Kaname what type of character is he?

First topic message reminder :

So I found this site randomly and found this I belive that it is the perfect description for kaname.

Magnificent b****** The following is a copy and paste from the link to the left.
If there was ever a character that deserved to be called “Magnificent”, that character is the Magnificent b******. The Magnificent b****** is what happens when you combine The Chessmaster, The Trickster, and the Manipulative b******: bold, charismatic, independent, and audacious. Capturing the audience with his charisma, incredible intellect, mastery of manipulation, and boldness of action, this character is a show-stealer, demanding your reverence at every turn. The term "Magnificent b******" was first used by General Patton in reference to Erwin Rommel in the film Patton, upon realizing that he was facing a man who literally wrote the book on deceptive warfare. It acquired its current meaning courtesy of Lionel Luthor of Smallville, who was given this nickname by the Television Without Pity boards.
So what makes a character a Magnificent b******?
Let's break it down:
He is brilliant and utterly devious, to an almost breathtaking, mind-boggling degree. Call it genius, call it virtual omniscience, but he always seems to know what everyone else is planning at any given moment, and exactly how to arrange the game so he wins even when he is defeated. Didn't See That Coming doesn't derail him; he can always adapt.
He is a smooth operator. He always knows exactly what to say to position you where he wants you, always has a backup strategy and never loses his cool. Even if on the remote chance something happens that wasn't in his plans, you'd never know it from his actions.
He has a goal, he's not going to stop until he's completed it, whatever it is. To that end he will do almost anything. He'll move heaven and hell. Despite his choice of tactics, he is rarely if ever pointlessly cruel, and has a reason for everything he does.
He is charismatic, often charming, his personality like a physical force. People tend to like him, sometimes even when they know he isn't on their side, and even those who hate his guts have to admit respect. Even when at his darkest, he has traits which one can't help but admire.

There is also insight to the chess game and types of players at This Link.

@richard does evil to you means as the real definition of the word or as in spanish perverso? which can be translated as evil, wicked or else. It's more like a psycological meaning, for that kind of personality.

if you understand tell me...i am making no sense out of this also...still you can not say that i am not trying.

I don't get what is wrong with them being evil? Evil as in choosing the do negative things to full fill there goals in stead of positive things.
The reason I say kaname is evil is cause he uses negative options to reach his goals more often then positive options. To determine a person you take in there negative and positive and weigh them against each other.

LOL I am sorry Richard but when you are talking options which were the options that Kaname had in the first arc? tell me examples and how you reach this conclusion.

I know an option not to interfere at all; to take Yuuki, turn her to her pureblood status and have fun at an exotic paradise. Then nobody would label him as the magnificent b******. See my point?

I am sure that Zero would found a way out of this mess; after all what kind of hero is he, if he expects uncle Kaname to come and take his hand?

As it happens right now, Takuma had proposed that option to Kaname to take Yuuki and live happily ever after... Sara was happy to fulfill his role and kill all purebloods, not to mention Ichiou too from the past...given these two as options (since they were collaborators from long ago), why did he interfere in the first place i do not know? see my point...

options as you say...

as far as me listing some my meaning of good and evil is different from your own so they wont mesh, you seem to use a literal translation to base your good and evil while I use positive and negative actions weighed against each other.

sadly Richard, i see that you have nothing concrete to say, other than your own personal definition of evil...but communication is based on mutual understanding of the definition of words..that's why there are definitions, otherwise we can not communicate. If i start sharing my own personal "definitions" of right and wrong we shall never talk about a real thing..

Since as you say you are not good in expressing things the way you mean it, i would suggest to try the common terms that are understood by everyone...a much better way to communicate your meaning. Try to find the correct terms that do communicate the meaning. Otherwise this can not work. Both parties have to try...i can not make it through interpersonal meanings i am sorry.

A good person is not always good and an evil person is not always bad.

then you are speaking about actions...that evil(?) actions do not characterize a person as being bad neither good actions characterize a person of being good.

For me it would be the other way around since evil in its common definitions has far too strong meaning - immoral in order not to characterize a person...
such as

bad actions do not characterize a person as being evil neither good actions characterize a person as being a saint.

Let me see examples;

when Kaname kills Shizouka is a bad action but he does that to protect Zero and Yuuki, since Shizouka wanted them all at her disposal. In a far greater scale if Kaname had allowed to Shizouka to have it her way, someone else should kill her to free Zero that would be Zero or Yuuki herself

So the action of killing her is bad (as an action) but Kaname is not evil.

In the same view Zero kills the vampire that was at the auction (without giving him a chance to apologise or to further arrest him) so this action is bad. Well since Zero was not in reality protecting anyone at that time and he had captured the vampire, could we characterize him as evil? (where is the balance of the action here?)

Ichijou kills his grandfather but his grandfather was a manipulative b****** all the way so is Ichijou evil?

Still this having nothing to do with the initial question of your post.

Kaname may fit the description that you gave because the balance is in the intentions and what there is to protect or how many things depended upon his decisions or actions.

From your definition as described above:

However, it's true that his penchant for manipulation at the expense of others means it's common for him to be a Villain, Villain Protagonist, or at least an Anti-Hero, but purely heroic examples exist.

For me an additional reason that Kaname can not be the villain of the script is because there is no hero that can antagonize him. If there was a hero perhaps i would see a villain but i do not see a hero.

If he is the anti-hero then which are his selfish reasons to act so?

Instead I found this one that typically matches far more Kaname's ways;

Completing a triangle with the Action Hero and the Science Hero, the Guile Hero is a hero who operates by playing politics and manipulating the bad guys. The Guile Hero trades swords and guns (or science and technology) for charm, wit, political and/or financial acumen, and an in-depth knowledge of human nature. The Chain of Deals, along with the Social Engineering and Gambit Index tropes are all at the Guile Hero's fingertips. Often, a Guile Hero will manipulate the other good guys and a whole bunch of innocent bystanders as part of their scheme to bring down the Big Bad, though they'll take care to ensure the other characters aren't truly harmed in the process (and if they fail, they'll be very sorry). The Guile Hero is likely to be a politician or a businessman, and engage in Battles of Wits.
The Guile Hero could be a good analog to the Manipulative b******: the Guile Hero is unambiguously a good guy with the same goals as any Action Hero or Science Hero. While some other heroes may be unhappy with being manipulated by the Guile Hero, it is made clear to the reader that this character both has a heroic goal and is not (usually) Jumping Off the Slippery Slope into becoming a Well-Intentioned Extremist.
The Guile Hero combines elements of The Chessmaster, the Trickster Archetype and The Strategist without having to be all of these. A Guile Hero isn't necessarily The Chessmaster: the Guile Hero is simply a hero who uses wit, charm, and skill to mislead and set up the bad guys, while The Chessmaster is often devoted to grander schemes, and is always at the top of the food chain. A Manipulative b****** tends to be more personal and controlling in his manipulations. A Guile Hero need not be a master manipulator; "guile" can mean "shrewdness" instead of "deceit". The Chain of Deals is just as valid a tool for these characters as the Batman Gambit, and a Guile Hero may very well be a grown up High School Hustler.
In the Five-Man Band, the Guile Hero is most likely to be The Face of the troupe and/or The Smart Guy though a particularly bright Leader or Lancer can also fit in. If The Chick uses her emotional influence to the extreme and combines it with quick wits and words, she can also grow into one. The Guile Hero is also frequently a Sixth Ranger, and if Sixth Ranger is also a Guile Hero they tend to be Sixth Ranger Traitor.
Compare the Young Conqueror, which is a young example of this trope taken Up to Eleven with a side of Take Over the World ambition as well. May overlap with Good Is Not Dumb. Compare Silk Hiding Steel when a Proper Lady feels like plotting. Very, very rarely will this overlap with Small Steps Hero, due to the latter being unwilling to sacrifice innocent parties—but manipulating the villains is just fine.

and since we are referring also to hero - that means action is involved let's go and see who is the character that can be characterized as hero alltogether;

An Action Hero is a form of protagonist who primarily uses combat to achieve his goals in a story. If there's something in his way, his main response is to beat it up. This could be because he doesn't have the patience or skills for any other method, or because he just doesn't have the time. But then again, maybe he actually does try other methods first but it always seems to turn out that Violence Really Is the Answer.

[quote] The Hero can do all the unrelated fighting on the side that he wants, but if he doesn't use it to accomplish his primary goal then it does not make him an Action Hero. Likewise, a character can be a Badass, or show skill in combat, without actually being an Action Hero. If a character never seems to be working towards anything in particular, coming up against problems or facing trials, and generally acting as a Satellite Character, then this trope cannot apply to him.[/quote]

Now i see that violence is used, cunning also, i see that a hero can take many forms and can have multiple ways (manipulation included to achieve its ways) but all these of course mean that he is working for a greater purpose.

Let's see another definition of hero;

Joseph Campbell, a famous scholar who spent his career creating a hero archetype from the mythology of many cultures, once said, “a hero is someone who has given his or her life to something bigger than oneself.” A hero by definition is a person who acts beyond their duty to help or save others, often sacrificing him or her self in the process. The hero can be defined by current events, fictional heroes, and historical heroes in wars.

So what really makes you to chose the particular definition that you used about Kaname? and as an additional question i want to ask about Zero's role...as a description where is he as a hero? which are his goals? his intention to be sacrificed? or his altruistic attitude?

if you show me a hero here, perhaps i shall see a villain or an anti-hero.

And now that i read all the above quite enlightening things, thank you Richard i know that your initial thread would have a use, i can say with certainty that if not Kaname then this script has no HERO. So perhaps we should start from scratch? where is the hero?

look above your first post on this page, I judge them as good or evil on the the methods they use weighed against each other, good and evil might not be the best words to use.
Good or Evil
White or Black
Right or Wrong
Positive or Negative
In my reasoning no one is ever actually one or the other but a mixture of both, the side I add them to is the side with the greater value of them self's inserted into it. This also means that the side they are on can also change depending on there actions.

Have you ever played the game black or white 2? For every negative action you do you get negative alignment points, for every positive thing you do you get positive alignment points, the game takes your alignment and makes your hand and temple be towards the white good side or the black evil side depending on your overall actions.

I judge good or evil like that only not on such a grand scale. I judge it on the info I have at the moment and adjust it when new info is added or old info is invalidated.

Black or White 2...? You mean the newest pokemon games?

Check Out The Link

This game is really fun, unless you are trying to be good only with no evil then it can get frustrating. But when that happens just grab a villager and throw them to the next village, umm I mean carry.

All these are preety flat, i would suggest the next time that you try to fit Kaname under a description to take into consideration the original definition of the hero and work that way.

a: mythological or legendary figure often of divine descent endowed with great strength or ability
b : an illustrious warrior
c : a man admired for his achievements and noble qualities
d : one who shows great courage
a : the principal male character in a literary or dramatic work
b : the central figure in an event, period, or movement

Then go and see what trully makes a hero;

from Psychology Today...

What actually makes a hero? I'd argue it's the willingness to make a personal sacrifice for the benefit of others. If you don't find yourself having to resist a voice inside your head urging you to save yourself instead of whatever action you're contemplating, my heart, at least, will refuse to recognize your actions—however legitimately compassionate or courageous they may be—as heroic. Serving others while simultaneously serving oneself can be noble, certainly, but a special kind of nobility attaches itself to those who serve others at a cost to themselves.

And then see the types of heroes: what i see is that Kaname perfectly combines the Guile Hero with the Action Hero in this arc...

Even though Hino is by far more complex (or simple to my mind) to fall into these so general and mostly of all roughly cut models. Each writer may i dare to say wants her character unique, can borrow traits and step into archetypes but delivering one of the many is not so self-fullfilling as originality.

Meanwhile i insist in my original remark that in order for kaname to be the villain or the anti-hero we need to reach the end and mostly and most significant we need another hero; Yuuki is the main candidate to that, but due to their intention both of them to be sacrificed the status is the same.

Here we fall in the conflict that can be one of main issues that drive the plot (at far we see it so far) altogether;

Some good romance tips for the writers for anyone interested to read;

from the Writing World

Like any real-life relationship, the relationship in a romance novel has highs and lows, ups and downs. Both characters should work toward making the relationship work. Otherwise, you don't have a real relationship, you have a codependency or even (ick!) a stalker.

It is almost always necessary for the relationship to become threatened. Sometimes, the forces that threaten the relationship are external forces -- such as a war that drives the lovers apart. More often than not, however, it is the hero or heroine (or sometimes both) who threaten the relationship -- and they are the only ones who can get back together. Get back together they must (as Yoda would say), or you will not have a romance novel.There are some romances where the relationship is smooth sailing from the beginning, but those are rare and very hard to pull off. Like real people, the hero and heroine should enter the relationship with doubts and misgivings and fears, and those doubts, misgivings, and fears should drive what happens to the relationship.

Goals can bring the hero and heroine together, and they can drive them apart. Like all great fictional characters, your hero and heroine should both want something and try to work toward that goal. It might be something completely different from what the other wants, which would drive the conflict between them. The hero and heroine might be working toward the same goals, although in different ways -- resulting in (you guessed it) conflict. They might even join forces against a common enemy, in which case the conflict would be driven by external foes rather than clashes between the hero and heroine.

It must define the personal characteristics of the hero and heroine. He or she must be the kind of person who would become involved in such a conflict, and on a particular side of that conflict. Or, if they are thrust unwillingly into the conflict, it will define their personal growth through its resolution. The conflict defines the relationship between them as friends, as antagonists, and as lovers. It can also define their relationship to secondary characters.

Most important of all, the conflict must be one that is able to be resolved in a way that is both the logical outcome of all events, and is also satisfying to the characters involved as well as to the reader.

One often-heard suggestion on how to create sustainable conflict has been to place the hero and heroine on diametrically opposed sides of a major social or political event. These are situations that hold the potential for a great deal of emotional turmoil, as well as lots of action, which can enhance the escalating sexual tension necessary in a romance. At first glance, this sounds like a good idea.

However, your job as an author is not only to create the conflict and the tension, but also to resolve it. This is especially important in a romance novel, where your reader expects the hero and heroine to form a lasting, loving relationship. You, as the author, must never disappoint your reader!

If the goals of your hero and heroine are completely opposite, as you resolve the plot, one must win and one must lose. If the heroine wins, the hero turns into a wimp. No one wants a wimpy hero! If the hero wins, your story has turned into just another tale of how the masterful male overcomes the ditzy weakling, and outdated, female. What we are left with is basically a No-Win Situation with lots of room for resentment on both sides. The capacity to forgive and forget set aside, your "losing" character may seem less of a person if they are willing to relinquish a long-cherished, firmly-held dream to be totally subsumed in a relationship. The No-Win Situation may be the logical resolution of the conflict, but it may not be the emotionally satisfying conclusion your reader expects and deserves.

For me, the best plots make the hero's and the heroine's goals the same. Sounds silly. Sounds impossible! In a romance, the good guys (all of them) should always win.

Just some thoughts for the readers...that are coming from literature. I hope you shall find interesting remarks in there, without that meaning anything for the end but are common writing paths that allow the readers to experience, drama, conflict, resolution.

Of course you need a hero and a heroine to support such a conflict. It can not be accomplished with a satellite character as you understand and it's obvious.

If you are so against the character type then why did you say it was ok to post it?
The main thing that drew me to it is that it was chess involved and vk focuses on chess.
Exactly what part of it are you saying doesn't match kaname?

He is brilliant and utterly devious, to an almost breathtaking, mind-boggling degree. Call it genius, call it virtual omniscience, but he always seems to know what everyone else is planning at any given moment, and exactly how to arrange the game so he wins even when he is defeated. Didn't See That Coming doesn't derail him; he can always adapt.

He is a smooth operator. He always knows exactly what to say to position you where he wants you, always has a backup strategy and never loses his cool. Even if on the remote chance something happens that wasn't in his plans, you'd never know it from his actions.

He has a goal, he's not going to stop until he's completed it, whatever it is. To that end he will do almost anything. He'll move heaven and hell. Despite his choice of tactics, he is rarely if ever pointlessly cruel, and has a reason for everything he does.

He is charismatic, often charming, his personality like a physical force. People tend to like him, sometimes even when they know he isn't on their side, and even those who hate his guts have to admit respect. Even when at his darkest, he has traits which one can't help but admire.

As for what type of hero kaname is my answer will always be same, he is an anti-hero, a anti-hero is a person who uses dark,evil,bad,negative methods to complete a light,good,positive goal.

RIchard wrote:If you are so against the character type then why did you say it was ok to post it?
The main thing that drew me to it is that it was chess involved and vk focuses on chess.
Exactly what part of it are you saying doesn't match kaname?

He is brilliant and utterly devious, to an almost breathtaking, mind-boggling degree. Call it genius, call it virtual omniscience, but he always seems to know what everyone else is planning at any given moment, and exactly how to arrange the game so he wins even when he is defeated. Didn't See That Coming doesn't derail him; he can always adapt.

He is a smooth operator. He always knows exactly what to say to position you where he wants you, always has a backup strategy and never loses his cool. Even if on the remote chance something happens that wasn't in his plans, you'd never know it from his actions.

He has a goal, he's not going to stop until he's completed it, whatever it is. To that end he will do almost anything. He'll move heaven and hell. Despite his choice of tactics, he is rarely if ever pointlessly cruel, and has a reason for everything he does.

He is charismatic, often charming, his personality like a physical force. People tend to like him, sometimes even when they know he isn't on their side, and even those who hate his guts have to admit respect. Even when at his darkest, he has traits which one can't help but admire.

As for what type of hero kaname is my answer will always be same, he is an anti-hero, a anti-hero is a person who uses dark,evil,bad,negative methods to complete a light,good,positive goal.

If you are so against the character type then why did you say it was ok to post it?

Ι do not understand what you are saying; as a forum administrator my job is to promote the debates and the dialogue. If you have something against it, that's not my problem. Since when a forum decides what the members to post on the base "I agree? or I disagree?", if you were betting on that, wrong choice.

As a member I express my opinion the same as you do with your own opinion.

As for what type of hero kaname is my answer will always be same, he is an anti-hero, a anti-hero is a person who uses dark,evil,bad,negative methods to complete a light,good,positive goal.

plus you are not giving me any arguments, you are just insisting on that description of yours about anti-hero, that in reality fits all characters; is there a character or hero that does not use violance? or does not use manipulation and be cunning up to a point?

In literature, an antihero[1] (or antiheroine[2] as the feminine) is a protagonist who lacks heroic virtues and qualities,[1][3][4][5][6] (such as being morally good,[6] idealism,[7] courage,[7] and nobility).

So how can you judge if he is an anti-hero?

From Guile Hero:

The Guile Hero combines elements of The Chessmaster, the Trickster Archetype and The Strategist without having to be all of these.

Often, a Guile Hero will manipulate the other good guys and a whole bunch of innocent bystanders as part of their scheme to bring down the Big Bad, though they'll take care to ensure the other characters aren't truly harmed in the process (and if they fail, they'll be very sorry).

The Guile Hero could be a good analog to the Manipulative b******: the Guile Hero is unambiguously a good guy with the same goals as any Action Hero or Science Hero. While some other heroes may be unhappy with being manipulated by the Guile Hero, it is made clear to the reader that this character both has a heroic goal and is not (usually) Jumping Off the Slippery Slope into becoming a Well-Intentioned Extremist.

Does he mean to sacrifice himself? is this an heroic virtue (the highest) there is, that can define a hero? so can he be an anti-hero?

In literature, an antihero[1] (or antiheroine[2] as the feminine) is a protagonist who lacks heroic virtues and qualities,[1][3][4][5][6] (such as being morally good,[6] idealism,[7] courage,[7] and nobility).

I do not know how much clear to make it, it screams itself out and it's coming out naturally by definition. Want to insist on a point without considering all other aspects?
example there is NO HERO in VK right now if Kaname is anti-hero.

@ I think i shall stop here since i am never taking any arguements back but a blunt persistence on a certain idea. Hm...i think that this interesting to notice.

My apoligys on the first part, I was thinking you were sharing the opinions of the others thinking I posted it just to insult kaname, I still don't understand why it would be considered an insult.

As for the hero thing, sorry but I can only judge with in my own knowledge and all I know of is villian, anti-hero, hero.

In literature, an antihero[1] (or antiheroine[2] as the feminine) is a protagonist who lacks heroic virtues and qualities,[1][3][4][5][6] (such as being morally good,[6] idealism,[7] courage,[7] and nobility).

Joseph Campbell, a famous scholar who spent his career creating a hero archetype from the mythology of many cultures, once said, “a hero is someone who has given his or her life to something bigger than oneself.” A hero by definition is a person who acts beyond their duty to help or save others, often sacrificing him or her self in the process. The hero can be defined by current events, fictional heroes, and historical heroes in wars.

This definition of hero is the most common one; even a five years old will understand. The five years old child knows that the good guy will beat the bad guy.

A certain character to be a hero he needs to sacrifice something to do the feat.
In vk, the only ones who fit the definition are Kaname and the HW.

Kaname – 10000 yrs ago he made researches to find out how vampires can be killed. Afterwards he took the decision to sacrifice his life to save the human species from extinction.

Later, since someone else (HW) took the decision to be the “parent” he took upon himself the duty to teach others to use the weapons. He fought on human’s side against his own species.

Now, 10000 yrs later, he decided to take the same decision, choosing to sacrifice his own happiness, his own life for the greater good. Kaname makes the ultimate sacrifice to save others.

Of course that to fulfil their goals they will use force, but what hero doesn’t do it? Spiderman, Batman, are seen by many as heroes; who decided to punish the evil ones, trying to protect the weak.

Even the heroines from Sailor Moon fought with the evil ones; trying to save the human world, ready to sacrifice their life in doing so.

So far, I have seen no hero who accomplished great things only by talking.

Zero – he can be considerate hero only by that five years old girl from the beginning of the second arc (he saved her from the bad guy). But per general, considering how hino built his character, zero cannot be considerate a hero. He made no decision, no sacrifice to benefit to the greater good. Zero is a character who takes decision based on personal impulses, and most of the times these brought satisfaction only to himself.

Zero – he can be considerate hero only by that five years old girl from the beginning of the second arc (he saved her from the bad guy). But per general, considering how hino built his character, zero cannot be considerate a hero. He made no decision, no sacrifice to benefit to the greater good. Zero is a character who takes decision based on personal impulses, and most of the times these brought satisfaction only to himself.

BINGO!!!

so there is a problem after all with Kaname being the final villain or the anti-hero with the egoistical purposes; that there is no hero to substitute him. Who is fighting here? who is taking the burden of decisions? who is honoring the hero title?

All sources are in agreement;

Joseph Campbell, a famous scholar who spent his career creating a hero archetype from the mythology of many cultures, once said, “a hero is someone who has given his or her life to something bigger than oneself.” A hero by definition is a person who acts beyond their duty to help or save others, often sacrificing him or her self in the process. The hero can be defined by current events, fictional heroes, and historical heroes in wars.

From Psychology Today...

What actually makes a hero? I'd argue it's the willingness to make a personal sacrifice for the benefit of others. If you don't find yourself having to resist a voice inside your head urging you to save yourself instead of whatever action you're contemplating, my heart, at least, will refuse to recognize your actions—however legitimately compassionate or courageous they may be—as heroic. Serving others while simultaneously serving oneself can be noble, certainly, but a special kind of nobility attaches itself to those who serve others at a cost to themselves.

of course this can be another thread of Discussion; Zero..what kind of character is he?

Kaname – 10000 yrs ago he made researches to find out how vampires can be killed.
So kaname found a way to kill an immortal.

Afterwards he took the decision to sacrifice his life to save the human species from extinction.
He planned to do it but he never did since some one else did it in his place, so it was her sacrifice not his.

He fought on human’s side against his own species.
Before that he had no interaction with his own species till the hw pulled him in.

Of course that to fulfil their goals they will use force, but what hero doesn’t do it? Spiderman, Batman, are seen by many as heroes; who decided to punish the evil ones, trying to protect the weak.
Spiderman and batman do not kill.

This is a manga so we need to use manga/anime hero's, manga/anime hero's at least most of them do not kill. Superman, batman, spiderman, the hulk, black cat, rounin kension, vash the stampede.

he is HOT

who cares about his evilness when there are other things to admire about him.

Spoiler:

this pic of kaname by nina says it all.

aya-chan wrote: This definition of hero is the most common one; even a five years old will understand. The five years old child knows that the good guy will beat the bad guy.

Exactly dear!!!! Even a toddler understands that the big bad wolf has to die! Of course the Little Red Riding Hood wasn’t the aspiration of two characters thus there is none underlying need to label the “heroic” lumberjack as evil or as anti-hero cuz uses violence and kills in the end the Big Bad Wolf instead of locking him up in a cage for example

In our story all the main and secondary characters are resorting to violence i.e. they KILL! Even the most protected, innocent and gentle figure in this story, the heroine, kills and on top of that wields a powerful weapon which its form has been associated/identified with the DEATH >>

Spoiler:

The symbolisms and parallelisms are transparent. The author does not hesitate to relate her good characters with the death or with the necessity of killings. She doesn’t hesitate to give to Yuuki the role of the reaper >>> to take some lives in order to save more innocents in the process >>


Ergo; what validity bears the monolithic notion “the killings are the proof of evilness” when the undeniably good heroine wields the symbol of death plus she results on the conclusion that she has to bear this burden???

Of course if someone attempts to compare Yuuki with Minnie Mouse of Walt Disney shall reach the conclusion that Yuuki is evil and a dark character ROFLMAO

Are all the characters (Zero, Takuma, Yuuki, Cross, Yagari etc) evil and anti-heroes; or lack moral boundaries? Even the pure young maiden?
If so; then does this story promote amoralistic ideologies in general?
Are the soldiers who fought for liberty and took lives, anti-heroes??? O.O

OR such simplistic attempts feign false morality, double standards and an underlying hypocrisy in an effort to serve ulterior motives?

The criterion “the one who kills or resorts in violence hence is evil, period!” simply doesn’t have any ground nor any relation with the reality of this particular bloody, dark, violent gothic story.

One can wonder; so which are the criteria that distinguish the evils from the good ones?
Isn’t obvious? In a story where the wider objective and aim is the protection of the HUMANS; and in extension the protection of the weakest from the powerful; isn’t this line drawn clearly??? Doesn’t separate the good ones (who are bound to kill anyway) from the evil ones who also kill but additionally do not care for the innocent (human or not) victims that leave behind; or worse they see the humans as mere food supplies??

Of course the above it is not the only criterion but must be accompanied with the motives, consciousness, the necessity of a killing or of a seemingly bad deed, the outcome, the accomplished goal etc.

No one can reach in fair and correct conclusions by following a simplistic and monolithic line of thinking >> black or white?!
A mature reader owes to know the shades of grey as well…


Thus and the ones who cannot detect the clear line between the good and the evil in this particular story or accept the scope of this fiction cuz contradicts with their “high moral stand”; why do they read and follow this story in the first place???
Cuz under this light all are evils!

Or why do not apply their morals to all the characters but selectively on the ones who is convenient???

Example? I have heard countless times that Kaname ate the baby Kaname thus he is evil/villain! Except from the FACT that this is a DELUSION (which we all can understand how this twisted notion can influence the further judgement of Kaname and his actions, motives etc) ironically their fave chara has indeed devoured his OWN BROTHER who happened to be and HUMAN! So what does this make Zero according to their standards??? An evil monster who did an atrocity???

Holes! Big holes and prejudices which backfires!

---

@Jul excellent presentation and above all brilliantly documented stripped from personal opinions and biased scopes! I have the feeling that it might be very useful for future references (~_^)

Indeed this thread was an opportunity that one couldn’t let pass unexploited!

aya-chan wrote: Zero – he can be considerate hero only by that five years old girl from the beginning of the second arc (he saved her from the bad guy). But per general, considering how hino built his character, zero cannot be considerate a hero. He made no decision, no sacrifice to benefit to the greater good. Zero is a character who takes decision based on personal impulses, and most of the times these brought satisfaction only to himself.

BINGO!!!


so there is a problem after all with Kaname being the final villain or the anti-hero with the egoistical purposes; that there is no hero to substitute him. Who is fighting here? who is taking the burden of decisions? who is honoring the hero title?

Did Yori cross your minds???

And the Oscar goes to …

Sounds good when you take it out of context, care to say why yuki offered to act as a reaper for the pbs. Don't worry I will, she did it so a PB wont cause needless deaths just cause they want to die, which is what she believes happen at the ball at the time. That was the cause behind her offer. Also just how many pbs did she kill? None, saying some thing is 1 thing, doing it is another.

Yuki takes a stand on not killing, you can tell it from her actions, it is true she was there when rido died but it was the bloody rose/zero that killed rido, not yuki.

You keep bringing up fairy tails and literature when manga and anime do not fit into that category, lets see how to prove that. Go to your local library and ask for a book on fairy tails, a mystery novel, and a volume of a manga. You will only get 2 out of the 3.

There have been countless times through out vampire knight when yuki could have killed or let the people die yet she chose to have them live in the cases and complained if they were killed.

Yuki is the hero, for prof look at other heros from anime and manga and compare.

You are so insistent on saying kaname is hero and I do understand why you want to believe that. So name some characters like kaname from an anime or a manga that is a hero.

If you cant please drop the debate, you go on believing your kaname is a hero and I will go on believing my kaname is a anti-hero.

Yuki takes a stand on not killing, you can tell it from her actions, it is true she was there when rido died but it was the bloody rose/zero that killed rido, not yuki.

m...you don't even know who killed Rido do you? why don't you say that to Yuuki herself then?

http://www.mangahere.com/manga/vampire_knight/v12/c058/6.html

I mean if you have issues argue the heroine.

What Nina spoke of was the sense of Vampire Knight; a dark theme where all the so good vampires and also the hunters are also dedicated to a cause to protect humans and innoncents...

Also about the killings, if it does not reflect your tastes, that's your issue to deal with...what are you ranting here?

So who is the hero according to your opinion?

Can you answer a simple question or your so comprehensive skills is limited to tell us who the anti-hero is;

YOU SAID:

As for what type of hero kaname is my answer will always be same, he is an anti-hero, a anti-hero is a person who uses dark,evil,bad,negative methods to complete a light,good,positive goal.

DEFINITIONS OF ANTI_HEROES:

from wiki:

In literature, an antihero or antiheroine as the feminine is a protagonist who lacks heroic virtues and qualities, such as being morally good,idealism,courage, and nobility).

But because you seem to not understand that or pretend that you do not want;

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/antihero

a protagonist or notable figure who is conspicuously lacking in heroic qualities

Oxford university:

a central character in a story, film, or drama who lacks conventional heroic attributes.

Do you know what are the heroic attributes? Since you so much like the manga genre (that of course to your ears and eyes seems detached from the rest of the world go on and tell us...

But if you just have time to read (if you care at all to read of course)...

Let's clarify it even more:

http://www.writersstore.com/exploring-the-dark-side-the-anti-heros-journey/

Here;

Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones, Jodie Foster in 'The Silence of the Lambs' and Sigourney Weaver in 'Alien' are heroes. Their actions are motivated and influenced by a higher nature.

Macbeth, Scarlett O'Hara and Michael Douglas in 'Wall Street' are anti-heroes. Their actions are motivated by a lower, primordial nature.


The hallmark of heroes is personal sacrifice.
They personify the positive unselfish side of the ego, and their journey reveals the upside of the passage.

BUT WHAT AM I TELLING YOU RIGHT NOW?

According to your definition again:

As for what type of hero kaname is my answer will always be same, he is an anti-hero, a anti-hero is a person who uses dark,evil,bad,negative methods to complete a light,good,positive goal.

that's hero....

Often, a Guile Hero will manipulate the other good guys and a whole bunch of innocent bystanders as part of their scheme to bring down the Big Bad, though they'll take care to ensure the other characters aren't truly harmed in the process (and if they fail, they'll be very sorry).
The Guile Hero could be a good analog to the Manipulative b******: the Guile Hero is unambiguously a good guy with the same goals as any Action Hero or Science Hero. While some other heroes may be unhappy with being manipulated by the Guile Hero, it is made clear to the reader that this character both has a heroic goal and is not (usually) Jumping Off the Slippery Slope into becoming a Well-Intentioned Extremist.

to go on with the other article....

The m.o. of antiheroes is the antisocial act. They personify the negative selfish side of the ego, the side that has given the word 'ego' a bad name, and their journey reveals the dark or downside of the cycle.

Villains become anti-heroes when the story is about them; when we see the process they undergo to become villains. That's the only difference. They are both motivated by the same lower-self impulses.

Darth Vadar is a villain in part IV of 'Star Wars,' but, no doubt, will be the central character and an anti-hero in Part III, when he is being drawn into the dark side.

Whereas the hero represents that part of us that recognizes problems and accepts responsibility, the anti-hero is the will to power and insatiable greed, the materialistic, power hungry, tyrannical side of our natures; the side that wants to possess everything it desires, without limit, and control everything it needs. In real life, this is Hitler, Stalin and Mao Tse-tung. In story, it is Little Caesar, Michael Corleone and Commodus in 'Gladiator.'

The goal of the hero is to liberate an entity like a family, a country or a galaxy from the tyranny and corruption that caused a state of misfortune and to create a new unified whole.

The goal of the anti-hero is to take possession of an entity and redirect it toward goals that fulfill its own desires and needs, which is to accumulate, control and enjoy everything it needs to satisfy its insatiable cravings for sense objects, security, wealth and territory.

Because the anti-hero has no heroic attributes-qualities therefore he is selfish to the bone, seeking to pleasure his/her own self/nature # major contradiction to be an anti-hero and to want to sacrifice; this is an heroic attribute; seeing beyond self is not an anti-hero trait, it takes a hero to make a sacrifice. An Anti-hero will think only of himself, therefore shall not have the intention to be sacrificed. It does not fit with his profile.

If you can not understand that, then okay, return to your little personal definition and stop bombing us with definitions that are totally out of context.

Or if you can not comprehend that, then please do not insult the intelligence of the people who can. Is that an anti-hero attribute by the way?

I have heard countless times that Kaname ate the baby Kaname thus he is evil/villain! Except from the FACT that this is a DELUSION (which we all can understand how this twisted notion can influence the further judgement of Kaname and his actions, motives etc) ironically their fave chara has indeed devoured his OWN BROTHER who happened to be and HUMAN! So what does this make Zero according to their standards??? An evil monster who did an atrocity???

Holes! Big holes and prejudices which backfires!

I am still laughing the hole getting all the water in...until Hino finishes the manga I am sure that the all the sea shall be in there

Sounds good when you take it out of context,

Ahahaha … look who’s talking! That was a good one lol

care to say why yuki offered to act as a reaper for the pbs.

What different does it make for you? According to your logic >>

No matter how you look at it killing is evil even if the killed person deserved to die. Even if they were killed for a reason they were still killed.
.
.
.

As for the hero thing, sorry but I can only judge with in my own knowledge and all I know of is villian, anti-hero, hero.

In literature, an antihero[1] (or antiheroine[2] as the feminine) is a protagonist who lacks heroic virtues and qualities,[1][3][4][5][6] (such as being morally good,[6] idealism,[7] courage,[7] and nobility).

So; why you want the reasons that drove Yuuki in a decision to kill? Even if she did not act as a reaper still her intention lacks morality ACCORDING TO YOUR OWN DEFINITION … not mine!

Plus as Juliet pointed out to you >>

m...you don't even know who killed Rido do you? why don't you say that to Yuuki herself then?

http://www.mangahere.com/manga/vampire_knight/v12/c058/6.html

I mean if you have issues argue the heroine.

Ahem… sorry for bursting your bubbles but the facts are facts. Yuuki indeed killed Rido. But even if she couldn’t kill him cuz of lack of strength; does it change anything? The intention the will and the effort to kill are moral???

OR for Yuuki we should take a peek on her reasons while for Kaname his reasons are mere excuses thus do not make any difference??? >>>

No matter how you look at it killing is evil even if the killed person deserved to die. Even if they were killed for a reason they were still killed. >> remember???

Yuki is the hero, for prof look at other heros from anime and manga and compare.

Yuuki is the heroine not the hero and thus far she hasn’t done anything so heroic. It remains to be seen but again according to you>>>

Right now I would say no, yuki has 0 chance to stop kaname. Even if she uses the spell to turn him human, the fact she didn't consider that kaname may have a way to counter it is a great folly on her part.

https://vampireknight.all-up.com/t1409-can-yuuki-stop-kaname#35605

Ergo what a heroine is she; that has zero chances to stop the evil, anti-hero Kaname huh???

And one last thing…

Someone with such high, absolute and strict morals like you who deems Kaname as >>

As for why I think kaname is evil,
.
.
As for what type of hero kaname is my answer will always be same, he is an anti-hero, a anti-hero is a person who uses dark,evil,bad,negative methods to complete a light,good,positive goal.

How is it possible to even like the guy???? >>>

Richard wrote: I guess you would call me a Zeki cause it is the couple I prefer, however this does not mean that I don't like Kaname.

https://vampireknight.all-up.com/t1384-hello-all-i-m-richard

Are you underestimating our intelligence?
Are you pretending?
Or are you confused and contradictory with your own morals???
Cuz as far as I know when one with MORALS deems something EVIL and IMMORAL does NOT like it and owes to reject it!

Thus, nope I couldn’t care less to explain further my previous analysis to you since for me is crystal clear that it is pointless. Neither will I underestimate the capability of the readers to comprehend what they read by overanalysing the same things in order to burst your self-evident misconceptions.

On that note I had no intention to address to you or debate with you (which I didn’t) moreover try to change your opinions in the first place.

Hence YOU must drop debating or addressing to ME and not the other way around. Put your facts straight for a change.

Juliet wrote: Whereas the hero represents that part of us that recognizes problems and accepts responsibility, the anti-hero is the will to power and insatiable greed, the materialistic, power hungry, tyrannical side of our natures; the side that wants to possess everything it desires, without limit, and control everything it needs. In real life, this is Hitler, Stalin and Mao Tse-tung. In story, it is Little Caesar, Michael Corleone and Commodus in 'Gladiator.'

Oops! You must have hit a sensitive nerve for someone here dear

So Kaname isn’t an anti-hero BY DEFINITION, so what is he?
A! he might be just a supernumerary for whom it happens to talk constantly the entire fandom of VK … haters and lovers as well with the same passion!

Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones, Jodie Foster in 'The Silence of the Lambs' and Sigourney Weaver in 'Alien' are heroes. Their actions are motivated and influenced by a higher nature.

And if I may add some manga where the good characters or even the hero/protagonist resort in killings >>

1. Black bird (in fact this manga bears many similarities with VK and as storyline. The hero killed his own brother among many others.)
2. Uraboku (good characters killing)
3. Noblesse << the most powerful vampire, noble being and hero of the story resorts on killings as well…

So I suggest to the oversensitive audience to stay with Walt Disney’s stories better

Juliet wrote: I am still laughing the hole getting all the water in...until Hino finishes the manga I am sure that the all the sea shall be in there

Hahaha … Joey always saves the day! There is no other way than humour to bear the unbearable lightness of […] hahaha

@RIchard

RIchard wrote:care to say why yuki offered to act as a reaper for the pbs. Don't worry I will, she did it so a PB wont cause needless deaths just cause they want to die, which is what she believes happen at the ball at the time. That was the cause behind her offer. Also just how many pbs did she kill? None, saying some thing is 1 thing, doing it is another.

Yuki takes a stand on not killing, you can tell it from her actions, it is true she was there when rido died but it was the bloody rose/zero that killed rido, not yuki.


You are so insistent on saying kaname is hero and I do understand why you want to believe that.

you go on believing your kaname is a hero and I will go on believing my kaname is a anti-hero.

First off, you need to take a chill pill and if you can't chill then you need to drop the debate not the other way around. Second, if you understand why she wants to believe Kaname is the hero then why are you so desperately trying to disprove it? Some people think Zero is the hero, some think Kaname...and some think it's HW. While I do think Yuuki is the heroine since she represents light and justice, I also think that Kaname is the hero. He is the most important character in the story he moves things along though to everyone in the story he is the villain/anti-hero. HW sacrifice made her a hero, but she did it to protect Kaname and in the end she become a monster. And Zero's the future Hunter president he stand for justice and all, but he hasn't done anything yet to make him the hero other than killing Rido.

That said, Yuuki helped Zero take down Rido she even said so herself that she helped Zero kill Rido. Your opinion does not change the facts. According to Yuuki, she helped killed Rido and even asked Kaname if that's why they were hiding coz she helped kill Rido. These are facts from the manga. Yuuki offered to kill PBs who were tired of living, plus she tried to cut down Kaname to stop him only she couldn't lay a hand on Kaname because he is far too powerful for her. So Yuuki who is the hero/heroine according to you, has offered to kill and has helped killed. You're so sure Kaname is the anti hero for wanting to kill evil PBs yet hunters, Zero and even Yuuki help kill. Yuuki will kill if necessary, otherwise she is useless carrying that Artemis around threatening to kill PBs when she don't plan to go through with it.


As for the heroine being morally good. HA! Look at how Yuuki forcefully took Zero's memories against his will. Is that what heroes do? Betray people's trust? Zero trusted her. He might forgive Yuuki, still Yuuki did something against another person's will. That was downright criminal, IMO. Maybe Yuuki is becoming like Kaname doing what is necessary even if she becomes a villain to everyone else, including Zero.

Kaname's actions may at times make him look like the villain but what he is doing is for the greater good. Or else he would have slaughtered everyone and be done with it. He is after all the most powerful Pureblood alive. Who's to stop him? Even Yuuki can't and don't want to kill him, she feels she has to turn him Human. If Kaname was so evil, Yuuki should want to kill him like she helped kill Rido. But Yuuki knows Kaname's past...She knows he's the one that discovered how to kill Purebloods. The HW sacrificed herself in place of Kaname, he was going to do it she knew this that's why she beat him to it. Kaname carried the guilt knowing it should have been him not her. Without Kaname the HW wouldn't have known how to kill Purebloods so it all goes back to Kaname really. Plus, the HW herself became a monster in the end she took back all the weapons and tried to kill Yuuki.

I'm not saying this because Kaname's my favorite character but these are facts from the story. Kaname wanted to live with humans and he protected and help them like a true hero. He would have given up his life and he wanted to do so. It matters not if someone else did it. It's the fact that he would have done so if things didn't go the other way.


The only thing that bothers me is Kaname killing Aidou's father. He was innocent as far as we know, so I'm still puzzled why he had to die. And Ruka getting hurt was her own fault she threw herself in front of his sword. I don't believe Kaname would have killed Zero maybe hurt him a little so he couldn't stop Kaname. Other than that so far everything leads to Kaname as the hero, though Kaname's methods aren't always right but so what? Yuuki is so clueless. She needs to do a better job at being the hero instead of needing to be rescued all the time. I'm still waiting for Yuuki to become strong/powerful.

@Butterfly great points...to add a bit to your points...

As for the heroine being morally good. HA! Look at how Yuuki forcefully took Zero's memories against his will. Is that what heroes do? Betray people's trust? Zero trusted her. He might forgive Yuuki, still Yuuki did something against another person's will. That was downright criminal, IMO. Maybe Yuuki is becoming like Kaname doing what is necessary even if she becomes a villain to everyone else, including Zero.

In a general notice, no is not becoming evil, just manipulative, but there are a lot of heroes that do manipulate even the innocents to achieve a higher goal thus the self-sacrifice; but not really hurt the innocents.

An anti-heroe will have no problem to manipulate or kill to complete his own selfish needs. See Hitler that came on power through democracy to as chosen to help a country> he was a hero to the eye's of the people but took advantage of that power to promote his ego, to fulfill his own ambitions really killing and hurting the innocents.

Or Darth Vader, Lucas father in Star Wars, he started his journey and his task was to be a Jedi, to help others. Later he was drawn to the evil side. His journey from a hero to villain is the anti-hero phase.

A character can go and the other way around; a selfish being turning from anti-hero to hero. Thus saving the world and the day.

But selfish motives for power, control in the expense of others need to be there.

This is why self-sacrifice is purely an heroic act and can not be combined with an anti-hero profile.

Kaname had always the intention to sacrifice himself for others; call it humans, Yuuki, whatever...so his intentions from the start do not show a selfish profile, can not really support the anti-hero mask, even though he wants to wear it.

look at the first arc, he might be manipulative towards others (such as a Guile hero that i stated above) BUT NEVER HURT AN INNOCENT such as killing or severe damaging, his acts have the meaning to help, not to destroy, his actions proved to save Yuuki, the humans and eventually and Zero, from Ichiou's tyranny and Rido's future dictatorship. In this goal others also contributed;

Ichijou killed his grand-father, Cross killed the hunters president, Yuuki and Zero killed Rido.

The night class was there to stand and guard the day class. They were all collaborators against the conspiracy of the council.

The only thing that bothers me is Kaname killing Aidou's father. He was innocent as far as we know, so I'm still puzzled why he had to die.

Yes, and look with how much precaution Hino wraps that fact; Kaname talks to him ( a conversation that we do not know) and it seems that Aidou-dono sacrifices himself.

Hino to be careful like that, says by itself something.

Kaname wants to be seen as the anti-hero, the hero that turned bersek and betrayed the vampire society >
he achieves that through Aido's murder which i can not explain, but at the current phase for his own protection Aido-dono needed to disappear at least, he had been a witness to Sara's effort to take Hanadagi's powers.

Motives are to be revealed.

This should put in great suspicions and doubts the supporters of the anti-hero theory. Because an anti-hero does not seek the support or the license to do so or to kill an innocent, he just does, this is his/her nature. That's why he is immoral. He does not need to pretend he is because he is, much more than the motives are purely to satisfy one's desires.

example; he could have taken Yuuki and walk away and let anyone die, that is an anti-hero fulfilling only his/her own needs without care for the world around him.

This is why Kaname fails to persuade us that indeed is an anti-hero.
1. He had all the power that he had wanted.
2. He had the girl of his dreams to spend the eternity with. He leaves at the peak of their relationship.

So which selfish act is to be completed anymore/ what drives his plans?

Is he so crazy that he wants to kill all purebloods in the expense of his own happiness and benefit? in order to fulfill HW's wishes? to save the world from purebloods once and for all?

Now he remembered it?

So the plan was...

Yuuki was a human but he had to bring her back to save her and now that he saved her, he got tired, he wants to kill all purebloods and finally turn Yuuki human again.

And to do so he kills Aido-dono and some purebloods that happened to be available but at the same time he has a self-sacrifice syndrome, he awakens the HW, which by chance, now she remembers that she can not die unless all purebloods do (great coincidence), but Kaname has the idea that he shall replace her (sacrifice achieved) and by the way he can take and the rest of the purebloods with him or not.

We are not sure about the latest part whereas all the above make a perfect sense.

So what's the point of the story?

He had never the intention to live with Yuuki, so he trolled us all the way for a year in the mansion. He is so selfish that once he has all that he ever fight for (peace and Yuuki), he wants to die and kill the rest of the purebloods, because he remembered HW.

Now all of these are making perfect sense whereas there is also no other hero in the script with specific goals and ambitions. So according to the logic of the many, Kaname at the second arc plays all the roles;

he is the hero that he wants to kill himself to save others, Yuuki, HW see. "I will be the metal", he is the anti-hero that from good turned to evil, only that he insist too much, see. "Who Killed Ouri?" "Oh, that's me...that's me", and at the same time he is the villain that baby Yuuki and this selfless hunter (that never has a precise goal but his own self to preserve see Zero (joining in to get answers for his family) need to frame.



What worries more than Kaname's character is the willing readers that can eat up everything in order to have their fandom satisfied. Now this is not a problem of course because it's Kaname. Who cares to make any logic for the one that saved all others during the first arc and is also the one that saved human race from extinction?

No baby, he is evil...because he killed Shizuka who Zero tried to kill first but failed and baby Kaname, that Rido had already killed. So much hypocrisy lurking around that there is no reason and for Hino to ever give solid answers. Anything shall go.

Okay can i have an anti-hero, please? because i am bored with self-sacrifices and stupid kids that only search for answers...without finding any. (what happened to your family Zero? why you have to fulfill HW'wishes Kaname?).

So Kaname, take Yuuki and walk away as Takuma said, (after all what kind of anti-hero are you sitting there and not acting as a villain or anti-hero? don't you hear the fandom?
let Zero clean the mess, after all he has to make a name someday. Ah you are an anti-hero, you do not care, okay...LOL...

Back to reality check; Kaname does not match an anti-hero profile; his intentions need to be proved that are driven by egoistical purposes, we need to know for sure that he gave in the evil side, intentions and did all that to satisfy his needs and desires, taking innocents all the way down with him. But doubts are all over his intentions due to the self-sacrifice act; and also the questionable nature of the victims. Or the objectives that he had.

Talking before that about being villain or anti-hero is useless. Everybody is considered innocent until proof that they are really guilty and all curtains have fall.

Shooting him down without knowing his full plans and goals that as it seems and sounds are not egoistical motivated is predisposition towards a great character that despite be cunning and manipulative (and why not to be? a hero fights even with these so Hino rightfully uses these weapons to make Kaname's profile even stronger and support and his vampre nature) has saved many. Let's not become villains and anti-heroes ourselves looking only after our egoistical desires.

Got to love having 3 yumes going after 1 zeki here. You say I am trying to argue against your stand on kaname yet it was you who started arguing on my stand on him, when I try to defend my stand suddenly I am attacking your point of view on it instead of just defending my own. You show yuki saying she killed rido yet you don't bother going back to the actual fight and seeing bloody rose crush rido into the crystals.

You question my stand on who I like and who I don't when you should have nothing at all to say about that. I also like the joker from batman, oh wait he is an evil character so I guess to you I am not allowed to like him. You guys read only what you want to and ignore the rest making the same arguments over and over again posting outdated definitions that have to do with other types of literature. The only manga i have read that you posted is black bird, and the main lead in that is a antihero, I am sure if I read the others they would be anti heros as well.

As for your saying that saying some thing is the same as doing it, well fine then I guess there should be a lot more people in jail even though they did nothing, but thinking it is just as bad to you I guess.

I give up on this site, it is to hostile to zekis and the only mods are yumes who show favoritism for yumes, I was curious on why there were so few zekis here but now I know.
I am off to find a site that show mutual respect to both zeki's and yumes, don't bother responding to this cause I wont be back to read it, I am sure it will be deleted cause you wouldn't want people to know the truth that the mods are biased against zekis. Enjoy your yume only board.

As Juliet the only thing that I can say to you is:

Where are your arguments about the debate? Do they exist? Even your definitions about the anti-hero does not exist.
How you expect it to be accepted? Do you understand that the “anti-hero” definition is a common term used but in whatever context you insert it, “manga”, “anime”, “television”, the definition of the word has to stay the same?
Either wise people could not communicate. So make a favor to the people that you discuss with and realize that the words are there to facilitate the dialogue with the others, not for you to give it your own definition, it has a definition.
I am not going to shut it because you can not stand up to an argument. I have debated not just with three, but with much more zekis in my past and thank you, I enjoyed it, that’s what forums are; discussions.
I never went crying to the moderation; “oh please there are four zekis there against my post and you do nothing about it, you are biased!”.

Moreover I have debated moderators in other sites as well and perfectly knew that this had nothing to do with their work as moderators, since I was allowed to express my opinion against theirs whatever that was.

As a moderator what I want to say is that I could delete your post and the truth is that I should. You are attacking the moderation and the forum by calling it biased.

I personally told you as moderator that it’s okay to post that thread. PERSONALLY I DID SO THAT YOU CAN EXPRESS YOUR OPINION.
Did I ban, erase, delete or modified any part of your posts according to my liking?

As a moderator did I ever warned you about expressing your opinions? Prevented you by doing so? Ever “vanished” your posts?
So what are you blaming the moderation of the forum? For the freedom that it gave you to express your opinion? Who are you kidding with these nonsense?

People that only come here to insult, to flame and to blame, have no position.

Please stop accusing the moderators that after all have NOTHING TO EARN by this for your opinions about the manga and the characters.
A moderation work is something quite different that has to do as the word says with MODERATION, the functioning of the board and forum as a unity, and of course with the protection of members from being personally harassed, assaulted or attacked from other members;
not with the fact that Kaname might be hero or anti-hero and if Zero qualifies for a hero or an anti-hero.

As a moderator you can only call me biased IF I USE MY POWER IN ORDER TO CHANGE, MODIFY OR RESTRICT YOU OR BAN YOU BECAUSE YOU STATED YOUR OPINION.
I personally never made use of that advantage in no way and for no reason. So please stop blaming the moderation and stop blaming the walls of the forums because you can not have it your own way in the thread. Apart from being hypocritical, it’s quite childish and obvious game to play. Whoever wants writes on the board, whoever does not wishes can go. Your insults are there to prove your own unbiased view of the facts? or to damage/deliberately hurt and insult? to anyone seeing this discussion, it's obvious...

I also hope that you enjoy your next unbiased forum and have a long and happy stay there…with the best of intentions as you always have. Oh and stay "unbiased"...

RIchard wrote:Got to love having 3 yumes going after 1 zeki here. You say I am trying to argue against your stand on kaname yet it was you who started arguing on my stand on him, when I try to defend my stand suddenly I am attacking your point of view on it instead of just defending my own.

Do you even know what a debate is? I will take the liberty and presume you don't since you're complaining that you're attacked by yumes. When a member post a comment, other members have the liberty to agree or disagree, no matter what their numbers.
If you were not sustained in your logic, which contradicts the core of deffinitions, then blame your zekis fellows, and not the yumes who had something to say to your comment.

Complaining that you're attacked by 3 yumes, it's a childish thing but nothing new here - many zekis complained about that. I will tell you what I told others as well -

So what? I won't stop posting because the likes of you don't like it.

You show yuki saying she killed rido yet you don't bother going back to the actual fight and seeing bloody rose crush rido into the crystals.

You should go to the actual fight and see that before zero shooting rido, yuuki with her artemis pierced rido's body. yuuki helped zero in killing rido; even yuuki says so at the end of the first arc to kaname, and in the second arc to isaya.

But again, not that you deny the core definitions of different words, but you deny the manga either. Nothing new here either.

posting outdated definitions that have to do with other types of literature.

and which are the dated definitions? well, we know how yours are, but yours are not included in dictionares, so your biased defitions have no value.

What yumes did in their post was just to apply the definitions existent in dictionaries in a mere manga. If you're unable to apply a theory / definition, then the problem lays on you and not on the yumes.

I give up on this site, it is to hostile to zekis and the only mods are yumes who show favoritism for yumes, I was curious on why there were so few zekis here but now I know.

To end my comment to you in a good note -

Have a safe trip

What happened... did I miss the fight? Enough with the Kaname is evil/anti-hero BS and just enjoy the VK story. It's 100% pointless and out of context. Just because Yuuki didn't choose Zero during this chapter doesn't mean you have to dish it out on Kaname. That means you, Rich.