Naruto Analysis

Regarding the Term Mary Sue - It's Not Inherintly Sexist, So Stop Acting Like It Is

2020-03-05T17:46:15Z

Why do I link my mentions of The Universal Mary Sue Litmus Test here? (Except this one of course…)

I’m sad to say the creator of the test has bought into the current SJW rhetoric that the term is “more often than not just used to tear down female characters simply for having a prominent, active role in a story.”

Mind you, the push against the word because it is supposedly misogynist has existed for a long time, but I think it gained furor when Rey from the new Star Wars trilogy ended up being called a Mary Sue only for her to turn out to be a Mary Sue all along. Which makes the continued push a bit troublesome, because – it turns out, those raising concerns regarding certain story elements of her character were right all along, but someone who knows the fandom better than I explained why even back then her backstory really didn’t explain her traits, such as taking down a stormtrooper – whose not the same as taking down other scavengers, being that one is trained and the other not, making someone like myself who was excited at the possibility of a strong female more in line with Luke Skywalker being added to the series who also expected more explanation for some of the unexplained.

In fact, I’d argue those defending against the term typically DON’T ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND THE TERM THEMSELVES. Take the article Here's Why Rey From 'Star Wars Is Being Called a 'Mary Sue' (And Why She's Not One) where one of the arguments is that because “we should also remember the original definition of a Mary Sue: a character created to be an idealized proxy for the author” so “by this definition, Rey can’t even be a Mary Sue, because she’s the creation of male screenwriters.” Said argument ignores two important things.

One of the things people don’t understand regarding the author avatar is that said author avatar doesn’t need to be anything like the writer, yet we constantly saw females in fandom turning male characters into an idealized proxy of themselves when they write slash fiction between two male characters, which apparently are untouchable regarding the Gary Stu label because that is “so homophobic”, any form of criticism against how poorly written the slash fiction actually is just in the same way we’re trying to say Mary Sue is “so misogynist”.

Let’s not fool our selves into the fact what people are really saying, and I’m going to quote Is Rey From The Last Jedi A Mary Sue & Is It Sexist To Think She Is?,

“In essence, those who make this argument of sexism are dismissing any criticisms of a character based solely on that character’s gender.”

“Which is more sexist? Hating a character because of that’s character’s gender – or loving that character based entirely on that character’s gender?”

“… the very reason they defend that character is based on the fact they feel the character’s gender puts her above criticism.”

They go into why the term isn’t inherently sexist, but the real reason there is a negative connotation associated with the term of Mary Sue – that it is about the bad writing, not the character’s gender. They also bring up the fact the perfect role model is often not actually a “good role model” for female audiences, because they represent an impossible standard for girls, but I’ll add a lot of these so called “role models” also teach the girls some negative behaviors, like it being okay to disrespect their parents, yet by ignoring the term, we’re in effect ignoring these negative messages.

The second issue is the fact the understanding of what a Mary Sue is has in fact grown over time, yet despite the fact we have a better understanding – people want us to abandon the term simply because a few misuse the term, which in term gives those who misuse the term more power, nor do we ever correct the misconception that a Mary Sue isn’t a “strong female character”.
Seriously, we need to teach young writers that…

Tearing down a poorly written character is actually acceptable, but not a personal attack against them as a writer. We need to teach them criticism is a good thing, and not something to run away from. If you want people to stop calling your badly written character a Mary Sue or Gary Stu, then improve your writing.

The cases where it’s actually being used by a hater is rare, a whole lot rarer than those advocating that it should be disused try saying it to be. Seriously, there is no epidemic of misuse, but by not using the term properly, there will become an epidemic of misuse.

That there is a difference between an actual “strong female character” and a female character who can “kick butt”, but we must also remember the kind of narratives females are normally fed, in that we’re wanting characters like the original She-Ra only to be told we must settle for characters who don’t measure up to the male characters.

That the term Mary Sue can actually be uplifting, given the fact it’s recognized by many of us who specialize in the critique of such characters as an important stage of growth for any writer just starting out, but by ignoring the term and thus the stage of writing we don’t make any attempts to push the writers outside of their comfort zone let alone to grow as a writer.

That male characters can also be Gary Stus, but by ignoring the term we ignore the fact the term is starting to be used more and more for male characters, although in some cases what people label as a Gary Stu also tells you how well they know the term.

Seriously again, we need to be having these conversations with young girls, because they’re fed a lot of crap socially and often Mary Sues actually often exemplify and enforce a lot of that crap their fed. I loved the above writer and how they mentioned the fact an idealized role model without flaws is actually unhealthy for females because that exemplifies societies message that a female needs to be perfect to be considered strong, and that they have to prove this perfection to the real world, but on the other side you’ve got the ones who exemplify negative stereotypes, like the Women Are Delicate trope.
I’ll end this by quoting someone on DA – not the original poster, but EyeballEarth on Jan 25, 2016.

“It’s just a category for describing a certain set of characters used in fiction. People should stop overinterpreting things, it’s like some go out of their way to look for things to be offended by.”

Oh, and here’s a nice poll regarding the matter.

N1 - Enter: Naruto Uzumaki! - Class Room - 15%

2020-03-04T21:30:08Z

Class Time
There are a few specific things of note for this particular scene.

Naruto’s apparently failed the exam the last two times.

Iruka calling him an idiot was cut from the English version, but it does show up in the Japanese version.

The others from the Rookie Nine make an appearance.

Oh, and I almost forgot the sexy jutsu.

I guess I’ll start off by bringing up the fact we teach our kids here in the United States not to call others stupid, so it’s really not surprising when that got cut from the English version of the Anime. However, I think here is a good place to discuss the word baka or what Iruka actually calls him.

I’m honestly not sure when I first learned the intricacies of the word baka, though I do believe this occurred when I first started watching subtitled Anime. Somehow, somewhere I discovered something going into the intricacies of the word, possibly because someone pointed out the fact what certain fans thought the character was saying wasn’t actually what the character was saying. This being said, I point you to the article “What Does Baka Mean? Japan’s Most popular profanity” by Mami Suzuki, which goes into this intricacy.

As he says, “it can take on a whole range of meanings depending on the context, relationship, and other factors.”

This is why I say the context in which the person is being called an “idiot” or a “moron” is super important, particularly when we’re talking about Japanese culture. It doesn’t mean the same thing here as it does there, nor should we expect it to mean the same thing as our cultures do differ. More importantly, Iruka uses two different forms of baka. The first time he calls Naruto an idiot, the word he uses is bakayarou and pretty much calling Naruto out for being a jerk or schmuck as the above article states.

Neither of those equates calling the character an idiot, but it’s not something we’d expect a teacher to say in our culture either. There’s no getting around the fact Naruto’s behavior in the previous scene was majorly contemptible, so Iruka is justified in calling him out for such behavior. It’s probably not something that can be gotten out in the number of syllables allowed for Iruka’s speaking part at that time.

That, and the second time – after Sexy Jutsu, Iruka isn’t using the word bakayarou, but oobakayarou indicating as the article I mentioned says that Naruto’s behavior just sent Iruka through the roof. In other words, Naruto managed to escalate the situation with Iruka, yet we later learn that Iruka is actually a very patient, kind man, so for him to get to the point of using either of those words is pretty major. Not to mention, Iruka’s actually fond of Naruto – though I think I’ll leave that for later, though add in the fact – if I recollect correctly, the English version did bring back Iruka calling Naruto an idiot when it was used as a term of endearment.

Iruka’s also aware of the fact the spirit is sealed inside of Naruto, but narratively Naruto believes Iruka is not in his corner despite the fact he is. This comes down to the fact Iruka is indeed constantly losing his cool with Naruto a lot, yet also adds to the idea that – no – Naruto wasn’t ostracized because the spirit was sealed inside of him. It’s because he does stupid things like making the class repeat tests and – well, his sexy jutsu. Which, can you blame Iruka for getting mad at Naruto for inventing such stupid skills?

Speaking of which, there is a running gag through the series that all men are perverts. A few may be thinking, why say such a thing – people should know that not all men are perverts. Well, they don’t. It’s a definite stereotype regarding males, but it also shows up a lot in Naruto. Of course, one could say this is used as a running gag, but if this was just a gag – the nose bleeds, then why do we keep calling the men perverts? Is Iruka really a pervert?
I mean, this is a heated debate people have regarding characters in the series – whether they’re a pervert because the “gag” ends up used.

Except, this shows a major misunderstanding of the Nosebleed trope. To quote the trope page, “The nosebleed is a visual shorthand/euphemism for sexual arousal.”

Yup, that’s it. That’s what it means, not that the character is some kind of pervert. It’s a way for both Anime and Manga to keep the subject clean for younger audiences visually. Another tactic is to use steam coming out of the nose. Nosebleeds aren’t limited to male characters but can show up in female characters as well, but there is an added implication going on which a younger audience won’t pick up on, which is mentioned on the trope page. Sexual arousal is a natural, healthy body response to certain stimuli.

Which brings us back to the real implication here, putting aside all of the humor and such. The real pervert here is – guess what – Naruto. He’s a twelve-year-old boy getting a kick out of sexual arousing the adult males around him to the point their sexual arousal is evident to those around them. He finds their public mortification hilarious, which in turn only adds to the theory that the reason for the village hating Naruto has nothing to do with him having the Nine Tailed Fox sealed up inside of him.

It has to do with the fact he’s a brat, has no respect for anybody else yet expects others to respect him despite the fact he treats them like shit.
That said, that does lead to a new question, doesn’t it?

Q: Which characters in Naruto are actually perverts?

The main point I’m getting across is just because the narrative tells us perverts, doesn’t mean they’re one. In fact, analyzing this series – it’s not just about analyzing for what’s done well and what’s done badly. It’s about things like this – the way the narrative is viewed. Actually, there is another question which we can start answering.

Q: Why do people hate Naruto.
A: It’s not because of the Nine Tails being sealed in him like we keep being told.

This, in turn, brings me to the other part, the part regarding the addition of the Rookie Nine into the mix. In the Manga, they don’t show up at all until the Chunin exams because there was no forethought into their characters. Instead, we get three other students complaining about Naruto. Who are the characters we see?

One of the three kids behind him has these weird striped pants, a light-colored jacket and black shirt along with what looks like a cap of some kind along with eye glasses. We can’t see his hair.

The second one is wearing jeans and a sweat jacket with a big black dot on the front. He’s wearing a baseball cap and sports a mullet.

The third has hair like Jiraiya, wears a vest and head band which are dark and wears a light-colored shirt.

As for the rest of the class – none of these students are the Rookie Nine. Despite the fact both Sakura and Sasuke do appear on the cover splash, they are nowhere to be seen in the classroom. Which makes actual sense, given the fact both Sakura and Sasuke are top students. Certain schools in Japan organize the homeroom classroom based on grades. Of course, this also makes Naruto’s acting out even more significant if this was indeed the class where the lower ranked students are because he’s making it harder on them when it is already hard.

Of course, there is the fact Shikamaru isn’t in this class either.

He might be lazy and not show his smarts, but I also doubt he’d want to get on the wrong side of his mother too often, not to mention there is an instructor taking the time to give him an IQ test, something nobody did for Naruto. Added to this, he’s a part of a special team that always puts their children together, so they would naturally want them to be in the same classroom. The fact Naruto might not have actually been a part of the same class as the rest of the Rookie Nine – well, I think that is something to remember going forward.

However, this also brings us to another issue – the fact Naruto’s taken the test three times. From this standpoint – and the fact Naruto is shown being in the same class as others, later on, could the others have already graduated? Could they possibly hold the test three times and thus give the students three chances for graduating? One could argue Sakura and Sasuke are in the class, just in the spot in the upper left side of the classroom from where Iruka sensei is looking, yet…

Sakura’s already sitting by Sasuke by that particular implication, yet…

Here’s where I point out there are only twelve students in the classroom, two per desk, with six desks at this point. There is only one spot without a student, and that’s where Naruto would be sitting. Personally, I think this is an issue of Kishimoto not really thinking things through more than anything, but I’ll get into this some more later on regarding why this particular theory doesn’t work regarding why he took the test three times.

The other option for Naruto is that he failed – well, multiple times. Thus he got held back a few years. The problem with this particular theory lies in the fact he is actually the exact same age as everyone else. The idea that Naruto was able to graduate early was another theory, which does fit with his bravado. The problem is, we later learn from Sasuke’s own narrative that graduating early was no longer an option for young shinobi.

Which, honestly leaves the option of the test being given multiple times and the others having graduated sooner – yet…

It feels like all of the students who graduated were at the front of the classroom, but this is based on the idea that there are only the twelve students needing to graduate, for which there are multiple problems thrown in as the narrative progresses.

As such, what does that leave?

The failing the graduation test three times was thrown in because Kishimoto wanted the reader to sympathize with Naruto. Actually, this falls under one of the points made on The Universal Mary Sue Litmus Test.

“Do authority figures punish your character more harshly than they would have punished xir peers under the same circumstances?”

That’s two points towards Naruto’s score on said test. Of course, there are also times when the opposite is true – though we’ll get into that when the time comes. Well, technically it’s not the first point I’ve made regarding Naruto being a Gary Stu, in that he does possibly serve as a self-insert for Kishimoto, yet this is something which has a slightly subjective element. Self-inserting isn’t a part of the litmus test. Getting back to the actual issue…

Yes, Naruto is being punished more harshly than another character is punished due to the fact there is no significance behind him failing three times given what we learn in the future except to punish Naruto worse than anybody else because we’re supposed to believe he’s the victim of ostracization in the village. Yes, we come back to the nine-tails ending up being – well, we keep being told this is true, yet there is nothing to actually back this up. A few people may be thinking, but look at those two women in the school yard. Isn’t that proof?

That is something I’ll discuss when we get to the said scene, which is two scenes ahead, though you could probably break that up into “two scenes”. The plot point is the graduation test, so I’m putting that under one bullet point.

Anyways, back to discussing this particular scene. One of the things I have left to discuss is the fact the Rookie Nine do in fact appear. Given the likelihood that Kishimoto didn’t really think things through, such as coming up with characters outside of Naruto’s team until it was convenient to do so – the chunin exams, but in the process negating the narrative of “no friends”. In this regarding, the Anime does a good job by bringing in the Rookie Nine, but it also choses to treat them as actual characters who are important to the narrative – not just Naruto.

There’s a major advantage to having the Manga be ahead of the Anime, but this is also why Naruto has a lot of filler.

However, the scene no matter what way you look at it does exemplify the fact there is a good reason for people to not like Naruto. People dislike him because he causes trouble, but nobody likes people who are jerks. OF course, some people will argue that Naruto falls under the trope Jerk with a Heart of Gold.

Q: When does Naruto become a Jerk with a Heart of Gold?
There are definitely some redeeming qualities to Naruto’s character, yet that doesn’t mean he’s not a jerk and his behavior isn’t off putting. Let’s look at some other Jerk with a Heart of Gold so we can make some comparisons.

Bleach – for this fandom Byakuya, Renji and Kensei are given. The narrative doesn’t ignore the fact they’re jerks, but their golden moment comes later on in the narrative.

Detective Conan has Kogoro Mouri, His behavior isn’t treated as non-existent, people are turned off by his behavior, yet he does have his moments.

Fairy Tail has Gajeel, yet in this particular case one of the things which stands out to me is how certain fans of the series like to focus on the awful things he does at the beginning of the series, yet ignore the fact his personality starts softening up as the series progresses.

Fruit Basket has Kyo, who again, the narrative establishes as having some off putting behaviors, doesn’t ignore them, but reveals the reason behind the behaviors later on.

Gauken Alice – otherwise known as Alice Academy - has Natsume Hyuuga. The narrative pretended Natsume wasn’t a little pervert. The narrative also recognizes him as a complete brat. As for why he acts the way he is, it’s not revealed at the beginning like it is with Naruto, and instead ends up being revealed over the course of time.

Inuyasha is a rather abrasive character, but more importantly, Kagome doesn’t hold back in telling him off – or in this case – “sit”.

Soul Eater is possibly not a good example due to how much the series plays up the jerkiness of the characters for comedic purposes, yet in the same regard characters do react to them as if their behavior was problematic, nor is said behavior brushed away as if It weren’t an issue.

Of course, the examples I gave above aren’t the main character for the series – in other words, the person we’re being told the narrative from. In which case we have…

Fullmetal Alchemist doesn’t brush off Edward’s behavior towards others, having his younger brother apologize a lot, yet we also learn that his behavior is an over reaction to being called short a lot of the time.

Those are just examples from Anime series.
Moving along, there is one last point to be made. Some people wonder why Sakura should hate him the way she does – and right here you have an answer, although he didn’t do this in front of her in the Manga. It would still have gotten around he did change himself into a naked woman, but not many females would actually want to date someone who – well, turned themselves into a naked woman to get a reaction.
Well, there is Hinata.

I’m not sure what this says about Hinata as a character? Is she perchance bi-sexual, or one of the other sexualities out there that aren’t heterosexual? Is she that creepy of a stalker….

Here is where I’d play the audio of a recordtrack going off course if this were actually verbalized instead of written.

I won’t deny the narrative did some shitty stuff regarding her character and Naruto’s relationship, later on, not to mention Sakura may or may not have gotten shafted – that I’m going to examine if I ever get to that point, but….

Hinata isn’t a stalker. She’s not obsessive, nor is her behavior unwanted. That’s a stark contrast to Orihime Inoue from Bleach and Juvia from Fairy Tail who are indeed stalkers because they are obsessed. While Orihime’s behavior isn’t unwanted like Juvia’s, this can be tied to the fact Ichigo is oblivious to her feelings for him. Both have behaviors that if the genders of the characters were reversed, we would so be going, nope on.
Hinata, on the other hand, doesn’t follow Naruto around obsessively. Yes, she watches him from the shadows when she comes across him, but this comes down to the fact she struggles with admitting her feelings. The fact she has a big crush on him – that’s a moot point, not to mention not a sign of obsessiveness. Framing it that way – girls are wrong for having a major crush on a guy, period, but if they’re unable to tell the guy and not doing anything wrong…

… such as watching them sleep and debating kissing them while they sleep….

…. they end up vilified while the ones who actually have stalkerish behaviors end up getting a pass, even treated as if said behavior is romantic.

Yeah, that’s something I’ll discuss a lot under Hinata as a love interest tag.

That said, it doesn’t help her case that she’s crushing on Naruto despite the fact he pulls this stunt in class, yet if you think about that – that might also be why she’s not open with her crush on him. The other girls think he’s gross, but she’s already shy enough as it is and wouldn’t be able to articulate why she likes him, something we don’t learn until later on. However, in this particular case, Hinata is also not yet introduced as a character either. In fact, I don’t think we see her again until the Chunin exams.

N1 - Enter Naruto Uzumai - Naruto Causes Trouble - 9%

2020-03-04T05:37:06Z

Did you know this scene happens differently in the Anime then it does in the Manga?

That wonderful chase scene through the village? Never happened. Naruto hiding using ninja technes? Never happened. In fact, Naruto is pretty much caught in the act and unable to get away in the Manga. No, in the Manga we see Naruto painting graffiti on the faces of the Hokage and a bunch of shinobi gathering below calling him out for – well, there's a reason I called this scene from the series "Naruto Causes Trouble".

More importantly, Naruto as a character in the Anime differs from how he is in the Manga, but this is why I found myself asking the question of whether what we all fell in love with was the Anime, not the Manga.

How do we view Naruto in the Anime? We view him as the class clown who wants to make people laugh with his antics, much in the same way Iruka did as a child. There's also the element in his character of doing something nobody else would dare to do. He takes pride in the fact he's Konoha's number one prankster, but it feels like the reason he's failing may not have to do with a lack of intelligence, but because – well, learning is boring. It's rather easy to see Naruto as being ADD/ADHD.

In fact, here's where I bring up the fact I know of someone who personally related to Naruto. He recognized in Naruto a fellow compatriot, a child who couldn't focus, yet got left behind in school and was dismissed by his peers because he was different. He was also meant to be an underdog like this person. Of course, I also saw said friend fall out of love with the character because he turned out not to be an underdog like the narrative originally presented him to be.

Which brings me to the stark contrast between Naruto from the Manga and Naruto from the Anime at this point. The characterization in the Manga is much inline with the characterization from the one-shot I mentioned in the intro. By this, I mean the Naruto who will dig a pit and pee on someone simply because they make him mad. This Naruto – his reason for doing things is very different from what they are from the Naruto from the Anime.

He does it because he likes pissing people off, but he thinks everyone else is beneath him.

Yup. I said it,though I must admit most of the softening of Naruto's character is in theEnglish version of the Anime, as he still saying that he does it because he can.Yet, even in the Japanese version of the Anime there is a difference, given thefact Naruto is saying what he's saying to the two shinobi chasing him,whereas in the Manga it is in front of everybody. Because it is in front ofeverybody, it definitely makes Naruto come across as if he thinks he is betterthan everyone, whereas in the Anime it's him openly mocking the two chasing himbecause – well, they can't catch him.

Naruto thinks he's better than everybody else, which again feeds into Small Name, Big Ego. Instead of bragging about the adults not having the guts to do something, he outright says they wouldn't be able to do what he does. He's just that incredible, but apparently, Kishimoto thinks Naruto is just that incredible as well because nobody sees how amazing Naruto is because he's apparently ostrasized by all of the adults in the village because of the beast sealed inside of him.

This brings me back to the quote I got from the Small Name, Big Ego page – "you could say it was almost entirely an act to compensate for feelings of inferiority due to spending his entire life being the target of public shaming, hate, and mocking."

Is Naruto really the target of public shaming, hate and mocking like Kishimoto wants us to believe? I'm reminded of the school bully who calls their victims a bully because they want nothing to do with them, yet that's not bullying, but the consequences of having bullied someone. The closest we come to this in this particular scene is one adult calling him an idiot and another a moron – the person who calls him a moron is Iruka.

Which brings us to one of the major issues – he's being called an idiot and a moron because he is doing what is deemed an idiotic, moronic thing to do. Context is important, but I think we often get stuck on the fact we tell kids not to call others stupid because it can be a form of verbal abuse. It can also, depending on the circumstance be a form of endearment. Other times it is used as a defense mechanism.

Seriously, the fact he is being an idiot when he is being called an idiot should not be ignored, yet because people push this idea of never calling someone an idiot we've forgotten that – well, there is more to those words than people think. To quote Peter Kaufman's article "The Sociology of Calling Other People Stupid", "as these definitions suggest, being stupid or demonstrating stupidity are most often used in response to the actions or decisions of individuals."

In other words, if you don't want to be called an idiot, don't act like one.

Of course, Naruto in the Manga does give us an example of someone using the word stupid as an actual insult. Way to go Naruto! The point here, though, is context is important. They're calling him an idiot because he is being an idiot, while he's calling them an idiot because he feels everybody is beneath him. That's the real reason we tell kids not to call others stupid because that's the context they're most likely to use it in.

Oh, and according to the Manga, this was not the first time he's vandalized the Hokage monument. There's no getting around the fact Naruto from the Manga is in major need of a spanking, while Naruto from the Anime is need of a bit of guidance. Neither narrative says the reason he's hated by the village is because of the beast sealed inside him. Instead, it says he's hated because of the way he behaves, but other parts of the narrative support what is seen, not what we're told.

Of course, there is the argument the behavior started because of all the ostracization, and the fact Naruto had no friends – except he didn't – he was friends with Shikamaru, Choji and Kiba, yet there is something which majorly contradicts this in the second episode/chapter. Sure, the first episode/chapter is consistent in this narrative that the nine tails is the reason he's ostracized, yet this idea he was ostracized – it's a lie. He had Iruka, the ramen shop owner, and his daughter, just to name a few who never shown such behavior.

We also can't ignore the fact Naruto is known for doing things like vandalizing the Hokage faces, but this ultimately brings us to the following question.

Q: Do we actually ever see Naruto ostracized because he is a jinchuriki.
A: There actually is an event I can think of – one in this chapter, but that must be taken with a grain of salt. After all, it involves Mitzuki, but a bit more on that in a bit.

That said, regarding people calling Naruto an idiot – that's also dropped from the Anime.

N1 - Enter Naruto Uzumaki - Cover Splash (3%)

2020-03-04T05:31:23Z

I'm going to admit I didn't pay attention to the cover splash for the first chapter for my second analysis attempt. I was in a bit of a rush to get the second go through caught up to the first go through...

Anyways, moving along...

So, I've already discussed the cover for the volume and how that focuses way to much on Naruto despite the fact he is a main character – the cover splash for the first chapter ends up also not hitting the mark. Mind you, the illustration we see a lot less crowded than the one for the volume cover, but that doesn't change the fact three characters make an appearance on the front cover yet don't make an actual appearance in the first chapter. Well, Kakashi may be a background character at one point – but that's another matter entirely.

The cover still says Naruto is the main character, though not as loudly as the cover and titles do. We also see how these three characters are positioned. Sakura's watching him, cluing the viewer into the fact she's the love interest. Sasuke gets to ride this awesome bird – which doesn't appear until much later in the series. Kakashi is the teacher, watching over Naruto. That said, it's rather weird seeing Kakashi standing on the toad despite the fact he's never seen summoning toads.

Q: When does Sasuke's hawk first show?

N1 - Enter Naruto Uzumaki! - The Nine Tailed Demon Fox - 3%

2020-03-04T05:24:46Z

What ever happened to the tidal waves?

One of the things which always stood out for me is the fact the narrative mentions this destructive force at the beginning of the series, yet I don't recollect a single time where Kurama actually did this within the series. However, more important here is the reason I bring this up – the fact the narrative surrounding Kurama actually changed as the series progressed with a lot of what went down being honest after thought.

When we were originally introduced to Kurama, he was presented as a random spirit with no connection to the village which all of the shinobi were sent to the battle which in turn resulted in the death of the forth Hokage when he sealed the beast. In fact, I also think one might argue it is fair to say the reason for his death was attributed to injuries sustained during the fight at this point in time, but more on that hopefully in an analysis of a later episode.

Then Kishimoto introduced the concept of the jinchuriki with Gaara conveniently becoming one of the other ones despite the fact his narrative also gave a different perception to those following the series than what ended up actually being canon. In Gaara's case, we can accredit this to him being an unreliable narrator – something I hope to dive into more later, but in Naruto's case, this was presented to us in the beginning. The Anime presents this through the voice of the third Hokage, but the Manga presents it as something everyone in the village knows.

Don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying the jinchuriki idea wasn't a good idea. My point here is that this is one of those things Kishimoto definitely came up as an afterthought. One clue lies in regard to how late in the game the term jinchuriki ended up being revealed.

Q: When did the first mention of jinchuriki actually occur?
A: I believe that this occurred during Shippoden, but if it occurred sooner, Naruto was the only one being considered a jinchuriki.

The other issue is if this wasn't an afterthought, why didn't we get to see more of the jinchuriki than we did? Isn't the death upon removal actually a convenient way of not having to develop the characters of the other jinchuriki? I mean, by the time we learned there were more two were already conveniently captured and dead, which is far from being a good narrative. More importantly, when one introduces a "group" in a Shonen series, the said group is expected to be introduced.

Black Cat introduced us to all thirteen of the Chronos numbers. Fairy Tail introduced us to every member of the Element 4. In fact, the only time I've never, ever seen a series introduces the entire group is when a series say gets canceled, or the Anime catches up to the Manga and gets canceled. Yes, I'm talking about the original Anime adaption of Fullmetal Alchemist here. OF course, some will argue Shonen Jump forced the matter – but is this really true? Pay attention to the fact there were two already dead when we first learned there were more.

The jinchuriki weren't the only afterthought.

Kushina Uzumaki was also an afterthought, a character who came up within the narrative when the narrative conveniently needed her to drive the plot. While it is true Minato is the one to have sealed Kurama into Naruto, she was instrumental in what went down, yet right there on the first page of the Manga, she is not introduced. She – a female character – doesn't get treated like a heroine despite the fact her role was just as significant as Minato's, not to mention she's the wife of the fourth Hokage.

Q: How many times does Kushina get shafted prior to her character reveal due to the fact she was an afterthought? That, and a female character.

Of course, some might argue here this was done to make sure nobody figured out that Kurama was sealed inside of Naruto, which is why he carries his mother's name and not that of his father. The problem with this is – everybody knows what the Hokage looks like. Kishimoto may not have revealed Minator's face at this point, but there is something which indicates Naruto does indeed have to be his son to those following the series. The fact remains though – people should have known Naruto was the child of Minato, yet he's treated like dirt?

Q: When did we first see the face of the fourth Hokage in the Manga?

Of course, getting back to Kushina – while I'd love to attribute the fact she's not mentioned to the fact Kishimoto regulates females to domestic roles – this ended up in there because it was an afterthought. One, that, I might add, still ended up regulating a female to a role below that of a male character. Of course, I'm not saying Kushina is a bad character, more of her character ended up jilted by the narrative rather than treating her like she's the amazing character that she is.

It's also worth noting the Anime actually does some rearranging narratively. For example, we're tossed hints in the first episode that the forth is, in fact, Naruto's father, yet given the fact it wasn't evident in the Manga, it's also understandable why people didn't start questioning this issue at the beginning of the series – that people didn't recognize him as the son of a hero. The other change was to move the mention of the spirit being sealed into him as a baby forward. If it occurred at the same time as the Manga, we'd be getting that information in the next episode.

The better narrative ends up being the Anime on this one.

That said, there is also one more thing to be addressed – the fact the jinchuriki are supposedly ostracized in their villages. A lot of this is something we're told, not shown, yet there is good reason to bring into doubt the claim that the jinchuriki are oppressed, given first of all our limited knowledge. After all, one became the kage of his village, but Kushina didn't face the same ostracization as the others, though whether people knew she was the host is possibly unknown. The thing is – we never once heard of her losing control. Killer B also never lost control – that was the host before.

In other words, that isn't as black and white as Kishimoto tried to make it out to be.

N1 - Enter Naruto Uzumaki! - Volume Cover - 0%

2020-03-04T05:10:15Z

Do toads actually ever appear in this volume? Am I going to add this to the list of questions I'm looking to answer? Yup, I am.

Q: Do toads actually ever appear in the first volume of Naruto?

It is possible they're foreshadowing the appearance of the toad sage, but Kishimoto may just like drawing toads.

The other thing I noticed are the paintbrushes on Naruto's back meant to represent a giant shuriken, yet I don't recollect Naruto actually using a giant shuriken until Shippoden. No, the time he used Sasuke's doesn't count, because it isn't one of his tools. In fact, when is the first time we see Naruto using a scroll – after all, he has one in his mouth? In fact, I'd say the cover also falls into Small Name, Big Ego syndrome with the fact said cover screams, "look at me and how powerful I am".

Q: When is the first time Naruto ever uses the giant shuriken as his own personal tool?

Q: When is the first time we see Naruto using a scroll as a tool.

Of course, this has to do with how much content is crammed into the actual cover, not the fact Naruto – the main character – is on the front cover. Let's look at the first cover of some other comics.

Assassination Classroom – The face of the teacher blown up.
Black Cat – The cover is of the main characters, his partner and another character.
Bleach – The cover is of the main character and his sword.
Death Note – The main character, the Shinigami, a scythe and something I'm not sure how to describe.
Dragon Ball – The cover is of the main character riding the dragon.
Fairy Tail – A picture of the main character and her first team mates.
Fullmetal – The cover is of the two brothers.
Hunter x Hunter – The main character and a frog
One Piece – The cover is of the main character and his friends.
One Punch Man – One Punch Man and an enemy he took out. Oh, and his groceries.
Rurouni Kenshin – The main protagonist and his love interest.
Slam Dunk – One of the main characters.

I think that's enough examples to get my point across. None of the other Manga – and by the way, all of these are Shonen titles. I'm not very familiar at this time with Assasination Classroom, One Punch Man and Slam Dunk, so that may be the only reference to those, but all the others may come up again at some point., particularly since one of the major arguments regarding the Naruto sieres is – well – that what's in Naruto is how Shonen series are.

Of course, there's one more thing which the paintbrush reminds me of. Is Naruto the self-insert for Kishimoto. Someone I know suggested to me that Naruto is a stand in for Kishimoto and Gaara his twin, which kind of makes sense since Kishimoto has said some of Naruto's interactions with Hinata were based on an interaction between him and his wife, but as far as we know, his twin brother – like Gaara isn't married. It's also important to note that Kishimoto married in 2003, so is there a correlation between the shift of the series focusing on Sakura to focusing on Hinata?

Q: Did Kishimoto unintentionally represent himself through Naruto, his brother through Gaara and his wife through Hinata?

Q; Is there a correlation with when Kishimoto got married and the shift from focusing on Sakura to focusing on Hinata? (He married in 2003)

N1 - Enter: Naruto Uzumaki! - Title - 0%

2020-03-04T04:54:46Z

Here are the titles I will be discussing for this particular episode analysis.

VJ-1 – Uzumaki Naruto
VE-1 – Naruto Uzumaki
MJ-1 – Uzumaki Naruto!!
ME-1 – Naruto Uzumaki!!
AJ-1 – Come On! Naruto!
AE-1 – Enter: Naruto Uzumaki!

One of these titles isn't like the others – can you guess which one?

Let's start off by discussing what most of the titles have in common, the fact they feature Naruto's full name. The series is titled after him. The first volume is titled after him. The first chapter is titled after him. Exactly how important is this character? According to certain fans of the series, Naruto is so important that he's allowed to pull a Haruhi Suzumiya and bend reality to suit his narrative.

Okay, so maybe that's not what fans actually mean when they say Naruto is the titular character so the narrative should focus around him, but that is how it does come across when they excuse certain plot decisions based on the fact – gasp – he is the titular character, or some other excuse pointing out how important he is. Except, the narrative shouldn't actually bend to accommodate Naruto because he's not a Reality Warper.

For those unfamiliar with Haruhi Suzumiya, she is, in fact, a Reality Warper. The plot for her series is about preventing her from finding out she has these powers, but also prevent her from becoming too bored with what is going on. Even with these powers the narrative doesn't actually warp around her, she just simply warps the reality around her and strange things occur. If a Reality Warper like Haruhi can't warp the narrative, why should Naruto be able to?

Well, apparently Naruto is just that awesome, right?

Naruto – and the series – suffers from Small Name, Big Ego. I mean, you've got to have a very big ego to have all three titles like that, right? Naruto's character is given as an example of this trope, yet one trooper argues that "you could say it was almost entirely an act to compensate for feelings of inferiority due to spending his entire life being the target of public shaming, hate, and mocking." Except, there is an honest problem with this statement which I'll get into later at various points during the analysis. There's also a comment on the example page saying he grows out of it, but does he? How many times does he say something is beneath him?

Which – that brings us to our first question outside of the initial questions.

Q: Does Naruto ever grow out of the Small Name, Big Ego trope? Does he ever stop saying things are beneath him?

Of course, the manner in which the titles are chosen isn't usual. More often we'll get titles like the first chapter from the Harry Potter series, "The Boy Who Lived". Even in the case of Haruhi's series, there are additions added into the titles, as we actually see in the Anime titles. Of course, the English title –the addition simply backs up the whole Small Name, Big Ego issue, possibly because by the time the series was brought over here those dubbing realized Naruto was no underdog.

That's where the Anime title comes in. The words "Come On" should be familiar to Naruto fans as an integral part of the first opening song. Normally, I'd be discussing the opening lyrics in the episode they appeared in, but in this particular case, I am discussing it before they make an appearance. The importance of these lyrics is that Naruto is supposed to be perceived as an underdog, fighting his way forward, never giving up. In fact, this entire episode is about Naruto learning to not give up and to believe in himself, yet also realizing someone believes in him.

That, right there, is a stark contrast from the actual Manga series in that the Anime recognized the important message in the first episode whereas the most important thing for Kishimoto in the first chapter – and volume for that matter – was – well, Naruto.

Index - Comparison to Other series

2020-03-04T04:47:23Z

Analysis

- Assasination Classroom - N1: Volume Cover

- Black Cat - N1: Volume Cover, N1: The Nine Tailed Demon Fox

- Bleach - N1: Volume Cover, N1: Class Room (x2)

- DC Comics – I1

- Death Note - N1: Volume Cover

- Detective Conan - N1: Class Room

- Dragon Ball - N1: Volume Cover

- Dragon Ball – I1

- Fairy Tail - N1: Volume Cover, N1: The Nine Tailed Demon Fox, N1: Class Room (x2)

- Fruit Basket - N1: Class Room

- Fullmetal Alchemist - N1: Volume Cover, N1: The Nine Tailed Demon Fox, N1: Class Room

- Gauken Aluce - N1: Class Room

- Harry Potter - N1: Title

- Haruhi Suzumiiya - N1: Title

- Inuyasha - N1: Class Room

- One Piece - N1: Volume Cover

- One Punch Man - N1: Volume Cover

- Rurouni Kenshin - N1: Volume Cover

- Twilight – I1 (x2)

- Samurai 8: Hachimaru Den – I1

- Slam Dunk - N1: Volume Cover

- Soul Eater - N1: Class Room

Introduction (Part 2) - The Game Plan

2020-03-04T04:41:53Z

Of course, I can't do this analysis without actually having a game plan. In fact, the flaw with my first attempt was I really didn't have any kind of game plan and was simply writing up my thoughts after watching each episode. The second time around did have a game plan, but using the "good, the bad, the ugly" approach just wasn't working as this didn't provide any clear organization for me or the reader even though it does support the fact there are good things about the Naruto series.

So how am I going to go about this?

I'm going to tackle things scene by scene, at least to a point. I say this because one of the early episodes actually takes a scene from later in the Manga and proceeds to go back and forth regarding the matter. Each scene will be carefully titled so the reader of this analysis will know what part of Naruto I am referring to.

However, how am I going to tackle each scene? I'm going to try and ask myself certain questions as I watch the scenes. I can easily add questions to this list as I get further into my analysis, but here are the questions.

- What do the episode/chapter titles tell the reader/viewer?

- Are there any plot inconsistencies?

- Do a character's actions actually make sense?

- Does the narrative warp to accommodate a character?

- Does the narrative warp to accommodate a specific plot point?

- Who is/are the hero(es)/heroine?

- How are the female characters treated/represented?

- How are special needs individuals treated/represented?

- Does what the viewer/reader sees regarding a given character match with what they're told?

- Is a character's potential within the narrative wasted?

- Does the character grow and develop?

- Is there something in the narrative which didn't get built upon, but could have been?

- Why might someone like a given character?

- Why might someone hate a given character?

Also, here are some questions related to filler material?

- Is the filler consistent with the canon material which was already out?

- Does the filler add something important?

- Why might people dislike this particular filler if it is well made?

- Why might people not like this particular filler if it is not well made?

I'm also going to ask questions regarding shipping, though a few may wonder why I bring this up when it is such a sensitive subject matter. For starters, shipping is an important element of fandom, but romance is not – contrary to what some say – a foreign concept. The relationships the characters are involved in are an important element in the storyline. As such, the questions in this section aren't just about ships, but also friendships and family ties.

- What kind of relationship do the characters have?

- Do the characters treat each other respect?

- Do the characters have the potential to be in a romantic relationship with each other given the context?

Of course, since this is a visual medium, the art work is fair game as well.

Is the scene by scene it?

Nope.

- I'm going to keep a tally of things, such as how many times Naruto makes a situation worse just so he can be a hero in the narrative.

- There's going to be an end of episode analysis.

- Questions that arise which need to be answered.

- I'm still going to have my prompt list at the end of the chapter, but I'm going to work on the prompt list for each scene by scene so I'm not attempting to try and come up with one at the very end as I did. (There's actually an unpublished chapter in the original analysis because of this.)

Speaking of the prompts, since that is a form of challenge, and the rules on Wattpad have changed, I am going to say I am not affiliated with Wattpad in any manner, nor am I an ambassador. They're there for the fun of it, to inspire others to write, but if you want people to find your story, be sure to tag your story analysis-challenge and naruto. Don't shorten the first as that's not what readers will be looking for. You can also let them know which prompt you're using by using the prompt tag I've come up with for the prompt.

Moving on from there, I'm planning on breaking things up as well. I'm going to limit each book to a hundred episodes, plus any movies or OVA which occur along the way. I'm also going to do an overall after every ten episodes – I'm hoping I get that far. The over all list of prompts and taglist for said prompt will go at the end, though a prompt list will be created every two-hundred while the prompt list will include all tags. Oh, and I'm also wanting to examine the "opening and endings" to these, which includes the songs which go along with them. Covers and other things will be brought up as I progress as well.

As for a question and answer page – I'll add one if needed.

Also, I'm going to be making comparisons to various series as I go along, but have decided to keep track of when and where I make comparisons in yet another chapter.

Note - As I've already noted, I am starting my analysis of the series off with the title. In this part of the analysis I will be examining both the Japanese and English versions of the titles for both the Anime and Manga, but I will also be including volume titles as a part of this discussion. The discussion of opening and ending sequences will – with a few possible exceptions – coincide with the episode in which the opening and ending sequence first occurs. Volume covers and volume titles will be discussed when the first chapter of said volume comes into play. I will also discuss the splash covers for each chapter.

Introduction (Part 1) - There's Nothing Wrong In Loving a Flawed Series

2020-03-04T04:32:56Z

Kishimoto is a bad writer.

There, I said it.

It, being that Kishimoto is a bad writer, something I think quite a few fans of the Naruto series who would argue vehemently against despite the fact quite a few fans would argue Kishimoto left us with a majorly lacking ending to the series. Of course, here is where I'll openly admit it is within probability for a stellar series to have an ending that was majorly lack luster. The thing is Naruto isn't one of these series.

The fact Naruto ended poorly, while a surprise for others, wasn't at all surprising to me.

It was something I was expecting for a very long time.

Now that I've got that off my chest, let me say this.

#in

Isn't whether he's a bad writer subjective?

No, no it's not.

In fact, as a writer and an artist, one of the things which drives me nuts is this idea that what does or doesn't constitute a bad writer is subjective. In fact, I think a lot of the toxicity in fandom comes about because we treat fiction as something which is measured by subjective criteria and that there aren't any objective criteria to measure – well, anything by.

Of course, in bringing up objective and subjective criteria we've got to discuss the fact some people don't understand that the question of whether a work is good or not has nothing to do with personal likes and dislikes but is about the actual quality of the work. In fact, I've had someone once try arguing the question itself is subjective when in reality it's not.

Seriously, if someone wanted to know whether you liked or disliked something they'd ask if you liked or disliked something, not whether the series was good or not. A few might argue that the word good can mean something enjoyable rather than the actual quality of the work, but context is important. The conversation is still meant to be about the quality of the work, not whether you like or dislike something.

Isn't it impossible to like something which isn't of good quality?

No, not at all.

Of course, here's where I bring in Twilight to the discussion. Prior to the Twilight series, the idea that someone could possibly like something of poor quality was a foreign concept within fandom, though in truth I think it always existed – we simply didn't admit that we were a fan of something of low quality because this typically meant opening ourselves up for ridicule, yet the stigma of liking something for enjoyment purposes only still remains today.

Why do I like the Twilight series? The draw for me is certain characters such as Alice, yet the fact I love certain characters also makes me realize these characters ended up rather wasted within the narrative because everything was about Bella Swan, but everything morphed unnaturally around her as it does in the Naruto series.

Naruto is the titular character, so shouldn't the narrative morph around him?

Nope.

Actually, those who try arguing this have honestly not heard of the I Am Not Shazam trope. They don't know about the Protagonist Title Fallacy trope either. They don't know about Secondary Character Title, Title Confusion, or Antagonist Title. One of my favorites is when the Namesake trope overlaps with any of these. These are just titles where the protagonist isn't the titular character.

However, the argument here is that because the character is the title character, he or she should, in fact, get special treatment that a character who isn't the titular character wouldn't get. As I've pointed out, being the titular character doesn't mean you're the main protagonist, so why would it mean that they would get special treatment? More importantly, aren't we using the fact they are a titular character to excuse the bad writing? Added, there are plenty of stories where the main character is the main protagonist without warping the narrative around them.

Are you saying that Naruto is a Gary Stu?

Well, doesn't he in effect warp the narrative around himself, which is, in fact, the essence of what a Mary Sue or Gary Stu is? One of the interesting things about the whole titular character argument is that we're pretty much saying that a character can get a pass on being this type of character if they are the main character rather than focusing on the fact warping the narrative to suit a character is bad writing.

That said, going back to the mentioning of Twilight, there are things it does better, such as actually having a plot through the entire series. Even the filler has an actual plot. On the other side, because Naruto does have an actual plot through the entire thing this, in turn, leads to potentially even more plot holes than Twilight probably does. The treatment of female characters isn't stellar in this either.

Isn't this how things are in the Shonen genre?

When someone asks me this, I know their familiarity with the Shonen genre is actually very limited.

One of the most common misconceptions I see regarding the genre – and this isn't just for Naruto – is that romance isn't a thing. Except, one-eighth of the Shonen titles on MyAnimeList are also classified with the Romance genre, but these titles aren't the only ones with romantic relationships in them – those are just the ones where Romance is considered one of the major genres for the particular Anime, yet the oldest one in the database is from the 70s.

Speaking of older series, Dragon Ball often comes up as an example despite the fact it is an older series from the 80s, but also one of the series many mangaka in the genre seek to surpass in some manner. There's no use comparing a newer series to an older one regarding what is standard due to the fact the newer series should be going above those standards and not settling. In effect, by bringing Dragon Ball into the conversation fans of Naruto have admitted it had definite problems without even realizing it.

We're also talking about the treatment of female characters here and how it's not okay only for people to try to excuse this treatment narratively by saying others do it. That's not okay.

Would you make the same argument regarding male characters?

Actually, yes – yes I would, but have.

Did you know that the most sexually harassed character in DC comics isn't a female character, but male? Okay, so yeah – I'm now talking about an American comic series, so a few people may be thinking there is no correlation – yet sexism is sexism. As such I can point out the fact the most sexually harassed character in DC comics is actually Dick Grasyon, the first Robin, Nightwing.

Of course, there will be others who will argue he's okay with this objectification, yet isn't that because the writer makes him okay with it? Isn't the reason the writer makes him okay with it because society acts like men can't be sexually harassed?

The way the Naruto series treats the female characters is not okay, but the treatment starts from the moment the first female character was introduced.

Wait, when did the problems with Naruto actually start?

Regarding the female characters, I was definitely referring to the third chapter of the manga, but if you want to talk about when the problems with the series began – it's not when a lot of people think, but instead, the very second chapter, though if you actually take into consideration the pilot for the series – it's been flawed from the very beginning.

For those who've not read the one-shot, Naruto's character in the actual Naruto series is toned down majorly. Mind you, the one-shot itself isn't bad, given that it is able to stand alone, yet has the character growth Naruto should have had through the entire series in that one character, but effectively Naruto in that one-shot is the kind of character you'd expect to be in a juvenile delinquent center.

Seriously, he likes digging pits for people who tick him off and then pees on them, yet this is the kind of thing which led to him not being liked – not the fact he is actually not human. He's actually a child fox-demon in this, not a child with a fox-demon sealed inside of him. He's definitely cruel to people, yet it was this one-shot along with evidence that later contradicts this which made me start questioning a whole lot of things.

But yes, if we're just talking the manga the first contradiction actually occurs in the second chapter.

Isn't that one-shot proof Kishimoto is a good writer?

A one-shot is very different from an actual chaptered work where one needs to be consistent throughout. The fact the one-shot pilot is pretty good doesn't mean he's a good writer when it comes to the stuff which isn't a one-shot.

In fact, I tried giving his newest series, Samurai 8: Hachimaru Den, but couldn't get past the first major boss battle. The mistakes he makes with Naruto are repeated in this particular series, but in some cases, it's right there in your face, such as how the one female character – confirmed female – is in fact regulated to a support/house wife role, but ridiculed pretty much for being an absolute failure for not being feminine enough in the ways expected.

I mean, the main character gets all of his issues erased and gets to work on getting to the most coveted position because his will power is the strongest. At least Naruto's problems weren't erased, although his lack of friends was falsely attributed to the fox spirit being sealed inside of him. The fact certain people honestly think that adding the sci-fi element to Samurai is actually original when it's been done before is baffling.

Isn't the filler worse?

I discovered something in my second run through of the series which honestly needs to be addressed, but this is one of the reasons I'm starting all over.

The realization is that there is a lot more filler in the Anime than people actually realize. By this, I mean material not written by the original creator rather than just story arcs not created by the original writer. It's not just episodes which are filler – hence why we call it a filler episode, but scenes can be considered filler as well, but so is additions to existing scenes. If it didn't happen in the manga, it didn't happen in the manga.

Take the first six episodes of Naruto which are currently listed as "manga canon" on the Anime Filler list site. However, each of these contain filler material. The one which jumps out for me is My Name is Konohamaru!, where Naruto and Konohamaru visit various places so that Konohamaru can learn the Sexy Jutsu. Well, that's not in the Manga. In fact, there are things that are changed which drastically change how the viewer of the Anime perceives things compared to those who read the Manga, such as the removal of Naruto's hobby of making trouble.

In the second attempt – which was similar to the first – I tried breaking what I watched into the good and bad, only to discover a lot of what ended up being good in a given episode wasn't even Kishimoto's work, but in some places, issues with his actual work ended up being removed.

This isn't to say filler can't be "bad", but we need to get away from this idea that all filler is bad and instead judge it based on...

- Does it contradict the canon material already released at the time except for timeline inconsistencies created because the Anime caught up with the Manga?

- Is the narrative presented in the filler "bad"?

Which meant I had to also carefully examine why – when I did eventually get to episodes which are all filler, why people disliked that. That – that is when I realized that I needed to come up with a really concise plan on how to analyze the series, particularly since there were questions regarding how the female characters were handled, but why a given filler may be frowned upon despite the fact it didn't break canon, one of the most important rules for judging the work, particularly when said filler actually wasn't badly written.