Made in Abyss Episode 10 Discussion

EarlCiel said:


This isn't a direct response to you or any specific person, but it is related to your discussion so I thought I would join in. My thoughts on this is that there definitely was a need to break the tension as the buildup of such an intense scene had the purpose to break any misconceptions the viewer may have had about the abyss. I mean a child was able to navigate it, with help, but they have literally encountered little to no difficulties which is pretty unrealistic. The entire time the optimism of Riko and even the mystery of what Reg is capable of perhaps gave people the misconception that they were invincible with hope and with a way to get down. The training, sure, proved they had the potential to survive but they were clearly not prepared for what happened. So in that sense, the scene fulfilled its purpose and so I do not believe it was meant to actually kill a character since there is still a story to tell.

Therefore, yes, the appearance of Nanachi was used as a method to save them out of a helpless situation but honestly I feel that this is an understandable move to play. It was meant to be a scene that displayed helplessness and the only hope that they had was for someone with knowledge to rescue them since they really are incapable of getting out of this situation with no knowledge or experience. This is reality. Introducing another character did break the tension, but it was done intentionally; with purpose, therefore in good taste in my opinion.

What I would argue, however, is that just because something is fiction does not give authors or directors to allow ANYTHING to happen. Even for the sake of tension, there is a world established with a created order and when you break that order and create an explanation it simply would not make sense when you abruptly introduce concepts that break these rules to the viewer since this is not how the world works. There is a certain order already established, and sure, it can change, but this power to create a world can definitely be abused. It must be intentional, and for this anime I would agree that it is most certainly intentional and I bet later on we will be able to confirm this.

If I did have to criticize Made in Abyss, however, I would argue that my biggest criticism is how this mystery is being illustrated. The show uses the tales of the white whistles and rumors that are meant to paint a picture of what the abyss is like, and may even add elements of mystery but to me it would have been more effective for the children to learn more by exploring the abyss and learning more through experience than the stories or words of others. Additionally, if the stories of past explorers are meant to guide people I would argue they certainly do not help illustrate this world in the best way by merely revealing information about the different species and relics. It is almost as if the information people contribute is being hidden, yes, so this is intentional but withholding detail prevents from building this picture of the abyss. To me what is at the bottom of the abyss, this "mystery" lures the viewer in to the center of it but also narrows the viewers view of the world, if that makes sense. I felt like this was also the case with how Nanachi explains the curse to them, which I do understand is something that is hard to discover on your own, but for a story that thrives on the concept of adventure and exploration, the illustration of the new world below them, in my opinion, could have been executed in better taste. I am allured by the mystery, yes, the mystery of the world and the world itself...maybe not so much. We'll see.

EarlCiel said:


If you cannot read then I would gladly write you a summary but I think you are capable of reading.
I have however bolded statements to get my message across in case you are confused!

EarlCiel said:


It was not off tangent let me spell it out for you since you don't seem to get any of them. Why am I putting in so much effort in this? Why, I really wonder if it is because you are actually confused or just refuse to listen or even try to understand another perspective:

-The original post was complaining about the introduction of a character to save them and expressed displeasure with this technique; there was an argument of whether or not that technique was the best

-Reply to original post argued that Reg was unable to "find a method" to save Riko since he does not remember anything

-You disagree and say that ANYTHING can be done and justified as it is fiction.

-I add to the discussion and bring up that the breaking bone almost severing arm scene served a PURPOSE which was intended to shock viewers of the dangers of the abyss, so yes, the tension and emotional factor was prioritized but then having a character help save them was LOGICAL and needed (further explanation of this and support found in my first post). It was meant to be a scene that displayed helplessness and the only hope that they had was for someone with knowledge to rescue them since they themselves are incapable of getting out of this situation with no knowledge or experience. This is reality. THIS is the message the author wants to convey through this scene. I also DISAGREE with you or do not completely agree with your statement in this post because yes, you can add anything but in my opinion this was NOT a cheap move because it was meant to convey a MESSAGE. One where people would realize that everything you watched about the abyss being an easy adventure is wiped away because Riko is a kid and Reg does not remember anything. This is an established fact. The author makes this consistent.

-You become confused but go on further to say that you believe it was a cheap method to use by having someone introduced and solve their struggles calling it a "cheap method" and alter scenarios that you believe the author COULD HAVE executed instead and even give an example of how you can just add stuff to a story that is fiction and it does not need to be 'logical'. Then you give your vampire sunlight example.

- I basically summarize my first post; again, disagreeing with you. Yet I give you a concrete answering being that you COULD reconstruct the story and add stuff but to a story and anything CAN happen but since it is a story (and this is particularly if you want to write a good story) it needs to remain internally CONSISTENT. You'd have to foreshadow the way that can happen or make it logical WITHIN the story's rules. The logic has to agree with itself.

Your FIRST response to how the writer could've changed the scenario to save the character:
A) Instead of a few hours, the character had maybe a few DAYS to live.

My response: The author COULD have changed the impact of the poison but the scene was meant to show how gruesome, how dangerous the abyss is. If Riko had a few days to live, would this paint the abyss to be as dangerous as it is? Is this a video game where you just get..more time? Does that show how deadly the poison is? No because they get extra days to try and find out and try things to stop the poison. This is not a kids show.

Your SECOND response to how the write could've changed the scenario to save the character:
B) Rika knew how to stop the poison, because, as it's been pre-established, she's damn knowledgeable about the Abyss."

My response: Riko DOES NOT have surpassing knowledge about the poison. She may seem like she knows everything from past episodes everything she knows is from previous explorers who they themselves do not understand how the abyss works. So for her to know exactly how to stop the poison it is simply not consistent with what the show is trying to convey. She is not omniscient--SHE DOES NOT KNOW EVERYTHING.


Not sure if that clears anything. If not, really I do applaud you for trying to understand but the points are all clearly established. Next time, I'd take the time to try and understand someones post since I've never met someone who actually cannot decipher what I am trying to say. And I've written longer essays. It may genuinely just be really hard for you to view things from another perspective. And I'm not saying that in a condescending way, but rather as an observation. If this is the case, I recommend you go write out a story and add whatever elements and plot points you want. Then try to give me a cohesive story with a central message if you have whatever you want happening. A story's purpose is not to just throw random information at you but convey themes and messages. If you want to write a story about vampires that die in sunlight and talk about how helpless they feel and then at the end you feel like throwing in a new mechanism to help them live in sunlight go right ahead. No one will understand what you want to tell in your story or if you are just stringing together random events.

Have a nice day.

EarlCiel said:
Up to this point many people, probably you too, were under the illusion that the children could probably make it down.
There was that hope. This scene was meant to tear that hope down and hit you with 'reality' of the abyss.

EarlCiel said:
That's the message I meant...the only way out is not with someone's help but the way I viewed it was they honestly would be PRETTY screwed without help. Basically dead.

EarlCiel said:
Yes, the author could have conveyed how gruesome the abyss is through losing the arm perhaps even maybe their life I guess. Honestly the possibilities are endless. I personally do find it unconvincing that these two children would know exactly what to do in this situation given you need some medical background (Reg even questioning the reliability of Nanachi who looks about their age...) but each to their own opinion. Admittedly, I do see where you are coming from.