Leaderboard

These are certainly very virtuous traits, but they're also very generic. A decent portion of the non-murdering characters in the series fulfill these criteria to some extent or another, and there's nothing that really sets Ran apart. As for her stupidity and maturity - like I said, she's neither stupid nor immature because both of those qualities are constantly adjustable in her case. You seem to bring personal attachment up a lot, but just as you are attached to Ran or childhood friendships, so might others be attached to Ai or troubled pasts. Your love for a character is irrelevant in a discussion regarding the character's merits within the series. Do you really think it's adequate to compare the separation of ones parents to being born into a criminal lifestyle, orphaned at a young age, recruited into a criminal syndicate before you even hit puberty, and forced to work for your sister's killers under the threat of death? There are plenty of examples - on nepotism, on identity and belonging, on emotions, on appearances - but you could just her DCW Wiki page. I never implied any intrinsic purpose, I merely described Ran's roles in there series. The idea that any sort of fictional character yields any intrinsic purpose is inherently flawed, as the state of inherence denotes natural designation - something that this work decidedly lacks. You argument of intention is irrelevant, as it doesn't change the fact of significance itself. That said, while your views do sound like the antithesis of Barthes' stance, I don't think they hold any ground here, as the principle just doesn't apply - it focuses on the interpretation of subtext, not plot relevance. I don't think there's any way you could really doubt the existence of these values. Essence is realized in the discrepancy between the claims, actions, and thoughts of characters, presenting itself in the intellectual and emotional purity of a character. Necessity can be measured in the number of unique connections a character's presence within the story creates between otherwise independent entities. Finally, significance can be viewed as the number, eccentricity, and complexity of a character's intellectual/emotional contributions to the story. As I mentioned above, there are plenty of examples - on nepotism, on identity and belonging, on emotions, on appearances. Check her DCW Wiki page for more. There are countless instances of Ai solving cases before Shinichi, often demonstrating a deeper understanding of the culprit's thoughts and intentions in the process. She also yields far greater knowledge over a broad range of subjects, and tends to put far more thought into matters that require serious contemplation. The core issue underlying the organized measurement of intellect in real life is a result of the various variables in play - be it personal philosophy, education, organizational difficulty, upbringing, or local culture. These factors are either not present or not as prevalent in a work of fiction, which makes it much easier to measure established competence and/or intelligence. As for Ran - see my reply to Hobgoblin. Ran is only ever as intelligent/mature as the situation demands. Her personality is generic and her mental faculties aren't consistent. She's not a persona, she's a plot device.