Does Dragon Ball rely too much on interviews for lore?

[ATA]

Howdy!

I've been a Dragon Ball fan all my life. I love the characters and I actually love the filler episodes of Z and the slice of life epiosdes of Super because it shows the characters actually relaxing and doing regular Earth things instead of the consistent Fight or Flight mode.

However one thing I'm noticing is Toriyama uses interviews to expand the lore of Dragon Ball. Please correct me if I'm wrong but we don't see Krillin as a police officer or 17 as a Park Ranger until Toriyama gave that interviews in the mid 2010s. Afterwards, RoF and Super showed both. Something else I've noticed is the Namekian's class system was dicussed in interviews and Dragon Ball Online before DBS SuperHero finally mentioned it in animation form. We also learned about S Cells, Launch's whereabouts, Saiyan's family dynamics, and Beerus destroying the Earth's Dinosaurs alongside Beerus sealing Elder Kai via interviews.

Now I'm not saying interviews can't be used for fun facts or to expand the lore. I would just have prefered if DB did more showing than telling. In my opinion I feel like a good poriton of these could've been showed to us in the manga or anime. If we use the "Toriyama didn't have the idea in his mind at the time" reasoning then I understand but still would have rathered if Dragon Ball showed the lore more than talked about it in interviews. I'm not sure how popular interviews are in Japan but I feel like internationally it's more of a "IYKYK" type of deal. I get that Dragon Ball's storytelling is rather simple and tries(outside of Master UI vs True UI) not to be complicated, I just believe a scene or two showing these things could've helped fans get a better understanding of the series.

So what do you guys at Kanzenshuu think?
Do Dragon Ball Relies Too Much On Interviews For Lore?

[MasenkoHA]

Not really no. A lot of the lore is completely unnecessary and doesn't need to be in the story. When 17 is written out of the story what he's doing doesn't matter, what Lunch is doing after she ran off doesn't matter. S cells don't matter. Very rarely is lore given out that feels like "Yeah, this should have been stated in the story"

Beerus destroying the Earth's Dinosaurs alongside Beerus sealing Elder Kai via interviews

I am almost positive those were stated in Super's tv series.

[VegettoEX]

I agree with MasenkoHA above, in that the series itself doesn't "rely" on ancillary "lore" materials that aren't explained within the context of the series itself when or if necessary.

If anything, I think fandom "relies" (or rather, focuses) on them too much... and for that, we're pretty much singularly responsive for enabling this here at Kanzenshuu, since we're more or less the only English-language resource that's done the firsthand work to compile, translate, and present them all. Sorry!

There are certainly examples due to the disastraous production of Super where you have things like the Pilaf gang's child appearance being explained in the Battle of Gods film, then not being explained in the TV series adaptation, and then getting a bonus chapter in the manga dedicated to it... but that's less an external "lore" problem and an internal production/collaboration problem. It's not the aforementioned "S-Cells" example, which has literally zero bearing on the franchise whatsoever.

There are a lot of external lore examples that DO end up getting adapted into the material, and it's always interesting to see when or if that happens.

For example, we learned about single-lens scouters that go across the user's full face / both eyes in 2014 in a Saikyo Jump interview, which was a year ahead of Resurrection 'F' -- it's clear that Toriyama was thinking about his design for Tagoma when he answered that.

... but, again, it has no real relevance of bearing or impact on anything whatsoever in a bubble.

But then we have things like Yamoshi, which of course hasn't been addressed directly by name at all in the actual series material itself... but related things like the Namekian Book of Legends have been.

... which is also weird but ultimately still has no impact on a watch/read of the series at all. You're missing nothing by not knowing that interview tidbit about Yamoshi by name. It doesn't enhance anything at all.

There's a separate angle where you could argue that if you're interested in "lore" for a series, that Dragon Ball doesn't do "enough" (or more of it "well enough") within the confines of the serialized story itself... but for that I'd argue that it's not something I've come to enjoy Dragon Ball for in the first place, and in fact think it does pretty poorly when it DOES attempt to do it...

... in which case I'd personally argue, yes, keep the weird/extra/pointless "lore" to interviews in these cheap children's magazines rather than in the series itself!

[ATA]

I agree with MasenkoHA above, in that the series itself doesn't "rely" on ancillary "lore" materials that aren't explained within the context of the series itself when or if necessary.

If anything, I think fandom "relies" (or rather, focuses) on them too much... and for that, we're pretty much singularly responsive for enabling this here at Kanzenshuu, since we're more or less the only English-language resource that's done the firsthand work to compile, translate, and present them all. Sorry!


But then we have things like Yamoshi, which of course hasn't been addressed directly by name at all in the actual series material itself... but related things like the Namekian Book of Legends have been.

... which is also weird but ultimately still has no impact on a watch/read of the series at all. You're missing nothing by not knowing that interview tidbit about Yamoshi by name. It doesn't enhance anything at all.

I actually do agree that the Dragon Ball community relies on guidebooks and interviews too much when it comes to Battle Powers, Power Scaling, and "Who's stronger than who" debate. I also think that's regional as I normally see international fans bringing it up rather than Japanese fans. Granted my Japanese fan interaction haven't happened as much as international fan interaction. On the topic of Yamoshi I actually forgot he existed. I remember people thought new Broly was going to be a time travelling Yamoshi .

Not really no. A lot of the lore is completely unnecessary and doesn't need to be in the story. When 17 is written out of the story what he's doing doesn't matter, what Lunch is doing after she ran off doesn't matter. S cells don't matter. Very rarely is lore given out that feels like "Yeah, this should have been stated in the story"

Beerus destroying the Earth's Dinosaurs alongside Beerus sealing Elder Kai via interviews

I am almost positive those were stated in Super's tv series.

Slightly off topic but I why was 17 written out the story anyways? I feel like 17 would be worried about 18 during Buu's invasion. I think S cells do matter and could be used to explain why U6 Saiyans are "better" or achieve Super Saiyan easier. On the topic of Beerus, I feel like those statements came before Super's TV show. I remember it being a running joke that "Beerus did it!" due to Toriyama shoehorning him into the lore. I may be wrong however.

[MasenkoHA]

Slightly off topic but I why was 17 written out the story anyways? I feel like 17 would be worried about 18 during Buu's invasion.

Because he doesn't matter. He's not an antagonist anymore and he's not part of the main character's life. After the Cell saga the main character is Gohan. The story is mostly told from Gohan's point of view. The first time we see Kuririn and by extension 18 in the Boo saga is when Gohan goes to Kame House to tell Kuririn about the 25th Tenkaichi Budokai. Gohan doesn't know or have a relationship with 17 so we don't see 17. We don't need to see 17 worry about 18 because he's not relevant to the story. It's the same reason we don't see Suno in every story arc worry about Goku.

I think S cells do matter and could be used to explain why U6 Saiyans are "better" or achieve Super Saiyan easier. .

But here's the thing they don't matter. They're just the most apathetic of handwaves to appease nitpicky fans. We already have to accept u6 Saiyans are built different. Their evolution never included monkey tails and turning into Oozaru (because Toriyama just didn't want to draw tails again) and they're less violent and bloodthirsty than U7 Saiyans. (which is more likely Toriyama wanting the U7 to have a friendly rapport with the U6 Saiyans) Why can't we just accept they have an easier time reaching Super Saiyan and Super Saiyan 2?. Especially when the real reason they got to Super Saiyan and Super Saiyan 2 so easily is so they could stand a chance against the U7 Saiyans in combat (and I imagine Super Saiyan toys sell well?) It's the same reason Gohan was so much stronger than Goku at a third of his age or why Goten and Trunks were even stronger than Gohan and had an easier time reaching Super Saiyan. It's a useful shortcut to let those characters be active participants in a series that continuously escalates how strong the antagonist are.

[Yuji]

I don't think so, because Dragon Ball in general doesn't rely on lore. Toriyama introduces, reintroduces and retcons lore as he sees fit to serve the story arc he's writing at that moment thematically. It's primarily an action series first, a character-driven series second. Plot and lore are way down on Toriyama's priorities.

I know fans want Dragon Ball to be like Naruto or One Piece with an intricate mythology that accounts for every single on-panel tree branch, but the vague nature of the series' lore contributes to the charm, I think.

[Luso Saiyan]

I know fans want Dragon Ball to be like Naruto or One Piece with an intricate mythology that accounts for every single on-panel tree branch, but the vague nature of the series' lore contributes to the charm, I think.

I agree. In fact, I particularly like that the mythology in DB is presented casually but is not careless. In the sense that when an idea is introduced or presented, it's thought through. The how and why may change later or, or never be revealed at all, but at least there's the sense of a "grounded reality" behind it that transpires to the reader, even if it remains exclusively in Toriyama's head.

[ABED]

I've come to dislike lore more and more over the years as I don't think it adds much to the story. Lore feels like a dressed up term for accumulated exposition. I'm not pointing the fingers at anyone in particular but there are sects of fandom that place too much emphasis on lore as a concept. Maybe it does make things "feel more real" but placing too much importance on it can interfere with the story which is what gives any of it any meaning to begin with. Even Tolkien's stories which are MUCH more lore heavy have good stories. It's notable that The Silmarillion is his least accessible work and least popular of the Middle Earth stories. The other two are popular not due to lore but because one is a silly children's book and the other is, for all its complex plotting, at its core is a very simple story.

Dragon Ball's story is simple and charming. That's the way I like.

[ATA]

Howdy!

I've been a Dragon Ball fan all my life. I love the characters and I actually love the filler episodes of Z and the slice of life epiosdes of Super because it shows the characters actually relaxing and doing regular Earth things instead of the consistent Fight or Flight mode.

However one thing I'm noticing is Toriyama uses interviews to expand the lore of Dragon Ball. Please correct me if I'm wrong but we don't see Krillin as a police officer or 17 as a Park Ranger until Toriyama gave that interviews in the mid 2010s. Afterwards, RoF and Super showed both. Something else I've noticed is the Namekian's class system was dicussed in interviews and Dragon Ball Online before DBS SuperHero finally mentioned it in animation form. We also learned about S Cells, Launch's whereabouts, Saiyan's family dynamics, and Beerus destroying the Earth's Dinosaurs alongside Beerus sealing Elder Kai via interviews.

Now I'm not saying interviews can't be used for fun facts or to expand the lore. I would just have prefered if DB did more showing than telling. In my opinion I feel like a good poriton of these could've been showed to us in the manga or anime. If we use the "Toriyama didn't have the idea in his mind at the time" reasoning then I understand but still would have rathered if Dragon Ball showed the lore more than talked about it in interviews. I'm not sure how popular interviews are in Japan but I feel like internationally it's more of a "IYKYK" type of deal. I get that Dragon Ball's storytelling is rather simple and tries(outside of Master UI vs True UI) not to be complicated, I just believe a scene or two showing these things could've helped fans get a better understanding of the series.

So what do you guys at Kanzenshuu think?
Do Dragon Ball Relies Too Much On Interviews For Lore?

Okay after doing more research, Toriyama did include the Namekian's class system in the manga and the anime(I don't think the English Dub of Z or Kai said "Dragon Clan". So I underestimated Toriyama on that note.

[Civic]

The question asked was not "do you like DB lore" but "does DB rely on interviews for lore" and to an extent it does. they're not especially important things, but 16 being based on Geros son, 19 based on one of his sons toys, a clearer understanding of what Gohan Beast is as a transformation, etc. come from out of universe sources, some of which are interviews with Toriyama.

[MasenkoHA]

The question asked was not "do you like DB lore" but "does DB rely on interviews for lore" and to an extent it does. they're not especially important things, but 16 being based on Geros son, 19 based on one of his sons toys, a clearer understanding of what Gohan Beast is as a transformation, etc. come from out of universe sources, some of which are interviews with Toriyama.

Sure, Toriyama uses interviews and what not to get into lore but what is the problem here exactly? If the story doesn't make sense without the lore then yes it would be a problem that fans would have to seek out interviews just to understand what the hell is going on but that's not really the case here.


16 as Gero's son is a unique example because while you don't really need to know that it does seem weird to never bring up something that feels like it should be super important. It would be like if Toriyama revealed the reason Gohan looks so much like Yamcha is because Yamcha is secretly also a Saiyan and fathered Gohan but then the series never gets around to explaining it in-universe.


The topic question kind of infers that lore is dependent on understanding or enjoying the story. We don't need an inner monlogue from Gero going "Ah poor 19 I based his design on my son's favorite doll as a child"

[Civic]

Theres no problem with it. I'm just addressing the question as asked. Yes a lot of lore is discovered outside of the anime/manga. Does it have a noticeable impact on story? No. In fact I kind of like it that way. Those who are die hard fans like us get interesting little nuggets about the universe (eg. 16s likeness).

[ABED]

Is the question more about whether the amount of lore comes primarily from the series or interviews? The word "rely" implies that it's important.

[jjbgood]

The thing is... i dont consider anything as canon, if its not in the main story. Everything thats in interviews can be altered, retconned, changed or completly dismissed when that part needs to be adressed in the series. It doesnt matter... S-Cells... Yamoshi... nothing happend yet. Its just things Toriyama had in mind one time and probably forgot in the meantime