EVEN MORE CLARA DOLL DETAILS:

Julius and Ishtar are Well Written Characters, Actually

You All Are Just Taking Spoken Words At Face Value

The title to this post is tongue in cheek and the subtitle to this post is mostly a joke, but I've seen a lot (with no real change over time) of misunderstandings regarding the character writing of these two. Mostly confusion over exactly how "himself" Julius really is, and why the hell Ishtar stays with him; there are some finer points as to what the game expects you to feel about these characters, too.

Part 1: Julius (The original one, to be clear.)

So, most people know Julius's general backstory- was a good kid until he was given the Loptous tome. This is where the information ends, though. We learn nothing else about him, even from other characters, besides "he was such a nice guy."

There are a lot of arguments made that certain actions taken by the Julius we see imply that he's still in there, but these don't hold much water. There's also mention of Loptous "fully returning" in the final chapter, but in terms of actual events, this seems to refer more to the fact that Arvis is out of the picture than to any change in Julius himself.

Characters in the game who actually interact with him treat him in varying ways. Arvis calls him a demon; Ishtar spends half of Thracia worried for his health; Manfroy spends much of the second generation of FE4 treating him like a child, suggesting that at least he thinks that he's not actually speaking to his god for most of it. All three of these people, though, have good reasons to be deceiving themselves. (Arvis is a major wifeguy; Manfroy really doesn't want to be shown up as a religious authority (see his interactions with Veld); Ishtar (in Thracia specifically) is a 14-year-old at best going "I can fix him." with her childhood crush.)

The most important testimony, funnily enough, comes from someone who's not seen him in over half a decade. Julia, upon initially encountering him, tells him that he is not her brother and asks him who or what he really is- that her actual brother died seven years ago. Julia, who treats her father and his sins with a gentle hand, and even greets Julius by calling him her brother, isn't the type to treat someone as unforgivable if there's any way she could see to save them. And of course, she has no memories of possessed Julius to mix with her memories of the Julius she knew and loved as a child- unlike Ishtar.

Per Kaga: "The tome... makes Loptous able to control Gair's descendants. The final boss of Genealogy of the Holy War was its victim." It certainly doesn't sound like Julius has any effect on things.

TL;DR: Julius is gone as hell from at least the start of Thracia 776, but in practice probably from 771.

Part 2: Loptous (This Fucking Guy)

As for Loptous, we get PLENTY to characterize them. They're a complete misanthrope and a sadist, of course, which isn't news to anyone who's played FE4; but they're also interesting in terms of how incredibly paranoid they are- for the sort of evil god figure, such vulnerability is surprising. There's a lot to dig into.

Most people who've played Thracia know about the "jealous about Reinhardt" scene, and many people take this (and his obsessiveness in general) to be a twisted expression of Julius's actual feelings for Ishtar- but this doesn't actually make any sense. Julius was possessed (and killed Deirdre) at age nine to ten, at the oldest- seven to eight is more likely. (Deirdre's not pregnant yet at the end of chapter 5, which takes place in 761; 778 is the year the game ends. Per Julius himself, Deirdre bit the dust seven years before 778, thus he'd be ten at maximum.) If Julius has feelings for Ishtar at all, they would have developed entirely after being possessed (or at most been a puppy crush that developed into something more later). While possible (if Julius is still there) Occam's razor simply says that Loptous is the one who has feelings for her, instead. (Or doesn't, and thinks of her as useful. Who am I to psychoanalyze a lizard? But dragons in FE are perfectly capable of getting attached to people, and cartoon villain though he is, I don't think Loptous would be an exception.)

This scene makes more sense in the context of Julius's further paranoia in chapter 10, after successfully capturing Julia; Manfroy is understandably more concerned about the army of rebels on their doorstep than some chick with a book (who doesn't even have a chance to get her hands on the book.) Julius, by contrast, sees Seliph and crew as busybodies at worst, but is very nervous about Julia escaping. Together with the Ishtar discussion, it seems that he's entirely unconcerned with any threat he's posed unless it's an obstacle to another vessel coming into existence or Naga herself. (This bites him directly in the ass, but it does the same to Manfroy; the paranoia in Julia's case is justified, but Seliph is why she's able to become a threat in the first place.)

His relationship with Manfroy is interesting- Manfroy seems to believe that he's speaking in some way to "Prince Julius", even going so far as to attempting to provide justification for why Arvis had to be gotten rid of in chapter 10 (The Emperor had long served his purpose, Your Majesty. He was little more than an obstacle to your ambitions. He had to die.), but Julius doesn't seem to care about this in the slightest. This is curious; why would Manfroy expect him to care about this after killing his mother in cold blood? One possibility is that he's convinced that that was only because he saw her as a threat- that Loptous exerts some influence over him, but Julius is still at heart a teenager who still cares about his family members to some extent.

This probably comes as a surprise to the player, too- Julius can come off as a bit childish. The way he follows his whims instead of plans and "plays around" can come off as being a teenager. Indeed, the game in chapter 10 has essentially no rhyme or reason to it, and seems quite out of character for an ancient dragon- at least until you remember the previous conversation, where you see his certainty at nothing but Naga being able to kill him. (This is even shown in gameplay, very funnily, by him not having Nihil- unlike every other one of Sigyn's (Maera's) descendants. Nihil, in Japanese, is 見切り awareness of everything. He's not paying attention!) In play that's just a way for you to get the Leg Ring if you somehow lost it in gen 1, plus a bit of a challenge. The intended solution is suicide + valkyrie staff; but if you're willing to put in the effort, it's a great way to demonstrate how arrogant Julius is right from the get-go.

As for the sudden turn to flower gardens in chapter 4 of Thracia, that's less whimsical and more practical- telling Ishtar to shut up without doing so explicitly when she won't fall for some particularly weak lies. Those lies are an interesting point, though! What good does it do to try and convince her that what he's doing is harmless when he eventually gives up in lieu of open threats ("Are you trying to escape me in death, Ishtar?")

My hypothesis is that "teenager under the dark god's influence" is vastly more capable of getting things done given Arvis is still around than "actually, it's just a dragon". Manfroy himself doesn't seem to be too loyal to Julius, in actuality- he's perfectly willing to make decisions that he won't agree with. There's a possibility that he's doing this because he thinks he's talking to a teenager, but there's another, quite salient possibility that he enjoys being the head of the church quite a bit, actually, and doesn't want to give up that position. In essence, I argue that Manfroy is a Gharnef in more ways than just being an evil wizard- he's got the one-upmanship, too. In that case, convincing him that the reason he wasn't listened to was because he was trying to argue with a bratty teen and not because the demon he summoned in the basement doesn't actually like him at all might be very useful.

(There's an interesting point, if that's the case, to be made about "why the FUCK would you send Julia out to fight instead of just killing her"- besides the fact that Manfroy doesn't see her as a real threat, there's always "well, just in case she IS a real threat, it's best to have her around in case my relationship with the brand new emperor goes pear-shaped pretty fast." like elice with aum. That's just a theory, though- it's perfectly reasonable for him to just be an overambitious idiot, too, like Hilda.)

Therefore, the thesis of this and the first part is that Julius is a.) Dead as hell and b.) Being imitated to some extent by Loptous in order to get things done more efficiently.

Part 3: Ishtar (Well, Why The Fuck Is SHE Still With Him, Then?)

Most people generally take issue with one of Julius or Ishtar on the basis that either we're expected to think of Julius far too sympathetically considering how Ishtar acts around him or Ishtar's a complete idiot for staying with him for this long that the devs tried to make sympathetic by having her save kids at the last minute.

I've attempted to deconstruct the former line of reasoning (we are NOT expected to think of Julius-as-of-right-now at all similarly to people such as Lyon) but what about the latter? Is Ishtar really an inconsistent, poorly written character?

The answer is... mostly. In Genealogy, that is.

Ishtar in Genealogy, textually, seems to have a fairly happy relationship with Julius, all things considered. He does act weirdly possessive in chapter 8, and there's the implication that she's trying to run away in the final chapter (and she saves those kids), but you're given no real reason why other than her conscience catching up with her, which is inconsistent with her behavior in chapter 10; sure, the rebel army killed her dad and brother, but the same thing happens to Julia and she's perfectly happy to return to your army at endgame- it's kind of odd for Ishtar to participate in a game of hunting rebels with this in mind.

Of course, in Genealogy, you can argue that evidently their sunny relationship isn't all it seems, and she's not leaving due to her obligations to her family, that she doesn't seem THAT happy to play kill-a-rebel, et c. But it's just "whose interpretation is it, anyway" with only Genealogy in mind.

And then we get Thracia.

Thracia sheds light on all of this to an incredible degree. At the end of Chapter 4, we get to see Ishtar and her family obligations show up- they don't seem to actually be that pressing, though. She seems more concerned with the fact that Julius is unhinged, appearing more forlorn than anything, and appears to think that she can argue him out of child sacrifice. This is "I can fix him" Ishtar; she seems to be convinced that whatever Julius is going through he'll recover from eventually.

After this, we don't see her for a hell of a long time! But she eventually does return in 17A, to summon Saias and his ten leadership stars off the field. In this chapter, though, she's a bit more than forlorn; she refuses to ask the Loptrian bishops for help in healing Julius's illness, because she thinks they're to blame for his condition. (She'd be right, though.) Here, she seems to be a little less convinced of her ability to Fix Him(tm)- she just wants to stop things from getting worse.

And finally, the fucking chapter of all time, that confirms the light to see her actions in Genealogy. 21x. The two of them make a stop by the fort after you escape, and Julius mocks House Friege again- but notes that she's not the problem with it. As the conversation goes on, Ishtar spends the whole thing horrified, at both him and her mother- far from her forlorn air in chapter 4, by the end of the conversation here she's begging him to not kill her childhood friend and guard. There's no more "I can fix him" or even "I can stop him from getting any worse". The reason she's staying now is for her own safety- because she feels like she'd not be able to escape, even if she wanted to.

Of course, all of our encounters with her in Genealogy are after this conversation. By the point we fight her in chapter 8, she's too afraid to flee (and her father IS still alive at that point- she's fighting so he might not be killed, too. To a small extent, Blume and Reinhardt both get the same treatment as ch. 10 Arvis; Hilda, who's useful, isn't allowed to kick the bucket even after putting herself on the frontline, but the former three are, to put it nicely, left out to die.) By chapter 10, it's worse; instead of stating her opposition to the child hunts directly (like she does in chapter 4 of Thracia) she instead couches her disagreement in what Arvis wants- she doesn't want to anger him by speaking out here.

So, by the time you get to Miletos Castle, is that "I'd love to!" really something you can trust? Voicing her disagreement but still going along with something is one thing, but she's already passed that point. At this point, she's just hoping that she survives, because her mother evidently won't back her up. (Sorry Ishtar dear, mommy is climbing the social ladder.)

And eventually, she gives up on that, too. In the final chapter, when going off to fight your army, what she says is that she wants a chance for vengeance. Unlike in Thracia 21x, though, I don't think that what Julius says in response is baseless paranoia. Ishtar has personally betrayed him, after all; if he finds out that she saved those kids, she's going to go the way of Arvis- staying around as long as she's useful, and then being offed.

And as for joining the rebellion... She isn't entirely fabricating; they did kill her entire family. Also, though, it's pretty unlikely they'd allow her to join in the first place- princess of the Empire and all that. And who knows if Julius would try to get her back? He's brought her back from the brink of death at least once, most likely twice if you're decent at the game; evidently there's not much that would stop him from pursuing her.

So she's left with two options; to likely die once her treachery is discovered, or to definitely die and absolve her sins once and for all. I think it's pretty understandable, considering all she's experienced, that she'd choose the latter.

Of course, she's still complicit in the empire's actions over the past seven years- and she did make the mistake of thinking she could help Julius in the first place. She is not without sin- even if that sin stemmed from a childish crush that she never got an option to back out of. Yet, she (and Julius himself, though we never get to see him) is more of a tragic figure than a fool trapped by her loyalties. She may have once been the latter, but eventually had no choice.

Thanks for coming to my jugdralposting.

(Arvis is still the better main character of a Greek tragedy, though.)

i’m kinda upset that the fire emblem fandom keeps drawing Lucina with huge breasts because:

She binds for the whole damn main story

In the official hot spring DLC art she wears an alternate outfit without binding and look.

and there are plenty of other fire emblem women who are confirmed to be over 19 and have large breasts, please acknowledge them, gosh.

Ahhhh! It’s done! I’m so glad! This took a week to make, but it was a lot of fun! I took this as an opportunity to learn a new engine and also make a xanlas tribute~ And I’m so glad to finally be able to share it with everyone!

This story takes place in the aftermath of war, when the countries of Nohr and Hoshido have decided to make peace, Laslow prepares to return home as Xander becomes Nohr’s new king. Filled with doubt and regret, he has to decide: will he stay or will he leave?

This game is post revelations end. It should take, at most, 10 minutes to play. There are two possible ends. You pick the true end, decide as you see fit!

This game is made with love, so it is free to enjoy in its entirety. However I do request that you do not reupload it to another sharing site. Have fun! Happy Xanlas Week!

Characters: Laslow, Xander, Selena, Odin  Warnings: shaking screen Other: Fluffy, cheesy lines

[Download it here!]

Wallace @ Norman as soon as he learns about all the shit he did to Ruby throughout Pokespe:

[ID: a gif of a person winding up and kicking the camera. End ID]

So I was rather curious as to why Corrin and Azura were barefooted and everyone else (except Kana) had shoes.

In ancient Rome, footwear was a sign of power. Fathers would give their Sons shoes on their wedding days to symbolize “a transfer of power.”

Those who were imprisoned, enslaved, or even captured would have their shoes removed. Many prison uniforms did not include any form of footwear! And if you played the game, you would know that Corrin and Azura are captives, just raised by the royal family. The lack of shoes may represent their lower status in their countries, or may just show that they are captives.

However, bare feet can also symbolize innocence, which very much ties into the fact that, despite their choices, Azura and Corrin are ‘innocent’ for wanting peace. Another meaning to being barefoot is “a child”, which can explain Kana’s lack of footwear.

Everything Johan did was For Anna/Nina

Everything Johan did was for Anna. 

                      A “Monster” capable of love.

“What I’m most afraid of is…forgetting Anna. The strange lessons we have everyday… are making my memories fade. Please, don’t make me forget Anna. It’s only Anna and me in this whole world. Just give me that - please. Please.”  – Johan Liebert”

I was very confused about the complexities of Johan's character up until the last handful of episodes. After rewatching the series for a 3rd time and exploring how Johan is portrayed in the manga, it became very clear to me that my initial opinions about Johan were basic and devalued the intricacies of Naoki's writing. From the beginning we are only TOLD by conflicting views, who Johan was. His character, in the fictional world as well as our own, is simply defined by an individual's perception of him and the story presented. However, if we dissect ALL of the themes and even the undertones Naoki presented to us through the world of characters; I think it would be evident that Johan was not committing heinous acts for superficial reasons such as simply being evil to be evil.

So what was the method to his madness? 

I believe... Everything he did was for Anna.

(Yes this includes erasing himself from existence too )

Author's Note: I want to preface before you read on that although these essays are written in a sympathizing light that Johan has done PLENTY of wrong. This is not written in an attempt to dismiss his heinous acts lightly, but to simply understand the "Monster" of the series by tackling Johan's crimes deeper than the surface. I tried to make sense of Johan's every action in regards to his OVERALL PLAN and why Naoki presented them to us as viewers. For those who will nitpick the term "everything" quite literally, I want to make it clear that not E V E R Y S I N G L E A C T I O N Johan has taken coincides with his love for his sister; his actions towards the children specifically - because there are some things that had nothing to do with his "perfect plan" but more to do with attempting to build Johan's character and his view of the world us as viewers. Justifying ones actions vs. rationalizing ones actions are completely different. I am in no way attempting to discard the accountabilities that Johan should face for his actions, but instead trying to make sense of it all. I've analyzed Johan's crimes against children here: https://xprincessgarnetxvi.tumblr.com/post/691678531250487296/i-really-love-reading-your-essays-i-can However, this will explain the root of Johan's character and the core of his overall plan(s) that was committed for the sake of his sister from the very beginning to the end. The overarching theme and message of Monster is that there are no such thing as Monsters, only broken human beings capable of great evil; so we will humanize this great Monster in order to understand not only Johan Liebert, but the hows/whys Tenma/Nina was able to forgive him and ultimately find value in saving the life of this supposed Monster.

Before we begin, I'd like to take the time to thank you for reading! I can't wait to review your comments and further discuss this magnificent series of Monster!

-

Anna was set up from the beginning to become The “Monster” given she was the one who actually endured the experiments. Her tendencies are shown in glimmers throughout the show. The heartbreaking twist to it though... is that the only reason why she DID not become the beast, was because SHE ( unlike Johan ) HAD KNOWN REAL UNCONDITIONAL LOVE.

-Johan’s love and sacrifice is what kept her safe from the darkness he knew very well. He got his hands dirty to shield her. He chose to leave her behind in the care of her foster parents, knowing she would forget him, in order to heal.

He chose her than himself over and over; becoming her shadow; choosing to lose his only attachment to his already weakened identity in order for her to heal.

His love for her is why she never became a monster...and tragically, why Johan had.

Which reflects exactly what Mikhail Petrov (whose real name is Reinhart Biermann) said about his "PROFOUND DISCOVERY" concerning his current experiment on the children he had in his home; he said the children did not become animals because he gave them LOVE.

(Mikhail Petrov telling Grimmer how the children in his current experiment did not become Monster - it was because they had LOVE.)

In his own twisted way and view on things, he was protecting her. He killed every "parental" figure they had because he was betrayed by every adult figure in his life so far. People who mentioned calling the police, ended up finding out about their past - anything that could lead the man, who Johan referred to as “The Monster” into finding them, he disposed of.

The adults in their lives thus far would betray them, torture them, hurt them, throw them away- and forcefully separate them. In his severely abused mental state, any adult figure was a potential threat to his and Anna’s safety. So he’d kill in order to runaway from "the monster" and protect Anna. Then when Anna found out about the blood on his hands that fateful night the Monster paid them a visit, he realized that now he had become someone Anna feared - a different kind of Monster but all the similar to the one they were running from.

So he rationalized that now he needed to die.

In that moment, I think we should focus on his body language and expressions. Johan faced the ground. hardly picking up his eyes. His shoulders were sunken and he did not have that menacing little smile he usually had. Johan has killed in secret various times with Anna and back at Kinderheim.

So why was he so messy with the Lieberts?

Because he did not want to kill them - he said HE HAD TO.

It was not a calculated murder, because he was not truly calm and collected; He was afraid.

Lets not forget who Johan was up until that moment: the infamous little boy who provoked an entire riot and massacre by simply opening his mouth. With mere words he was able to sway the adults and children into doing what he wanted. BUT IN THAT MOMENT when Anna caught him red handed, he could not, or rather, would not - try and manipulate Anna.

(He has never once been shown trying to manipulate or abuse her throughout the entire series as he has done intentionally with the rest of the world.)

Instead, he asked her to shoot him and run - in an attempt to finally liberate her from the horrific life they had to lead up until now - blaming his existence for the constant chase their predator (Bonaparte) gave way to them as prey because in that moment, his memories were distorted and he believed he was the one who went to the Red Rose Mansion. **** (X) (this theory is challenged referenced below)

To Johan, him living was a danger to Anna and that night made it evident to him.

But when he was brought back to life and realized the gravity behind his methods, seeing how terrified Anna was of him - he started to cry. Because despite his initial feelings of finding his death absolutely necessary for her to be safe, he still wanted what he had with her; the only bond of love he ever knew.

What set his entire ADULT plan into motion (wiping out everyone who ever hurt Anna and created HIM) was Anna's rejection at the hospital. That was when he realized internally, he was beyond forgiveness and that he was nothing more than a monster. A Nameless monster in her reflection that needed to die in order for her to live in peace. (Referencing the God of Peace storybook. )

Johan was the one who gifted the God (Anna) her hat and then she saw herself as the Monster she was supposed to be due to the Red Rose Mansion experiments. This would NOT have happened if Johan did not give her the hat (the red hat which can symbolize the blood he spilled for her. ) so in this instance, Johan is also the reflection (you are me and I am you. They are both nameless monsters)

From that moment on, he wanted to wipe out his entire existence, and that meant those who ALSO "created" him so that Anna could heal as Nina.

I believe this is what is depicted in the Nameless Monster storybook. 

Initially, we are made to believe Johan wanted to “consume everyone” so he would be the last one standing. The Monster known as Johan in the book also devours his counterpart, the Monster who went West and then there is no one left to call him by his name. But clearly, Johan never does this, because Johan never attempts to kill/devour Anna/Nina - because what it symbolizes is entirely different in nature regarding Johan’s intention. 

A quick reminder that both Johan and Anna were considered Nameless Monsters. HOWEVER - by Johan’s hands, Anna does not remain “Nameless” nor does she ever become a “monster” the moment Johan decided to not only leave her behind in the hands of a loving family, but by her changing her name and her identity to Nina. The Fortners never made any implication that they knew of Nina’s past concerning the Lieberts murder and I believe this is because Johan introduced her as Nina to the Fortners and never allowed them to see the trail behind her identity as Anna Liebert. 

Symbolically, Johan, as the Nameless Monster, consumed the Monster inside of Anna and became the only Monster left. This is what is mirrored in Johan’s intentions and the Nameless Monster storybook. 

With Anna forgetting him and Johan leaving her behind thus losing his only connection to someone who truly knew him, now all that is left is Johan, without absolutely anyone to call him by his name - the one and only Nameless Monster.

And this is heavily referenced in Another Monster:

(This reinforces that Johan was trying to make Nina forget her past as Anna)

There wasn’t some sick satisfaction from any of his killings done when he was a child. To him, it was needed for the sake of her safety. This was Johan’s initial “plan.” set in motion. He wanted to be the only one left in the world with his sister - so that they wouldn’t have to be afraid anymore. 

(I also believe at that point when they were kids, Johan's very first plan he referred to when telling Anna "Remember, I have a plan." was to run to another country with her so that the Monster will never find them. It is the only logical idea of a plan that a child could conjure following what he actually leads them to do, which was cross the border. Simply destroying the world is unreachable in his current state and Johan is smart enough to not be delusional in his endeavors. With that being said, he had to kill that old couple to erase any trail they may have left of "two beautiful blonde twins." But this plan fails because they nearly die at the Czech Border and was discovered. )

(Johan telling Anna he has a plan.)

RUHENHEIM:

One of the biggest moments in Ruhenheim has been misinterpreted and lost due to the mistranslations in both the English Dub and the Japanese subtitles. 

I clarify and mend this by breaking down what Nina unraveled in Boneparte’s house when she looked at the portraits by correctly translating the Japanese script/text in depth here on this post:

 But to summarize it for the purpose of this essay, it was revealed to us as viewers that Johan apologized to Anna when she returned from the Red Rose Mansion, revealing the overwhelming weight of guilt he carried when Anna had been taken that day. 

(That day depicts the moment their mother made the terrible 'Choice')

and then Johan accepts his mother will never return to them (assuming she abandoned them) and goes on to tell Anna this:

Johan is the one crying because soon after, Nina tells us that Johan was in that room crying.

This information provides clarity as to why Nina was finally able to understand Johan, empathize with him enough to be able to forgive him. She remembered he was a boy who felt guilty over what happened to her; a boy who cried when he realized they were now all alone in the world.  She understood that Johan desperately did anything and everything to ensure he and Anna survived despite it all.

That Rainy Night:

I want to GREATLY EMPHASIZE the important factor I missed my first time watching the scenes with Johan/Anna - the scenes shown to us were ONLY through her recollection as fragments due to her memory loss. They were told from what she COULD remember, so her take on what really happened that rainy night the first few times the events are unfolded before us should not be taken as absolute. At least...up until it is revealed in the final episodes that Anna realized that on that night instead of seeming like an empty shell of a person asking for death, Johan was crying and crying before she shot him.

The scene where Anna finds the portraits reveals what truly happened between them and its so important. She said “Johan was crying “here” just like before.” She was mimicking a memory she had just recalled in its entirety. “Why are you crying, why are you crying?” She sounded in distress. Directly after she reveals that she remembers him crying, it shows the image of him pointing at his head that rainy night.

Even though Johan told her to shoot him, it is IMPORTANT that he was crying and the author highlights this for a reason.

I believe that, finally being able to vividly remember that day finally revealed to her that Johan wasn’t the “face of absolute evil” she initially dismissed him to be; he was a boy/man who could cry and mourn - he was human. He was a terrified boy protecting Anna and himself the only way he knew how. and instead of showing him forgiveness/love - she added on to his collection of wounds scarred upon his soul from everyone else who chose to harm him.

Tenma...was ultimately the ONLY one in his life who showed him kindness.

Johan's intentions and reasons behind many crimes: Essay II.

( I will summarize it here as the extension essay was far too long to put on this post)

**** (☓) I want to ask, did Johan truly believe he was the one who went to the Red Rose Mansion or was that simply a masquerade he performed to make sure Anna did not remember?

(I wrote an essay on this being a possibility here: PART 2 OF THIS ESSAY. This will explain Johan's intentions in depth)

(this is a theory I FIRMLY believe and have completely adopted. But for the sake of argument, I will entertain both concepts behind Johan's memory in this essay.)

If we entertain the idea that Johan never misconstrued his memories about the Red Rose and pretended he did, I can dissect Johan’s intentions a bit more intricately.

Throughout the series you see that he is trying to wipe everyone who knew of what happened to Anna off the face of the earth, that included himself. He did not want Anna to remember. So when it was revealed she did remember, he mourned. It was subtle but evident in the anime when she reveals “you are wrong.” something in him shifted - for once he was reacting to the words of another.

She said "he had a smile but seemed like he was crying. I never seen such an expression on his face before." That entire scene, Johan’s eyes expressed something we’ve never seen from him throughout the series - a sense of mourning or longing?

Johan in front of Anna always appeared the most human and I feel Naoki did this with purpose.

(Naoki specifically told the directors/animators of the anime series to never stray from how he expressed Johan's eyes for a very important reason. )

Johan's expression finally meeting Anna after 13 years apart.

-

If, however, Johan DID truly think he was the one who suffered at the red rose mansion, his “perfect suicide” plan still relates to his twisted-selfless feelings for Anna.

Johan learns it was not him that suffered at the Red Rose Mansion...but Anna instead. and then Johan goes on to commit the "perfect suicide." In his plan to die, he wanted to take The Monster with him, forcing Bonaparte to endure the same exact hell he forced Anna to suffer as a child.

Call it an act of revenge. Some may think Johan is incapable of being vengeful but I cannot see this cruel and calculated act as anything other than malice. After Bonaparte was finally dead, the monster disposed of - Johan was ready to die.

But you can see his conviction began to slip away when Anna forgave him. What made it worse was realizing he was wrong about Tenma because even now, Tenma was still hesitating on killing him ruthlessly like he always presumed would happen. Johan thought he had humans all figured out - after all, all Johan has EVER known was the darkness in people’s hearts. That is why he was so confused/moved by Tenma and wanted so desperately to prove him wrong.

The manga portrays Johan’s expressions 1000X BETTER THAN THE ANIME. As soon as Anna arrives, Johan is just staring at the floor, unable to look at her - Repeating everything from that fateful rainy night when they were kids. But this time, Anna doesn’t kill him, she chooses love and compassion. and when she says she forgives him - his reaction is something the anime does not do justice

(The subtle shift the artist expressed in his eyes from her words is so significant but missed in the anime; but he reacts rather deeply, moved and shocked by her words.)

Because "Forgiveness is the remission of sins. For it is by this that what has been lost, and was found, is saved from being lost again."

In the manga he isn’t quick to reply. He ponders over her words carefully and I think this is when his mind starts panicking.

Anna realized that forgiveness was the one thing he wanted that night she shot him, despite him also thinking his death was needed. His value depended on her view of him; and what she once robbed from him was now returned - a human being worthy of forgiveness instead of a monster.

He is telling her the evident truth that he cannot turn back because he TRULY believes Tenma is going to kill him any moment.

Johan refuses her forgiveness not because he resents her or thinks its too late for her to redeem herself - but because he doesn’t think he deserves it. “There are somethings that cannot be undone.” Because it is too late, Johan is going to die - he WANTS to die. Then you see the fear and helplessness in his eyes after getting the one thing he always wanted [ Anna’s forgiveness] because he desperately wanted to die as the only thing he knew himself to be: the nameless, nonexistent monster. But both Anna and Tenma rob him of that by bestowing upon him the gift of compassion, mercy and empathy; for the first time treating and valuing him like a human being instead of a monster,god,experiment, devil etc., as everyone around him has his entire life.

(The Monster inside of Johan begins to crumble.)

Johan in his final moments was cracking and finally falling apart. You see it in the final expression he makes: the distraught, confusion and sadness. Because he realized, he was wrong about people, he was wrong about the world. But how can we blame him for his view on humanity when all he has ever been shown since birth was how ugly, selfish, cruel and inhumane people can be?

How can we expect someone who has only seen darkness to be able to find the light?

I want to clarify one thing I noticed: Johan has never shown to take any kind of sick satisfaction from killing unlike all the other serial killers being interviewed in the series. (aside from Richard) Specifically, Johan is without "the lust for murder" as Lunge explains in Another Monster - which is why Johan hired other people to kill for him instead. Especially contrasting Johan with Roberto, specifically, when Roberto tries to kill Anna.

(that is until Richard, which makes Johan's dealings with him stand out for a reason. He doesn't even take pleasure in killing the Red Hiddenburg, he leaves before witnessing her death instead of reveling in his 'checkmate' coming to fruition.)

Despite his callousness and his lack of care for life - Johan, despite how much of a "monster" he was, very clearly had humanity and had love....for his sister most of all. Johan saw when his mother choose, how little their lives meant to her and this instilled his nihilism at such a young age. He watched Anna get tossed to the wolves like nothing and in that moment, he probably thought his mother chose Anna over him for a reason. (even though the question on her intention would haunt him for the rest of his life) But her being able to choose is what hurt him the most and it's probably what instilled his self sacrificing mentality to care for Anna above the world in order to never make the same mistake his mother had.

That is why after she got back from the Red Rose Mansion, he cried for her story and apologized as if it was his responsibility to feel guilty over what happened to her. It should have been him that suffered. Then after, he treats her with the upmost care, telling her everything is hers, no matter what she will win everything because he would deem it so. He is kind to her, never letting go of her hand even when she is dragging behind - he sacrificed all of himself for her...

Because she deserved everything in the world to contrast their mother throwing her away.

(it should be noted that the Lieberts did not want Anna either but only adopted her because Johan refused to leave the orphanage without her. Which is also why I believe he killed them when Bonaparta came because he thought the Lieberts were conspiring with Bonaparta to get Anna)

🌰 (The ‘Acorn game’ represents their Mother's choice, a child in each hand. But in this version, Johan would ensure that no matter what hand Anna chooses, she will NEVER choose wrong. He manipulates the fate behind her choices by holding two acorns instead of one; never letting her make the same mistake as her mother.)

He wanted her to know above all else, she was loved.

A clear indication of this adoration/attachment he has for her is the fact that he DOES NOT forget her even after enduring the hellish experiments in Kinderheim that aimed at wiping out / messing around with his memories.

-

I wrote this because I was astounded to see various posts/Wiki pages implying that Johan’s intentions were to torture Anna and make her kill herself. Telling her to shoot him was his first attempt to drive her insane? They twisted a lot of things Johan did to try and make this statement true. But I cannot comprehend how they drew this conclusion? The series has characters mentioning on more than a few occasions that Anna is dear to Johan. "He is lost with you."

Everyone knew Anna was important to Johan, Professor Geidlitz was the first to mention this besides the old blind man. Roberto was aware of this which is why he tried to kill her as mentioned in Another Monster. Which is ALSO why Peter Capek tried to hold her hostage to prevent Johan from killing him.

and for the first time, Johan DOESN'T kill him.

Johan cried when he awoke at the hospital after he reached for his sister and she screamed in fear of him. His face full of tears - his heart completely broken. If his intention was to drive Anna insane, he would have triumphed in that moment she screamed and fell to the ground after he reached out to her. But instead he mourned.

Anna has mentioned several times that Johan has cried for her, like when he was in the room full of their happy portraits, he was crying. He never once tried to bring harm to Anna - not intentionally towards her person. Explaining the Fortners murder - either he killed the Fortners after they decided to keep lying to her, thus keeping him in the shadows when he wanted to return. OR he killed them because they were going to tell her the truth about her identity, which was something Johan worked to conceal. (this theory is explained thoroughly in essay #2 )

Regardless, if he wanted to torment her, he would not have tried to lure her away to the castle when he set up the Fortners to be killed.

They imply that Johan wanted to torture her and then kill her at the end. But that makes absolutely no sense. Where in the storyline does Johan give off this tendency towards her? Even at the end he told her where to meet him in Ruhenheim and not once did he try to shoot her or Tenma. Honestly, if he really wanted to provoke Tenma to shoot him, he would have held the gun to Anna instead of a random child. But even though being shot by Tenma was his greatest endeavor, he refused to point the gun at someone who was important to Tenma...because Anna, is important to Johan too.

To say Johan, despite being hailed as the Monster of the series, had no love or humanity in him and was merely the Devil himself...completely missed the point of the story...

I’d like to point out the constant mentioning of Hitler in this story and draw another important factor...Hitler brainwashed people to commit mass genocide. Under his rule, millions perished in horrific ways. But despite that...Hitler was capable of loving others. Hitler was also loved by others. The terrifying truth about people who commit atrocities...is that they are not monsters or demons or devils...

they are merely human.

-

Here’s two passages from ANOTHER MONSTER [novel post Monster written by Naoki] that really drives this point:

- PSA: My twin brother FINALLY finished his 2 HOUR Johan Analysis Essay, that dives deeper into Johan's character. This essay and essay #2 will be included in this analysis video as we both worked on it together. However, this lays out the details visually and with beautiful music. Please watch!

Hey all, did you know that the original lyrics to Fates’s iconic song were a hilariously accurate description of its plot events?

To my knowledge, there isn’t a literal translation out there that highlights just how well it serves its prophetic function, so I wrote up this translation+analysis post. Enjoy.

Massive spoilers for all of Fates.

@someobscurereference I’M FINALLY DONE WITH THIS 44 SLIDE MONSTROSITY

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1u0HxzRT2jte626lSvK_MyNhxaxwOpoAHHXokXT08fuI/edit?usp=sharing

Here’s the link to the slideshow, it should pop up as “This is a title” because I am very creative

Also WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS FOR THE HIDDEN FATES DLC AND LASLOW-ODIN SUPPORTS

Make sure to view it in presentation mode because there’s a lot of transitions and animations! 

Anyways, AFTER HOURS OF WORK IT’S FINALLY DONE SO HERE IT IS, I SPENT SO MUCH TIME GETTING ALL THE NOTES AND PICTURES AND THIS TOOK AT LEAST 10+ HOURS OVER THE LAST WEEK

LIKE, I’VE NEVER PUT THIS MUCH WORK INTO EVEN SCHOOL PROJECTS

BUT THIS WAS FUN AND I ENJOYED IT AND I HOPE YOU DO TOO

Chapter 13 of Fates Revelation is a writing highlight for me.

Corrin: What's going on? They're both blaming each other for this carnage.

Azura: Of course. Kingdoms at war will always twist things to benefit themselves.

Ryoma and Xander-representative of Hoshido and Nohr as a whole-uphold the conflict and status quo of the world they live in. Even if it makes no sense, they accept that they're enemies and an enemy must have done something awful to harm the peace.

Even parts of their battle quotes and end of chapter dialogue emphasize this.

Ryoma: It doesn't matter, Kagero. Anyone who doesn't side with Hoshido is the enemy. What will you be?

Xander: Trust her? Don't be a fool. I won't listen to any more of your lies. You've chosen your side—opposite me. Prepare yourself, Camilla.

-

Xander: This isn't over! We'll fight to the very last man!

Ryoma: You won't see Hoshido waver! We'll fight until there's no one left!

Xander: Whoever retreats now admits defeat! Nohr will never lose to Hoshido.

Ryoma: This war will continue until we take our last breath!

They are unable to see any part of a conflict as something with them or against them. Nuance and rationality don't sit well in minds stubbornly steeped in years of animosity. War, hatred, and reinforcing the way things are is something both of them are willing to do, because they see no other path or choice for themselves.

Corrin and Azura meanwhile, actively disrupt their world views.

Corrin: ...You may be my brothers, but I won't go easy on you if you try to stop me! Come, everyone! ... Ryoma! Xander! Please, you both have to listen to me! We've defeated the real enemy—you don't need to fight each other now!

Azura: Ryoma, Xander... It wasn't Nohr or Hoshido who destroyed this town. It was done by the invisible forces that we just defeated. Now that they are gone, I will not allow any more senseless violence. I will sing my song as many times as necessary to restore peace. Do you still insist on fighting?

And it's not empty words or cries that fall on deaf ears. Corrin is strong. Her will is iron-clad, and she will ensure her vision of peace is made a reality, no matter who she makes an enemy of. Azura is strong as well. What she lacks in directing a path on her own, she makes up for with raw resilience and no qualms about using her song-something that risks her life-to end things on her terms.

They force their stubborn older brothers to look at things in a different perspective; to stop trying to hack and slash their lives away and consider a bigger threat to what and who they care about.

While they aren't swayed immediately, they're undoubtedly shaken. After that, it takes personal introspection and uncomfortable truths for each of them to swallow their pride and admit their ways are wrong, and to follow Corrin to end a senseless war.

And I love this exchange at the end as well:

Scarlet: Ryoma's talked my ears off about what happened to you as a kid. You sound like an idealistic brat to me. You want to bring peace to the world? Ha!

Corrin: There's nothing idealistic about ending this horrible war.

REJECT 👏🏽THE 👏🏽 STATUS 👏🏽 QUO 👏🏽!

Accusing others of being naive or idealistic for things like this, in my opinion, shows cowardice, or even ignorance; a life that's been beaten down by other upholders of a terrible state of the world until they agree.

Why is it naive to trust people? Why is it idealistic to want something like endless warring to stop?

We're fed a lie as children: "Life's unfair, you can't do anything about it." Says who!? Why accept that life is cruel and unyielding, when there's so much capacity for good in the world? Is life actually unchangeably unfair in its nature, or is it simply malefactors taking advantage of innocent people in order to rise up to slake their own greed?

Once terrible people get in power, they beat down any forms of resistance and feed this very same lie to them. Worse still, they can even convince the masses to discriminate, fight, and kill each other all so they can swoop in during the aftermath and reap the benefits. And people, at their lowest point, take solace in any explanation-no matter how untrue and no matter who it's coming from-in order to have some semblance of control or direction. That forms their new view of the world.

It takes people who haven't been exposed or raised to believe such nonsense (Corrin) and people who are wise enough to recognize the true problems of the world (Azura), to push against this normalized destruction between two innocent groups of people and direct their ire towards the actual oppressor (Anankos).

It's succint, but scathing. The word choice-in both JP and localization-is too deliberate to consider it a coincidence, I genuinely think it's a good criticism of how our modern world works as well. From a philisophical standpoint it is basic, but Fates as a whole also tackles issues of ignorance/discrimination, xenophobia, the boundaries and meanings of family, who defines justice, the belief of many versus the will of the few, embracing consequences instead of running away, and exploring the concept of leadership in general.

For a game this big, IMO, it meets the mark more often than not when considering the points it wants its audience to hear.

Fates’ 2nd Gen Characters: Parallels and Contrasts

A request from an anon. Again, I won’t do the neutral children since it would be kind of difficult to do so. But it was easier than I thought to do the rest of the kids.

Shiro and Siegbert: Both are heirs to their respective kingdoms through their very renowned fathers and are actually pretty insecure about inheriting the title of king. Siegbert is principled and docile, and always knew he was royalty. Shiro is rebellious and direct, and was kept in the dark about his identity. Siegbert idolizes Xander and wants to be just like him, whereas Shiro wants to be better than Ryoma and went so far as to fight with naginata so he’d have an advantage over his dad in a fight.

Kiragi and Forrest: Both have mixed feelings about their royal blood and their inheritance; Forrest is afraid of the responsibilities and terrifying power that comes with being royalty and Brynhildr’s successor, whereas Kiragi hates being coddled due to his status. Forrest is a healer with a keen aesthetic eye, loves fashion and prefers to keep things neat and tidy. Kiragi is an amazing hunter who is one with wilderness, and is pretty unkempt. Forrest is shy with confidence issues (said issues being more apparent in the JP version, again he was kind of changed in Western releases) and has an uneasy relationship with Leo. Kiragi is optimistic and outgoing, and loves Takumi unconditionally.

Asugi and Nina: Both of them have very strained relationships with their fathers, are skilled in espionage, fight for what they believe is righteous and just, have unconventional obsessions and both of their paralogues require you not to let them escape. The key difference is that Nina chose the same path that Niles did despite him not wanting that for her, whereas Asugi resents being the sixth Saizo, and wants to find his own path in life no matter what his father wants.

Mitama and Soleil: Both are noted to have inherited a slew of traits from their respective fathers (Soleil inherits Laslow’s smiling credo and flirtatiousness with women, Mitama inherits Azama’s star eyes, wisdom, and sharp tongue). However, Soleil is sociable and enthusiastic, while Mitama is lazy and keeps to herself. Also, Mitama is very artistic; she enjoys poetry, scroll crafting, and chigiri-e (a Japanese form of artwork where you tear and paste together colored paper to create an image). Soleil on the other hand has as much artistic style as stale bread, and is outright noted to be a terrible dancer and singer, among other things.

Caeldori and Ignatius: Both characters look up to their fathers and want to be just like them, but have massive insecurities. The difference lies in that Caeldori is outwardly confident in both social interaction and battle, but is incredibly anxious and afraid of not measuring up to her father. Ignatius is afraid of looking like a coward to basically everyone, especially because his role as an armor knight means he must protect people; however, he gets a boost of bravery and courage whenever he’s on the battlefield. Another difference is that Caeldori hates being treated like a natural talent because it makes her feel isolated and her hard work being ignored, whereas Ignatius diminishes his own talents and hard work a lot, and hates looking like a failure in front of people.

Rhajat and Ophelia: Both are eccentric spellcasters who are talented in the dark arts. Ophelia is open and dramatic, whereas Rhajat is gloomy and introverted. Ophelia makes her love and admiration for her father well known, hence her being inspired by him. Rhajat on the other hand is initially rebellious and standoffish with her father, but does reveal that she loves him deeply. While Ophelia is always flashy and chipper, she’s secretly insecure that people won’t take her seriously and that she’ll never measure up to the Chosen One status that she seeks to accomplish. Rhajat may appear standoffish, but desperately wants to make friends and have people like her despite her gloomy aura and odd habits. In short, both care deeply about what others think of them despite it seeming like the contrary.

Hisame and Percy: Both characters initially rebelled against their fathers. Both also have contradictory traits compared to their fathers (Hisame’s seriousness vs Hinata’s carefree attitude, Percy’s good luck vs Arthur’s horrendous luck). However, Percy’s rebellion against his father is played for laughs and a reference to both of their respective luck (good luck that Percy had mercenaries to back him up, bad luck that Arthur has to deal with the mercs), and he ultimately loves his father a lot. Hisame’s relationship with Hinata though is more complex and deep-seated, but he ultimately does care for his father and is actually secretly jealous of his carefree nature. Lastly, Percy is childish and innocent, whereas Hisame is calm and wise beyond his years.

Selkie and Velouria: Both characters are scions of their respective beast tribes and love their fathers dearly. Selkie is a free spirit who loves playing with others and getting praise, whereas Velouria likes to remain by herself most of the time and has more unconventional interests. Selkie is naive to the ways of the world, and often has to be taught about things such as morality during conflict or how her race puts her in danger. Velouria on the other hand is quite knowledgeable about things, if a bit blunt. Also, Selkie is clingy to her father because she never had a chance to visit the rest of the kitsune hamlet, but Velouria is clingy to her father because she knows she’ll eventually have to live for herself one day and is trying to make the most of the time with her dad that she can.

-

And there you go. I hope I made a good sequel post.