Changed line(s) 13 from:
n
\
to:
\\\"He\\\'s almost always right, is a friend to all his bandmates, and morally superior.\\\"
How is Lightning almost always right? Or morally superior, for that matter?
\\\'\\\'The word protagonist has various definitions, even Vaan fits at least one description of the word.\\\'\\\'
I love how you state this without giving what definition you are talking about. Vaan is TheIshmael, not the main character.
\\\'\\\'So the most important character is not always the main character, take Serah for example. Her level of importance is on par with Fang and Vanille\\\'s but that doesn\\\'t make her any more of the main character than it does those two.\\\'\\\'
Serah is important, but she fails to be a main character because she fails the other criteria. There is more than just \\\"really important to the story\\\" to being the protagonist, after all.
\\\'\\\'If the main character was the most important character then Aerith would be the main of VII, Yuna the main of X, Ashe the main of XII, and so on and so forth, the most important character has rarely ever been the main character of a Final Fantasy game. \\\'\\\'
Gotta love that slippery slope fallacy. I don\\\'t know why you latched onto \\\"most important character\\\" as the \\\'\\\'only\\\'\\\' trait of the protagonist, but I very clearly spelled out what one was. (Given your earlier post, you also seem to think that protagonist also means the most character development, but this is also fallacious. A static character in a cast of dynamic characters can be a protagonist.) Once again:
\\\"A protagonist (from the Greek πρωταγωνιστής protagonistes, \\\"one who plays the first part, chief actor\\\"[1]) is the main character (the central or primary personal figure) of a literary, theatrical, cinematic, or musical narrative, around whom the events of the narrative\\\'s plot revolve and with whom the audience is intended to share the most empathy.\\\"
Let\\\'s break that down: 1. Most of the plot revolves around them. 2. They are intended to attract most of the audience empathy.
In other words, Serah cannot be the protagonist because, while she is important, the plot does not revolve around her as a character much and she is not the focus of the audience.
And let\\\'s not even get into the relative importance of other FF characters or their status as main characters - it is \\\'\\\'completely irrelevant\\\'\\\' to this particular work. Whether or not Yuna or Tidus is the main character of FinalFantasyX has absolutely zero bearing on who (if anyone) is the main character of \\\'\\\'any\\\'\\\' other work. None at all.
\\\'\\\'Vanille\\\'s importantce is completely overplayed. She can actually be replaced rather easily by just replacing her with someone else that Fang cares for enough to do the things she did. I\\\'m not a fan of her but Fang is more important than Vanille. Also Van\\\'s importance entirely relies on the backstory, and she has no focus for 90% of the game. Within the actual events of the game she does next to nothing of note, other than tag along. I\\\'ve seen the Vanille argument torn to shreds about a hundred times now and I can\\\'t help but shake my head when I see people try and use her role as the narrator to reinforce their argument. \\\'\\\'
I\\\'m really not looking to get into a completely irrelevant side-debate here. For a quick overview: Vanille\\\'s actions (and lack thereof) are one of the main driving forces for the entire first half of the game, even if the player doesn\\\'t know it. She essentially is the Call to all of the playable characters except Fang, directly or indirectly. As to her importance lying in the backstory... your point is? How is being important in the backstory equivalent to being unimportant? Vanille is of central importance to the story, both before it begins and during the narrative. A passive role in the story does not make her less important. It just makes her passive.
(I feel dirty now, I hate Vanille.)
As to her role as a narrator, it doesn\\\'t make her more important. And I don\\\'t believe I said it did. Ever. Anywhere. It \\\'\\\'does\\\'\\\', to a slight degree, make her the target of more audience empathy. However, being the narrator (the veiwpoint character), is not the same thing as being the protagonist. So her status as a narrator does not really mean all that much as far as an argument about main characters. (Notably, I already said this about Vaan. In a sane world, an opponent would assume I could generalize this onto another work, but this is yet more evidence that we don\\\'t live in a sane world, I suppose.)
Howver, all of that isn\\\'t really important to the central issue here. \\\'\\\'I\\\'m not arguing that Vanille is the protagonist.\\\'\\\' My argument is and has been from the beginning that XIII can be seen as an ensemble piece, and that different characters take turns being \\\'\\\'the\\\'\\\' main character, rather than having a single main character throughout.
In order for Lightning to be the main character, most of the narrative has to revolve around her. It does not - on many occasions we jump to the other characters and focus on them (and not only when the party is split). We spend much more than half the game focused on other characters\\\' arcs, most of which don\\\'t have that much to do with Lightning.
For example, we spend most of the first two thirds of the game switching [=POVs=] (not usually a trait found in works with a single main character). Sazh and Vanille\\\'s segments are treated with equal importance and Lightning and Hope\\\'s. Snow is sidelined, but there is no real indication given \\\'\\\'in the narrative\\\'\\\' that one of these characters is more important, more central than the others. Vanille\\\'s development and role is more subtle, but it is no less there. Sazh and Hope get very dramatic focus during this arc. Lightning falls somewhere in between those two extremes.
When they partially reunite, it is not Lightning taking charge and stealing away the focus. Instead, focus is given to Snow and Hope, as they deal with their story arcs. When the rescue mission is mounted, we are still not concentrating on Lightning - the rescue has more of a focus on Fang and her feelings about Vanille than anyone else. At this point we\\\'ve almost completed the game - where is this supposed focus on Lightning?
We follow the party to dangerous locales, and we get a little bit of Hope and a whole lot of Fang, Vanille, Snow, and Lightning. Notice how that doesn\\\'t just say mostly Lightning?
We return to Cocoon, confront the BigBad and Lightning has the focus for a bit, but then it switches to Fang and stays there until after the climax and most of the resolution.
As to her importance to the narrative, why is she more important to the story than any other character? She doesn\\\'t do \\\'\\\'more\\\'\\\' to drive the plot than anyone else does. Her decisions may drive parts of the story, but not to any more of a degree than one can argue for Snow, Fang, or Vanille. Or quite possibly Sazh or Hope.
Now, since that was a long wall of text. Let me reiterate: I am not saying the view that Lightning is the protaginst is wrong. I am not asking that we remove all references of her as the main character. I am asking for one word (one. fucking. word.) to be added to the page to acknowledge that there is room for debate on her status as a main character. Both by the contradictory WordOfGod and by DeathOfTheAuthor you can make this argument. It exists. Acknowledging that it exists won\\\'t hurt anyone. I promise.
How is Lightning almost always right? Or morally superior, for that matter?
\\\'\\\'The word protagonist has various definitions, even Vaan fits at least one description of the word.\\\'\\\'
I love how you state this without giving what definition you are talking about. Vaan is TheIshmael, not the main character.
\\\'\\\'So the most important character is not always the main character, take Serah for example. Her level of importance is on par with Fang and Vanille\\\'s but that doesn\\\'t make her any more of the main character than it does those two.\\\'\\\'
Serah is important, but she fails to be a main character because she fails the other criteria. There is more than just \\\"really important to the story\\\" to being the protagonist, after all.
\\\'\\\'If the main character was the most important character then Aerith would be the main of VII, Yuna the main of X, Ashe the main of XII, and so on and so forth, the most important character has rarely ever been the main character of a Final Fantasy game. \\\'\\\'
Gotta love that slippery slope fallacy. I don\\\'t know why you latched onto \\\"most important character\\\" as the \\\'\\\'only\\\'\\\' trait of the protagonist, but I very clearly spelled out what one was. (Given your earlier post, you also seem to think that protagonist also means the most character development, but this is also fallacious. A static character in a cast of dynamic characters can be a protagonist.) Once again:
\\\"A protagonist (from the Greek πρωταγωνιστής protagonistes, \\\"one who plays the first part, chief actor\\\"[1]) is the main character (the central or primary personal figure) of a literary, theatrical, cinematic, or musical narrative, around whom the events of the narrative\\\'s plot revolve and with whom the audience is intended to share the most empathy.\\\"
Let\\\'s break that down: 1. Most of the plot revolves around them. 2. They are intended to attract most of the audience empathy.
In other words, Serah cannot be the protagonist because, while she is important, the plot does not revolve around her as a character much and she is not the focus of the audience.
And let\\\'s not even get into the relative importance of other FF characters or their status as main characters - it is \\\'\\\'completely irrelevant\\\'\\\' to this particular work. Whether or not Yuna or Tidus is the main character of FinalFantasyX has absolutely zero bearing on who (if anyone) is the main character of \\\'\\\'any\\\'\\\' other work. None at all.
\\\'\\\'Vanille\\\'s importantce is completely overplayed. She can actually be replaced rather easily by just replacing her with someone else that Fang cares for enough to do the things she did. I\\\'m not a fan of her but Fang is more important than Vanille. Also Van\\\'s importance entirely relies on the backstory, and she has no focus for 90% of the game. Within the actual events of the game she does next to nothing of note, other than tag along. I\\\'ve seen the Vanille argument torn to shreds about a hundred times now and I can\\\'t help but shake my head when I see people try and use her role as the narrator to reinforce their argument. \\\'\\\'
I\\\'m really not looking to get into a completely irrelevant side-debate here. For a quick overview: Vanille\\\'s actions (and lack thereof) are one of the main driving forces for the entire first half of the game, even if the player doesn\\\'t know it. She essentially is the Call to all of the playable characters except Fang, directly or indirectly. As to her importance lying in the backstory... your point is? How is being important in the backstory equivalent to being unimportant? Vanille is of central importance to the story, both before it begins and during the narrative. A passive role in the story does not make her less important. It just makes her passive.
(I feel dirty now, I hate Vanille.)
As to her role as a narrator, it doesn\\\'t make her more important. And I don\\\'t believe I said it did. Ever. Anywhere. It \\\'\\\'does\\\'\\\', to a slight degree, make her the target of more audience empathy. However, being the narrator (the veiwpoint character), is not the same thing as being the protagonist. So her status as a narrator does not really mean all that much as far as an argument about main characters. (Notably, I already said this about Vaan. In a sane world, an opponent would assume I could generalize this onto another work, but this is yet more evidence that we don\\\'t live in a sane world, I suppose.)
Howver, all of that isn\\\'t really important to the central issue here. \\\'\\\'I\\\'m not arguing that Vanille is the protagonist.\\\'\\\' My argument is and has been from the beginning that XIII can be seen as an ensemble piece, and that different characters take turns being \\\'\\\'the\\\'\\\' main character, rather than having a single main character throughout.
In order for Lightning to be the main character, most of the narrative has to revolve around her. It does not - on many occasions we jump to the other characters and focus on them (and not only when the party is split). We spend much more than half the game focused on other characters\\\' arcs, most of which don\\\'t have that much to do with Lightning.
For example, we spend most of the first two thirds of the game switching [=POVs=] (not usually a trait found in works with a single main character). Sazh and Vanille\\\'s segments are treated with equal importance and Lightning and Hope\\\'s. Snow is sidelined, but there is no real indication given \\\'\\\'in the narrative\\\'\\\' that one of these characters is more important, more central than the others. Vanille\\\'s development and role is more subtle, but it is no less there. Sazh and Hope get very dramatic focus during this arc. Lightning falls somewhere in between those two extremes.
When they partially reunite, it is not Lightning taking charge and stealing away the focus. Instead, focus is given to Snow and Hope, as they deal with their story arcs. When the rescue mission is mounted, we are still not concentrating on Lightning - the rescue has more of a focus on Fang and her feelings about Vanille than anyone else. At this point we\\\'ve almost completed the game - where is this supposed focus on Lightning?
We follow the party to dangerous locales, and we get a little bit of Hope and a whole lot of Fang, Vanille, Snow, and Lightning. Notice how that doesn\\\'t just say mostly Lightning?
We return to Cocoon, confront the BigBad and Lightning has the focus for a bit, but then it switches to Fang and stays there until after the climax and most of the resolution.
As to her importance to the narrative, why is she more important to the story than any other character? She doesn\\\'t do \\\'\\\'more\\\'\\\' to drive the plot than anyone else does. Her decisions may drive parts of the story, but not to any more of a degree than one can argue for Snow, Fang, or Vanille. Or quite possibly Sazh or Hope.
Now, since that was a long wall of text. Let me reiterate: I am not saying the view that Lightning is the protaginst is wrong. I am not asking that we remove all references of her as the main character. I am asking for one word (one. fucking. word.) to be added to the page to acknowledge that there is room for debate on her status as a main character. Both by the contradictory WordOfGod and by DeathOfTheAuthor you can make this argument. It exists. Acknowledging that it exists won\\\'t hurt anyone. I promise.
