideology, then he wouldn't be the top contender to be Pirate King besides Luffy. Because One Piece is a VERY ideological-centric series, with Teach's characterization heavily embodying. If there's a character that embodies instinct and blind to any form of meaningful intangible concepts and conduct, look no further than Bellamy in the Jaya arc. In how Luffy and Zoro decided to not fight out of pity for their lack of ambition and ideology in their lives, Bellamy roughing up and stealing Cricket's gold as soon as he heard word after making fun of his efforts to prove the City of Gold exists, superficially praising his bounty until he learned that both Luffy and Zoro's (the two humble and wise adventurers with constructive endeavors) were bigger, and Teach smashing Sarkies' face into the boardwalk for the latter not accepting his captain's defeat and the power of ideals. Or another example would be Buggy in general. Oda makes strong characters, and ones that reach as high as the Admirals and Yonko, because they have ideals. They have ideologies, be they selfish, altruistic, or fiendish. If not, they're weak both mentally and physically. I think that you're equating how Teach rejects the common ideologies of the world, like many villains (including Doflamingo as a prominent example), as meaning that he doesn't have any of his own, which are not the same thing at all. I could even use Hody as an example with how it was revealed that his grudge against humans was just mindless rage that was only sparked by romanticizing racism from being inspired by Arlong's trash talk. Hence why he had to take pills to be taken seriously as a threat. Oda frequently ties in ideology to the capability and strength of his characters.
Also, it's not like Teach's personality has to be developed SOLELY because of trauma. Doflamingo was a spoiled oppressive brat before he became poor. The settings only amplified his flaws which already existed. Probably because Oda didn't want to have Doffy to be a sympathetic character, but only promote more focus on how messed up he is. Especially in comparison to his twin brother, who isn't like that at all. Rosinante and Law frequently try to state that Doflamingo was "born" evil in that sense, and Teach may very much be like that as well despite having a tragic backstory. So you're technically still likely to get the type of Teach you perceive him as, just in a different execution that shows how his upbringing may have supplemented what may have already been corrupt about him to begin with. Like I said in my previous comment in the world thread. Tragic backstories and settings can actually serve to make you hate characters more than feel sympathetic for them. It's not tragedy or one's circumstances that defines them, but how they choose to interpret and react to those events.
Why is he so driven? Because every human, who more who less, desire always more without ever be satisfied, it's a basic need of every person and it is not caused by any form of traumatic experience (on the contrary it is often caused by a spoiled life), and Teach is the pure embodiment of that, as the concept of piracy and outlaw is the pure embodiment of that, it's not like every character must have some complex characterization otherwise the plot would be so disappointing. I would find disappointing if Teach wasn't just the simple character he appears to be. He wants to obtain "everything" that exist in the world, without any compromise, at the point that he was ready to never begin his road to the top if he failed to have for himself what he thinks is the ultimate devil fruit, as he was ready to disband his crew and abandon his ambitions if he failed to obtain the Gura Gura powers (as Shiryu said). There's a reason that the Yami Yami no mi resemble his personality so much, a force that sucks in everything, as his greed and ambition to have everything for himself is boundless, as there is a reason Oda wanted to call him initially Everything D. Teach (see One Piece green databook).
Every human desires. That's obvious. But their background and environment can serve as catalysts that make them crave even MORE. No, not every good character needs complex characterization or some tragic upbringing. I love plenty of villains that are just naturally selfish and corrupt. It's just that Teach's portrayal, as I've mentioned above, evidently has a lot of evident depth that needs to be explored. Just because piracy is formed by greed (and also LOTS of backstabbing and abuse. Like how Blackbeard in real life as well as other pirates that were originally privateers for England ended up being abandoned in the New World and turned to piracy as a form of rebellion and indulgence). I never looked at Teach as a simple character ever since his inspiring speech in Jaya that immediately made him unlike a mere selfish pirate for the sake of it like Bellamy and Buggy. Hell, even other characters wonder about how mysterious he is like Shanks and Marco. Very much in the same way other characters are surprised by somebody as strong despite his looks, enduring, stupid, and ironically charismatic as Luffy is. If Luffy, his direct parallel, didn't stay being a simple protagonist, then why does Blackbeard have to stay being a simple antagonist? Blackbeard can still be a simplistic character personality and aspiration-wise like Luffy. Just as breeding and cunning as he's always been. But that doesn't mean his BACKSTORY has to be, in which Luffy's isn't after seeing it right before the timeskip.
And of course Blackbeard's greedy lol, I never denied that as the theme of his character. I just don't think superficial, instinctive greed is all there to this character in and of itself. You may certainly be correct about it being the cornerstone of his character, but it's unlikely to only be that. Just the fact he's willing to be so "all or nothing" when it comes to being properly prepared and have the right opportunity in his grip like you mentioned highlight how there is more to him despite his simplistic design and selfishness.
I don't find any contradiction or hypocrisy in his belief for fate and the use of cunning either, he just believes that it was fate Thatch found the Yami Yami only to be killed by him and take it, his belief on fate has not the purpose of justification for his acts, he doesn't need such a thing as a justification because he doesn't understand what good and evil are, rather the purpose for such belief is to give him self confidence for his seemegly impossible goals (because the goals he aims to are without doubt the most ambitious for all the characters in the series).
Justification from an ethical view? Yes, Teach could care less about that. But justification from a "logical" perspective to enlighten others he surpasses? As if it's his philosophy on how the world operates and why he is so successful in his risky actions despite the odds? And logically, it is hypocritical. At least when he keeps making statements about strength like how he told Bonney that only the strong are capable of venturing into the New World, and says things like "Whoever gets scared, loses." That is literally the most hypocritical thing Teach could have EVER said, and yet falls completely in line with how overconfident and pretentious (but not without merit in some regards) his character/philosophy is established to be.
! 
! 
! 
! 
I understand how me saying his fixation on fate is hypocritical when it hasn't been explicitly questioned or countered so far in the series. But honestly, it's totally bound to. I very much doubt that Oda is building up the dichotomy of fate versus luck between the Blackbeard Pirates and Straw Hat crew to never have them conflict with each other as a focal point between what separates our "heroes" from these "villains" despite their similarities in crew structure, charisma, and power. And it is VERY common for fiction to tackle and criticize the notion of fate if it is introduced as a motif later on in the series rather than a central theme upon the series' introduction like with Avatar: The Last Airbender. Often disparaged for discrediting the power of willpower, effort, and choices amongst characters, which runs directly against Teach's notions of fate and survival of the fittest/strongest (the latter of which he expressed to Bonney). A character who we are supposed to detest and want to see the downfall of, and every One Piece villain ends up having their philosophy overturned and ambition shattered. I wouldn't be surprised to see these perspectives clash as we learn more about the Will of D and how it figures into the recurring theme of inherited will, and how that is interpreted by the characters. And Blackbeard is definitely interested in that and the Void Century, as Oda revealed in one of the last few SBS sections that one of his hobbies is researching history (not that it wasn't already obvious enough that he would get involved with those plotlines by being a D and Raftel (and presumably One Piece) being integral to the Void Century/Ancient Kingdom).
Do you really believe, and i mean, do you HONESTLY believe that Oda would reveal and spoil even the slightest of reliable hint before the final arc would even begin, and what's more a hint so easy and immediate to intepret (everyone immedietaly thought Blackbeard's evil cuz of bad past when they saw that drawing, me too), also after that trolling he pulled on us with Doflamingo backstory where his childhood sketch suggested a life in poverty while in the end it was quite different? To me it's the contrary, that Blackbeard sketch proves that his past life was indeed different from the most immediate interpretation that it suggest. There are countless possible intepretations for that sketch, for example he could have been crying just because he acted so selfish and boundlessly greed that he didn't fit in any societies, everyone laughed at his impossible ambitions, even his parents if he had ones, and he continuosly got into fights, that is as much as i can concede to Blackbeard's past, but never that those experience were the cause of his personality.
Totally lol. I notice how you keep claiming that Oda is unpredictable, but… He isn't. Now, he surely comes up with MANY surprising events such as Kaido's introduction in terms of how they're executed. But with the concepts and elements of One Piece's narrative in general, it's totally possible to predict them. That's because Oda likes planting seeds for future plot threads and developments, and we as fans grow more accustomed to Oda's storytelling patterns and mindset over time. Going back to Kaido, yes, we had no idea he would be revealed in such a way. But narratively, it was kind of predictable to expect him to finally be introduced in the aftermath of Dressrosa with how built-up he was throughout the saga and Doffy's downfall immediately effecting his SMILE production operation by completely halting it. And even then, over 100 chapters earlier, he actually showed off this color spread. In which lots of fans predicated that the character depicted in the upper-left corner was Kaido, especially because of his juxtaposition with Big Mom being on the opposite side.
! 
Not to mention other plot threads like Lola being Big Mom's daughter. The Dressrosa Coliseum participants becoming Luffy's allied fleet akin to allied crews under Yonko as an essential resource for future conflicts. Or Kaido most likely having an eastern dragon Mythical Zoan Devil Fruit because of the GIANT EASTERN DRAGON TATTOO on his body, Shenron-esque whiskers, Kin'emon's phobia of dragons in Punk Hazard, Momo being so terrified of looking like a dragon, -as well as Dragon Ball being a well known source of inspiration for One Piece. There were even people who were right about Jimbei becoming a Straw Hat since IMPEL DOWN, and not just because he looked cool, but by analyzing how Fishman Island was protected by Whitebeard and how Whitebeard would have to die in the war since we learned how he is a good guy in order to have Luffy be the new protector of Fishman Island as a follow-up to how he defeated Arlong as a means of promoting racial peace co-existence, and how a Shichibukai joining would be plausible at that time of the story. Or how obvious it is that Shanks will be killed by Teach by pretty much being fated to fight, and how Shanks can't still be around by the Final War because he would be a crutch for Luffy's success as a Yonko from proper narrative analysis. Or Bepo and Pedro's animal physique strongly hinting they were Minkmen, and the name "Minkmen" being on a slave reward paper during Sabaody Archipelago. Or the Enel cover story having hints about the Ancient Kingdom. Or Usopp's lies coming true. And so on and so on.
With someone who is such a master planner, that means he HAS to leave behind a trail. And as soon as we realize the trail he's left for previous plot threads, we can become engaged into gradually detecting growing trails for future plot threads. Even towards the endgame of the series, where it's pretty obvious that it will be some sort of three way conflict between the Straw Hats, World Government, and Blackbeard with an Ancient Weapon belonging to each side. One Piece as a series is not being written as the most unique and revolutionary work of all time for the teenage boy demographic. It's being made to be the ultimate action-adventure shonen story that homes in on its tropes and even some cliches, but pouring sheer passion and creativity into how they are executed or sometimes even turned upside-down. Hence why Dragon Ball is one of its main sources of inspiration, and why it's so likely for Shanks to die akin to so many mentors of other action-adventure shonen manga heroes. And why it is totally possible for us to analyze Oda's craft and make accurate predictions for what types of narrative directions and arcs to expect. But when it comes to specific details and EXECUTION (notice how I keep repeating this word), which Oda often even spitballs on the spot like not initially planning for Vivi to be a princess until Whiskey Peak, Oda is always a master of surprise.
Being predictable is not solely a weakness. If anything, in the case of One Piece, it's credibility towards Oda's capabilities as a writer in creating such a rich world of intersecting character interaction, repercussions, flashbacks, and overall lore. He is a master weaver of storytelling akin to a spider with silk. Its webs may be hard to see due to being so thin and practically transparent, but once you notice under the right type of lighting and perspective, you marvel at its intricate craftsmanship.
And Doflamingo WAS in poverty. We were completely right about that lol. And like I've been trying to tell you over and over again about these tragic backstories that Oda writes, he always places their emphasis on how they make the villains even MORE DETESTABLE. Which is exactly what he did with Doffy. Which is exactly what he did with Arlong. Which is exactly what he did with Hody. Which is exactly what he did with Caesar. Which is exactly what he did with Lucci. And is exactly what he's going to do with Teach. Not to mention how obvious it is that Crocodile's a girl, especially with how his face isn't shown in Chapter 0 and how his younger self looks extremely androgynous.
Seriously, one image as simple as the one for Blackbeard is obviously not going to spoil EVERYTHING, or even most of what his flashback might be. Like I mentioned before in my previous reply. But it's still a pretty notable indicator of what to expect in his INEVITABLE flashback, his background influences, and his motivations. And I never tried to claim the flashback had to be the sole cause of his personality, as I've mentioned before in this reply. Just influences and amplifiers.
No. It is just pure greed that motivates him, nothing else. He has no ego problem whatsoever. How can the final villain of One Piece, the one who should embody piracy, sin, the devil itself, just as the real Blackbeard was often paralleled with the devil, be so pathetic to have ego problem, insecurities, having been bullied. Greed is the essence of dreams after all. He is presented as the greatest dreamer of the series, THE DREAMER, THE DEVIL, there is no reason to contaminate his character with further motivations or justifications, that would just make his character impure from what he's meant to embody.
Look at this:
[hide]http://i.imgur.com/YLfqFEL.png
http://cdn.mangaeden.com/mangasimg/da/da1785c4b37f2b6b2418645e3ba56a2ec6e737b174bc432df3291d24.jpg
http://cdn.mangaeden.com/mangasimg/a1/a19f305908f6da68fe7cadace828b6ab90b945a8becdbb359bc45651.png[/hide]
That's it. This is the core of Blackbeard. In those panels often overlooked by fans there is the essence of who is Blackbeard. During Coby's speech i think that even Doflamingo and Akainu could understand what he was trying to say, even though they considered him an idiot for that. But Blackbeard was genuinely incapable of understanding what the hell Coby was trying to say, his motivations for risking his life with Akainu. He genuinely doesn't understand concepts like code of morals, good, evil, code of conduct, empathy, he is, as Whitebeard said to Shanks, an idiot. Something like that can't be caused by traumatic experience, but just by sheer idiocy and stupidity, and craziness too. If he was what he is now because of a sad past he would at least be able to get Coby's motivations.
I don't think that scan from Marineford really works when everybody was confused lol. How is Blackbeard supposed to react to a random Marine scrub telling everybody to stop fighting? And Akainu, someone who has clear ideology, was also initially dumbfounded because of Coby's ideals going directly against his own. That doesn't mean Blackbeard doesn't have any standards or an ideology, at most it means it clashes with Teach's as much as it does Akainu's. You're right that greed and selfishness are the main drives of Teach. But that doesn't mean it doesn't have any background depth in how it was sparked or amplified in his past. Plenty of characters throughout the series react speechless or mystified when characters give profound statements like that, such as when Fujitora
Honestly, I don't even think we really disagree on Teach being a greedy sociopath that doesn't care for or comprehend ethics. I just don't think that's all there is to his past and why he's so driven to be so cunningly patient and willing to achieve the heights of becoming Pirate King.
And why does an ego problem have to be pathetic for a villain? Or insecurities? It just gives them more depth. Every character, even if they're heroic, is capable of struggling with some type of flaw. And it's often what makes or breaks them into becoming a hero, villain, or whatever morality and lifestyle they choose. It all depends on how they compliment a character's personality, and in Teach's case, it perfectly meshes with how slimy, cowardly, dishonorable, and desperate he can be. How he grovels in pain on the ground so pathetically (although it makes his feats of surviving such attacks and standing his ground more impressive), is extremely overconfident (as noted by Whitebeard as a significant flaw), puts on facades to deceive others, and views lives as being completely expendable. He's ALREADY pathetic, and that's why we love him in comparison to other villains that seem so invincible and sure of themselves in having planned out every single plot-twist. Because he doesn't back down and instead chooses to embrace all of that corruption without judgment with "irrelevant" morals and such. Insecurities would't negate having naturally selfish personality, if anything it just empowers it to a degree like how far Blackbeard is willing to go and not having any shame in his actions.
And the real Blackbeard was compared to the Devil because he wanted to make himself look like the Devil with wicks and growing iconic beards and having a fancy black flag. He had a flair for the theatrical and knew that intimidation was the key to success, even though there strangely aren't any reports of him torturing/murdering prisoners and innocents.
Teach find is resolve in his trust on his fate. Doflamingo's beliefs are about strenghts and the superiority of his blood, Ener's beliefs are about God superiority to men, all as you've said. But Teach doesn't have any belief, except his own desires, again because he can't understand morals, good and evil not because he grew nihilist from it for bad experiences. He didn't get mad when Bonney kicked him in the face, he doesn't get mad when someone insult him, not because he thinks he's in the right because he is stronger, but because he genuinely doesn't care about being in the right, he doesn't ever understand what is right and what is wrong. And i don't really think that the fact he doesn't care if he's fat is due to his power and his success, i think he just doesn't care regardless if he failed or succeed.
I never said he got mad when he's insulted. He gets disconcerted when he's obstructed from what he wants. What he's spent time waiting so long for. Just look at his face when Thatch got the Yami Yami no Mi. He was obviously disturbed and upset with that frown in the background. Then he kills Thatch, steals the fruit, and brags to Ace about how he was "fated" to have it. And I would argue he was a bit bothered by how Bonney refused him and how his indecent crew was laughing right behind him (even though he would probably do the same if he was in their shoes lol).
! 
You know… Why exactly can't he become nihilistic and having a hard-on for fate from bad experiences BECAUSE he's so naturally greedy and blind to the sense of the concept of good and evil? Why do we have to make this a choice of EVERY SINGLE TRAIT OF BLACKBEARD being either/or in terms of nature versus nurture? I kind of feel like we're going in circles when, really, we have have a piece to a puzzle respectively that only compliments BOTH of our arguments if we just put our heads together.
Insecurities? more interesting than a pure embodiment of greed evil and sin? ambiguity on his viciousness? The final villain of One Piece? I'll NEVER believe that. I swear, if it turns out to be this way, and it won't, i don't care if it last 100 or 30 chapters to the end, i'll stop reading the manga in that exact moment without seeing the ending for the disappointment.
Again, insecurities do not make for a bad character. I would actually argue that Blackbeard, the villainous epitome of the series just being a ball of greed and sin from birth without any elaboration on his motivations and perspective in how they formed, would be way more bland and disappointing. And I'm sorry that you have to feel that way.
Not as bad? Of course Akainu caused much more victims with its extreme act, but to give an order and to execute it personally while seeing your victim die are two completely different things. Stop and think for a moment what Blackbeard really did. more than 20 years side by side on the same ship, more than 20 freaking years as crewmates, brothers, and baaam, cold blooded murder without any shreds of remorse if not: "i know it's a serious crime to murder your nakama" and then proceeding to smile hysterically. Can you see what i mean by BB being the most evil character in the series?
I was talking about in how Oda showcased those events. Of course what Blackbeard was horrifying. But let's compare the panel time these separate instances got:
! 
! 
! 
I'm not going to feel bad for a character (and flashback overall) I only saw in ONE small panel, and a bond that was thought to be mutually shared in which we never saw any with the betrayer involved. Seeing how close the Whitebeard Pirates were in Marineford certainly makes Blackbeard more detestable. But not as much as he could have been if we actually got a full flashback of Ace's time with Thatch, their interactions with Blackbeard and some of his feats with the crew, how they found the Yami Yami, and at least seeing Thatch's corpse lol. Descriptions can certainly be more haunting if left up to the imagination. But tragic events happening to characters who we actually know and got to see struggles with them before and/or after the incident will always ring with more resonance.
Also, yes. That is quite evil. And what's wrong with seeing how Blackbeard got that point of villainy and having such a cunning nature that is obviously abnormal and compliments how mysterious in general with having an atypical body, an atypical philosophy on fate and strength, and atypical knowledge of how to both steal and take in a second Devil Fruit? If those qualities didn't exist, then I would be more than satisfied with Teach just being a greedy embodiment of sin. But with what has been built up in both his character and the overarching themes of the series, I expect more. MUCH more.
I don't mind if other villains are not pure embodiment of evil, or if they exhibit ambiguous ethics, i'm fine with that and i like it. But not the final villain of the manga with pirates, who, both in the manga and in real life, symbolize sin, greed and often the Devil, please Oda no.
But sin frequently derives from temptation. Especially with the knowledge of such acts being forbidden, ironically. A Teach who was born greedy, undergoes circumstances of being criticized, obstructed, and beaten due to disapproval and/or other selfish but less insightful and more nihilistic individuals. Such as Higuma the Bandit in the first chapter of One Piece when confronting Luffy and Shanks, and having to be put down later on. Or Bellamy in Jaya as a parallel to that scene and having to be knocked out by Luffy. Considering how the latter is when Blackbeard is first revealed and how he is meant to both be a parallel to Luffy and inevitably duel Shanks to the death, I think it would be very interesting to see a Blackbeard flashback with such an interaction, and how a character like Blackbeard (especially a young, more inexperienced, and probably less wise version) deals with it. But I'm sure Oda can be more creative than that, it's just the first thought that pops into mind.
Seriously. A tragic backstory only helps the way you perceive Teach if Oda characterizes him as greedy from the start. It doesn't have to be from insecurities, but it's a valid possibility since the flashback will happen. And it has to reveal SOMETHING about his character that we don't already realize when it comes to the depths of his greed and ambition.
And on the subject of Akainu, the fact that he looks so thuggish and bloodthirsty as a child makes me think it would be cool to see if his backstory revolved around growing up around pirates or criminals. Ironically like how Luffy grew up with mountain bandits now that I think about it…
Also, let me end this whole reply on this. Throughout the series, we see Teach gaining in power. Playing tactically to keep his reputation on the level of a nobody, and then gradually gaining power with deception and unscrupulous methods. This is seen both literally in the events of how he rises through the ranks of being a part of Whitebeard's crew, an unknown captain ragtag pirate gang of criminals, a Warlord, and finally an Emperor, as well as his abilities and operations focusing on stealing the powers of others in weapons and Devil Fruits.
Just indulge me on the possibility of a flashback being inevitable for a minute. If we are to see a flashback of Blackbeard that showcases, wouldn't it make the most sense that if by going into the past, and thus backtracking on Teach's progress, that his beginnings would focus on Teach in a state of ironic powerlessness? Which especially fits with how he is so used to taking in pain despite the evident trauma and having adapted to not care what anybody else thinks about him in the end of the day? Especially with how his protagonist parallel also has humble beginnings and was constantly discriminated and underestimated?
[/hide]
[/hide]
[/hide]
[/hide]
