Humble Background.

[Grimlock]

In another thread I once again find myself seeing an argument like this:

the idea that X character was actually a nobody, but became "somebody" through sheer will and talent is far more endearing than X character coming from a notable background

And now I think it's time we discuss that. Do all protagonists/major characters really need to have a humble background?

Just to clear things out, yes, I understand people enjoy seeing characters growing up. Achieving things by themselves, through their own effort and such. This concept is what allows people to somehow feel more relatable, attached to the characters. I get that. The point is, why does it seem like people want this theme for every major character in all fiction? Do we really need to follow the whole "progress" basically rooted in the same idea? In past conversations, people had come at me with "nah, it doesn't make sense for Bardock to be this badass. Toei giving him anything more than what was shown in the TV Special diminishes Goku as a character and what he's accomplished. Bardock can't be the Legendary Super Saiyan, or else Goku is doomed!".
I mentioned Naruto once and I got similar response, people actually don't like that Naruto is the son of the Fourth Hokage. What's next? People will think little of Monkey D. Luffy's actions once/if Eiichiro Oda establishes that Monkey D. Dragon is a "badass father"?

I really don't see the problem here. It's like "hey, you're gonna have a kid that will become the protagonist. Therefore you can't do anything remarkable in your life. You have to be a nobody, don't make a name for yourself, now get out of here!". It goes without saying it doesn't make sense at all, and honestly, it's kind of stupid too. I have to admit I'm starting to think this "humble background" theme that is shared among many fictional characters and is loved by the audience to be a bit overrated. Just because it is effective in some cases doesn't mean everyone has to follow that idea. I think it's perfectly okay and equally interesting to see how other kinds of characters (a rich person; someone who has few(er) problems in life; comes from a notable family/parents and etc) develop themselves and how they achieve their goals. It's all about balance, seeing the other side may just be as effective as the one you're used to.

Anyway, what do you think of it? Are you also a bit fed up with this argument that characters must have a humble background?

[TheBlackPaladin]

Protagonists certainly don't need to have a humble background, no. However, it is typically the easier choice from a writing standpoint to write them that way because they are more relatable and more set up for an arc showcasing their development and changes...both of which are generally regarded as paramount for protagonists. Conversely, if you have a hero who isn't coming from a humble beginning, the challenges are that they don't have much room to grow and that they aren't relatable. "He's living the dream, and his life is awesome"...isn't the premise for a story. Not a good one, anyway.

The only quasi-exception I can think of to this is Rocky in Rocky III, because the central theme of that movie was about the dangers of complacency once you've made it to the top. Even that's not the greatest example, because while it may be a story about a guy who made it to the top and forgot where he came from, the protagonist is still someone we got to see before he forgot where he came from.

Anyway. As this relates to Dragon Ball, the only way I could see a story like this working is if it was a story about...well, Vegeta, I guess. "Prince of all Saiyans" certainly isn't a humble title. Since Dragon Ball as we know it covers Goku's growth, it could be interesting to see a darker "mirror-image" type story chronicling Vegeta's growth. Sure, we got a glimpse of Vegeta as a child via the Bardock special, but I could see the story being expanded. What was his relationship with his father like before Freeza got involved? How did he interact with other characters growing up like Raditz, or Nappa, or Tarble? How often did Freeza interact with Vegeta...was it more of a "observe from a distance," deal, or was he more of a twisted version of a father figure to Vegeta? What sort of people did he meet during his conquests of other planets? Did he have any romantic interests? Who trained him, and how did it shape him as a warrior? When did he find out that it was actually Freeza who destroyed Planet Vegeta? There's certainly ample ground for a story there...

...just not a story featuring somebody who is relatable. Hence the reason most protagonists start from humble beginnings.

[Vijay]

Well, M8 Broly came outta nowhere & was OP AF. Lil to no information abt his training whatsoever.

I'm believer of certain amount of mystery is required. Not everything gotta be shown in clear-cut. For instance, how Goku attained SSJ2 & ridiculously miraculous SSJ3 forms while training in Otherworld. It wasn't shown...and I bet it would've tarnished the form had it was shown.

[ABED]

I wouldn't say it's necessarily more endearing, but chosen one stories seem to dominate a lot of stories and it's refreshing to see stories about people who become extraordinary through effort not by prophecy or through some bloodline.

At this point, I would prefer stories about the chosen one to not portray that as a good thing but rather a curse.

[MasenkoHA]

The idea Goku was ever from a humble background is debatable.

The story initially treats him as “Here’s a boy with a monkey’s tail found in the wilderness and trained by the old martial arts sage who discovered him”

It’s only retroactively where it was like “Actually he’s an alien whose entire race has monkey tails and are really strong and battle oriented, he’s not even that special he was sent to earth because he was a weak baby lol”


Bardock being the first Super Saiyan is stupid because it’s stupid and sounds like a shitty fanfic.

[DragonBallFoodie]

There is more retconning going on in DB than should be needed. First we have Goku as just being lucky, than he was rewritten into being the only survivor of a world of warriors (who are themselves rewritten to be nicer than they were before), and now he's turned into some sort of chosen one. Why does Toriyama need to rewrite his characters, I don't know.

[LoganForkHands73]

The idea Goku was ever from a humble background is debatable.

The story initially treats him as “Here’s a boy with a monkey’s tail found in the wilderness and trained by the old martial arts sage who discovered him”

It’s only retroactively where it was like “Actually he’s an alien whose entire race has monkey tails and are really strong and battle oriented, he’s not even that special he was sent to earth because he was a weak baby lol”

Yeah, that's pretty accurate. Goku is clearly quite "special" from the moment we meet him as he shrugs off a gunshot to the face and lifts a 2-tonne car over his head. One of the central points of drama in the earlier Dragon Ball arcs is that he's gaining strength waaay too quickly and it's seriously freaking everyone out, including Roshi who desperately wants to hammer in the message to Goku that there's always someone stronger out there. Sure, Goku is humble in many ways because of his underprivileged childhood in the wilderness and he's always wanting to get stronger, blahblah, but a recurring theme is that he has incredible natural talent, more so than just about everyone he meets. However, the introduction of his Saiyan origin did certainly help to make him much more relatable.

In another thread I once again find myself seeing an argument like this:

the idea that X character was actually a nobody, but became "somebody" through sheer will and talent is far more endearing than X character coming from a notable background

And now I think it's time we discuss that. Do all protagonists/major characters really need to have a humble background?

Just to clear things out, yes, I understand people enjoy seeing characters growing up. Achieving things by themselves, through their own effort and such. This concept is what allows people to somehow feel more relatable, attached to the characters. I get that. The point is, why does it seem like people want this theme for every major character in all fiction? Do we really need to follow the whole "progress" basically rooted in the same idea? In past conversations, people had come at me with "nah, it doesn't make sense for Bardock to be this badass. Toei giving him anything more than what was shown in the TV Special diminishes Goku as a character and what he's accomplished. Bardock can't be the Legendary Super Saiyan, or else Goku is doomed!".
I mentioned Naruto once and I got similar response, people actually don't like that Naruto is the son of the Fourth Hokage. What's next? People will think little of Monkey D. Luffy's actions once/if Eiichiro Oda establishes that Monkey D. Dragon is a "badass father"?

I really don't see the problem here. It's like "hey, you're gonna have a kid that will become the protagonist. Therefore you can't do anything remarkable in your life. You have to be a nobody, don't make a name for yourself, now get out of here!". It goes without saying it doesn't make sense at all, and honestly, it's kind of stupid too. I have to admit I'm starting to think this "humble background" theme that is shared among many fictional characters and is loved by the audience to be a bit overrated. Just because it is effective in some cases doesn't mean everyone has to follow that idea. I think it's perfectly okay and equally interesting to see how other kinds of characters (a rich person; someone who has few(er) problems in life; comes from a notable family/parents and etc) develop themselves and how they achieve their goals. It's all about balance, seeing the other side may just be as effective as the one you're used to.

Anyway, what do you think of it? Are you also a bit fed up with this argument that characters must have a humble background?

I get you to an extent. Most humble heroes do tend to have something remarkable about them to begin with which they subsequently improve upon, which Goku exemplifies too. I agree that Bardock being a formidable warrior in his own right doesn't diminish Goku's character at all (though I'd draw the line at him becoming Super Saiyan personally, partially because it was handled awfully), since it was stated that he was already a veteran warrior whose unusually high power level came down to the fact that he, like Goku, was constantly throwing himself into harsh battles that would leave him half-dead, giving him masses of zenkai boosts over the years. It's only natural that he got pretty dang strong. If anything, Toei's Bardock exemplifies the same themes of Goku's Saiyan arc journey in that he became strong off his own back even though he too was born an unremarkable low-class warrior. Similarly, Goku being considered a worthless runt by his own worthless low-class father should be considered a huge contributor to the themes of the toxicity of genetics/class hierarchy in the Saiyan-Namek arcs.

Equally, I don't mind the idea about the modern Toriyama Bardock being truly unremarkable. But I don't agree with the consensus of some fans that OG Bardock being a badass somehow invalidated Goku's character.

[DBZAOTA482]

The idea Goku was ever from a humble background is debatable.

The story initially treats him as “Here’s a boy with a monkey’s tail found in the wilderness and trained by the old martial arts sage who discovered him”

It’s only retroactively where it was like “Actually he’s an alien whose entire race has monkey tails and are really strong and battle oriented, he’s not even that special he was sent to earth because he was a weak baby lol”


Bardock being the first Super Saiyan is stupid because it’s stupid and sounds like a shitty fanfic.

Basically Goku was initially introduced as a strange boy who was trained by one of the world's greatest martial artists, but created a legacy for himself through hard-work and intuition.

Even with the alien origin, it didn't mean much as he was born a weakling by their standards.

[Kamiccolo9]

Characters don't need to have a humble background. I mean, look at Batman.

What they need is some kind of conflict, some event to bring them down to Earth and show that they are "one of us." Again, Batman.