[Discussion] One Piece Theory (+821): Oda's Unbelievable Foreshadow in Facebook

[scorezor]

[video=youtube;YInbIZ6EOIA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YInbIZ6EOIA[/video]

enjoy.

 

[Passerby]

So a Japanese guy eating a Japanese food is a foreshadow?

 

[scorezor]

u didn't understood lol.

 

[WhistleBlower]

Question: At 1:31 in the above video what is that image from?

 

[scorezor]

Question: At 1:31 in the above video what is that image from?

i dont know , ask him xD

 

[Caliburn]

This is why I hate video theories, this is flat-out horrible, but the creator wants to make it look appear sensible with smokescreen and flashy effects figuratively speaking. I'm starting to hate the "Oda is a god of foreshadowing" statement even more than I already did due to people and vids like these. Yes Oda foreshadows stuff, but what he doesn't do however is foreshadowing every little minuscule non-important thing =/

Cobi saying that pirates have invaded the marines as spies is not a foreshadowing.

Usopp having written on his swimming trunks "lie turns into reality" is not a foreshadowing.

Concept arts are no foreshadowings.

Oda saying he is eating a popular Japanese meal in Japan is not a foreshadowing.

Crocus drinking with an unknown character is not a real foreshadowing.

The SBS thing is only half and half a potential foreshadowing.


A good and a real foreshadowing will only be clear when the thing it foreshadows has occurred and has a unique property that makes it almost certain it was meant as a foreshadowing. Especially the latter thing is important as something that's vague and ambiguous would be extremely redundant as a foreshadowing because even if what it foreshadows has occurred, you can't say for certain it was a foreshadowing.


Cobi making a general, broad remark of how pirates have been known to infiltrate the marines as spies and it actually happening 700 chapters and 15 years later, is not a foreshadowing because that statement is so incredibly vague and general.

Usopp having that sentence written on his trunks is representation of a personality trait of his, not a foreshadowing. That some of Usopp's lies became truths has been discussed for years now as it was already proven all the way back on Little Garden it was possible. So having that written on his trunks in a recent cover art is not even remotely a foreshadowing.

Concept arts by their very core mean that they were things that did not made the cut or got changed that much it really isn't a foreshadowing anymore. For example I can see traits of Dorry, Don Krieg, Z and Pica among others in those concept characters. The fact that these concepts were released alone means that even if something still would be used from them, it would be so different it's not a foreshadowing anymore as they really aren't going to release exact concepts of characters that have yet to appear unless it's specifically stated like they do for movies and games. Even if one of those concepts still would be used, he would be so different that any kind of intentional foreshadowing would be mute.

I mean Oda saying he is eating udon, a popular and common Japanese food, and afterwards introduces a character named Oden, now as as a foreshadowing that would be so utterly stupid it can't be a real foreshadowing. I mean how does that sound? "I'm eating udon" "Omg Oda is saying a character that is named Oden will be introduced"! It makes no sense, the two have nothing in common and apparently Oda then can't say anything even boringly normal without someone finding a meaning behind it. It's possible there was some inside joke for himself, but you really shouldn't become paranoid about this.

That Crocus is drinking with a character that has its back to us, well then there is logically a high chance that character will pop up sooner or later. That however can not be considered a real foreshadowing simply because that possibility would be that obvious. It's similar to how we can be certain the last unknown admiral will make his appearance at some point.

The only thing that could be considered half and half a legit foreshadowing in that entire vid, was the SBS part. Though technically speaking that person only asked one question and Oda replied to that one question. He didn't ask anything about those rabbits, he just mentioned it. Now that Oda ignored the rabbit-thing might indicate it indeed has some kind of importance.

 

[Punk Hazard]

This is why I hate video theories, this is flat-out horrible, but the creator wants to make it look appear sensible with smokescreen and flashy effects figuratively speaking. I'm starting to hate the "Oda is a god of foreshadowing" statement even more than I already did due to people and vids like these. Yes Oda foreshadows stuff, but what he doesn't do however is foreshadowing every little minuscule non-important thing =/

Cobi saying that pirates have invaded the marines as spies is not a foreshadowing.

Usopp having written on his swimming trunks "lie turns into reality" is not a foreshadowing.

Concept arts are no foreshadowings.

Oda saying he is eating a popular Japanese meal in Japan is not a foreshadowing.

Crocus drinking with an unknown character is not a real foreshadowing.

The SBS thing is only half and half a potential foreshadowing.


A good and a real foreshadowing will only be clear when the thing it foreshadows has occurred and has a unique property that makes it almost certain it was meant as a foreshadowing. Especially the latter thing is important as something that's vague and ambiguous would be extremely redundant as a foreshadowing because even if what it foreshadows has occurred, you can't say for certain it was a foreshadowing.


Cobi making a general, broad remark of how pirates have been known to infiltrate the marines as spies and it actually happening 700 chapters and 15 years later, is not a foreshadowing because that statement is so incredibly vague and general.

Usopp having that sentence written on his trunks is representation of a personality trait of his, not a foreshadowing. That some of Usopp's lies became truths has been discussed for years now as it was already proven all the way back on Little Garden it was possible. So having that written on his trunks in a recent cover art is not even remotely a foreshadowing.

Concept arts by their very core mean that they were things that did not made the cut or got changed that much it really isn't a foreshadowing anymore. For example I can see traits of Dorry, Don Krieg, Z and Pica among others in those concept characters. The fact that these concepts were released alone means that even if something still would be used from them, it would be so different it's not a foreshadowing anymore as they really aren't going to release exact concepts of characters that have yet to appear unless it's specifically stated like they do for movies and games. Even if one of those concepts still would be used, he would be so different that any kind of intentional foreshadowing would be mute.

I mean Oda saying he is eating udon, a popular and common Japanese food, and afterwards introduces a character named Oden, now as as a foreshadowing that would be so utterly stupid it can't be a real foreshadowing. I mean how does that sound? "I'm eating udon" "Omg Oda is saying a character that is named Oden will be introduced"! It makes no sense, the two have nothing in common and apparently Oda then can't say anything even boringly normal without someone finding a meaning behind it. It's possible there was some inside joke for himself, but you really shouldn't become paranoid about this.

That Crocus is drinking with a character that has its back to us, well then there is logically a high chance that character will pop up sooner or later. That however can not be considered a real foreshadowing simply because that possibility would be that obvious. It's similar to how we can be certain the last unknown admiral will make his appearance at some point.

The only thing that could be considered half and half a legit foreshadowing in that entire vid, was the SBS part. Though technically speaking that person only asked one question and Oda replied to that one question. He didn't ask anything about those rabbits, he just mentioned it. Now that Oda ignored the rabbit-thing might indicate it indeed has some kind of importance.

Don't see why the hell my comment was deleted, so I'll just try again.

I disagree. Just because you don't see these things are foreshadowing doesn't mean they can't be. Boring and mundane things, you have a point, but to dismiss cover art? I don't see the basis. There's no reason cover art can't be foreshadowing and people have made excellent connections before.

 

[Lawlermelon]

Your comment was deleted because it was a subtle way of trolling. Dont play dumb, nig ga.

 

[palmer]

lol smh .

 

[Caliburn]

Don't see why the hell my comment was deleted, so I'll just try again.

I disagree. Just because you don't see these things are foreshadowing doesn't mean they can't be. Boring and mundane things, you have a point, but to dismiss cover art? I don't see the basis. There's no reason cover art can't be foreshadowing and people have made excellent connections before.

You just quoted my post, said "I disagree" and bolted. Any person with common sense would add why he/she disagrees and because it came from you, well then there was little doubt you did that on purpose in an attempt to annoy a staff member again by disagreeing with him, but not saying why. Logically I'm going to remove the post then as it's plain trolling. So stop acting dumb and saying why you don't get why your post got deleted. That's the drawback of having a big provocative mouth like yours, it gets suspicious when you suddenly go silent. That becomes even more obvious from this post, which is near useless. You used what you tried to prove as an argument to prove it. People have never made excellent connections before, they used vague, ambiguous things that they highly subjectively interpreted and got away with it because it was so so vague and ambiguous and that was my exact point. This is seriously one of the oldest tricks in the book, it was already done in ancient Greece: if you make a vague, ambiguous statement, but not too vague, you can make people believe whatever you want as you can go with it into any direction you want. This is how many pseudo-psychics fool people.

Neither cover art nor color art are part of the story. The first Oda even makes on requests of the readers, he doesn't make them up. They depict scenes that have nothing to do with the story whatsoever. These supposed people you are talking about are delusional, they are the ones who have no basis. For the record what I said wasn't just some subjective opinion, but what a definition of a real foreshadowing is. Oda knows the story, he doesn't need to make vague, ambiguous foreshadowings. So yeah there is no basis to start seeing things into artworks Oda made on requests from other people that depict things that have nothing to do with the story.

People didn't make excellent connections, they were so gullible and naive to think they had, the person who made that vid is a prime example of that.

 

[Punk Hazard]

You just quoted my post, said "I disagree" and bolted. Any person with common sense would add why he/she disagrees and because it came from you, well then there was little doubt you did that on purpose in an attempt to annoy a staff member again by disagreeing with him, but not saying why. Logically I'm going to remove the post then as it's plain trolling. So stop acting dumb and saying why you don't get why your post got deleted. That's the drawback of having a big provocative mouth like yours, it gets suspicious when you suddenly go silent. That becomes even more obvious from this post, which is near useless. You used what you tried to prove as an argument to prove it. People have never made excellent connections before, they used vague, ambiguous things that they highly subjectively interpreted and got away with it because it was so so vague and ambiguous and that was my exact point. This is seriously one of the oldest tricks in the book, it was already done in ancient Greece: if you make a vague, ambiguous statement, but not too vague, you can make people believe whatever you want as you can go with it into any direction you want. This is how many pseudo-psychics fool people.

I didn't read this part. This much negativity is unwanted.

Neither cover art nor color art are part of the story.

So what? Why is it so farfetched to assume that Oda isn't clever and creative enough to draw these little independent cover pages or artworks that sometimes might contain an allusion to the story?

Is it really so impossible that Oda might be doing both at once every now and again? Sure, EVERY thing might not be foreshadowing, but to say that the cover pages or the artwork contain zero foreshadowing 100% of the time? Why? Why do you say adamantly want this to be true? Is it just to go against the grain? I don't see the point or use in being so gun-ho against such a little thing that could actually be true.

The first Oda even makes on requests of the readers, he doesn't make them up.

This doesn't mean he can't also include an allusion to the story. For example, if Oda were to ask to draw the Admirals playing cards, he could easily do so and have Akainu be holding an Ace or dropping an Ace or something to allude to Akainu killing Ace, providing foreshadowing and fulfilling the art request. Before you say it, yes I know this never happened, it's an hypothetical example that shows it's not impossible.

There's no reason for you to be so negative and killjoy whenever this kind of thing is brought up. No one is gonna stop making the connections, so it's a pile of ranting and toxicity that will accomplish nothing ever. Please stop.

 

[Lawlermelon]

I didn't read this part. This much negativity is unwanted. .

Hahahaa you're such a dumbas s. Your failed attempts at trolling are hilarious. Shut your slave mouth.