Forum - View topic

The Real Pirates of One Piece

I was also hoping to see a mention of Roronoa Zoro, one of the most important characters in the series, named after François l'Olonnais, one of the most badass French people to have ever lived.

I always thought that the One Piece Blackbeard and Whitebeard were both based on the real life Blackbeard, with Teach being based more on the legend on Blackbeard, and Newgate being based more on how Blackbeard was actually supposed to be. Every account of him that I have read, made his real character out to be much more honorable, still a pirate, but not cruel.

I was sticking to the villains for this article (or at least the characters presented as more villainous), but if I do write more of these, he'd be at the top of my list. I was trying for a mix of well-known and obscure source pirates, as well as male and female...and, you know, keeping it a manageable length. So sadly my list had to be narrowed down.

Honestly, the art style in East Blue wasn't bad, it was just different but in a unique, wow I'm watching something fascinatingly different sort of way. Especially the HD remasters. The most atrocious character design has been during Arabasta, Thriller Bark, and then post-timeskip has been snot city which I can't even with but whatever, Oda, he's been sick lately so, you know, you write what you know, man.

jojothepunisher wrote:

Looking at those pictures of the pirates reminded me how ugly One Piece's character design is.

They are nearly twenty years old. Now some old characters designs to hold up over time, but a lot of them don't age well.

zrnzle500 wrote:

jojothepunisher wrote: Looking at those pictures of the pirates reminded me how ugly One Piece's character design is. They are nearly twenty years old. Now some old characters designs to hold up over time, but a lot of them don't age well.

How does age have anything to do with the quality of the art over time? Even back in the 90's Oda's art style was off the beaten track (mostly drawing comparisons to Dragon Ball), and when it started getting coverage in the West during the early aughts I remember people pointing out how different it looked, either loving it or disliking it. If anything, it just goes to show that attitudes have stayed the same, even as time has gone on.

In any case, I do like Oda's art style, and a lot of his full color illustration work is amazing. His anatomy and perspective can get a bit wonky at times, but it's still well-realized nonetheless.

How does age have anything to do with the quality of the art over time? Even back in the 90's Oda's art style was off the beaten track (mostly drawing comparisons to Dragon Ball), and when it started getting coverage in the West during the early aughts I remember people pointing out how different it looked, either loving it or disliking it. If anything, it just goes to show that attitudes have stayed the same, even as time has gone on.

In any case, I do like Oda's art style, and a lot of his full color illustration work is amazing. His anatomy and perspective can get a bit wonky at times, but it's still well-realized nonetheless.

In this case, opinions have stayed the same as you mentioned, due to its iconoclastic designs. Considering the medium, two dimensional drawings, doesn't change, the quality shouldn't change with time. Taste in design does however change. Would you say that designs from say the 90's or early 00's are still good looking? The quality of the art doesn't change, but people's opinion of those designs definitely does.Significant changes in character design taste are often a barrier to watching older shows, which is often mentioned by reviewers reviewing older shows. Now as you mentioned, the designs were very different so this applies less to One Piece, but more conventionally designed shows are very much affected by changing character design taste. The best and most iconically designed ones can hold up to time as well, but most designs live and die with the trends of the time.

I think it's all subjective. It's true that general tastes change with time, but that's not to say that the stylistic sensibilities of one era are necessarily better than any other (unless you're talking in some sort of technical or mechanical sense). Personally yes, I would say that character designs from the 90's and early aughts are still good looking, but it depends on the style or artist you're referring to. If we're talking about the works of artists like Rumiko Takahashi, Rui Araizumi, Yoshiyuki Sadamoto, Akira Toriyama, Masaki Kajishima, Naoki Urasawa, Masashi Kishimoto, Yuzo Takada, CLAMP, Kenichi Sonoda, etc., I think they generally had art styles that were popular and influential in their time that I think are still really good. Now if you ask if I still liked Masami Obari's art style from works like Gowcaizer or Fatal Fury, I would say no, but I'd also say that I didn't like those designs much back when I first saw them in the 90's either.

I think my issue may be more with how commentators sometimes word things when it comes to older works, as though to suggest that stylistically/spiritually speaking, the sensibilities of works become worse with time, which I don't think is the case. Those older works themselves don't change, but the people who first watched them, and the people who are still watching anime, they can change relative to those works, and I think that affects perceptions more than necessarily the quality of the work itself. There are still fantastic works from the 90's and early aughts that are very enjoyable and great to read/watch, and I think boiling any sort of lacking quality down to "its age" maybe undercuts that older works can also be very good even in a modern context. People who are hesitant to experience older works because of their style I think are like anyone who hesitates to check out something that's old and different --- they just have preconceived notions that older means worser, and understandably aren't as willing to invest the time to know if that's really the case or not, which is a shame.

But getting back to One Piece and Oda's art style, it wasn't really a work that reflected the era it came from, it was as odd and distinct back in the 90's as it still is now, so I don't think it can be said that it was part of any trend that died with its time.

chex mix wrote:

Honestly, the art style in East Blue wasn't bad, it was just different but in a unique, wow I'm watching something fascinatingly different sort of way. Especially the HD remasters. The most atrocious character design has been during Arabasta, Thriller Bark, and then post-timeskip has been snot city which I can't even with but whatever, Oda, he's been sick lately so, you know, you write what you know, man.

You're the first person I've seen insisting Alabasta and Thriller Bark had declining quality in art.

Plus, Thriller Bark is all around so... I don't know, boring, yet annoying? In my opinion, and I skip it in my rewatches from what point I tap out on at up to spoiler[Kuma showing up] which to be sure must affect my opinion. It's fine.