Work Text:
【Notes】
This is a personal, rambling collection of thoughts and reflections, not a formal analysis.
Personal viewpoints archived here. If the reader disagrees, the reader is free to write their own piece.
The author is not a native English speaker.
【Key Considerations】
As this piece explores the original author's intent and narrative techniques in certain sections, discussions from the audience's perspective are unavoidable.
As this piece explores writing perspectives, certain sections may treat characters as narrative devices rather than individual human beings.
This piece may disrupt audience immersion and cause discomfort; proceed with caution.
【Note】
The author recently lacks patience for euphemistic phrasing, resulting in a potentially colder writing style. Readers have the right to stop reading.
If you dislike this, you are free to leave the page.
————————
Since the format of the Eva character analysis illustration seems to have been sent incorrectly, making it hard to see, I'm resending it along with some new essay content.
In many excellent and authentic stories, there is one similar characteristic—what the characters say ≠ objective reality.
Such as include the blurred world history mysteries in Re:Zero, the limited perspectives and biases stemming from characters' personal experiences or stances in Fate, or self-deception like Eva.
This often reflects both the author's meticulous portrayal of reality and serves as part of the narrative trick.
Failing to recognize this leads to getting lost in the narrative maze, detached from the story's reality, forever circling within one's own subjective perspective.
—When Eva subjectively believes "her failure stems entirely from her title," "UTP treated her unfairly," and "she had no choice but to watch her life be ruined"—without evidence, and thinking with common sense, what grounds do we have to accept this as the objective truth?
If Eva truly wished to escape the title and its potential biases, she could simply lose the competition—if being the top performer in competitions earned her the title, then ceasing to be the top performer would naturally get her out of it.
The notion that being "Ultimate" (a socially certified elite) guarantees success, or that a legitimate national institution should immediately make special exceptions—or "cut corners"—based on an individual's completely unreasonable demands, is a clear manifestation of a privileged mindset.
Consider this situation:
If a random passerby on the street suddenly declares, "The Earth is square," or "I'm from another world," or "The government is persecuting me," would we simply believe them? (Of course, this example is extreme.)
How is a character—especially one newly introduced or at the story's beginning—any different from a random passerby we saw on TV?
I once saw a viewer of another story criticize Character A for "not trusting Character B," claiming, "I know A wouldn't do that," and I feel???
Even setting aside the relationship between A and B in the story, has the audience even seen B appear three times in total?
Even with lifelong friends, family, or life partners, how many people can honestly claim they "unconditionally believe every single word they say"?
—Even if they don't mean to deceive you, they themselves have their own cognitive limitations due to their experiences and perspectives. Everyone is like that.
The character of Eva embodies this extreme version of "over-simplified thinking"—where "the subjective interpretation I like, equates the objective truth."
After all, Eva's character design and portrayal are deliberately crafted to induce audience empathy and self-projection.
—She is almost a perfect embodiment of human frailty—always choosing the simplest, least effortful, and most emotionally comfortable path—the most comfortable form of self-destruction.
She's also a warning sign.
But this is just a casual essay. I won't dwell on it further; I'll save more formal discussion for a proper article.
——————————
【Rejecting Malicious Responses—Distorting the Author's Intent, Misrepresenting the Article's Content, or Launching Emotional Attacks】
【The author reserves the final right to choose not to respond.】