Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
- Dec 11, 2014
To me it would be absurd if it didn't count. Death is death. If someone was alive at some point and then their biological functions ceased... they're dead. How does a flashback or them not being main characters make any difference in what is basically a purely medical distinction as long as the narrative confirms them as dead?
If the "peripheral" aspect was relevant we would come to bizarre conclusions such as "No children die in Genocyber" because the two children that get their heads graphically ripped apart by gatling guns at the beginning of the second episode are only "peripheral" characters and don't appear at any other point in the show.
Or you could argue that in the previously partially mentioned anime "Boku dake ga Inai Machi" all the murders take place in the past and never on screen... but yet they are undeniably a core part of the story.
And I would say that you can't really overstate Osamu's influence on 02 since if he didn't died pretty much most of the plot simply could not have happened, it was a very vital point in the plot.
In general I feel that when we start talking about qualifictaions for death or something we are not simply talking about death but some kind of abstract value judgement regarding those deaths... which in turn is very subjective and not really useful for establishing any kind of useful criteria for listing or classifying stories.
The point was that Osamu wasn't live in the 02's story. So that doesn't count as a character dying in the story because the character was dead from the start.
From a perspective of what you convey to an audience, there's a big difference between a child character who dies during the story and child character would have been dead from all time.
Is it an anime? If yes, than it's a valid example Because at some point the actual statement at which the example was directed became a general statement that was not only including anime such as Digimon. When the opinion "Children don't die in anime" came up it wasn't specificially stated that it was only referring to "Shounen Anime" or "Children's Anime" (where that sentiment would have been more defensible even if not by much) but was a comment that referred to the medium of Anime in general and in this context it's simply factually wrong.
For example here is a list of over 40 anime which at some point in the story feature the death of one or more children (note that it only includes anime that I personally watched, I'm sure many could be added to it):
Shinsekai Yori, Ajin, 91 Days, Hunter x Hunter, Akira, Psycho-Pass, Narutaru, Bokurano ,Berserk, Gantz, Death Parade, Monster, Ga-Rei:Zero, Boku dake ga Inai Machi, Texhnolyze,Elfen Lied, Ghost Hunt, Genocyber, Katanagatari,Mahou Shoujo Ikusei Keikaku, Wolf's Rain, Re:Zero kara Hajimeru Isekai Seikatsu, Fullmetal Alchemist, Mirai Nikki, Ergo Proxy, Hellsing Ultimate, Tokyo Magnitude 8.0, Steins;Gate, Charlotte, Koutetsujou no Kabaneri, Subete ga F ni naru, Grave of the Fireflies, One Piece, Code Geass,Higurashi no naku koro ni, Umineko no naku koro ni, Betterman, Ima Soko ni Iru Boku, Parasyte, Mahou Shoujo Madoka Magica, Owari no Seraph, Orange ... and then of course Zero Two with Osamu.
(the fact that in the original post that brought up the issue Meiko was stated as an example of a "child" made examples rather numerous)
In the end I'll say again that I don't expect tri to feature nazi vampires eating babies at any point... but it has happened in anime.
My point is that Higurashi No Naku Koro Ni was not a valid example to prove that Tri can kill "child" characters.
In fact, I mentioned that children died in animes.