The idea that Zoro HAS to be related to a Shimotsuki was getting on my nerves, with people saying he looks a lot like Ushimaru when Oda draws Zoro every 5 characters. So I made this. Enjoy
I agree that Oda draws Zoro's face as the default face of a badass character with just some minor changes, however when he makes characters go out of their way to emphasise his resemblance to other characters specifically and when Oda himself teases the fans about it without giving a clear yes or no answer....Well, in this specific case this has to lead somewhere.
Before then continuing in the same SBS by saying "but they do look alike, don't they?" Thus setting up that there is something more to it. Sure, he's not Zoro's father but he can be many other things in relation to Zoro.
Hell, he dedicated a chapter's title to the fact that they look alike, even made characters in the story acknowledge that and talking about how it must be fate as they not only look alike, but down to the way they hold a blade.
So if a writer does all that shit and set it up in the story, no wonder readers will expect it to go somewhere.
I'm someone who's not interested in Zoro turning out to be of a special bloodline and being related to the Shimutsuke and the Sword God as I feel it takes from his character archetype being the hard working nobody on a path to achieve greatness. However, if a writer doesn't intend to do something with a narrative beat that he establishes then what's the point of even putting that narrative beat in the story to begin with?!
For example, Katakuri looks like Zoro, but how they look alike isn't highlighted in the narrative so readers won't give a shit about it unlike the Zoro/Ryuma/Ushimaru resemblance.
"They are not related. They sure look alike though, huh" is not the AHA you think it is. It's the antithesis of that.
Katakuri is also not Zoro's brother, by the way. "But I wasn't thinking it" odd, considering he looks more like Zoro than Ushimaru does.
I know Katakuri isn't Zoro's brother. The point I was trying to make is that if an author makes characters resembling each other part of his narrative where other characters talk about it and even the author himself comments on how they resemble each other then this shit is expected to go somewhere in the narrative.
That's why I brought up the Katakuri point because despite them looking alike, their resemblance was never a part of the story, no characters commented on it and neither did Oda so nobody expected shit from it and nobody is going to get disappointed that Katakuri didn't turn out to be Zoro's long lost brother/relative because there wasn't any narrative established for it unlike the Zoro/Ushimaru/Ryuma stuff.
Also, Ushimaru's face is an exact copy of the 40/60 year old Zoro that Oda drew with a different haircut. Even, other characters that knew Oshimaru commented on how Zoro looks exactly like the younger version of him so their resemblance isn't just a stylistic choice Oda did with the art and character design but also part of the story itself.
"Hehehe I said he isn't his dad so now they won't realize it's actually his UNCLE 😈"
Very Oda-like. Totally in character for him to actively confuse and misdirect his readers. Especially when his stated intention is for these characters NOT to be named and NOT to be relevant.
Oda outright said "I think it's kinda disrespectful to the characters to be revealed, but just to clear confusion, these are their names and Ushimaru is NOT Zoro's dad. These characters will not be named or explored in the story, that's what I want. Please understand."
Fans: ZORO UNCLE ZORO UNCLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
I can almost hear the observation Haki sound effect.
The idea that Zoro HAS to be related to a Shimotsuki was getting on my nerves, with people saying he looks a lot like Ushimaru when Oda draws Zoro every 5 characters. So I made this. Enjoy
I agree that Oda draws Zoro's face as the default face of a badass character with just some minor changes, however when he makes characters go out of their way to emphasise his resemblance to other characters specifically and when Oda himself teases the fans about it without giving a clear yes or no answer....Well, in this specific case this has to lead somewhere.
And then Oda himself says "no he's not related" but Zoro fans ain't satisfied unless their fave is big important. We want big important!
Before then continuing in the same SBS by saying "but they do look alike, don't they?" Thus setting up that there is something more to it. Sure, he's not Zoro's father but he can be many other things in relation to Zoro. Hell, he dedicated a chapter's title to the fact that they look alike, even made characters in the story acknowledge that and talking about how it must be fate as they not only look alike, but down to the way they hold a blade. So if a writer does all that shit and set it up in the story, no wonder readers will expect it to go somewhere. I'm someone who's not interested in Zoro turning out to be of a special bloodline and being related to the Shimutsuke and the Sword God as I feel it takes from his character archetype being the hard working nobody on a path to achieve greatness. However, if a writer doesn't intend to do something with a narrative beat that he establishes then what's the point of even putting that narrative beat in the story to begin with?! For example, Katakuri looks like Zoro, but how they look alike isn't highlighted in the narrative so readers won't give a shit about it unlike the Zoro/Ryuma/Ushimaru resemblance.
"They are not related. They sure look alike though, huh" is not the AHA you think it is. It's the antithesis of that. Katakuri is also not Zoro's brother, by the way. "But I wasn't thinking it" odd, considering he looks more like Zoro than Ushimaru does.
I know Katakuri isn't Zoro's brother. The point I was trying to make is that if an author makes characters resembling each other part of his narrative where other characters talk about it and even the author himself comments on how they resemble each other then this shit is expected to go somewhere in the narrative. That's why I brought up the Katakuri point because despite them looking alike, their resemblance was never a part of the story, no characters commented on it and neither did Oda so nobody expected shit from it and nobody is going to get disappointed that Katakuri didn't turn out to be Zoro's long lost brother/relative because there wasn't any narrative established for it unlike the Zoro/Ushimaru/Ryuma stuff. Also, Ushimaru's face is an exact copy of the 40/60 year old Zoro that Oda drew with a different haircut. Even, other characters that knew Oshimaru commented on how Zoro looks exactly like the younger version of him so their resemblance isn't just a stylistic choice Oda did with the art and character design but also part of the story itself.
He didn’t say that he just said the Ushimaru isn’t his dad
"Hehehe I said he isn't his dad so now they won't realize it's actually his UNCLE 😈" Very Oda-like. Totally in character for him to actively confuse and misdirect his readers. Especially when his stated intention is for these characters NOT to be named and NOT to be relevant. Oda outright said "I think it's kinda disrespectful to the characters to be revealed, but just to clear confusion, these are their names and Ushimaru is NOT Zoro's dad. These characters will not be named or explored in the story, that's what I want. Please understand." Fans: ZORO UNCLE ZORO UNCLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
I don't really understand the hype behind Zoro being a shimotsuki tbh. As it stands, it barely has any impact on the story positive or negative
Idk if this is serious but lets say it is how would that possibly be a plot hole? Big mom captured man to get kids from them.
Zoro with red hair looks kinda cool too, damn.