[iKumdo]

Originally Posted by Tsukou

Spoiler for plot theory question:

But basically what you're saying is, it's there, for the sake of being there. Since you mentioned that it is about as irrelevant as Don Krieg or Arlong's history, it brings me to why I think the Davy Back fight was really more fillerish, then actual substance of a substantial plot point/arc. Arlong's history is deeply tied into fishman history, which goes back to the Shichibukai, and even further with Fisher Tiger, along with the connections between Hachi and Rayleigh, and the Sun Mark.. and you understand what I'm saying.

The problem I had with the Davy Back arc, was that it was a completely self-contained arc, with no real connection to anything. Whether you read it or not, you have no problem reading the rest of the manga. There was no substantial connection between any points in the One Piece world. (Of course maybe Oda will go back to it, and show the relevance, but I'm doubtful of this).

I mean, maybe if you can show me how this arc was in any way meaningful to anything, outside of the arc itself. In every other arc, we see it as another insight into the world of One Piece, and how every story, every person is in someway connected to one another. But at the same time, I felt that this Davy Arc was so self-contained, that it pertained nothing to the One Piece world, aside from the One Piece crew, and the Davy Back crew. To me, this means that this section could easily be removed, and still have continuity in the series. Thus leading it to be more of a filler arc.

Now I understand when you say that characters ultimately drive the plot. But unfortunately, characters alone don't make a good story either. A good story in conjunction with well-made characters creates something amazing. If either is lacking, we can immediately tell. The one problem I have with your analogy is that One Piece and The Adventures of Huck Finn has a glaring difference. One Piece is as much about the characters as it is about the world the characters are living in. That's what makes it amazing, the world itself, is an entity. Obviously Luffy is the focal point of the One Piece manga, but I would most certainly pay to read how other stories were formed. About other crews, and other stories in the One Piece world.

Now you can also argue that Davy Back is like one of the stories of another crew. But the biggest problem is that I don't see how it connects to the rest of the world. I didn't really feel for the Foxy Pirates. I felt they didn't really have a deep and involved background, nor really interested. I mean, reading it may have given me a few chuckles, but overall it was dull.

While I'm not saying I could have done a better job, I just felt that maybe there was a better way to transition between Sorajima and Aokiji. I understand that it would have been abrupt to have from one, immediately to the next, but I mean, we see them running from one major plot line to the next all the time. I felt like this "filler" was to help relieve Oda and give him time to set up his thoughts for how he wanted the next arc to be, but it still doesn't feel like he put that much thought into it. And it felt like it was "filling" up time..

While I do agree that the idea of losing a nakama in this arc, helped bridge the losing of another nakama on the next, that felt a little odd. Doing a joke of losing a nakama, into really losing a nakama.. it just didn't sit well either.

Another problem I have with your statement is that you are giving the Davy Back Arc as much value as any other arc, which is an argument that I just can't see how you justify. You tell me that it's about nakama spirit, and a "preparation" for the upcoming upheaval that is the Strawhats Crew. But the twist would have been more shocking to me, if we didn't experience the Davy Back arc to begin with, and would have had a greater impact in my mind.

Just because there's a great work of ficton, doesn't mean it is perfect. That much is absolute. I mean, I've read my share of books, and there are times, when I ask myself was this section really necessary in the book, because it seemed to have little to no-relevance to the main plot line, except that it involved the main characters of the main plot line. But other then that, had no real significance towards anything, except for being. That doesn't mean I like the book any less, it just means, that's what I thought about it.

I think I've gone on too long, because I've been rambling for a while, but my main point is this.

With or without the Davy Back arc, the story would exist. The One Piece World has shown no relation to this arc, aside from the fact that the Strawhats accidently ran into it. Every other place, has shown a relevance into the One Piece World, and how it is formed. Tell me what relation this Davy Back arc had with the One Piece world, whether it be the future, or the history. Because I honestly see ZERO relation.. I see it as a self-contained story, with no relevance to anything outside of the self-contained story.

Finally, just good characters don't make for a good story, nor does a good story make good characters. They are needed to each other, as a symbiotic lifeform. To say that one creates the other, or vice-versa is in my opinion, wrong. The most interesting characters can do the most uninteresting things, and that would make for bad story. Davy Back arc simply had the good characters, in a self-involved uninteresting story, which became nothing in the series. That's a filler to me.

It's not even the fact that it was boring to me. It's because it simply had no relation to anything outside of the arc itself. No relation to the One Piece world which all other arcs had. It's only use was that of "character development" which frankly, I didn't see much of either, they remained basically the same.. going in and going out.. (but you can prove me wrong on that). The thematic value of the Davy Back arc was well established prior to the Davy Back arc. And the one piece story/world remained the same. We also learn no new pieces of information, about anything pertaining to anything outside of the arc itself. To me that sounds like a filler.

Spoiler for response:

As I have mentioned before, it is obvious that Davy Back Fight is not as significant or interesting to the main plot, but its presence is about as necessary as any other arc in the story.

As stupid as this might sound, it's rather true that good characters with good conflicts create good enough of a story. When you read books like David Copperfield, that's pretty much what you get. Story is driven by characters and their conflict, and that creates good plot. There doesn't have to be any convoluted twists, but a good climax would be great. Davy Back fight had good characters (if you don't like the Foxys, at least you had the main SH crew) with a conflict.

I understand your argument about Arlong's connection with the Shichibukai, but what about Don Krieg? What about Kuro? Think about every villain on the East Blue; none of them were quite necessary. These villains, and their past were used to give us a deeper look into the characters that would join the crew as well as a look at the world of One Piece.

The Davy Back Fight also did the same, though it was less "flashy." We get to see more about the world of One Piece. Another weird island, another aspect (the Davy Back Fight), and another look into the characters (the SHs could've just destroyed the Foxy crew instead of participating in the games).

I've also mentioned the necessary of establishing a form of "realism" in an unreal world. Constantly going through massive events in the story can get tedious and seem unreal.

Overall, it's too early to determine the true value of the Davy Back arc, but currently, it stands as a necessary arc. Not because of its significance to the main plot, but because of the way it establishes the story and the way it satisfies the conventions of novels. You might think that there are points in the novels you read that seem unnecessary, but they're all there for a good reason. I don't know if you have, but try looking into creative writing books/classes. Simply reading books is not enough to understand the aspects of novels.