Kumo Desu Ga, Nani Ka?

I think it's too loosely used in the series to base it so hard on that. Sure, some characters have a theme relating to one of the sins or virtues, but when you go to using several of them for one character you're really just cherry picking for what happens to match up. I mean, how many of the sins and virtues are associated in some way with Shiro? How many of them are associated with D? It's not like the series bases characters on the sins the same way like, say, FMA or Umineko. To me it feels more like when discussions in the Touhou thread at multiple times tried to associate the characters with Tarot cards.

Discussions through whatever arbitrary lens you want is one thing, but when you start to argue that two characters are the same just because they fit one specific slot, I think it kind of misses the mark, especially if the two traits you pick from that slot don't really have anything to do with each other than that they exist in that slot, and the character fits far more than just that one slot.

Well, Kumoko has Sloth, Pride and would have acquired Gluttony if someone else didn't have it. D, meanwhile, created her by fusing a spider's soul with a tiny piece of her own. These skills are all stated to be ones you only acquire if you already have personalities inclined towards them to begin with. They also change a person's personality over time to express said sin (or virtue) over time unless the person has a way to resist it, especially if the person uses the skill often. Given that she has these skills and the way they work, I think it is a normal to assume that they're meant to be foreshadowing for personality flaws she displays later in the series. You can see why it would also apply to D.

So with that in mind, if you check out the way these sins have defined in religion, history and literature, you can see that Sloth is generally defined by apathy and an unwillingness to act. Pride is, loosely, the belief that one is better than others and that they have less worth. Gluttony is overconsumption and hoarding, especially at the expense of others. Their behavior displays every one of these, showing a good understanding as to how these flaws have been classically defined and a clear authorial intent to use them as a motif.

I believe that is why he is asking you the question he did.

As far as the seven heavenly virtues go, it would take a long time to talk about the MC herself, but the quick examples here would be Shun and his teacher. Shun's kindness and mercy is partially a natural trait of his, but is also strongly implied to be enhanced by the skill he possesses either for better or worse. He's merciful past the point of what many consider reasonable and engages in self sacrificial behavior as a result. While this looks dangerous to those around him, they're also traits we admire in ours heroes.

Oka-chan, meanwhile, is literally living for her students as an emotional crutch and gives away for more of her time and effort than could be considered in any way healthy, nearly dying for them at several points. This is, again, behavior that is often considered admirable but in context can also be seen as self destructive. Kumoko held the same skill, Charity, for a time and she is indeed naturally inclined to give towards others what she doesn't need herself. Despite what she would have you believe, she actually likes helping and cares for people a lot, going out of her way to help others because she can't bear not to.

The conflict her between Sloth and Charity is one I'm not sure how to internally resolve because it can make her behavior seem kinda inconsistent when you look at her actions. Maybe that's the point, I don't know. The story isn't over yet.

Edited by Arha on Jul 19th 2021 at 8:41:05 AM

Basically what Arha said. The classical readings of the Sins and Virtues (that is, what they were actually considered to encompass rather than just the modern interpretations of the names) are shown to apply to characters in a very textual way. They may be outdated in modern thought - like psychoanalysis, for example - but if the author of a work intended psychoanalysis to be a major theme while they were writing, then that can still be a useful lens to look at the work through.

I'm aware of that. But it doesn't explain why differentiating a lack of empathy, apathy, and pure laziness can just be tossed away because they're categorized in the same slot under that one lens. It also doesn't explain why D and Shiro are so similar you can say they're basically the same character.

I don't think I did either of those things.

While I wasn't responding to you in particular with that, I don't think you should call Shiro a mini D just because both of them happen to have some traits that fall under Sloth, which by itself dismisses the differences I mentioned before. I don't think you were literal with that, but I don't think it was clear either.

I'm not the one who said that. I disagree with that statement as well. D is a foil to Shiro, but not for the reasons Chaosjunction said.

You didn't originally say it, but you agreed she was like that "in a way", which is why I said you didn't mean it literally.

And honestly, as a foil, I think D appears too little. I don't think there's enough substance to it, at least so far.

As far as the sins applied to the characters go, I think that's about on the same level as fortune telling. Some of it fits by design, and if you squint you can make a little more fit, especially if you ignore part of the character. So I think the author is mostly using the sins and virtues for ideas and concepts, rather than as basis for the characters. I mean, I think Wrath suits Wrath less than both Shiro and Sophia, and Pride has one aspect that fits Shiro, but in the wrong way, and she has other traits going counter to Pride.

Well, it's a fair point that my argument regarding Pride can seem like a stretch. I stand by what I said, but to make a convincing argument as to why I do think it's the author's intention would take a really long time.

As for Wrath and Sophia, anger and jealousy are constant problems for them and always have been. Wrath, for example, is calm most of the time but he has always had a quick temper and a tendency to solve problems with violence. He's mostly calm because he is making deliberate efforts to deal with that flaw of his.

Well, it's present, but it's not particularly strong, so all I see is the original concept of the character for Wrath, but it becomes less and less relevant the longer you get into the story. So my disagreement isn't whether it's present, but how deep it goes. Especially for characters like Shiro, who's far more complex than can be described with the classical sins and virtues.

I'll agree that it's not his major flaw, but it's definitely a sin he struggles with. And Shiro definitely has problems that make her unhappy or do bad things that don't fall under one of the sins as well, such as crippling social anxiety. The seven deadly sins don't fully describe them or their flaws, but you can see how they're problems the characters have to struggle with. I think the author used them as a starting point and built off them from there.

That's pretty much what I meant.

The sins are certainly flaws that are problems characters struggle with, since that's what they're originally conceived as. I find that use of them to be much more in line with their historical meaning than using them as themes for superpowers or what not that I've seen in other places (and here). I mean, they were originally warnings to people so they could be alert against these flaws in particular. That's also my view of religion in general (guidance), but that's a bit off topic here, so I'll just stop with that thought.

Honestly, the superpower theme thing is kinda lame, no matter the series. It just feels played out, sorta like how almost no one does magic eye powers seriously anymore unless they have... Mind blanked out, can't remember the term. Waaah. Only getting a pass for it because you did it so long ago that it was actually cool back them.

And we should also be grateful that the sins actually mean something unlike SDS where, oops, they're actually all totally innocent but just feel like soooo bad, guys!

Can someone tell me whether this Merazofis/Sophia thing is actually a thing in the light novels? That is disgusting if it is. What the hell? Why is everything romance related I hear from the light novels so gross?

Merazophis cares about Sophia a lot, but it's platonic.

Edited by Chaosjunction on Jul 25th 2021 at 7:03:50 AM

The relationship remains platonic on both sides then, yes? Because I do not need a teenager crushing on what is basically their dad and I definitely do not want to see the opposite either.

Sigh. The light novel relationships just seem so gross to me as described.

Does she view him as a father figure? It's not like Sophia was ever a child in that world, from day 01 she had the mind of someone who might as well be an adult.

That doesn't mean it wouldn't be skeevy if he reciprocated, but it's somewhat understandable that she wouldn't view him in familial terms.

He absolutely functions as one. He and Shiro are the closest Sophia has to a family and they're like her parents. Shiro is a bad mom though.

Affection isn't necessarily romantic, and she does display some kind of affection towards Mera. However, "the object of her affection" implies he's the only one she has any affection for, which makes it seem more romantic. It's not a particularly precise way to write it.

It's also not how you write an entry, since, "Towards [person]," is not a complete sentence, even if you add the descriptor phrase after.

Author appears to be returning to the WN and intends to pump out chapters daily until the story reaches a conclusion. On the one hand, cool, it'll finish. On the other, boo, that implies this really is the final arc and the actual villain of the story is unlikely to face consequences for her actions.