@Rundas Well spotted! Maybe I should have been quicker to recognise the Sanji one, I have that spread up on my wall...
@emi_b7 Great find on the Franky one, that was driving me crazy!
@Deicide It's probably too soon to have a full set of official colours for Egghead stuff. A lot of things from the early colour panels in the Vivre Cards for Onigashima were changed when the final volumes came out. Still, nice to have something to work with for it.
Furiko sailed out with Kozaburo, Minatomo, and 22 other people from Wano, so it makes me wonder how many Wano descendants are out there that don't know are descended from Wano.
It really is a shame Chopper couldn’t even address the SMILE affects within the story. I’m more or less ok with this SBS explanation.
As for Chopper’s dream I don’t think it’s off the table at all. Remember that good future/bad future SBS? Chopper gave out a medication stating something like “this will fix anything.” I don’t remember what he said exactly but it struck me as Chopper’s dream clearly not being forgotten by Oda.
As they say “the dreams of reindeer never die!”
Folks who read One Piece… Just better people. ¯\(ツ)/¯ 
@RomanceDawn said in Volume 105 Predictions/Discussion:
It really is a shame Chopper couldn’t even address the SMILE affects within the story. I’m more or less ok with this SBS explanation.
As for Chopper’s dream I don’t think it’s off the table at all. Remember that good future/bad future SBS? Chopper gave out a medication stating something like “this will fix anything.” I don’t remember what he said exactly but it struck me as Chopper’s dream clearly not being forgotten by Oda.
As they say “the dreams of reindeer never die!”
I know that as long as Chopper keeps the memory of Hiriluk's determination in him, then he won't care how many people think his attempts to cure more is impossible.
Back when that chapter came out, I alerted that Lulusia being in the New World made no sense given previous depictions of the country. Good to know my insticts were correct!
@Gizmo said in Volume 105 Predictions/Discussion:
Okay, so Oda addressed that Tama is a Kurozumi, that Hiyori’s final line about burning was meant to address Orochi only, but leaves open the possibility of Kurozumi hatred in the future…
Given the discussions had here about that line When it came out, I’m glad Oda addressed the fact that discrimination might still exist on the Kurozumi, and that while Hiyori might have not meant the line to bear no ill will on the bloodline, it could still be interpreted like that for some of the folks out there.
I really appreciate Oda's thoughtful and mature response to the question. Ideally, he would have depicted that stuff in the story directly, but this at least shows he really put some thought into the situation and its implications. What Captain M said is also true, reading the ending of Wano in volume format will really be an improvement, since you get all these extra information inbetween chapters and Hiyori's statement about the Kurozumis will immediately be clarified and put into context.
The whole "Korozumi Tama" "Korozumi were born to burn angle remains tremendously unfulfilling to me, a muddled conciet that doesn't amount to any coherent statement or messaging in-story; the idea that hatred might remain to trouble undeserving Tama one day is a powerful message that the HOO RAH WHAT AN AWESOME PUN ending of Wano abso-fucking-lutely does not commit to or reflect any awareness of. Theres probably all sorts of language nuances I'm missing, but I retain that in terms of the most straightforward flow of statement/retort it is in no way apparent that Hiyori is talking about just Orochi, rather than the Korozumi at large. Orochi says that the hatred of the Korozumi, the clan, something bigger than just himself, will live on, going "screw YOU korozumi Orochi, and JUST you" feels inappropriate as a badass retort.
And really, why would Hiyori restrict her response to just him? The notion that "well, she's not talking about cute little Tama of course" makes no sense, because as far as Hiyori knows, theres no Korozumi worth making concessions for. No one knows Tama is a Korozumi, I don't think Hiyori even know Tama exists period.
The whole thing feels like it might have been aiming for a meatier or more complex message early on, but then either got cold feet or forgot about the issue entirely. If the takeaway ultimately is that "this feels like it paints [characters] in a bad way and has disastrous consequences for [innocent, likeable character]" then this should ideally also be evident as intended by the storytelling, rather than "this just feels kinda weird and bad?"
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Mugiwara_23
@Riddler said in Volume 105 Predictions/Discussion:
@Gizmo said in Volume 105 Predictions/Discussion:
Okay, so Oda addressed that Tama is a Kurozumi, that Hiyori’s final line about burning was meant to address Orochi only, but leaves open the possibility of Kurozumi hatred in the future…
Given the discussions had here about that line When it came out, I’m glad Oda addressed the fact that discrimination might still exist on the Kurozumi, and that while Hiyori might have not meant the line to bear no ill will on the bloodline, it could still be interpreted like that for some of the folks out there.
I really appreciate Oda's thoughtful and mature response to the question. Ideally, he would have depicted that stuff in the story directly, but this at least shows he really put some thought into the situation and its implications. What Captain M said is also true, reading the ending of Wano in volume format will really be an improvement, since you get all these extra information inbetween chapters and Hiyori's statement about the Kurozumis will immediately be clarified and put into context.
Not like like it matters that much in the grand scheme of things since Wano can still use Hiyori’s words as a springboard to act nasty on regardless of her intent. I’m def interested in what Oda would have in store for a Return to Wano story, and not just for Pluton either.
@Riddler Honestly I think the problem was less that it wasn't depicted in the story and more an issue of framing/paneling.
By having O-Tama's status as a Kurozumi be revealed through a panel of her parents' funeral, I'd argue creates an interesting amount of information density. It cements that Orochi is and always was 1000% full of shit whenever he tries to claim any sort of righteous fury or justified vengeance for the Kurozumi if he's simultaneously working his fellow clan members to death. And having O-Tama's parents' gravestone be included in the same graveyard as those who were killed in the factory, with their family names listed on the grave markers, speaks to a certain level of solidarity in the present Wano amongst the residents who were forced to toil. But the problem is that those grave markers are definitely a "squint or you'll miss it" detail that definitely would've been better served by being allotted a larger panel. As is the information doesn't have any room to breathe and gets lost in the deluge of all the other things that are happening in Wano.
Even so, Oda's response acknowledging other interpretations of Wano's final scenes definitely helps when re-reading the arc. Whether or not it's something Oda circles back to at a later date, knowing Oda has considered the same questions the readers were asking does give some of the open-ended questions left in Wano a sense of purpose even if it doesn't necessarily fix everything about Wano's ending.
HQ digital cover:
It kind of looks like Blackbeard has his left hand up Luffy's ass.
ONE PIECE VOLUME 105 DIGITAL RAW HQ
http://sakurafile.com/53qobghbee8r/One_Piece_v105.zip.html
https://katfile.com/ys6eojzsoxbm/One_Piece_v105.zip.html
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Mugiwara_23
English volume covers:
Hopefully that Wano banner gets updated to Egghead sometime in the four months between now and release, as discussed in the vol 107 thread. Apply some pressure, anyone on the Viz staff who still hangs around here!
My hopes for this being unfinished hinge on how badly the Luffy silhouette in the logo blends into the orangish background. Usually, if that's going to happen, they put a little filter behind the logo (see volume 97 for an example) but maybe the reason that isn't here is because the logo will get replaced by an alternate version with different colours sometime soon...
@Captain-M
Best bet would be Stephen, but I am not sure if he has any say in the design of the volumes.
@Captain-M said in Volume 105 Predictions/Discussion:
My hopes for this being unfinished hinge on how badly the Luffy silhouette in the logo blends into the orangish background. Usually, if that's going to happen, they put a little filter behind the logo (see volume 97 for an example) but maybe the reason that isn't here is because the logo will get replaced by an alternate version with different colours sometime soon...
Wow, I didn't even notice but now I can't unsee. It's interesting that the blue would've been contrasting enough. Now I miss the foil that used to be on the logo before the massive catchup project.
The Onep Ece is real!
Just skimming through vol 105 and Odas argument is quite nuanced and I think a lot of people can learn from it.
@shadyagent Yeah, Oda's made some missteps with female characters before, but this is a stance I like.
Bad fanservice often feels like breaking the fourth wall to try and appeal to the reader/viewer directly, bypassing the fictional world we all came for in the first place. It's easier to both accept and enjoy it when it comes organically from character interactions and personalities. In the same way you would have a hard time convincing a reader a scenario is threatening without giving stakes to the characters, or making a reader scared without putting something terrifying in the room to frighten the characters as well, it's best to make things sexy for the characters first, and let the readers' emotions follow.
...We really gonna bring this up when the current arc features a copious amount of ass and crotch shots of women in bikini bottoms? Which Oda explicitly said he did after someone told him he's bad at drawing butts? Yeah sorry, but this is not an area in which Oda deserves any praise.
Legend of the Strongest Onani Master Kurosawa 
@Hattori No, I agree, Egghead has had some ridiculous choices made on this front. All of the low angle camera shots are exactly the kind of for-the-viewers-only mistake I was talking about. Trying to do fanservice of a character fighting for her life is a contradiction of terms. Do you want me to be invested in the tension of the fight or enchanted by her body?
Women in bikinis? Fine. Great, even. This is a world inspired by tropical Caribbean seas, it's the kind setting where it makes sense from a world and character perspective to dress light. The default outfits for the men leave a lot of them barechested or at least open-shirted as well and the exceptions, like Sanji in a full suit, make sense from character perspective. People do complain about the number of bikini outfits, but they don't break my immersion. Egghead, on the other hand, makes the weird choice to completely cover up the men while leaving the women dressed in the typical style, and that no longer makes sense in the context of the setting/wordlbuilding. Especially after emphasising that Vegapunk's air conditioning gives the place a warm climate. It no longer feels like the characters have chosen those outfits for themselves because of their individual fashion senses/environmental needs, it feels like the author has chosen them for the sake of the reader. And then you get the camera angles...
But the general sentiment behind that specific Q&A I think stands, even if Oda himself hasn't perfectly executed on it or stuck to it.
@Captain-M Not only are all the men on Egghead covered up, even FRANKY of all people is wearing a full pair of pants!!! The most egregious wrongdoing of all. When even Franky is more covered up than the women... you know something is wrong
That said, I still think Oda's answer is bad. He talks all about giving female characters agency in these situations, but they are just that - characters - and not real people. They don't have actual agency; Oda makes all the decisions on their behalf. There are plenty of situations before Egghead where women wear revealing outfits even when it makes zero sense (hello Rebecca), so it's clear he's just horny.
Legend of the Strongest Onani Master Kurosawa
@Hattori Franky's Egghead outfit is truly a travesty!
I definitely get the difficult with claiming "agency" on the part of a character. It's something that applies broadly in storytelling. You want the main character's agency to be a driving force for the main plot, but it's the author who decides the core traits and motivations that inform those decisions, and the author who writes out the character's inner world that decides when the development sticks. Characters don't really make choices that drive the plot, the author has them make the decisions the plot needs. The trick is giving the illusion of agency - that the choice the plot needs is also the one they would make as a well-rounded and believable human being.
There's people in the real world who enjoy dressing scantily, either in spite of or because of the attention it gets them. Real people are often motivated by attraction and libido. Knowing the author had an input (and probably an ulterior motive) in a character having those traits doesn't mean they can't feel like a natural part of a fully-realised character, even when they create fanservice.
The scene with Nami in the baths at Alabasta, as the example shown with the SBS, works because I'm willing to believe that kind of teasing as a part of Nami's character and it doesn't feel insane for her to do it in such a relaxed setting among close friends. On the other hand it would feel extremely out of place for Robin to do the same thing. The illusion of agency would feel broken if she was made to act that way for no better reason than that the audience would enjoy it.
Rebecca is a little more complicated - as a prisoner she didn't choose the outfit for herself and the story makes a point of showing the collosseum's weight restrictions for gear leave most of the men in capes and speedos as well. And we're told outright that the rules are meant to force the fighters to be as exposed as possible so the crowd can see blood. The only other female gladiator I can recall, Acilia, is similarly clad. It could be argued that plenty of fighters, such as Luffy and Cavendish, managed to get at least a thin shirt in, but they're guests who brought their outside clothes. Prisoners might not even get anything besides their minimum of armour for the ring. It's been a while since Dressrosa, but I don't recall the manga's framing having an majorly undue focus on Rebecca's exposed skin (the anime was another story), so it works as a symbol of her captivity and abuse. But then, a character beat of her being able to give it up and change into something normal soon after being freed might have been worth adding to bring that full circle as an idea. Defending it is not a hill I want to die on, but it's not so far outside the rules of the setting that it breaks immersion.
@Captain-M It's definitely a more believable part of Nami's character, but Oda is also defending something that brought no value to the story in the first place. You could cut happiness punch and nothing of value would be lost. In fact it'd be only upside, since people made to be felt uncomfortable over fanservice would feel more welcome. I've heard from several people that they've dropped One Piece over issues like this. Like yeah Nami would probably do that, but what reason did Oda have to include such a scene? Only one that I can think of: titillation for his male audience. So I still wouldn't call it a good defense, just a less worse one - for something that shouldn't be defended in the first place.
Legend of the Strongest Onani Master Kurosawa
@Hattori said in Volume 105 Predictions/Discussion:
@Captain-M It's definitely a more believable part of Nami's character, but Oda is also defending something that brought no value to the story in the first place. You could cut happiness punch and nothing of value would be lost. In fact it'd be only upside, since people made to be felt uncomfortable over fanservice would feel more welcome. I've heard from several people that they've dropped One Piece over issues like this. Like yeah Nami would probably do that, but what reason did Oda have to include such a scene? Only one that I can think of: titillation for his male audience. So I still wouldn't call it a good defense, just a less worse one - for something that shouldn't be defended in the first place.
Why is adding "value" a prerequisite for a story? Does drawing lots of animals because ODa likes animals add value to the story of One Piece? Warisaki my favorite One Piece animal e.g. might be seen as "unnecessary filler" if the Arabasta arc would have been released nowadays. I do agree that the current arc has some very questionable design choices regarding female characters and I m pretty sure I pointed that out even in this forum a couple of months ago, but the point is, in the core Oda made a really good point but does not want to be the goody two shoes and abstain from drawing "fanservice -like" scenes. If people dropp One Piece due to fanservice or "unwoke stuff in the american sense" then it is fine. I also heared from "several people" especially women that they like when girls and woman are shown sexy (true story). However it is not an argument at all. It is always fair to not like or even condemn a piece of art but generalizing a point is not a grown up thing to do
@shadyagent Let me rephrase. Not everything Oda includes needs to add "value," but in the case of fanservice, it actively DETRACTS from his work. Fun scenes like the crane in Alabasta could probably be taken out and most people wouldn't care or notice, but it's a case of no harm no foul.
Objectifying women on the other hand is not some minor gripe, and it's definitely not just an American concern. I'm sure plenty of his audience likes the fanservice, but to me that is simply not worth it at all if it comes at the expense of very real harm to other segments of his fanbase.
Oda can do whatever he wants, he doesn't need to change anything just because people don't like it or drop the series over it, but that doesn't put him above criticism.
This is not even touching on the fact that half the time the fanservice involves underaged characters. But that's definitely not a can of worms we need to open right now
Legend of the Strongest Onani Master Kurosawa
@Hattori said in Volume 105 Predictions/Discussion:
@shadyagent Let me rephrase. Not everything Oda includes needs to add "value," but in the case of fanservice, it actively DETRACTS from his work. Fun scenes like the crane in Alabasta could probably be taken out and most people wouldn't care or notice, but it's a case of no harm no foul.
Objectifying women on the other hand is not some minor gripe, and it's definitely not just an American concern. I'm sure plenty of his audience likes the fanservice, but to me that is simply not worth it at all if it comes at the expense of very real harm to other segments of his fanbase.
Oda can do whatever he wants, he doesn't need to change anything just because people don't like it or drop the series over it, but that doesn't put him above criticism.
This is not even touching on the fact that half the time the fanservice involves underaged characters. But that's definitely not a can of worms we need to open right now
To me it seems the point is missing. And yeah just look at every other color spread and you have the proof: sex sells I dont disagree with your remarks regarding fanservice at all. How you use it to make a "political" statement is not really ok and is a modern twitter thing imo. It is about nuance and since english is not my mother tongue I wont even try to put that into perspective. I get what you are saying and agree with its core (not the part about detracting) but I dont agree with your overall statement in terms of nuances you are using.
@shadyagent It's not a political statement. And it's also not something I'm interested in sugarcoating. But we can just agree to disagree on that part. It veers a bit too much into meta discussion at that point
@Hattori I 100% get it, and I've argued similar points in the past and I don't think you're wrong. Oda probably misses more than he hits on handling depictions of sexuality and sex appeal appropriately, but I'm not about to go back over ever single scene that could conceivably be ranked as fanservice and give them a pass or fail rank to verify that gut feeling.
Not too long ago (and probably ongoing) there was a lot of back and forth in online tv and movie forums about sex scenes and if they should ever be done at all. A lot of people were of the opinion that they're not worth it because they 'don't move the plot forward.' There was a particular level of sexlessness that seemed to be argued for that I couldn't help forming a strong disagreement with. Sexuality is a big part of the human experience and a massive motivator for a whole lot of real-world adults, it would be weird to say it's the only thing we've got going on that's not okay to explore in art. (Not to say that's what I think you're doing, just why I have a bit to say and why some of it might feel mildly tangential).
And there's no easy answers here! Like okay, I've established that I think sexuality and sex appeal are okay as part of a story and can make worthwhile contributions to tone and characterisation even if they aren't vital plot components, but then do we judge Oda (and many, many other authors) not on having them, but for contributing to the overexposure of the specific kind of sex appeal that's aimed at straight men? Genre fatigue comes in a whole lot of forms. I go back and forth between sci fi and fantasy novels as I have my fill of the tropes of one or the other, box office figures are suggesting hard times for superhero story beats. Everyone, especially in mainstream manga, seems to target and depict the same sexuality in a lot of the same ways, so it's definitely reasonable to feel burned out on the boobs-in-your-face genre of fanservice too.
And unfortunately this male appeal overlaps with things that really shouldn't be sexual at all. Like basically anything involving exposed skin. If we look at Rebecca again, her chainmail bikini is something that has been abusively forced on her. I never felt compelled to look at her in that light because her situation is objectively awful (and she's a kid), but you can't escape the knowledge that divorced of its context it looks like fetish gear and that there's a portion of the audience who won't care about the context anyway. Because we know that nudity is such a huge appeal point to the demographic and that the kind of appeal is so common, we end up making it our first assumption that that is what the nudity is there for, at best in addition to symbolising vulnerability/freedom/obliviousness/pre-original-sin-ness or anything else the author might or might not have had in mind. Do we look at intention or effect in this case? How do we quantify the ratio of readers who 'got it' vs the ones who saw flesh and thought 'great, the author's saying put the book down and take a wank break' without digging deeper?
Then, is the answer to making these things feel less awkward equal opportunity objectification? But it's not as easy as that. Luffy, Zoro and Usopp show off most of their chests in their default outfits and have run around naked in baths, and Luffy flashed half of Amazon Lily, but it doesn't scan the same way. If you look at Q&As and polls on what women find sexy and what they look for physically in men, you find really different stuff from the inverse. 'Teasing in a skimpy outfit' is (broadly and generally) much further down lists of straight women's desires than for straight men. You see it fall behind things like hands and forearms, hair and beard grooming, the voice, and assorted personality traits. Things that have a much greater overlap with nonsexual character-building, so they pass through more subtly when they are done. This straight male kind of appeal that relies mainly on exposed bodies isn't just the most prominent way in terms of the number of people working on it, it also sticks out the most.
And you'll find different things again in what gay men generally look for in other men and what gay women generally look for in other women (or would want for fanservice targeted at them). That just makes it even more complicated and nuanced to find the most equal and equitable levels of sexualisation/objectification. And again do we look at intent or impact?
Getting that variety of fanservices aimed at different demographics would be great, but it would also likely only feel at its most natural and reach its target audience best if it comes from an author who is genuinely into it as well. (Although writing from the viewpoints of people who aren't you is obviously part of being a good author so experiments and attempts to capture the gaze of other genders/sexualities are admirable and encouraged!) There should be more female and queer authors writing what appeals to them, and it's a much broader cultural issue (in different forms across different parts of the world) that the industry favours the straight male version and markets anything else as a niche if at all.
I've just kinda settled on the point of authors should write what interests them and do it with all the passion they've got, and it should be on the industry to facilitate as many different kinds of people doing this as possible. Lots of things get written in lots of stories that don't directly add plot value - there are fanservice fights, there are fanservice character meetings, there are fanservice throwbacks to iconic moments. Lots of manga authors don't do cover pages the way Oda does, it's just the first normal page of the chapter with the title in between the panels. You could argue that when he's not doing a cover story he could use the front page to add more canon story instead of superfluous animal illustrations, but he does the animal illustrations because they appeal to him. I'm not going to hesitate to call fanservice out if it breaks my immersion in the world or characters to exist (again, the Egghead outfits and camera placement are awful) or if there are so many of these scenes the actual story comes at the expense of them, but I've gotten a bit past saying they outright shouldn't exist at all. And in that light, the statement that the character should be a willing participant in whatever scenario brings them into the spotlight rings true.
Regarding egghead: I really do not like the designs of the Vegapunk clothes. I do not watch the anime so I cant tell how design would present itself in in color and motion. I would go so far that the Egghead design isnt even "Fanservice" since it does not have any sex appeal despite beeing short. Showing skin isnt equal to "fanservice". It is just bad because the characters look stiff (boots!!!!) or more lenient judged: it looks horrible to a degree so that it is funny again.
Speaking of fanservice: When I started reading mangas, "fanservice" used to be a broader term that also includes any trope that is trying to appeal to the audience like "naming attacks".
@shadyagent Egghead: Yeah, it feels like half of them were designed for the winter island suggested by the blizzardy seas outside, and the other half designed with the air conditioning in mind. Might have been interesting worldbuilding if the island had a more traditional cast of locals whose fashion sense was divided into pre- and post-Vegapunk styles. But instead it's just divided perfectly down gender lines.
And I definitely agree with the difference between showing skin and fanservice. They can be (and often are) the same, but I think a lot of online discourse doesn't want to look further than that assumption. You'd have a bad time if you went down to your local beach with the mindset that anyone in a revealing outfit was doing it for no reason other than your personal visual enjoyment.
I also remember the older, broader definition of fanservice, it's funny how much it's changed over the years. The sexual definition was prominent even then, but it was at least on equal footing with fan culture shoutouts. But language marches on.
@Captain-M
I just watched this video and now the "pantsu" depiction of the female strawhats on egghead shines in a different light. It is a little bit of mental gymnastic but is kind of hilarious.
Under the dust jacket: Pandaman hidden in the Vega Tank
@Captain-M Rebecca is one of my favourite character in Dressrosa and how well Oda just handled her was spectacular too but it's just sad that the vast majority of readers fails to realize her worth because she is seen wearing a pretty revealing and call her a "damsel in a distress" as she isn't shown killing some big bads in the arc which just shows the reading comprehension of these people but I will try to fill in every information I could about her and properly explain her super hated outfit and her entire characterization from scratch.
The bikini armour that she wears is often seen as negative and misunderstood as a representation of oversexualisation. What is she wearing though and why is she wearing it? To begin with, she is a pacifist and yet competing in the Colosseum which itself comes straight from the Romans (so we can expect a lot of references towards Roman culture). Her being a pacifist impacts her choices on both how she fights which in turn affects her choice in appropriate armour. Her fighting style is based entirely on evading, disarming, countering and controlling the attackers body weight. Knowing this, in practicality what she needs is light armour that allows her to be as flexible as she can; the armour itself doesn't need to be strong as it should never be in the position where she needs to actually rely on it.
This gives us the general outline of what she needs from her armour. She's in the Colosseum as a gladiator which was strangely one of the least sexist places, in function, that the Romans had. Both men and women competed (though not often in a mixed setting as Oda has written) for money, glory and better lives. we'll look at her choices in her armour that works on the same idea as Acilia but the representation is different.
To begin with there's her helmet. This is a gold (traditionally would've been iron with a silver or gold gilting) Late Roman ridge helmet with a red plume. The existence of the plume on the helmet represents status, or rank and would've been exclusively for centurions or higher ranking military members. Next is her greaves; the shin guards which were also considered a status symbol within Roman culture (we find a good number of people buried with a single greave that seems to support this). Her weapon of choice is a gilted long sword which seems to be more of a connection between to the Spanish cultural aspects that's been injected into Dressrosa which seems to serve the story telling of Don Quixote (both Doffy and the actual story of Don Quixote).
Her chest piece is a form of lorica squamata which is a type of scale mail armour famously used by the Romans which was also generally made out of iron but you can find depictions of emperors and higher officials wearing similarly gold/silver gilted scale mail. She also wears a gold cingulum or baltea (which was more common with centurions who would wear lorica segmentata, or segmented armour) which was a a piece of armour which worked as an apron-like thing which protected the genitals; the more high status you were the more often this would change from leather straps (which most of the other gladiators are seen in) to gilted scale metal armour. Then there's her paludamentum (the cloak/cape) which seemed reserved for military commanders. After the reign of Augustus (the guy responsible for the English August month's name) it became restricted to just the emperor. The fact that it's blue is also a representation of rank, as blue was historically kept for higher classes as it's one of the most expensive and difficult dye's to create from natural resources (blue is one of the rarest colours in nature).
Her entire outfit is a recognition of her former royalty and her presence both in the Colosseum as well as the fact that it was a choice that she could make as any other gladiator could, is a reference of how Doffy was diminishing the worth of the previous Royals culture as well as the royalty itself. This would've been in part what could make the crowd against Rebecca as not only was she seen as from a hateful royal family line, but also the fact that she's holding onto these cultural aspects which used to seperate the common person from the upper classes. You can see this difference between Rebecca and Acilia; Acilia wears simple greaves, simple leather strips, and an iron helmet without a plume. She does wear a paludamentum which references high status but this is likely taken straight from her historical counterpart; there existed a real gladiatrix called Achillia which is seen depicted with one which seems to be a "cosplay" female version of the warrior Achillies. There's a stone carving of her fighting against a representation of the the mythical Amazonians.
Had to get all that off my chest lol.
How did Rebecca become the person she was when we see her at the Colosseum? To begin with she was born in secrecy from a princess and a military commander after spending years and years fighting against his own violent nature and history. She lived in general happiness until Doffy appeared and one of his family murdered her mother. Her father, was literally objectified, removing all memory, love and worth that she had for him. However, he was the one to now raise her as a stranger. Through his shame for his past violent nature he made an effort to protect her from this type of life; feeling he was not worthy of even touching his own daughter; yet had to carry her mothers corpse to her unable to properly grieve himself as he was a stranger to his daughter and he had to put her first. This is where men generally become emotionally objectified; he had to somehow put those things to the side and look forward. Even at the end of the story he was going to remove himself from her life for her sake.
So she was essentially raised as an orphan with emphasis put on pacifism; yet had to learn to protect herself and dodge because of the dangerous times she was living in. She was against violence from this teaching from her father and despite this great limitation they both put on her she had the confidence adn strength to enter the Colosseum in order to get to Doffy. She was willing to go against her values and morals, which would emotionally hurt her, in order to take out Doffy and save both her country and herself and Kyros. Her motivating factor being that she loved the toy soldier like a father (because despite the literal objectification of him, he behaved and treated her like she was his child). Her dream being to create a peaceful environment where she could live with what she thought was her found father figure.
Rebecca herself being a kind person who put others before herself (which can be seen with her giving up food to Luffy and how the old gladiators felt about her) which can also be seen in her grandfather. What would normally be a story where she would be objectified to a simply damsel in distress became a story about fighting against tyranny with pacifism where she attempted to right the wrongs of the past. Oda doesn't shy away from the more difficult aspects of the pacifist ideology either; he will put her in positions where it seems like the only option is violence, he temps her with it and certain characters even take away her will and attempt to force her into it. She's a representation of inherited trauma, fighting against the publics view's of her as their beliefs are manipulated by cruel people through political, cultural and even magical manipulations of what reality is. Despite this, she remains a virtuous at her own expense, she stood up as a symbol of justice through non-violence. Her compassion for others and the courage she has to stand up to these things keep her set on her goal despite the horrors, both physically and mentally, that she's put through in order to make her falter.
There's a saying I like that comes with the following bit: "It's better to be a soldier in a garden, than a gardener at war." Oda has recognised this aspect of pacifism mixed with ability to defend and offers a more nuanced take. When she finally meets the murderer of her mother, in a garden of sunflowers, her pacifist ideology hits a wall. She is forced to wrestle with her own morals and ideology in order to get past this obstacle. Oda offers a solution where she can keep true to herself; by understanding that she doesn't need to and that she can literally rely on a soldier in a garden rather than become the soldier herself. There's a problem that a lot of ideologies get into that Oda recognises; they're short sighted and often don't apply theory of mind or group outcomes. War exists and so do pacifists, but reality shows that people are neither good or bad and that they're simply grey blobs consisting of good and bad motivations. When we can't do something, for whatever reason, then we have to rely on others. In Oda's fashion it's more about knowing what to pass down to following generations. Kyros has went a bit too hard in pushing for pacifism from the shame of his own violent past and through that we get the recognition that it is a virtuous intention but the ideology is incomplete without a moderating factor from the reality of life. It's a recognition that pure pacifism like Rebecca's is a nice thing to believe in but functionally it puts the responsibility of action on others; and when we're young children that responsibility often lands on our parents as they try to guide us through life. She, herself, is an inverse of Doffy. While Doffy went through many of the same issues that she did, it's how we're guided through life by our gaurdians that molds us into who we are. Where Doffy was groomed into being a murderous being who's goal is chaos and destruction, Rebecca has been groomed for peace and freedom. Her true motivation, is to simply live in peace with her father.
Don't misunderstand me here; I don't believe that Rebecca is stupid or unaware that pacifism like that requires relying on others to make up for it's flaws. I think that's she's courageous and steadfast in her beliefs and the only time we really see her falter is when it comes to her being face to face with her mothers murderer. This almost worked too but when it comes to our most weakened states and we're encouraged to do things against our own morals and beliefs; that's when we should be looking for support because we can't do everything by ourselves, while we also can't expect others to do everything for us. Kyros appearing and fighting Diamante wasn't him saving a damsel in distress (stereotype, she was definitely in distress); it was him appearing to do the things she couldn't so she didn't have to go against her own beliefs and morals. He helped her back to her feet and dirtied his hands so she didn't need to (which I think we can agree, children shouldn't kill people). A recognition that his actions are hurtful, and that he wants to protect his child from them. This also mirrors what we had with Fisher Tiger; Kyros had that violence in him in the same way that Tiger had that racism in him and both shared the recognition that it was wrong. Both understood they couldn't do anything about the fact it was in them, but understood the importance of not sharing that with the future generations. Violence, is unfortunately a reality of life, unlike racism which is a social construct.
Most storytelling would see Rebecca reduced to a sex object or a damsel in distress. Oda, on the other hand, creates a story that is always recognising Rebecca's own agency and her own choices; from her choice of what she's wearing to her actions and motivations. Despite the pacifist ideology, Oda gives her plenty of challenges that she herself needs to fight against and where she can't she relies on others. This has been taught throughout One Piece, all the way back to Luffy fighting Arlong and proudly stating he needs to rely on others to survive. This is not weakness, this is reality; if Rebecca was weak then she wouldn't have been able to hold onto her beliefs in the face of such brutal testing. Even when the characters in the story remove her agency (Doffy controlling her) she retains it as a character screaming out about it. At the end of the story, she also showcases her emotional stoicism that she got from her father and sacrifices what she wants thinking that she was doing it for him. The whole goal and dream that she was fighting for from the beginning, she was willing to give up on because she believed it was something he wanted. That is insanely strong conviction to attempt to sacrifice so much for anothers sake. That scene with Luffy at the window asking her what she wants always gets me. I hate that she gets objectified and reduced to her body and gender; especially under the false idea that the people saying this are fighting against sexism, when they're the one's reducing her to that perception.
Woosh! finally done
