Moral and character arbitrariness in Dragon Ball Super

[darzap]

I have a big issue with the writing of Super that I'd like to discuss here.

Episode 98 created a really eery mood, when it came to the destruction of a universe, which reminded me of the weird scene in which Beerus contemplated in front of Bulma to wish for the destruction of everything with the Super Dragon Balls (near the end of episode 29). We got this ominous smile from the Grand Priest and the angel and the contrast of the dark music and the cheerful Zenos. I think there is a pattern with Super sending very mixed signals with regard to morals and characters. DB and DBZ have been very clear about the fact, that those who kill the innocent or destroy worlds are the enemies. I don't mean to say that it was all black and white. There has been hypocrisy, there have been characters who changed and there have been characters with unclear motivations, which is all great, I don't want one-dimensional characters.

But Dragon Ball Super started with the introduction of Beerus, a character with no more regard for innocent life than Kid Boo, yet anybody is fine hanging around with him and doesn't plan on stopping him. Of course, after he starts hanging around regularly, we don't really see him destroying anything. Yet, at the end of the universe 6 tournament, Beerus is cool with Champa killing his team to the dismay of everybody else and taunts Goku with his powerlessness to do anything about it. Right after this scene however, this is all forgotten. Next time we see Champa, it is for playing baseball with the team he wanted to murder for failing him the arc before.

Next arc, Zamasu goes through the universes eradicating the mortals he deems worthless and Zamasu is obviously evil, Whis assisted in stopping him and promised assistance for stopping him in another future timeline. In this arc the omni-king eradicates the life he deems worthless plus the gods associated with it and even if we say, he's a child with no sense of right and wrong, the grand priest and the angels are all cool with that, no signs of any inner conflict. Beerus cares about the relationship with his brother enough to use his wish to restore U6 earth, yet he is not shown to be in any conflict now, when his only path of survival requires having Champa erased from existence. Whis saves the earth from destruction during the Frieza arc, but he doesn't seem to care now.

I think this is terrible and lazy writing. How can I even speculate about the angels or the Grand Priest being evil, when there are major inconsistencies about the very concept of evil itself in Dragon Ball Super. What moral signals would they have to send to be evil that they haven't sent yet? Would it even matter? Because they might send completely different signals in the next episode. The only reliable definition of evil and villain seems to be "goes after the Z fighters so that they have to fight him". We have foreshadowing (like at the end of episode 29) yet nothing comes from it and it never gets resolved. I can't really speculate about many of the major characters, because their characters do not seem to follow any rules at all. There is foreshadowing by having weird smiles in faces of angels at the destruction of a universe, but what are we supposed to get from that? They have been complicit in the evil that has happened there anyway.

[avasatu]

The nature of good and evil are determined by the underlying moral substructures designed by the beings at the top of the divine cosmic hierarchy. Who are you to say that something which constitutes evil when a mortal does it is also evil when the god of the multiverse does it? The two instances can hardly be compared, because motivation as a causation of action is different between gods and men by construction.

The real issue is that the gods and the mortals in Super are so....similar. More similar and in more ways than they ought to be, and THAT's what makes moral relativism in Super hard to swallow. It's too easy to conflate the morality of the actions of Zeno and the Grand Priest with that of, say, Goku because they both come off as regular dudes, and in fact they are SHOWN to relate (i.e. an angel smirking after his universe is erased because he doesn't like his GoD: that's an awfully mortal portrayal of a moral response). Heck, gods in Super are basically mortals with higher power levels. In some respects, that is bad writing; you're correct. In others, it's philosophically interesting, particularly if the show does anything with it. If the show in its totality butchers this, THEN I'll call it bad writing overall.

Cool topic.

[Fizzer]

I've always found it hard to deprogram the moralism of the Funimation dub from myself after growing up with that, but I think good and evil has always been treated in quite a unique way in Dragon Ball, which seems to have some sort of moral relativism to it. If anything, good in DB seems to be protecting and looking out for those who are close to you personally, but doesn't expect you to take any action one way or the other with respect to people you don't know. Beerus, as part of the natural order, destroys things, but he cares about his brother. It also seems that in DB morality comes second to authority - it's wrong for Freeza to destroy planets, but fine for Beerus or Zeno, because they're "allowed to".

[darzap]

Thanks for the responses and those are fair points, that made me realize that I failed to convey my issue in its entirety. I'm less concerned with universal morality, even though that is an interesting issue, than with the moral frameworks the individual characters operate in.

Goku is, as Fizzer pointed out, not as heroic as the Funimation dub might display him (I grew up on the German dub, so I don't really know too much about that). He wasn't looking for evil to defeat and didn't actively travel the universe to make it a better case and I'm totally cool with that. I would not prefer a superhero character over Goku for the sake of him being a paragon of morality. However Goku was not cool with Vegeta killing the innocent at the tournament, even though he had no attachment to them. The Z fighters always bothered to revive the innocent bystanders. Goku and Vegeta did bother to fight for the future omniverse, even though, they didn't have to and they could have easily abandoned this world. He did complain about the crimes of future Zamasu to present Zamasu, when they confronted him. So he is not cool with destruction happening right in front of his eyes. But he is cool with hanging around with Zeno after witnessing him erasing an entire reality. My problem is not Goku being inconsistent with some universal ethics but him being inconsistent with his own ethics and not because he is lenient, there is nothing to suggest that he wants Zeno to change or to reconsider his decisions.

The Great Priest being completely detached from creation would a totally fine character. But we see have seen him display mildness towards Goku when he befriended the Omni-King, called him Zen-chan, even fondness, when he brought in Future Zeno, and a desire to visit Universe 7. However, he is not moved when announcing that 7 out of 8 universes, possibly including universe 7, will be erased. It would only take one line from Whis to at least acknowledge that contradiction. Now he smirks at a shocked Goku, after Zeno destroyed Universe 9.

Beerus, as part of the natural order, destroys things, but he cares about his brother.

Except when he doesn't, like right now, when it's been established for quite some episodes that at least one of the brothers has to die and neither of them has shown the slightest bit of trouble with that prospect during all of the arc so far.

Since philosophical issues have already been brought up in this topic, here is the one that bothers me about this: What is a character? Is a character just a combination of a drawn face and a voice actor? That can't be it, otherwise Black and Goku would be the same character. No, there needs to be something not necessariliy constant but at least continuous about their thoughts, actions and traits. We would not be cool with Goku becoming a space pirate or GoD next arc.

Let's look at a example from another universe: Severus Snape. He seemed to hate Harry, he insulted him, his character, his father, his friends, he insulted Hermiones looks and her character, but he never insulted Harry's mother, which would have been consistent with his (until then) visible trait of hating Harry or Hermione's heritage would have been consistent with his spitefulness towards Harry's friends and with Snape being Slytherin. But there was a persistent fact about him, that would have been contradicted by that and the author knew that. I was cool with the revelation because it made sense, even though there was no hint about it, at least it didn't destroy the previously established character because there wasn't a major contradiction with earlier work.

Now, could the same be said about Whis, the Grand Priest or Goku? Is there somebody who knows: That's what Goku thinks about right and wrong and thatswhy he reacts that way to Majin Vegeta or Zamasu and that way to Beerus and Zeno. That's what Daishinkans feelings, attachments and motivations, thatswhy he reacts that way to Goku here and smirks to Goku there. Those are the inner workings of Whis, thatswhy he helps the cast here and there and there, and has this meaningful talk with Beerus about Goku changing them and is now laughing when it's mentioned that he is safe while all the cast he was interacting with, is in existential danger.

Or is there some guy, writing the dialogue who says: Zamasu is the villain so Goku condemns his actions in the future city but Beerus and Zeno are our new regulars and sources of comedy, so Goku never questions their actions. It would add to the comic effect of the scene if Daishinkan is way more lenient to Goku than Kaioshin and it would add to the cheerful mood if he comments fondly that Goku and universe 7 sparked his interest, but it would add to the eeriness of this other scene if Daishinkan smirks coldly at Goku as a whole universe is erased. It would be really convenient for the plot to have Whis do this and that and that, it would be really convenient for the schedule to have an episode of Whis and Beerus talking half a episode about sth. that will never be important again and now it would add to the perceived danger if we show that they cannot rely on Whis caring about their fate. Let's Android 17 be a complete nihilist, so we can insert some conflict that needs to be resolved before recruiting him.

Because if the later was the case, why bother discussing potential character motivations, interpreting implicit characterization and speculating about how characters react to sth.? How would I develop a bond as a viewer with new characters if they are hardly characters?

[Master Xar]

It's not as simple as you may think... Goku is a person that holds the closest things to him and protects them .If it's a situation he absolutely cannot help with (like in the current arc) he will back down and do the best that he can to resolve the situation the best way he can, the most interesting thing about the characters in Dragonball is that they are never motivated to do something by just one motivation.

Take Frieza for instance he destroyed Planet Vegeta for multiple reasons, 1.) he can stop the Saiyan legacy dead in it's tracks and coinciding with his paranoia 2.) he won't need to train because he is too arrogant to do so to keep the Saiyans under his heel... why get a trillion dollars when you already have a billion? 3.) Beerus... The God of Destruction asked him to, it keeps him in Beerus' good graces and let's him do his main motivation.

Then there is Goku and why he fights, he does it not only to protect his friends, but he also does it because he loves to fight, if he can save people along the way? Fine. But, if he can't save those people and it's hopeless, he won't let it chain him down or depress him, is he mad that he can't help them? Sure. He just isn't going to scream into the heavens and cry about him not being strong enough to save random people he doesn't know. His friends? Maybe. Plus you have to take into account just how much shit Goku and his friends have been through, they've fought aliens, Super-powered Androids, ancient Mythical Cosmic Horrors, Gods and more. The fact that half of even HALF of them are still sane after dying multiple times as well as some being tortured is a miracle...

A bit of Moral Dissonance and Detachment is to be expected, I don't see it as Goku being a hypocrite it's just that most of his morals stead from if he is able to do something about it, it's conditional and human. Would you protect a child in a carriage from strolling down a steep hill? Yeah sure. Would you protect it if it's surrounded by a bunch of thugs with guns and knives and you have your little brother or sister with you and you're running late for something? I doubt it...

Moral and how you follow them are EXTREMELY conditional and unless you you have enough conviction to fuel an army chances are you aren't going to always die for them...

[Amerigo]

Goku respects power - the more powerful someone is, the more willing Goku is to overlook their misdeeds.

Frieza killed his parents, wiped out his race, tortured his son, killed his friend, and even destroyed his planet - killing Goku's family and friends. Yet Goku is still willing to treat Frieza with laughter and smiles. Because Frieza is powerful

Goku does not see people as individuals, but as objects of power. The more powerful someone is, the more Goku takes interest.

If Vegeta was weak, Goku would not waste anytime with him. If Gohan was weak, Goku would barely spend anytime with him.

Zeno is all-powerful, so Goku will continue overlooking his misdeeds.

Make no mistake, if Zeno was weak, Goku would never have bothered him to begin with.

[darzap]

It's not as simple as you may think... Goku is a person that holds the closest things to him and protects them .If it's a situation he absolutely cannot help with (like in the current arc) he will back down and do the best that he can to resolve the situation the best way he can, the most interesting thing about the characters in Dragonball is that they are never motivated to do something by just one motivation.

Well, that is pragmatic of course, however I would like the writers to give some sign of Goku having any trouble with the Omni-King after said Omni King wiped out the future multiverse, almost killing all of them if they had not flied immediately.

But, if he can't save those people and it's hopeless, he won't let it chain him down or depress him, is he mad that he can't help them? Sure.

Are you sure, though? Because I'm not. I am not sure at all, that Goku was mad at the Omni King. I do not expect Goku to confront him, but at least a single line of Goku saying, that he misjudged Zeno and Daishinkan and is unhappy about the things those two (or 3) decided would be nice, so that we could actually be sure, that Gokus character is still in-place.

A bit of Moral Dissonance and Detachment is to be expected, I don't see it as Goku being a hypocrite it's just that most of his morals stead from if he is able to do something about it, it's conditional and human. Would you protect a child in a carriage from strolling down a steep hill? Yeah sure. Would you protect it if it's surrounded by a bunch of thugs with guns and knives and you have your little brother or sister with you and you're running late for something? I doubt it...

Moral and how you follow them are EXTREMELY conditional and unless you you have enough conviction to fuel an army chances are you aren't going to always die for them...

That is not my point at all. I am completely fine with hypocrisy or even pure evil in fiction. I think Frieza is a solid character and so is Frost. I am also fine with an inconsistent moral framework. My problem lies with inconsistencies in the application of whatever (consistent or inconsistent) moral framework in the writing of the character. He shows his disdain for Zamasu, a god eradicating life from 12 universes because he considered it worthless, when they confronted him, but he remains friends with Zeno, a god who did or plans to eradicate 13 universes, 7 because he considers the life in it worthless and 6 on a whim. Yes, he has no shot of toppling Zeno at this moment, and, yes, there are explanations conceivable, but we don't get them (and DB was never known for subtlety), not even hints. Just one line of Goku saying something to the effect of "I was wrong about Zeno, I need to keep him happy but I am really not cool with him." would be sufficient to at least acknowledge (on the part of the writers), that there is some problem for the character Goku, to keep up the illusion that the authors care and that we are always dealing with the same character, when his image shows up in a frame.

Goku respects power - the more powerful someone is, the more willing Goku is to overlook their misdeeds.

Frieza killed his parents, wiped out his race, tortured his son, killed his friend, and even destroyed his planet - killing Goku's family and friends. Yet Goku is still willing to treat Frieza with laughter and smiles. Because Frieza is powerful

Goku does not see people as individuals, but as objects of power. The more powerful someone is, the more Goku takes interest.

If Vegeta was weak, Goku would not waste anytime with him. If Gohan was weak, Goku would barely spend anytime with him.

Zeno is all-powerful, so Goku will continue overlooking his misdeeds.

Make no mistake, if Zeno was weak, Goku would never have bothered him to begin with.

I'm sorry but I don't really think, that's an established fact or a fair representation of Goku. Goku is a fighting addict, so he is hanging out with people who might give him a fight. But this treatment of Frieza is not consistent with his treatment of Frieza back in the Namek arc, even though Frieza was mucher stronger than Goku back then and right now they are roughly equal, probably with Goku ahead. Pretty much every villain started out stronger than Goku (with the exception of Black and ironically Golden Frieza), but if Goku showed them any respect it was only "professional" respect, it didn't imply that he overlooked their misdeeds, the way I took it. Did he ever give the buddy vibe, when talking to Vegeta on Earth (3x as strong as him), Frieza on Namek (>20x as strong as him), Semi-Perfect Cell before he was in the room of spirit and time (much stronger than him) or even Majin Boo prior to his redemption?

[sunkensheep]

But Dragon Ball Super started with the introduction of Beerus, a character with no more regard for innocent life than Kid Boo, yet anybody is fine hanging around with him and doesn't plan on stopping him. Of course, after he starts hanging around regularly, we don't really see him destroying anything.

I think that's just because he's a God and it's his job to destroy. As far as the mortals know, he and the Kaioshins are there to balance creation and destruction (at least, in theory). What would you do if you befriended Shiva, the hindu God of Destruction? Would you say to him 'please, don't destroy?'. I think it's plausible to accept a god for what he does, since that's his purpose in a scheme bigger than you. Furthermore it's convenient to do that for many reasons: if you're friend with him you'll have a strong ally and it's possible that he won't destroy you (as Bulma knows well). Plus, for Goku and Vegeta it's an occasion to fight powerful enemies.

Yet, at the end of the universe 6 tournament, Beerus is cool with Champa killing his team to the dismay of everybody else and taunts Goku with his powerlessness to do anything about it. Right after this scene however, this is all forgotten. Next time we see Champa, it is for playing baseball with the team he wanted to murder for failing him the arc before.

I think you're taking Champa's actions too serious here. He's basically a child with superpowers and those dialogues are intended as gags.

In this arc the omni-king eradicates the life he deems worthless plus the gods associated with it and even if we say, he's a child with no sense of right and wrong, the grand priest and the angels are all cool with that, no signs of any inner conflict.

Why should they have an inner conflict? Zen'O-Sama is the god of everything, it's their duty to accept what he does. Plus, the universe ratings thing gives us reason to think that there's a logic he follows to do what he does.

But he is cool with hanging around with Zeno after witnessing him erasing an entire reality. My problem is not Goku being inconsistent with some universal ethics but him being inconsistent with his own ethics and not because he is lenient, there is nothing to suggest that he wants Zeno to change or to reconsider his decisions.

Goku didn't see Zen'O destroying a reality just for the sake of it (even if he knows that he did it), but to save Goku's own reality from Zamasu, whose power was out of anybody's reach. So in Goku's eyes, he did it for a good reason. And if I remember it correctly, Goku wanted to ask Zen'O to not destroy the losing universes in the ToP, but was stopped by Beerus because he said it was too dangerous to question him, that he could have him erased on the spot. And in general, Zen'O is the god of EVERYTHING. It's plausible for the characters to acknowledge that kind of authority.

Beerus, as part of the natural order, destroys things, but he cares about his brother.

Except when he doesn't, like right now, when it's been established for quite some episodes that at least one of the brothers has to die and neither of them has shown the slightest bit of trouble with that prospect during all of the arc so far.

That's just a typical tsundere reaction. If and when one of the two will die, I don't think that the other would be happy.

Goku respects power - the more powerful someone is, the more willing Goku is to overlook their misdeeds.

Frieza killed his parents, wiped out his race, tortured his son, killed his friend, and even destroyed his planet - killing Goku's family and friends. Yet Goku is still willing to treat Frieza with laughter and smiles. Because Frieza is powerful

Goku does not see people as individuals, but as objects of power.

I think that's just partially true. Goku respects power, but I doubt that he would treat Freeza the same way if he permanently killed, let's say, Gohan or some other family member. The reason why Goku can have that kind of attitude it's because he's not responsible for any of Freeza's deaths since he met him: All the good guys killed by Freeza when Goku was around are now all alive and well, thanks to the dragon balls.

In general, I think that all the mortal characters agree in some way that the godly realm exists for a reason, so they accept to be allied to a god whose purpose is to destroy, and willingly or not they are forced to please a childlike omnipotent god because, well, he's the highest rank in the whole creation and they don't have much of a choice. And that goes for any universe, even for the righteous Pride Troopers, who fight aliens who want to (illegally) destroy a planet but hang out with a GoD who (legally) destroys planets.

I think it's just a matter of authority and accepting that there's a scheme bigger than you that you cannot question, at least until it turns against you. In that case, you're allowed to fight to survive.

What I don't understand is why the characters are scared to die. I get it why they are afraid to be erased from existence, since it's new in Dragon Ball. But as for "regular" dying, they all know that there's an afterlife where they could be happy. I think they should be more relaxed toward death.