QUOTE
It's not a NaruSaku interaction. It's an indication of how she feels about Naruto's abilities. It's a back-handed compliment, but she's using Sasuke's rivalry with Naruto to motivate him.
And I don't think that she had a constant awareness and appreciation of Naruto at that time. It was still developing.
Yeah, it's an indication that despite his courage (which she'd just seen to the point that she can no longer deny it), she still thinks he sucks ability-wise as a ninja (despite him having had the biggest had in most of Team 7's victories, all of which she witnessed). Some compliment and appreciation that is...
QUOTE
You mean other than nodding and going along with his idea?
If she didn't trust him, she would've tried to stop him. Instead, she was persuaded. And when Sasuke reproves the two of them for it later, she doesn't try to blame Naruto for it.
She never nodded at him, she didn't trust him, and she did try to stop him, multiple times over. And she was never persuaded (More like got exasperated with him and gave up, letting him suffer the consequences for himself). And Sasuke reproved her for letting Kabuto (a supposed enemy) get near her and the scroll, NOT for her trying to open up the scroll. That (Kabuto getting near) was in fact her fault just as much as it was Naruto's. So she naturally had a reason to take up some blame.
But still, this is a relatively minor point and getting the focus off the topic at hand (not that we're really dealing with the topic all that much anyway). So I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, again.
QUOTE
He says just the reverse to Sasuke in the Valley of the End - that he was trying to deny their similarities and how close they were. And their difficulties after Sasuke sacrificed himself to save Naruto in the Wave arc suggested just the same - they couldn't handle the knowledge that they actually cared for each other.
Oh yeah? Then how come Naruto specifically thinks of Sasuke when he considered the people who saved him from the "black hell" his life was in (during the fight against Gaara) by, in his own words, "recognizing me" (Chapter 132)? In that scene where he reflects on the people he thinks recognized him, Sasuke is one of the FIRST who comes into the picture, along with Iruka and the rest of Team 7. The fact that Naruto later wanted Sasuke to recognize him
as an equal has no bearing on whether or not Naruto considered him a precious person. In Naruto's mind, Sasuke was already a precious person due to the fact that he thought Sasuke "recognized" him, as a person if nothing else (in fact, Sasuke even referred to Naruto as a "cherished companion" to his face in the fight with Gaara on Chapter 133!). Of course, he later found out that in Sasuke's mind, their connection was not nearly precious enough to prevent him from leaving Konoha (and by extension, Naruto himself), or for that matter, important enough to stop him from thrusting a couple of Chidori through Naruto's chest.
My point is, Naruto's perceptions of how other people valued their bonds to him were clearly inaccurate from the reality. It happened with Sasuke, and it happened with Sakura as well (at least until the PoaL).
QUOTE
Sorry. Must've just been anime then. She also calls out for Naruto during the Gaara fight, but that's also just anime.
No worries. But the latter is in fact in the manga, when she utters Sasuke's name first and then Naruto's name before she blacks out (Chapter 131).
QUOTE
If you understood what I meant, why are you saying that it's impossible for them to have gotten closer in part one if the bulk of the development happened in part one? You're asserting that I claimed that all of the development happened in part one and that there was no further room for them to get closer.
I never asserted that you claimed that ALL of their development happened in Part I or that there was no room to get closer. What I said was that I
understood your opinion that the bulk of their development happened in Part I, not that I agreed with it. Understanding does NOT mean agreeing. I never agreed with this opinion, even though I understood it by way of comprehension (maybe I should have said comprehended it from the beginning). I understand many things in this world, but I still don't
agree with most of them.
QUOTE
What I think is that you've measured it out a lot more precisely than I have.
Well, I tried to illustrate it as best I could. But it's not as if I look at Naruto and Sakura in the manga and see a specifically labeled "NaruSaku closeness" meter over their heads, and then watch it fill up when they display closeness...
QUOTE
I'd be happy to say that it was roughly 50/50, but if you pushed me (well, you don't have to push me, I've already volunteered it) to say where most of the development comes from, it's prior to the PoaL. That's where all the groundwork was. The PoaL and subsequent events is just where the payoff became more obvious.
But I disagree with this opinion (that all or even most of the groundwork was laid before the PoaL), simply because the building blocks/cornerstones directly responsible for Naruto and Sakura's deep friendship in Part II were not laid
until the PoaL and afterwards. What are these building blocks?
A) A voluntary opening up of relations with the intent of friendship on BOTH sides.
B ) A willing and constant appreciation for what the other person is, on BOTH sides.
C) A recognition of the extent of loyalty felt by both partners towards the other on BOTH sides.
D) A desire to understand the other person on BOTH sides.
E) A desire to work towards building, maintaining, and protecting a deep connection on BOTH sides.
Until the PoaL, all of these only applied to one partner, and one side: Naruto. But after the PoaL, these began to apply to both partners: Naruto and Sakura. This was not payoff at all. Until all these applied on BOTH sides, no payoff could be worked towards or obtained. The payoff, as it was, began coming only after Naruto returned empty-handed in Part I (when Sakura tells him they'll bring back Sasuke together), and mostly comes in Part II, where we see, among other things, Naruto and Sakura eating together (with Sakura even offering to feed him
) and Sakura offering to save Sasuke for Naruto (and absolving his promise). None of these things happen at anywhere near those points in time if the foundations of their relationship I lettered above are still missing. And the level of closeness that allows and inspires these actions is also not reached unless those cornerstones are laid. Without them, the relationship stays as Naruto-centric and lukewarm as it was before the PaoL, or fails to deepen notably at the very most. And I reiterate, those cornerstones were laid at the PoaL, and not before.
QUOTE
And yeah, I am still confused about your own perceptions. Maybe it's just that you're trying to emphasize your points, but in putting down any progress that they've made in part one, it sounds like you feel the fraction of development was a lot less than the 20-25% that you just claimed.
Well, the numbers were probably generous to begin with (it might be closer to the middle teens than the middle twenties). But I did try to factor in Naruto's 100% dedication to the cause, and perhaps inflated them a bit that way. But still, that's besides the point, I think. The general idea I was trying to make there is that a far greater amount of development happened right at and after the PoaL than before.
QUOTE
I read all of the definitions and while I went with the most popular, none of the ones require consciousness of one's actions IMO. Some imply it (like the American Heritage one using "management" or the part with "insidious means"). Skillful isn't synonymous with deliberate or conscious. Neither is shrewd, artful, or unfair. And a person can act towards a certain purpose without being conscious of it. Maybe I'm especially absent-minded, but I have a lot. I think the unconscious mind is a pretty powerful tool and can do a heckuva lot that one isn't aware of.
Shrewd and artful certainly imply consciousness of action, for they are the product of concious thought. And to an lesser extent, skillful and unfair imply consciousness too. Skillful implies it due to the fact that it becomes nothing more than luck without it, and unfair implies a conscious idea of what "fairness" is to begin with. But still, that's nitpicking here, and you're certainly welcome to your opinions. I just happen to use the definition that best applies to the circumstances and the situation, rather that something as vague as "most popular". And in my mind, there is nothing unconscious about being a "manipulative b*tch". To be something like that, you have to be aware of exactly what you're doing and actually try to do it.
QUOTE
And
I have the
11th Edition of Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, copyright 200
5.
It says the same thing though. :amuse
You're welcome to argue that
some definitions of manipulative require conscious effort (although I'd still disagree). But some clearly don't, including the most common definition. Anyway, we're way off topic here. I guess it beats going over the same ground again.
Nah, I think I'll pass. It's clear that we don't agree here, and we likely wouldn't even if we had an eternity to debate it. So I think we should just save ourselves the trouble
SkyStrider
P.S: For some reason, I can't get the quote function to work. Sorry.
This topic is locked
