idk, it just seems like a strange reason to completely hate everything a fantastic story stands for. we have plenty of dragon ball emotes despite the fact that that series has a ton of random sexual assault as humor from the main character’s beloved teacher (and various other characters), and that’s way worse than anything in frieren
tbh the whole thing just feels like contrarianism to me. oh yeah, you like this wholesome refreshing fantasy story about the fleeting connections we make as mortal beings? im gonna find a way to make it sound racist so i can judge you for that
There’s a refreshing fantasy story about the fleeting impermanence of life that’s marred by the author’s intentional-or-otherwise take that because some sentient fantasy races are just born evil due to biology they must be exterminated. That’s not subtext, just the plain text.
There are cool/good parts of the show I like and there are parts that I don’t like and take issue with. It’s weird that you’ve just straight up invented a guy to strawman and squash all the nuance here.
Why is it that every time someone’s even a little bit critical of the treats here no one has the humility to say “Huh, I didn’t think of it like that, maybe I’ll consider your point of view?” instead of “Quit showing off your media literacy degree you wokescold!” It’s exhausting.
I thought UlyssesT ended Treatlerism single-handedly when he went at it with the Game of Thrones fans on Hexbear all those years ago but guess not. Permanent Cultural Revolution! No Treat is Above Criticism!
Edit: Hell, I’m not even opposed to Frieren emojis or anything. Do what y’all want, even if I won’t use them
Every struggle session always boils down to one side saying “This treat is potentially problematic sometimes, but you’re not a bad person if you still enjoy it.” and then the other side always going “HOW DARE YOU?! FUCK YOU! STOP CALLING EVERYONE YOU DON’T LIKE A NAZI! THERE ARE NO PROBLEMS WITH MY TREATS AND YOU’RE A CUCK WOKESCOLD IF YOU SAY THERE IS!”
I thought UlyssesT ended Treatlerism single-handedly when he went at it with the Game of Thrones fans on Hexbear all those years ago but guess not. Permanent Cultural Revolution! No Treat is Above Criticism!
Ironically you’ve constructed a strawman of a strawman in order to dismiss what I said without actually engaging with it. I directly addressed the criticism leveled against the show and explained why I think it’s inaccurate and invalid, and you have added nothing to the conversation at all.
The criticism was “some sentient fantasy races are just born evil due to biology they must be exterminated.” I countered that the people leveling this criticism never seem to take issue with any of the other monsters who need to be killed in self-defense because they are harmful, despite being identical in all but aesthetics. The only difference between the monster that looks like a treasure chest and eats you when you try to open it and the monster who looks like a dude and eats you when you try to share tea with it is the shape. If those ones are racist, then the entire show is full of nonstop racism from beginning to end it should be unacceptable to claim to like any part of it.
You are strawmanning because you are not listening to any arguments people have to say, please listen to the arguments people actually make instead of insisting they are making an argument that they are not.
Either say anything of substance or leave me alone. You have come at me in two comments and said absolutely nothing in either of them. I’d love to listen to what you had to say, if you were actually willing to say anything. Unfortunately, that would require you to have a spine and actually say something that can be responded to. As it stands, you’re taking the very convenient position of just insisting that I’m wrong without saying anything I can listen to or respond to, so you can always be perfect and I can never argue against it.
I can see how what I said has come across that way, I wasn’t talking about my argument there, but you’re right, it is a poor showing of me to not commit to a position, so here mine:
Frieren isn’t a show that exists in a vacuum, we can’t just say “It explains it in the text that it is ok, so that makes it ok.” to reference something similar to the dragonball idea you mentioned earlier, if we had a story where the all the females characters were hyper-sexualised and always wore extremely skimpy outfits, obviously for male gazey reasons, would that then become ok because it is explained in-universe that they do that because of cultural reasons or something? I imagine you wouldn’t say so. Now I know you’re already going “But Frieren isn’t like that!” And you’re right, it isn’t. But my point isn’t to say “Frieren bad” it is to say that the thermian argument, the idea that an in-universe explanation for something is the only explanation, isn’t a good way to examine art.
Frieren is a great anime, the first three or so episodes were probably the best anime I think I’ve ever seen, so understand I’m not coming at this from a perspective of “I hate this and want you to hate it” but “I love this, but there’s one part of it that I don’t think adds anything to the overall story.”
And that part is the demons. They are inherently evil monsters who prey on humans. There’s nothing wrong with that. Like actually, that’s completely fine, monsters pretending to be human so they let their guard down? That’s a classic part of storytelling for a reason, it is compelling and interesting. That is not the problem with Frieren’s demons.
The problem is how Frieren, a fantasy show, with a bunch of magical stuff, goes out of its way to produce a pseudo-scientific reason for the demons. They aren’t just demons that crawled out of hell, they literally evolved to be monsters that look like humans to better destroy them. They could just be magically created or come from the pits or hell or literally have no explanation for why they exist at all, they could just be a part of the world.
But the show doesn’t do that, it tries to give a psuedo-scientific explanation, which comes with some real world baggage. The show chooses to depict a “nits make lice” scene with a young demon, saying that even the young need to be killed because they are all inherently evil and seek only the destruction of humanity. Again, in the text, this is correct, in the world of Frieren it is morally correct to slaughter young demons because they are inhuman monsters disguised as humans. And again, this wouldn’t be a problem if they didn’t try to make it about how they evolved to trick humanity. I find this really fucking gross and unnecessary.
I’m sure you know what I’m getting at by now. The way the demons in Frieren are talked about is the same way the nazis talked about the Jews. Inhuman monsters that pretend to have emotions so they can manipulate and destroy people. Now obviously the demons in the show are not a stand in for Jews, they have no Jewish traits or stereotypes associated with them, and as others have put, they have a lot more in common with real world fascists than they do with any groups fascists target. But the fact that the show chooses to depict them using nazi style racial pseudoscience is baffling, it’s a very strange and pointless writing decision that sticks out like a sore thumb. I don’t know what the author’s intentions behind it are, and I don’t think the author is intending to actively spread that sort of toxic idea, but when it is a magical fantasy world and they could’ve picked literally any reason for the demon’s existence and they picked one that fascists absolutely love is quite troubling.
It sticks out, it’s uncomfortable, it doesn’t really fit well with the rest of the show’s focus, about trying to form connections with the people around us. If I had to guess, it was a botched attempt at creating villains who are a “foil” to that sort of idea, villains incapable of forming true connections with others, and for the most part, the demons work on that level. But again, the show goes out of its way to, in a magical fantasy world, provide a pseudo-scientific, not fantasy, explanation for their existence that mirrors the real world hateful beliefs of white supremacists and nazis. Again, this almost certainly isn’t intentional, and it doesn’t make the show a bad show, or you a bad person for liking it, like I said earlier, I like the show. It’s really good. But this one specific part is really bad and I don’t like it.
Also, aside from that the demon fights are by far the most boring part of the show, it just turns into generic shonen battles and I lose interest really quick, give me a million Fern taking care of sleepy Frieren scenes before another demon fight please.
This isn’t some kind of “gotcha” or even a “you must change your mind and agree with me!” kind of thing, the point is to actually explain what the problem I have with the show is. It’s like, a really minor gripe all things considered, but for some reason, some people are just flatly refusing to even consider what problems people have with the show and it is infuriating. You can like a show and also admit it has flaws, and be ok with someone else being turned away from a show because they find the flaws more off-putting than you do. Please actually listen to what I’ve said, again, not trying to “prove you wrong” or whatever, I just want you to actually understand what my problem with the show is, even if you aren’t bothered by the problem in the same way, that’s fine, I just want you to understand my position, even if it isn’t a position you would hold.
Frieren isn’t a show that exists in a vacuum, we can’t just say “It explains it in the text that it is ok, so that makes it ok.”
That isn’t what I was saying at all. I was pointing out that the criticism seems disingenuous because applying the same criticism to other parts of the show that no one ever applies those criticisms to would lead to the same conclusions. As I said, if the demons are racist, then so are the mimics and most of the other monsters. They all operate the same way. They’re all sentient beings with feelings and desires, who hunt people with varying strategies and varying degrees of success. They all evolved into their niches in the same pseudo-scientific way you’re criticizing regarding the demons. If this criticism of the demons is valid, then this:
if we had a story where the all the females characters were hyper-sexualised and always wore extremely skimpy outfits, obviously for male gazey reasons
is what Frieren is the equivalent to. The racism would be a fundamental part of the entire show. I am arguing that it is nonsensical to argue that the demons are a racist allegory and also that this is just one small misstep in an otherwise good story. If the demons are a racist allegory then Frieren is one of the most racist stories ever told, and the main characters are going around committing hate crimes in most of the episodes. They’ve fought everything from mostly normal looking animals to dragons to plant monsters to humanoid monsters. Why is it only the humanoid monsters who need to be treated as if they’re different? They only look different, and hunt in a different way. The giant plant monster hunts by magically lulling people to sleep. The treasure chest mimic hunts by ambushing greedy adventurers. The demon hunts by making the same noises people make at each other to lower their guard. I’m not arguing it’s okay because the story justifies it, I’m arguing that if it isn’t okay, it’s not okay in any part of the story. The criticism I’m making is that this complaint is leveled at a nonsensically narrow section of a larger story which does all of the same stuff.
I don’t think the demons are a racist allegory. If you do, then no part of Frieren that involves monsters isn’t racist. Those are the only two positions that make sense as far as I can see.
The problem is how Frieren, a fantasy show, with a bunch of magical stuff, goes out of its way to produce a pseudo-scientific reason for the demons. They aren’t just demons that crawled out of hell, they literally evolved to be monsters that look like humans to better destroy them. They could just be magically created or come from the pits or hell or literally have no explanation for why they exist at all, they could just be a part of the world.
Everything in Frieren is pseudo-scientifically explained. It actually goes to pretty great lengths to show that its magic system is not unexplainable mysterious woo that mystical priests conjure up on behalf of the gods. In their world it is science, and it develops as science. Intelligent beings learn about it, innovate with it, and manipulate it to their own ends. Nothing in the setting just comes out of nowhere, it is all implied to be series of hard sciences unlike our own which, while not fully understood by any character, are logical and consistent with themselves. None of the monsters crawled out of Hell or just appeared on the Earth one day. They all evolved, just like the humans and elves and dwarves and everyone else probably did. If it is racist to say it’s ok to kill demons because they hunt humans because that’s what they’ve evolved to do, exactly the same criticism can and should be leveled at the depiction of every single other monster in the entire show. Do you criticize as heavily the episode in which they kill the giant plant monster that kept putting everyone to sleep? It didn’t crawl out of Hell either. It evolved into a niche to hunt humans and propagate thereby. The only reason we never got a scene where the main characters learn that they should destroy any such plant they find is because no one ever needed to learn that. It is self-evident. Demons are the best at hunting humans because you have to learn that lesson. They’re good at making you think they’re different from the treasure chest mimics or the giant magic plants, which makes them especially dangerous to empathetic social creatures like humans, elves, and dwarves. The only “point” being made is “this is a cool fantasy monster that challenges the protagonists in a way that other monsters can’t.” Empathy is cool and good, and it should be cultivated, so it’s scary and interesting and cool to explore scenarios in which that strength of empathy is actually a weakness which can be exploited. It contextualizes the place of empathetic social creatures like humans in the world and food chain of the fantasy bullshit that’s going on in the story. In a fantastical world where the laws of physics are a little different, there’s shit out there that can use our strengths against us and that’s fun to explore.
This isn’t some kind of “gotcha” or even a “you must change your mind and agree with me!” kind of thing, the point is to actually explain what the problem I have with the show is. It’s like, a really minor gripe all things considered, but for some reason, some people are just flatly refusing to even consider what problems people have with the show and it is infuriating. You can like a show and also admit it has flaws, and be ok with someone else being turned away from a show because they find the flaws more off-putting than you do. Please actually listen to what I’ve said, again, not trying to “prove you wrong” or whatever, I just want you to actually understand what my problem with the show is, even if you aren’t bothered by the problem in the same way, that’s fine, I just want you to understand my position, even if it isn’t a position you would hold.
On the other hand, you can acknowledge that not everyone agrees with you about your particular criticism of a story, and that doesn’t make them a treatlerite “stop calling everyone you don’t like a nazi” chud. Your opinion on this story isn’t the only valid reading available and having a different opinion doesn’t make me a fascist for fuck’s sake.
You’re saying with so many words that I have no media literacy. Maybe that’s true. But please tell me then-
Why is framing the antagonists in this way necessary?
What themes or aspects of the story does this explore, that is integral to the core theme of exploring the beauty of the fleeting nature of life?
What does the story gain from including a scene where our heroic protagonist implores her party to… kill a little girl demon? And then why does the story go out of its way to justify the protagonist’s point of view as ultimately the only correct one?
(Hell, just straight up- why is the “monster” a little girl? Like, why did the author choose to portray the monster as a little girl? What was the purpose of this entire detour in the story? Was it really necessary to draw “nits make lice” comparisons, intentional or not?)
In all your other examples, the monsters are unthinking magical beasts, and no one is going to quibble about the ethics of self-defense in a wild animal attack. The demons on the other hand are presented as a civilized race capable of higher thought, except that they are biologically predisposed towards lying and magic fascism, so the only rational action on encountering one is to exterminate it.
If they’re just monsters, why does the author have to go out of their way to present them as civilized sentient beings? Can’t they just be monsters? What narrative purpose does this serve? Why did the author choose to write the antagonists like this?
Show: This is a monster that pretends to be a harmless stranger. It’s ok to kill it because it’s trying to kill you.
Comrade, do you not see the similarities with what you wrote here to what Israeli’s say about Palestinians?
Why is framing the antagonists in this way necessary?
What themes or aspects of the story does this explore, that is integral to the core theme of exploring the beauty of the fleeting nature of life?
I went into this a bit elsewhere in the thread, but I think the point is that this is a setting where the innate human desire to empathize, to form bonds with others, can be a weakness. I don’t think it’s trying to make a philosophical point about that though, it’s not saying that we should all be cold hardened killers who don’t trust. It’s just exploring what that would be like, the challenge and the conflict which emerge from humanity being part of a food chain which contains creatures that hunt us using our empathy as a weakness. The same way any of the antagonists challenge the protagonists. It’s an interesting issue for the characters to have to overcome.
What does the story gain from including a scene where our heroic protagonist implores her party to… kill a little girl demon? And then why does the story go out of its way to justify the protagonist’s point of view as ultimately the only correct one?
I think it’s there just to enhance the immersion in the challenge the characters are facing. When you or I look at that particular monster, we feel the same empathy all of the ignorant people in the story feel. You and I would definitely be killed, successfully hunted, by these demons if we existed in that world. That’s why they’re a dangerous challenge for the protagonists to face, that’s why they’re scary and believable as a problem. The world in which the story takes place is exceedingly dangerous and, even though the protagonists are practically gods, there are plenty of things which could conceivably kill them, and you and I can fully understand exactly why it would work because it would work on us. Is there no value in crafting a believably dangerous monster?
In all your other examples, the monsters are unthinking magical beasts,
As far as we’re told in the story, there is no difference between the chest mimics, and the random wolves, and the dragons, and the demons. They are all equally thinking or unthinking as you prefer to interpret their behavior. They are all merciless hunters who will kill you if you don’t kill them first. The difference is in their appearance and in their strategy, not in their internal experience.
If they’re just monsters, why does the author have to go out of their way to present them as civilized sentient beings? Can’t they just be monsters?
I would argue the author goes extremely far out of their way to prove them not to be civilized beings. They are just monsters. They just want to eat you. They literally do not know the meanings of the words they say, or have any concept of the empathy which those words exploit. They are no more civilized or more sentient than the mimics or the ghost-mimics or the wolves or the giant plant. They just evolved into the niche of looking like they are, because that makes people easier to hunt.
Comrade, do you not see the similarities with what you wrote here to what Israeli’s say about Palestinians?
We’ve all heard fascists compare various groups of people to animals. Is it therefore unacceptable to compare horses to donkeys? If I say horses are very much like donkeys, it’s equivalent to fascists saying certain groups of humans are like donkeys? I just don’t see it. Fascists say all kinds of shit that isn’t true. That doesn’t make it untrue when you say things that sound superficially similar but are fundamentally different because they regard completely different subjects. I don’t see how this logic can’t be used to negate all comparisons between any two things anywhere. The US can’t be like the Nazis, because that sounds awfully similar to how fascists say the USSR was like the Nazis. Is that not logically the same argument you’re making here? If not, what is the difference? Israelis can say shit about Palestinians that isn’t true and that same thing could be true if they were saying it of a different subject. If an Israeli said Palestinians are purple or green fruits often used to make wine, it wouldn’t suddenly be wrong to say that grapes are purple or green fruits often used to make wine. They’re different things. Palestinians aren’t demons, they aren’t a magical fantasy race that evolved to eat humans. Demons in Frieren are a magical fantasy race that evolved to eat humans. They’re not Palestinians. Where is the connection?
I went into this a bit elsewhere in the thread, but I think the point is that this is a setting where the innate human desire to empathize, to form bonds with others, can be a weakness.
Ok, but what does this have to do with the core theme of the fleeting beauty of impermanent life? If the author is trying to emphasize the beauty of empathy and bonds, why introduce a Talking Points USA counterpoint that empathy is a weakness, that we have to be selective in our empathy and only empathize with the right people? Why is it ok to empathize with Elves or Dwarves or Humans, but not Demons? Why is it only this specific race of people who will take advantage of your empathy, and not, y’know some human bandits or something? How does this serve the narrative, or what narrative could it be pushing intentionally or otherwise?
I think it’s there just to enhance the immersion in the challenge the characters are facing.
Ok, but why does it have to be a little girl demon specifically tho. Why can’t the challenge be a dragon or a magic plant. Why does the moral of the story have to be “You can’t empathize with everything”? Why is Frieren killing a little girl demon framed as heroic? Isn’t that kinda fucked up? What purpose does that serve in the larger narrative?
They literally do not know the meanings of the words they say, or have any concept of the empathy which those words exploit. They are no more civilized or more sentient than the mimics or the ghost-mimics or the wolves or the giant plant. They just evolved into the niche of looking like they are, because that makes people easier to hunt.
Ok, but… if they’re just supposed to be monsters, why go out of the way to present them as people. Like, if you need a thinking opponent why invent an entire race biologically so neurodivergent they’re predisposed towards evil and not just like, make Frieren fight other mages taking an exam or something idk.
Where is the connection?
So, sometimes, what fascists do is they write stories where the lies they tell in real life are completely justified in the fictional world they create. They do this in order to spread their lies, because people who just take things at face value uncritically will knowingly or not internalize their ideas.
Yes, you laid out the diegetic argument for why the demons aren’t people, which is true according to the story’s logic. That’s a Thermian Argument.
I’m asking why the story is written that way in the first place. I’m criticizing it because it didn’t need to have been written this way at all.
Of course I know that Demons and Palestinians are two different things. Why can I make the comparison between what you wrote and IDF propaganda in the first place though? Other shows don’t leave the wiggle room for that kind of comparison.
Why does the story about celebrating the fleeting impermanence of life need an antagonistic race of people that are somehow biologically in-universe what right wingers accuse people from the global south of being, and must be exterminated on sight? Who is this story for?
Ok, but what does this have to do with the core theme of the fleeting beauty of impermanent life?
I don’t think every single scene in every show has to be a rehash of its core theme. Do you? Regardless, I’ll touch on this a little bit further down.
hy introduce a Talking Points USA counterpoint that empathy is a weakness, that we have to be selective in our empathy and only empathize with the right people?
I pretty clearly said I don’t think the author was trying to make any point like this at all. But on thinking on it more, I can answer this on its own terms, see below.
Ok, but why does it have to be a little girl demon specifically tho. Why can’t the challenge be a dragon or a magic plant.
I also pretty clearly addressed this. Neither of us needs to be told why a dragon or a giant maneating magic plant is a bad thing that you should kill. It’s not a challenge to us, to our feelings, to come to the conclusion that those things should be fought. There is an artistic difference between the choice to portray an antagonist no one will empathize with and an antagonist which most of us will empathize with on some level, especially when that is exactly the challenge the characters in the story are grappling with.
Why is Frieren killing a little girl demon framed as heroic?
There are a couple of reasons in my opinion. First of all, Frieren is exercising a lesson she learned from the person closest to her so long ago. Her determination to destroy demons wherever they are found is part of her connection to Flamme. On some level, she holds on tight to what she was taught by Flamme, because she loves Flamme and misses her and wouldn’t want to question whatever wisdom she taught her. On another level, part of her sense of self-worth is her effectiveness at fighting demons. She’s been training 24/7 for centuries for the sole purpose of making herself as effective as possible at killing demons. She has to see the extermination of demons as righteous and heroic, or she’s wasted a very long time even in elf time.
Another aspect is that Frieren is herself a victim of genocide. I don’t think the demons are especially effective parallels for fascists in most regards, but they certainly have elements of fascists that I think are intended. I think that the fact that Frieren, whose species was nearly successfully exterminated by demons (perhaps even successfully–since the population is likely never to stabilize) is one of the world’s staunchest and most powerful opponents of demons is intended as an anti-fascist allegory. She is heroic because she won’t allow fascism to take root under her nose. When she sees them, she gets rid of them. Because she has seen first hand the genocide they will commit unchecked. Is it not true that fascists ooze their way in under false pretenses and innocuous guises? Haven’t we all seen the baby-talking fascists spreading their fucking frog cartoons? There is an argument to be made that the “little girl” was precisely this disingenuous childish ruse fascists pull to covertly spread their agenda.
It’s more like “this wholesome refreshing fantasy story about the fleeting connections we make as mortal beings that is really compelling has this one really uncomfortable part that is really poorly thought out and sticks out like a sore thumb.”
A lot like the DBZ SA stuff come to think of it. A problematic element in an otherwise good story that some people can overlook, ignore or recontextualise but other people can’t and it creates friction around that.
idk, it just seems like a strange reason to completely hate everything a fantastic story stands for. we have plenty of dragon ball emotes
despite the fact that that series has a ton of random sexual assault as humor from the main character’s beloved teacher (and various other characters), and that’s way worse than anything in frieren
tbh the whole thing just feels like contrarianism to me. oh yeah, you like this wholesome refreshing fantasy story about the fleeting connections we make as mortal beings? im gonna find a way to make it sound racist so i can judge you for that
There’s a refreshing fantasy story about the fleeting impermanence of life that’s marred by the author’s intentional-or-otherwise take that because some sentient fantasy races are just born evil due to biology they must be exterminated. That’s not subtext, just the plain text.
There are cool/good parts of the show I like and there are parts that I don’t like and take issue with. It’s weird that you’ve just straight up invented a guy to strawman and squash all the nuance here.
Why is it that every time someone’s even a little bit critical of the treats here no one has the humility to say “Huh, I didn’t think of it like that, maybe I’ll consider your point of view?” instead of “Quit showing off your media literacy degree you wokescold!” It’s exhausting.
I thought UlyssesT ended Treatlerism single-handedly when he went at it with the Game of Thrones fans on Hexbear all those years ago but guess not. Permanent Cultural Revolution! No Treat is Above Criticism!
Edit: Hell, I’m not even opposed to Frieren emojis or anything. Do what y’all want, even if I won’t use them
Every struggle session always boils down to one side saying “This treat is potentially problematic sometimes, but you’re not a bad person if you still enjoy it.” and then the other side always going “HOW DARE YOU?! FUCK YOU! STOP CALLING EVERYONE YOU DON’T LIKE A NAZI! THERE ARE NO PROBLEMS WITH MY TREATS AND YOU’RE A CUCK WOKESCOLD IF YOU SAY THERE IS!”
When Hexbear needed him most, he vanished.
I just want you to actually have any media literacy if you’re going to criticize something.
Show: This is a wild animal that wants to attack you in the wilderness and eat you. It’s ok to kill it because it’s trying to kill you.
You: Ok.
Show: This is a monster that pretends to be a treasure chest. It’s okay to kill it because it’s trying to kill you.
You: Ok.
Show: This is a monster that pretends to be the ghosts of your loved ones. It’s ok to kill it because it’s trying to kill you.
You: Ok.
Show: This is a monster that pretends to be a harmless stranger. It’s ok to kill it because it’s trying to kill you.
You: What the fuck, how dare you?
Can you actually please listen to people and stop strawmanning them?
Ironically you’ve constructed a strawman of a strawman in order to dismiss what I said without actually engaging with it. I directly addressed the criticism leveled against the show and explained why I think it’s inaccurate and invalid, and you have added nothing to the conversation at all.
The criticism was “some sentient fantasy races are just born evil due to biology they must be exterminated.” I countered that the people leveling this criticism never seem to take issue with any of the other monsters who need to be killed in self-defense because they are harmful, despite being identical in all but aesthetics. The only difference between the monster that looks like a treasure chest and eats you when you try to open it and the monster who looks like a dude and eats you when you try to share tea with it is the shape. If those ones are racist, then the entire show is full of nonstop racism from beginning to end it should be unacceptable to claim to like any part of it.
You are strawmanning because you are not listening to any arguments people have to say, please listen to the arguments people actually make instead of insisting they are making an argument that they are not.
Either say anything of substance or leave me alone. You have come at me in two comments and said absolutely nothing in either of them. I’d love to listen to what you had to say, if you were actually willing to say anything. Unfortunately, that would require you to have a spine and actually say something that can be responded to. As it stands, you’re taking the very convenient position of just insisting that I’m wrong without saying anything I can listen to or respond to, so you can always be perfect and I can never argue against it.
I can see how what I said has come across that way, I wasn’t talking about my argument there, but you’re right, it is a poor showing of me to not commit to a position, so here mine:
Frieren isn’t a show that exists in a vacuum, we can’t just say “It explains it in the text that it is ok, so that makes it ok.” to reference something similar to the dragonball idea you mentioned earlier, if we had a story where the all the females characters were hyper-sexualised and always wore extremely skimpy outfits, obviously for male gazey reasons, would that then become ok because it is explained in-universe that they do that because of cultural reasons or something? I imagine you wouldn’t say so. Now I know you’re already going “But Frieren isn’t like that!” And you’re right, it isn’t. But my point isn’t to say “Frieren bad” it is to say that the thermian argument, the idea that an in-universe explanation for something is the only explanation, isn’t a good way to examine art.
Frieren is a great anime, the first three or so episodes were probably the best anime I think I’ve ever seen, so understand I’m not coming at this from a perspective of “I hate this and want you to hate it” but “I love this, but there’s one part of it that I don’t think adds anything to the overall story.”
And that part is the demons. They are inherently evil monsters who prey on humans. There’s nothing wrong with that. Like actually, that’s completely fine, monsters pretending to be human so they let their guard down? That’s a classic part of storytelling for a reason, it is compelling and interesting. That is not the problem with Frieren’s demons.
The problem is how Frieren, a fantasy show, with a bunch of magical stuff, goes out of its way to produce a pseudo-scientific reason for the demons. They aren’t just demons that crawled out of hell, they literally evolved to be monsters that look like humans to better destroy them. They could just be magically created or come from the pits or hell or literally have no explanation for why they exist at all, they could just be a part of the world.
But the show doesn’t do that, it tries to give a psuedo-scientific explanation, which comes with some real world baggage. The show chooses to depict a “nits make lice” scene with a young demon, saying that even the young need to be killed because they are all inherently evil and seek only the destruction of humanity. Again, in the text, this is correct, in the world of Frieren it is morally correct to slaughter young demons because they are inhuman monsters disguised as humans. And again, this wouldn’t be a problem if they didn’t try to make it about how they evolved to trick humanity. I find this really fucking gross and unnecessary.
I’m sure you know what I’m getting at by now. The way the demons in Frieren are talked about is the same way the nazis talked about the Jews. Inhuman monsters that pretend to have emotions so they can manipulate and destroy people. Now obviously the demons in the show are not a stand in for Jews, they have no Jewish traits or stereotypes associated with them, and as others have put, they have a lot more in common with real world fascists than they do with any groups fascists target. But the fact that the show chooses to depict them using nazi style racial pseudoscience is baffling, it’s a very strange and pointless writing decision that sticks out like a sore thumb. I don’t know what the author’s intentions behind it are, and I don’t think the author is intending to actively spread that sort of toxic idea, but when it is a magical fantasy world and they could’ve picked literally any reason for the demon’s existence and they picked one that fascists absolutely love is quite troubling.
It sticks out, it’s uncomfortable, it doesn’t really fit well with the rest of the show’s focus, about trying to form connections with the people around us. If I had to guess, it was a botched attempt at creating villains who are a “foil” to that sort of idea, villains incapable of forming true connections with others, and for the most part, the demons work on that level. But again, the show goes out of its way to, in a magical fantasy world, provide a pseudo-scientific, not fantasy, explanation for their existence that mirrors the real world hateful beliefs of white supremacists and nazis. Again, this almost certainly isn’t intentional, and it doesn’t make the show a bad show, or you a bad person for liking it, like I said earlier, I like the show. It’s really good. But this one specific part is really bad and I don’t like it.
Also, aside from that the demon fights are by far the most boring part of the show, it just turns into generic shonen battles and I lose interest really quick, give me a million Fern taking care of sleepy Frieren scenes before another demon fight please.
This isn’t some kind of “gotcha” or even a “you must change your mind and agree with me!” kind of thing, the point is to actually explain what the problem I have with the show is. It’s like, a really minor gripe all things considered, but for some reason, some people are just flatly refusing to even consider what problems people have with the show and it is infuriating. You can like a show and also admit it has flaws, and be ok with someone else being turned away from a show because they find the flaws more off-putting than you do. Please actually listen to what I’ve said, again, not trying to “prove you wrong” or whatever, I just want you to actually understand what my problem with the show is, even if you aren’t bothered by the problem in the same way, that’s fine, I just want you to understand my position, even if it isn’t a position you would hold.
That isn’t what I was saying at all. I was pointing out that the criticism seems disingenuous because applying the same criticism to other parts of the show that no one ever applies those criticisms to would lead to the same conclusions. As I said, if the demons are racist, then so are the mimics and most of the other monsters. They all operate the same way. They’re all sentient beings with feelings and desires, who hunt people with varying strategies and varying degrees of success. They all evolved into their niches in the same pseudo-scientific way you’re criticizing regarding the demons. If this criticism of the demons is valid, then this:
is what Frieren is the equivalent to. The racism would be a fundamental part of the entire show. I am arguing that it is nonsensical to argue that the demons are a racist allegory and also that this is just one small misstep in an otherwise good story. If the demons are a racist allegory then Frieren is one of the most racist stories ever told, and the main characters are going around committing hate crimes in most of the episodes. They’ve fought everything from mostly normal looking animals to dragons to plant monsters to humanoid monsters. Why is it only the humanoid monsters who need to be treated as if they’re different? They only look different, and hunt in a different way. The giant plant monster hunts by magically lulling people to sleep. The treasure chest mimic hunts by ambushing greedy adventurers. The demon hunts by making the same noises people make at each other to lower their guard. I’m not arguing it’s okay because the story justifies it, I’m arguing that if it isn’t okay, it’s not okay in any part of the story. The criticism I’m making is that this complaint is leveled at a nonsensically narrow section of a larger story which does all of the same stuff.
I don’t think the demons are a racist allegory. If you do, then no part of Frieren that involves monsters isn’t racist. Those are the only two positions that make sense as far as I can see.
Everything in Frieren is pseudo-scientifically explained. It actually goes to pretty great lengths to show that its magic system is not unexplainable mysterious woo that mystical priests conjure up on behalf of the gods. In their world it is science, and it develops as science. Intelligent beings learn about it, innovate with it, and manipulate it to their own ends. Nothing in the setting just comes out of nowhere, it is all implied to be series of hard sciences unlike our own which, while not fully understood by any character, are logical and consistent with themselves. None of the monsters crawled out of Hell or just appeared on the Earth one day. They all evolved, just like the humans and elves and dwarves and everyone else probably did. If it is racist to say it’s ok to kill demons because they hunt humans because that’s what they’ve evolved to do, exactly the same criticism can and should be leveled at the depiction of every single other monster in the entire show. Do you criticize as heavily the episode in which they kill the giant plant monster that kept putting everyone to sleep? It didn’t crawl out of Hell either. It evolved into a niche to hunt humans and propagate thereby. The only reason we never got a scene where the main characters learn that they should destroy any such plant they find is because no one ever needed to learn that. It is self-evident. Demons are the best at hunting humans because you have to learn that lesson. They’re good at making you think they’re different from the treasure chest mimics or the giant magic plants, which makes them especially dangerous to empathetic social creatures like humans, elves, and dwarves. The only “point” being made is “this is a cool fantasy monster that challenges the protagonists in a way that other monsters can’t.” Empathy is cool and good, and it should be cultivated, so it’s scary and interesting and cool to explore scenarios in which that strength of empathy is actually a weakness which can be exploited. It contextualizes the place of empathetic social creatures like humans in the world and food chain of the fantasy bullshit that’s going on in the story. In a fantastical world where the laws of physics are a little different, there’s shit out there that can use our strengths against us and that’s fun to explore.
On the other hand, you can acknowledge that not everyone agrees with you about your particular criticism of a story, and that doesn’t make them a treatlerite “stop calling everyone you don’t like a nazi” chud. Your opinion on this story isn’t the only valid reading available and having a different opinion doesn’t make me a fascist for fuck’s sake.
Not helping your credibility with shit like this
Go away.
No u
You’re saying with so many words that I have no media literacy. Maybe that’s true. But please tell me then-
Why is framing the antagonists in this way necessary?
What themes or aspects of the story does this explore, that is integral to the core theme of exploring the beauty of the fleeting nature of life?
What does the story gain from including a scene where our heroic protagonist implores her party to… kill a little girl demon? And then why does the story go out of its way to justify the protagonist’s point of view as ultimately the only correct one?
(Hell, just straight up- why is the “monster” a little girl? Like, why did the author choose to portray the monster as a little girl? What was the purpose of this entire detour in the story? Was it really necessary to draw “nits make lice” comparisons, intentional or not?)
In all your other examples, the monsters are unthinking magical beasts, and no one is going to quibble about the ethics of self-defense in a wild animal attack. The demons on the other hand are presented as a civilized race capable of higher thought, except that they are biologically predisposed towards lying and magic fascism, so the only rational action on encountering one is to exterminate it.
If they’re just monsters, why does the author have to go out of their way to present them as civilized sentient beings? Can’t they just be monsters? What narrative purpose does this serve? Why did the author choose to write the antagonists like this?
Comrade, do you not see the similarities with what you wrote here to what Israeli’s say about Palestinians?
I went into this a bit elsewhere in the thread, but I think the point is that this is a setting where the innate human desire to empathize, to form bonds with others, can be a weakness. I don’t think it’s trying to make a philosophical point about that though, it’s not saying that we should all be cold hardened killers who don’t trust. It’s just exploring what that would be like, the challenge and the conflict which emerge from humanity being part of a food chain which contains creatures that hunt us using our empathy as a weakness. The same way any of the antagonists challenge the protagonists. It’s an interesting issue for the characters to have to overcome.
I think it’s there just to enhance the immersion in the challenge the characters are facing. When you or I look at that particular monster, we feel the same empathy all of the ignorant people in the story feel. You and I would definitely be killed, successfully hunted, by these demons if we existed in that world. That’s why they’re a dangerous challenge for the protagonists to face, that’s why they’re scary and believable as a problem. The world in which the story takes place is exceedingly dangerous and, even though the protagonists are practically gods, there are plenty of things which could conceivably kill them, and you and I can fully understand exactly why it would work because it would work on us. Is there no value in crafting a believably dangerous monster?
As far as we’re told in the story, there is no difference between the chest mimics, and the random wolves, and the dragons, and the demons. They are all equally thinking or unthinking as you prefer to interpret their behavior. They are all merciless hunters who will kill you if you don’t kill them first. The difference is in their appearance and in their strategy, not in their internal experience.
I would argue the author goes extremely far out of their way to prove them not to be civilized beings. They are just monsters. They just want to eat you. They literally do not know the meanings of the words they say, or have any concept of the empathy which those words exploit. They are no more civilized or more sentient than the mimics or the ghost-mimics or the wolves or the giant plant. They just evolved into the niche of looking like they are, because that makes people easier to hunt.
We’ve all heard fascists compare various groups of people to animals. Is it therefore unacceptable to compare horses to donkeys? If I say horses are very much like donkeys, it’s equivalent to fascists saying certain groups of humans are like donkeys? I just don’t see it. Fascists say all kinds of shit that isn’t true. That doesn’t make it untrue when you say things that sound superficially similar but are fundamentally different because they regard completely different subjects. I don’t see how this logic can’t be used to negate all comparisons between any two things anywhere. The US can’t be like the Nazis, because that sounds awfully similar to how fascists say the USSR was like the Nazis. Is that not logically the same argument you’re making here? If not, what is the difference? Israelis can say shit about Palestinians that isn’t true and that same thing could be true if they were saying it of a different subject. If an Israeli said Palestinians are purple or green fruits often used to make wine, it wouldn’t suddenly be wrong to say that grapes are purple or green fruits often used to make wine. They’re different things. Palestinians aren’t demons, they aren’t a magical fantasy race that evolved to eat humans. Demons in Frieren are a magical fantasy race that evolved to eat humans. They’re not Palestinians. Where is the connection?
Ok, but what does this have to do with the core theme of the fleeting beauty of impermanent life? If the author is trying to emphasize the beauty of empathy and bonds, why introduce a Talking Points USA counterpoint that empathy is a weakness, that we have to be selective in our empathy and only empathize with the right people? Why is it ok to empathize with Elves or Dwarves or Humans, but not Demons? Why is it only this specific race of people who will take advantage of your empathy, and not, y’know some human bandits or something? How does this serve the narrative, or what narrative could it be pushing intentionally or otherwise?
Ok, but why does it have to be a little girl demon specifically tho. Why can’t the challenge be a dragon or a magic plant. Why does the moral of the story have to be “You can’t empathize with everything”? Why is Frieren killing a little girl demon framed as heroic? Isn’t that kinda fucked up? What purpose does that serve in the larger narrative?
Ok, but… if they’re just supposed to be monsters, why go out of the way to present them as people. Like, if you need a thinking opponent why invent an entire race biologically so neurodivergent they’re predisposed towards evil and not just like, make Frieren fight other mages taking an exam or something idk.
So, sometimes, what fascists do is they write stories where the lies they tell in real life are completely justified in the fictional world they create. They do this in order to spread their lies, because people who just take things at face value uncritically will knowingly or not internalize their ideas.
Yes, you laid out the diegetic argument for why the demons aren’t people, which is true according to the story’s logic. That’s a Thermian Argument.
I’m asking why the story is written that way in the first place. I’m criticizing it because it didn’t need to have been written this way at all.
Of course I know that Demons and Palestinians are two different things. Why can I make the comparison between what you wrote and IDF propaganda in the first place though? Other shows don’t leave the wiggle room for that kind of comparison.
Why does the story about celebrating the fleeting impermanence of life need an antagonistic race of people that are somehow biologically in-universe what right wingers accuse people from the global south of being, and must be exterminated on sight? Who is this story for?
I don’t think every single scene in every show has to be a rehash of its core theme. Do you? Regardless, I’ll touch on this a little bit further down.
I pretty clearly said I don’t think the author was trying to make any point like this at all. But on thinking on it more, I can answer this on its own terms, see below.
I also pretty clearly addressed this. Neither of us needs to be told why a dragon or a giant maneating magic plant is a bad thing that you should kill. It’s not a challenge to us, to our feelings, to come to the conclusion that those things should be fought. There is an artistic difference between the choice to portray an antagonist no one will empathize with and an antagonist which most of us will empathize with on some level, especially when that is exactly the challenge the characters in the story are grappling with.
There are a couple of reasons in my opinion. First of all, Frieren is exercising a lesson she learned from the person closest to her so long ago. Her determination to destroy demons wherever they are found is part of her connection to Flamme. On some level, she holds on tight to what she was taught by Flamme, because she loves Flamme and misses her and wouldn’t want to question whatever wisdom she taught her. On another level, part of her sense of self-worth is her effectiveness at fighting demons. She’s been training 24/7 for centuries for the sole purpose of making herself as effective as possible at killing demons. She has to see the extermination of demons as righteous and heroic, or she’s wasted a very long time even in elf time.
Another aspect is that Frieren is herself a victim of genocide. I don’t think the demons are especially effective parallels for fascists in most regards, but they certainly have elements of fascists that I think are intended. I think that the fact that Frieren, whose species was nearly successfully exterminated by demons (perhaps even successfully–since the population is likely never to stabilize) is one of the world’s staunchest and most powerful opponents of demons is intended as an anti-fascist allegory. She is heroic because she won’t allow fascism to take root under her nose. When she sees them, she gets rid of them. Because she has seen first hand the genocide they will commit unchecked. Is it not true that fascists ooze their way in under false pretenses and innocuous guises? Haven’t we all seen the baby-talking fascists spreading their fucking frog cartoons? There is an argument to be made that the “little girl” was precisely this disingenuous childish ruse fascists pull to covertly spread their agenda.
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
It’s more like “this wholesome refreshing fantasy story about the fleeting connections we make as mortal beings that is really compelling has this one really uncomfortable part that is really poorly thought out and sticks out like a sore thumb.”
A lot like the DBZ SA stuff come to think of it. A problematic element in an otherwise good story that some people can overlook, ignore or recontextualise but other people can’t and it creates friction around that.