Is Dragon Ball cynical at its core?

[HeroR]

Considering this is a series where even the most despicable and evil pieces of shit can be guaranteed a spot in heaven, and get the super-special-awesome extra treatment of retaining a body in the afterlife, if they perform at least one incredibly noble deed in their life, and you're still retaining optimism of living a peaceful life even when you've lost everything , I think it's safe to say on that on the sliding scale of idealism against cynicism, Dragon Ball is deeply entrenched in the side of optimism and the "glass is half full" mentality.

That's not really true. Piccolo outright said Vegeta was going to hell since one good deed doesn't make up for a lifetime of evil.

But he still got keep his body when he died. And when the wish was made for only the good people to be resurrected from Majin Boo's rampage on Earth, Vegeta was included.

He only kept his body because Yemma needed him as backup against Buu: https://youtu.be/tCwykhqtAEE?t=58 and for the sub version https://youtu.be/xyJsGKE9SoI?t=5

As for him being wished back, that just proves that the Namekian Dragon is more forgiving than Yemma. That and Vegeta had to perform several more good deeds, not just one, like: fusing with Goku, coming up the with the plan to kill Buu that revived the Earth, and willing to stay dead and going to hell since he was certain he wouldn't be among those revived.

[Lord Beerus]

That's not really true. Piccolo outright said Vegeta was going to hell since one good deed doesn't make up for a lifetime of evil.

But he still got keep his body when he died. And when the wish was made for only the good people to be resurrected from Majin Boo's rampage on Earth, Vegeta was included.

He only kept his body because Yemma needed him as backup against Buu: https://youtu.be/tCwykhqtAEE?t=58 and for the sub version https://youtu.be/xyJsGKE9SoI?t=5

As for him being wished back, that just proves that the Namekian Dragon is more forgiving than Yemma. That and Vegeta had to perform several more good deeds, not just one, like: fusing with Goku, coming up the with the plan to kill Buu that revived the Earth, and willing to stay dead and going to hell since he was certain he wouldn't be among those revived.

Funny enough, in the manga, Yenma doesn't actually specifically say that reason for why he gives a body after he dies was for fighting Majin Boo. He just states that he kept Vegeta's soul intact "just in case". Which flies in the face of everything Piccolo told Vegeta was going to happen when he died. Vegeta getting a physical body in the afterlife was something Yenma didn't need to, but he did it anyway... just because.

And you know, I've never really agreed with the logic of keeping Vegeta as a back-up anyway. It's so goddamn contrived. Vegeta already fought Majin Boo and lost horribly, what kind backup would Vegeta provide? I mean, a day had passed since Vegeta killed himself and Majin Boo had only grown much stronger since Vegeta last fought him. So why did Yenma still feel the need to give Vegeta body? What the fuck could he possibly do? I mean, appreciate the effort on Toriyama to try and handwave why Vegeta isn't rotting Hell like he should be, but it was so half-arsed in my opinion.

[HeroR]

But he still got keep his body when he died. And when the wish was made for only the good people to be resurrected from Majin Boo's rampage on Earth, Vegeta was included.

He only kept his body because Yemma needed him as backup against Buu: https://youtu.be/tCwykhqtAEE?t=58 and for the sub version https://youtu.be/xyJsGKE9SoI?t=5

As for him being wished back, that just proves that the Namekian Dragon is more forgiving than Yemma. That and Vegeta had to perform several more good deeds, not just one, like: fusing with Goku, coming up the with the plan to kill Buu that revived the Earth, and willing to stay dead and going to hell since he was certain he wouldn't be among those revived.

Funny enough, in the manga, Yenma doesn't actually specifically say that reason for why he gives a body after he dies was for fighting Majin Boo. He just states that he kept Vegeta's soul intact "just in case". Which flies in the face of everything Piccolo told Vegeta was going to happen when he died. Vegeta getting a physical body in the afterlife was something Yenma didn't need to, but he did it anyway... just because.

And you know, I've never really agreed with the logic of keeping Vegeta as a back-up anyway. It's so goddamn contrived. Vegeta already fought Majin Boo and lost horribly, what kind backup would Vegeta provide? I mean, a day had passed since Vegeta killed himself and Majin Boo had only grown much stronger since Vegeta last fought him. So why did Yenma still feel the need to give Vegeta body? What the fuck could he possibly do? I mean, appreciate the effort on Toriyama to try and handwave why Vegeta isn't rotting Hell like he should be, but it was so half-arsed in my opinion.

That's basically the same thing. Vegeta only kept his body because Buu was still around and they might need Vegeta. Otherwise, Vegeta would have lost his body, be tortured and cleanse before being reborn.

Not really since they wanted to keep as many powerful people around as possible and as shown, the dead can do the Fusion Dance if things get too bad. I mean, Yemma loses nothing keeping Vegeta around.

[KBABZ]

It's still that for the most part, but what Toriyama has made clear time and time again is that he likes his characters flawed - problem is, once you involve conflict of global magnitude those character flaws get magnified as well. Goku's ardent desire to get stronger and find stronger opponents wouldn't be so bad if the consequences didn't involve the safety of other people.

I think the problem I have with most DB fans stating this lately is that, as someone who attended a film course in high school and in a tertiary education, I know that one of the first rules about writing a story is to give your character some personality flaws that tie into the story. I think people emphasize the "poison" quote too much and bag on the heroes having their own flaws, as if they're SUPPOSED to written as perfect people. But they're not, and those flaws often drive the plot. That's storytelling 101, right?

On Vegeta getting his body back: to me that was done as a hype move to get Vegeta back in the action and fuse with Goku.

[Fionordequester]

Funny enough, in the manga, Yenma doesn't actually specifically say that reason for why he gives a body after he dies was for fighting Majin Boo. He just states that he kept Vegeta's soul intact "just in case". Which flies in the face of everything Piccolo told Vegeta was going to happen when he died. Vegeta getting a physical body in the afterlife was something Yenma didn't need to, but he did it anyway... just because.

To be fair? Piccolo isn't the one who decides who goes to Heaven, and who goes to Hell. Even Kami was subserviant to Yenma; there's no reason why Piccolo couldn't be wrong (especially since he never met Vegeta till he was in his mid-20s).

[Lord Beerus]

Funny enough, in the manga, Yenma doesn't actually specifically say that reason for why he gives a body after he dies was for fighting Majin Boo. He just states that he kept Vegeta's soul intact "just in case". Which flies in the face of everything Piccolo told Vegeta was going to happen when he died. Vegeta getting a physical body in the afterlife was something Yenma didn't need to, but he did it anyway... just because.

To be fair? Piccolo isn't the one who decides who goes to Heaven, and who goes to Hell. Even Kami was subserviant to Yenma; there's no reason why Piccolo couldn't be wrong (especially since he never met Vegeta till he was in his mid-20s).

I never said Piccolo is one to say whether anyone goes to Heaven or Hell. Piccolo simply a rationale conclusion on Vegeta's potential fate in the afterlife based on the fact that Vegeta was a mass murdering, vindictive, narcissistic and spiteful asshole, and doing one good thing wasn't going to save his soul. I mean, Piccolo was wrong in the end, but that doesn't mean he didn't have to right so say that Vegeta was going to Hell. I mean, with all the shit that Vegeta has done in his life, and not just taking into consideration what he did in the Majin Boo arc alone, did you expect him to go to Heaven?

[Cipher]

Dragon Ball, like most Toriyama stories, is cynical about the systems of the world--the Boo arc opens on narration about more and more people getting up to no good as they became too use to peace, because "that's just the kind of beings humans are"; Mr. Satan sells the world a continuous lie; the gods are petty and ineffective; the main cast aside from Gohan and Trunks are all selfish weirdos; Goku not only tolerates risks from, but is sometimes willingly friends with, murderers and criminals so long as loved ones aren't at immediate risk. All of this is straight-up text. Most of it is presented tongue-in-cheek, though elements are occasionally highlighted as real problems.

But it isn't cynical about people, or potential for goodness, or even the power of people with common drives coming together and bonding with one another. It isn't misanthropic, and it isn't Randian, and those are both such important (I think) distinctions. Like the vast, vast bulk of Toriyama's catalogue--from Slump and Dragon Ball to his short one-offs--the core story is a bunch of selfish loners coming together to do some accidental good while--if they may not grow as people--at least forming bonds with one another, which we take as growth enough. (This really, truly, could be used to describe about 90 percent of his catalgoue.) And so even selfish, petty Arale and Senbei wind up being friendly and good-natured enough to change the will of a god set out to wipe his misbegotten humanity from the Earth. Even an apathetic god of destruction, or cold-hearted android, or intergalactic tyrant (to some extent!), or ancient demon reining hell across the universe since time immemorial, or fraudulent self-promoter only out for his own interests--wind up being softened and changed just by coming within the sphere of influence of someone as pure and good-natured--note; that doesn't mean entirely, rationally selfless, or unflawed--as Goku and his friends.

So the climax of the story can involve the cooperation of all humanity, and still have that humanity be buying into a lie, and have the main character immediately run away from his family with his new project, without it really feel like it's taking either a completely rose-tinted or completely damning view of anything. The overwhelmingly consistent message in Toriyama's works, presented in its tongue-in-cheek way, is that there's goodness in spite of inherent, systematic bad, rather than goodness because of inherent, systematic good. (Or even inherent personal good, in some cases.)

And isn't that basically true? Societies wage war, and oppress and pollute, and people are subject to greed and mob whims, but at the end of the day we're all still here with each other and the thing we've got going isn't worth throwing away.

Look no further, for all of this in a microcosm, by the way, than Battle of Gods. The universe may be predicated on arbitrary systems such as the whims of unpredictable and petty destroyer gods, but there's just something about Goku and the people of Earth that winds up changing even them. It's impossible to look at that script and call it cynical. Though, yes, importantly, it's also impossible to look at it and call it optimistic to a naive degree.

[ABED]

But it isn't cynical about people, or potential for goodness, or even the power of people with common drives coming together and bonding with one another. It isn't misanthropic, and it isn't Randian,

Ayn Rand wasn't a cynic. Just felt that needed to be said.

[Michsi]

If you think Dragon Ball is cynical or even hidden cynical, you really need to watched more anime like Death Note, Attack on Titans, and Berserk.

I watched all those and still think DB has a cynical side. It doesn't need to be dark or depressing or gory for that to be true. I think it has more to do with Toriyama's specific brand of humor for the most part.

I think the problem I have with most DB fans stating this lately is that, as someone who attended a film course in high school and in a tertiary education, I know that one of the first rules about writing a story is to give your character some personality flaws that tie into the story. I think people emphasize the "poison" quote too much and bag on the heroes having their own flaws, as if they're SUPPOSED to written as perfect people. But they're not, and those flaws often drive the plot. That's storytelling 101, right?

Yes, but flaws are usually there to be addressed and corrected. With the exception of the villain-turns-ally trope, DB makes no attempt at correcting flaws even when they're brought up in the story itself. The closest thing we got to Goku having a moment of introspection was during the Cell games but it's not treated as a turning point for his character and he goes right back to prioritizing battle after that.

Toriyama's aversion to treating things too seriously will always keep Dragon Ball out of reach of any serious topics being addressed outside of the occasional "the world is crummy" message .

[Cipher]

Ayn Rand wasn't a cynic. Just felt that needed to be said.

No indeed. I usually just build that in there to avoid implying that it's building up rugged, selfish individualism against the ills of collectivism in the way she does, which is what the argument that it's optimistic about its mostly selfish characters but kind of down on societal trends might accidentally do.

Since it's genuinely also really enthusiastic about the power of cooperation and helping others. It just doesn't go so far as to act as though that's the norm. (Which ... is a little cynical. There is definitely a cynical edge throughout Toriyama's works. It just isn't what comes out on top.)

[ABED]

Ayn Rand wasn't a cynic. Just felt that needed to be said.

No indeed. I usually just build that in there to avoid implying that it's building up rugged, selfish individualism against the ills of collectivism in the way she does, which is what the argument that it's optimistic about its mostly selfish characters but kind of down on societal trends might accidentally do.

Since it's genuinely also really enthusiastic about the power of cooperation and helping others. It just doesn't go so far as to act as though that's the norm. (Which ... is a little cynical. There is definitely a cynical edge throughout Toriyama's works. It just isn't what comes out on top.)

Cool. Cool, cool, cool. Thanks for the clarification.

I don't think it's cynical to say that humanity doesn't have the greatest track record. In my view while a great many things have improved over the years, some things have gotten worse. I think we've more or less given the deck little more than a shuffle. Still, there's enough beauty in the world that as long as you're reasonably healthy, and have someone to enjoy the ride with, life is good.

Being optimistic doesn't mean being having one's head in the sand about the state in the world, just that there's reason to belief that things can get better. And that's not too far off from the belief conveyed in DB.

[HeroR]

If you think Dragon Ball is cynical or even hidden cynical, you really need to watched more anime like Death Note, Attack on Titans, and Berserk.

I watched all those and still think DB has a cynical side. It doesn't need to be dark or depressing or gory for that to be true. I think it has more to do with Toriyama's specific brand of humor for the most part.

I think the problem I have with most DB fans stating this lately is that, as someone who attended a film course in high school and in a tertiary education, I know that one of the first rules about writing a story is to give your character some personality flaws that tie into the story. I think people emphasize the "poison" quote too much and bag on the heroes having their own flaws, as if they're SUPPOSED to written as perfect people. But they're not, and those flaws often drive the plot. That's storytelling 101, right?

Yes, but flaws are usually there to be addressed and corrected. With the exception of the villain-turns-ally trope, DB makes no attempt at correcting flaws even when they're brought up in the story itself. The closest thing we got to Goku having a moment of introspection was during the Cell games but it's not treated as a turning point for his character and he goes right back to prioritizing battle after that.

Toriyama's aversion to treating things too seriously will always keep Dragon Ball out of reach of any serious topics being addressed outside of the occasional "the world is crummy" message .

Some times, but realistically most people don't get over their personal flaws. They may become more downplay, but a prideful persona doesn't suddenly stop being prideful. Even well written literature like Harry Potter doesn't have its character overcome their flaws, like Snipe, despite their best efforts or even Harry to an extent.

That said, characters do attempt to fixed their flaws like Gohan who is wishy-washy, but is finally starting not to slack off when things are perfectly and trying to overcome his smug super traits. We then have Beerus who may still be a lazy and immoral SOB, to slowly overcoming these traits and coming more responsible and caring. Frieza also changes. He's still very evil, but he finally learns patients and when to retreat instead of letting his pride keep killing him.

Goku is a rare exception of a character who never changes, or has so little change that he's basically the same character. What you see is what you get, flaws and all.

[Cure Dragon 255]

That was a BEAUTIFUL post there Cipher!

[ABED]

One reason Goku doesn't change is he has no reason to do so. His flaws rarely lead to defeat, at least not a lasting defeat. What lesson is he supposed to learn if his love of battle doesn't lead to some repercussion? Vegeta is constantly getting his ass handed to him because of his mistakes. At some point he has to learn or it's just boring. In real life, it's different. People will make the same mistakes even if it leads to an early grave.

[Michsi]

Some times, but realistically most people don't get over their personal flaws. They may become more downplay, but a prideful persona doesn't suddenly stop being prideful. Even well written literature like Harry Potter doesn't have its character overcome their flaws, like Snipe, despite their best efforts or even Harry to an extent.

That said, characters do attempt to fixed their flaws like Gohan who is wishy-washy, but is finally starting not to slack off when things are perfectly and trying to overcome his smug super traits. We then have Beerus who may still be a lazy and immoral SOB, to slowly overcoming these traits and coming more responsible and caring. Frieza also changes. He's still very evil, but he finally learns patients and when to retreat instead of letting his pride keep killing him.

Goku is a rare exception of a character who never changes, or has so little change that he's basically the same character. What you see is what you get, flaws and all.

That's true, real life doesn't come with a well structured characters arcs with growth neatly wrapped up at the end, so in that regard, DB hits closer to real life. But you see, even that viewpoint is cynical. "People don't change that much, not really"

It's good that there is some development going on, but the examples you've given are from Super the series. I tie this perceived cynicism to Toriyama mostly so focus more on the manga, because as Cipher noted, it seems to be present in most of his works.



Another thing I wanted to add that also points towards this cynicism surrounding DB is the way many of the cast reacted to finding out about the TOP. The fact that almost no one made a fuss about the unfairness of it all and how the gods were making a spectacle out mortals fighting for their life. We even had characters willing to shrug the whole thing off - looking at you 17.

[ABED]

But you see, even that viewpoint is cynical. "People don't change that much, not really"

How is that cynical?

[DragonBallFoodie]

I don't think Dragon Ball has ever been a cynical tale.

There's never been any disillusionment or depression or really anything regarding the negative side of life (apart from the obvious bad guys). The protagonist is a character who is flawed, who gets sad and angry, but on the whole stays cheerful and optimistic and never gives up. His high spirit brightens up the fantasy and makes it more enjoyable IMO.

[HeroR]

Some times, but realistically most people don't get over their personal flaws. They may become more downplay, but a prideful persona doesn't suddenly stop being prideful. Even well written literature like Harry Potter doesn't have its character overcome their flaws, like Snipe, despite their best efforts or even Harry to an extent.

That said, characters do attempt to fixed their flaws like Gohan who is wishy-washy, but is finally starting not to slack off when things are perfectly and trying to overcome his smug super traits. We then have Beerus who may still be a lazy and immoral SOB, to slowly overcoming these traits and coming more responsible and caring. Frieza also changes. He's still very evil, but he finally learns patients and when to retreat instead of letting his pride keep killing him.

Goku is a rare exception of a character who never changes, or has so little change that he's basically the same character. What you see is what you get, flaws and all.

That's true, real life doesn't come with a well structured characters arcs with growth neatly wrapped up at the end, so in that regard, DB hits closer to real life. But you see, even that viewpoint is cynical. "People don't change that much, not really"

It's good that there is some development going on, but the examples you've given are from Super the series. I tie this perceived cynicism to Toriyama mostly so focus more on the manga, because as Cipher noted, it seems to be present in most of his works.



Another thing I wanted to add that also points towards this cynicism surrounding DB is the way many of the cast reacted to finding out about the TOP. The fact that almost no one made a fuss about the unfairness of it all and how the gods were making a spectacle out mortals fighting for their life. We even had characters willing to shrug the whole thing off - looking at you 17.

That isn't cynical at all. That's reality, people really don't changed that much when it comes to their personal flaws. Even ideal cartoons like My Little Ponies have the character keep their flaws even if they become my downplay like how Twilight Sparkle is more sociable compared how she was in Season 1, yet she still have those traits of being sociably awkward.

Even in Toriyama's work, we have Gohan go from a crybaby who couldn't defend himself to a seasoned warrior by the Cell Games. Even if he regressed in power in the Buu Saga, he never became the crybaby little boy again who was useless in a real fight. Or Krillin who went from a perverted little boy who was jealous of Goku and often demean him to being Goku's closest friend and having almost none of the perverted he had as a kid. Even how his friendship with Goku is portrayal is different since even when Krillin become friends with Goku in Dragon Ball, he still demeaned him and often gives him questionable advise, while adult Krillin almost never talks badly about Goku and during his more questionable moments and he's the one often asking advise from Goku.

[Michsi]

But you see, even that viewpoint is cynical. "People don't change that much, not really"

How is that cynical?

In the context of people having flaws and correcting them, the idea of people not really being able to change is very cynical. Improving and becoming a better person is a optimistic aspect and the opposite of that.

[ABED]

But you see, even that viewpoint is cynical. "People don't change that much, not really"

How is that cynical?

In the context of people having flaws and correcting them, the idea of people not really being able to change is very cynical. Improving and becoming a better person is a optimistic aspect and the opposite of that.

That's not what I took from that statement. It said "people don't change much" not that they can't. It's possible to change and for the better, but many people don't because lasting positive change is difficult.