JoJos vs Game of Thrones: A Thematic Comparison
I am going to be the first to admit: these two stories have nothing to do with one-another.
Game of Thrones and JoJo’s Bizarre Adventure are totally different in tone, characters, themes and aesthetic. Yet, I found myself drawn to both series for the same reason: both shows have an absolutely massive cast.
As a consumer of media, huge casts are a bit of a hit-or-miss for me. A massive cast can be a great way to get me invested in a universe, but if each character isn’t given proper time and development, I just find myself bored and confused. More often than not, having a massive cast is totally overwhelming, not just for me, but many others as well. It can be confusing to keep track of a conflict when each side has dozens, if not hundreds, of named characters with their own backstories, agendas and motivations.
Yet, I never had this problem with either of these series. Hirohiko Araki, writer and illustrator for JoJo’s Bizarre Adventure, and George RR Martin, author of A Song of Ice and Fire, both found a simple but clever way to make their casts manageable: separation. Counterintuitive as it may seem, it’s actually easier to keep track of a half-dozen plotlines with their own casts and conflicts; then it is to follow one ultra-massive main plot.
It would be pointless for me to create an essay that analyzes and contrasts the story of JoJo’s with Game of Thrones, because there’s nothing I could really say to connect either story; they are just too different. Instead, this essay will be about how Araki and Martin separated their massive casts into many different plotlines, and how this “separation” affects the themes, conflicts and villains of both series.
Differences in “Separation”
If I were teaching a class on literature, composition and storytelling, I would use these two series as two completely different examples on how to handle multiple main plots and subplots.
I want to open by saying that it is entirely possible but unlikely for series with large casts to have one singular, coherent plotline that ties all of its characters together. Many of the most iconic stories in fiction have taken to separating their cast across many different plotlines, simply because it makes sense. For example, JRR Tolkien famously kept the Fellowship together for only one book before sending them in various directions, a strategy that Martin admitted inspired him greatly.
Before we start, let’s define the methods in which these two authors (and many other authors) divide their story into different plotlines, which I call “primary separation”. The two methods of this are “geographic separation” and “chronological separation”.
JoJo’s is an excellent example of the latter. The chief reason why the manga has such a massive cast is because the story is divided into 8 different parts: each with their own protagonist, setting, antagonist, and conflict. As such, it necessitates that, with each change in time and setting, a new part should bring about new supporting characters.
The whole series is separated into these parts, and these parts cannot coexist, and while characters can appear in multiple parts, it is almost never without some sort of change to their personality, appearance, or abilities. This is because every part takes place in a new year. This is why Part 3, “Stardust Crusaders, aka SDC” does not take place alongside Part 4, “Diamond is Unbreakable, aka DiU” or Part 5, “Vento Aureo, aka VA”; Part 3 is set in 1988, Part 4 in 1999, and Part 5 in 2001.
In general, many generation stories feature chronological separation among its main cast, in some form or another. For an example near and dear to my heart, Star Wars is divided into three main trilogies spanning nearly 70 years in-universe, with each trilogy having their own characters and conflicts.
___
On the opposite end of the spectrum, GoT is an excellent example of geographic separation. These characters and their respective storylines occur simultaneously but are often self-contained, simply because they take place in different continents, kingdoms or areas of the same world.
*Now, there is something I want to clarify: JoJo’s has geographic separation, but this isn’t to the same extent as its chronological separation. Let me clarify:
In addition to being set in different time periods, the Parts of JJBA are also set in different places. By the end of Part 6, there are members of the Joestar family across America, Japan, and even Italy. However, this is not the reason why the Parts are self-contained. In fact, the opposite is usually true. Because the majority of the series is set in the late 20th century and early 21st century, modern technology is available to these characters, so they can travel across countries. For example, Koichi Hirose (a major character in DiU) appears in the beginning of VA. While DiU is set in the small Japanese town of Morioh, VA is set in Italy. However, as a friend of the rich Joestar family, Koichi has no problem simply flying to Italy.
Similarly, Part 3, Stardust Crusaders, opens with Jotaro in Japan and his grandfather, Joseph (the protagonist of Part 2), simply flies to Japan from America to meet Jotaro.
This is why geographic separation is so minor in JJBA, yet so major in GoT: in the former, modern forms of transportation mean that almost any distance can be covered easily, but in the latter, the lack of modern technology means that any geographic distance is taken much more seriously.*
Now, let’s examine the effects that these two methods of separation create for each series, and how these two methods create similar or different results.
Antagonists, aka the “Big Bads”
Let’s get this out of the way from the start:
GoT has no Big Bad (at least for the majority of the series), largely as a result of Martin’s focus on depicting a fantastical world in a realistic way, a vision carried on by the showrunners. The closest we have to a Big Bad is the Night King, but he only affects a few major stories in Westeros (like Jon’s). For most of the series, he has little-to-no bearing on the plot (especially Cersei’s storyline), and in the end, he’s not even the final villain for the heroes to overcome.
Instead, the characters serve as antagonists to each other’s storyline and protagonists for their own storyline. The spread of characters across the world because of “geographic separation” creates a new dynamic. Because these characters are spread out, the audience follows them as they become involved in almost every side of virtually every conflict in the series.
For example, if we were to isolate Robb’s storyline, we would get the impression he is the protagonist and Tywin (or, more accurately, the Lannister family as a whole) is the antagonist. However, this would betray all of the development and screentime the Lannister family receives; for example, Jamie is very much the protagonist of his own storyline, and the Stark family (specifically their banner men) serve as antagonists to him for the first couple of seasons.
If I were to use another example in modern pop culture, I would use Captain America: Civil War. In this movie, the main conflict is between Tony Stark and Steve Rogers; neither of them are inherently villainous, but they commit actions that the other perceives as morally questionable. The movie is arguably divided into two main stories: Steve trying to save Bucky, and Tony trying to uphold the Accords. Steve is the protagonist of his own story, and Tony is the protagonist of his. As the focus shifts from Steve to Tony, the former becomes an antagonist to the latter; in scenes when the focus shifts back to Steve, the reverse is true. In Civil War, Zemo is manipulating Steve and Tony into fighting one-another; much like how Littlefinger manipulates the various kings of Westeros into fighting each other.
This approach to storytelling and antagonistic conflicts is the polar opposite of JJBA and the chronological separation of its stories.
In JJBA, the different parts are all their own stories; as one ends (and it will inevitably end), another begins years later. This format necessitates that the Parts are self-contained; therefore, the complex, multifaceted conflict of GoT would not and cannot work.
Whereas GoT has no one “Big Bad”, JJBA has 6: Dio Brando, Kars, Yoshikage Kira, Diavolo, Enrico Pucci, and Funny Valentine. These guys serve as the “Big Bad” for their respective parts, but not for the series as a whole, so the title is something of an oxymoron, particularly with characters like Diavolo, whose actions affect almost nothing outside of Italy and VA itself.
The closest thing JJBA has to a “Big Bad” is Dio Brando: the reason why JJBA has 6 Big Bads is Part 8 doesn’t have a villain (so far), and because Dio is the antagonist for both Parts 1 and 3.
While Dio dies at the end of Part 3 in 1988, his actions influence the rest of the story for years to come. In 2012, we are still seeing the fruits of his schemes, as the antagonist, Pucci, is becoming stronger and evolving his abilities as a result of plans Dio devised 24 years earlier.
Morality and Amorality
The different methods of separation, geographic and chronological, also influence a major aspect of both series: morality.
As previously mentioned, in GoT, spreading out so many plotlines and characters across the entire world in “geographic separation” and leaving these storylines to occur simultaneously to one-another allows for the audience (and some of the characters) to explore every side of the fighting. As such, the audience often sympathizes with many characters (Jamie Lannister being one of the more important examples), even if they are allied with other, more amoral characters.
This paints the entire world as having what TV Tropes defines as either a “Gray-and-Gray Morality” (no one is good and no one is evil), or a “Gray-and-Black Morality” (no one is good, everyone is either evil or somewhere in-between), depending on the storyline. Some of the only characters that can be considered truly “white” (purely moral and good) die early in the story, such as Ned Stark; these characters tend to fall early because they have too much respect for their opponents or too much honor. With Ned Stark, he makes the mistake of treating his conflict with Cersei as anything but a game of life or death; when he gives her a chance to flee, she uses the time to ambush him, kill his supporters, and imprison him.
This is in large part why the multifaceted conflicts of GoT work so well: because we see every side, everyone feels well-developed. For example, Arya’s interactions with the Hound and Tywin Lannister develop both Sandor and Tywin. This is why when we see Robb’s forces clash with Tywin’s, we don’t feel as if this is a good-vs-evil conflict; instead, we feel as if this is a conflict between two well-rounded, three-dimensional characters. We don’t necessarily get the impression Tywin is pure evil (after all, very few people are in this series), he’s just a darker shade of gray.
If I had to touch on a specific example of a one-on-one fight that benefits from Martin’s gray morality, I would point to Brienne vs Sandor: Brienne is obviously a kinder, more moral, gentler person than Sandor, but this doesn’t make her “good,” and by extension, this doesn’t make him “evil”. In the heat of the moment, this isn’t a duel of light against dark that you would see in other fantasy stories; this is just a fight between two characters with conflicting goals.
(This is an especially relevant example because both are motivated into joining the fight by emotional connections. Brienne is fighting to save Arya to fulfill a promise to Arya’s mother, but Sandor is fighting because he’s grown fond of Arya (whether he wants to admit it to Arya or not), and he sees protecting Arya from the world as his responsibility. Both of these could easily be considered justified, moral motives, so if anyone watches this scene (including Sandor’s promise of protecting Arya) and gets the impression he is “the bad guy” of this situation, they’ve grossly misinterpreted the scene.)
This is also why so many characters are hardened over the course of the story, namely Jon Snow, Tyrion Lannister, and Daenerys Targaryen. They are the three most popular characters of the series, and arguably three of (if not the three) most important characters to the story, but this doesn’t exempt them from having to commit morally questionable actions (namely murder across the board). This is because they live in a world where people like Ned Stark are killed, because being “good” and “righteous” are virtues very few share, so they are weaknesses to be exploited by others.
Comparatively, JJBA has many characters that would fall on the more “moral” side of things compared to the inhabitants of Westeros, but they still have flaws to them, albeit ones that are less life-threatening to everyone around them.
This is a direct result of two interconnected factors: the “chronological separation” of JJBA, and the example set by the first JoJo, Jonathan Joestar.
With Jonathan, Araki created a true paragon of human virtue: he is a selfless, responsible, kind, calm, gentle figure driven by a deep sense to help others and stop those who wish harm upon the innocent. Essentially, he’s everything a hero should be…and he ultimately bites the dust.
Now, this isn’t a GoT situation: his moral compass and decency aren’t his downfall. However, his death marks the end of the first Part (Phantom Blood, the shortest arc of JJBA), and it set a semi-frequent trend in the series for rather depressing, melancholy endings to the Part.
Araki’s decision moving forward was to create Joseph Joestar (the next protagonist, specifically of Part 2) as a very different person from his grandfather, Jonathan. Joseph is much less respectful or kind than Jonathan, nor is he as restrained. The first and second episodes of his anime part exemplify this difference; while fighting a vampire (an enemy species Jonathan fought many times), he uses a machine gun to wound the vampire, even if it incites panic (and possibly endangers) innocent civilians nearby. Later in the fight, the vampire takes a hostage.
Unlike with Jonathan, who was incredibly formal and always acted like a gentleman around his own wife, Erina, Joseph has no such formalities; their first interaction is when Joseph tries to bluff her vampire kidnapper into letting her go by telling him that he “Doesn’t care about that floozy”, referring to the woman herself.
After the morally pure, almost flawless Jonathan Joestar, the other protagonists of the series all lack his traditionally heroic virtues, coming across as darker, flawed individuals. The next 4 JoJo’s are:
Jotaro Kujo, the protagonist of Part 3, is a delinquent with anger issues. His introductory scene is literally telling his mother “Shut up, you bitch!”, a scene that makes it very clear from the start just how explosive his temper is and how irritable Jotaro can be. When faced with more deadly antagonists, Part 3 does not shy away from Jotaro’s brutality, and Jotaro explicitly kills a number of foes onscreen, as do many of his allies.
Josuke Higashikata, the protagonist of Part 4, is much kinder and more honorable than Jotaro, and overall the closest the series has to replicating Jonathan’s virtuous nature, but he still has his moments, often stealing money from Joseph or getting wrapped up in get-rich-quick schemes with his friends.
Giorno Giovanna, the protagonist of Part 5, is one of the more amoral characters in the original continuity, in no small part due to being a criminal (and eventual boss of the Italian mafia). His introductory scene is literally stealing a man’s luggage, and later pickpocketing him. Additionally, many of his fight scenes depict him as having a certain viciousness to him reserved for deadlier, unrepentant, unhinged criminals, such as Cioccolata, who earns a seven-page long beatdown.
Jolyne Kujo/Cujoh, the protagonist of Part 6 and Jotaro’s daughter, inherited her father’s anger issues. Her storyline often explores just how disastrous an explosive temper can be, and how such anger and irritability is so blinding it can completely override Jolyne’s better sense of judgement, putting her in increasingly perilous situations.
All of these characters are ones that fall on the “gray” side of the moral spectrum, being better than the villains they face but with their own sets of flaws and moral complexities to deal with. And unlike many other Shonen stories, they often never truly resolve these flaws or even acknowledge them as flaws. The most clear example of this is Giorno, whose story never presents his desire to become a gangster and mafia boss as “misguided” or “mistaken”; in fact, considering the story ends with him achieving his dream and becoming a mafia boss at age 15, his story seems to reward his viciousness and criminal ambitions, rather than punish them.
However, unlike GoT, which subtly tells the viewer/reader that being completely “pure” and “good” is wrong, as it makes you a target for others who perceive your goodness as a weakness; JJBA never makes such claims.
To summarize:
GoT and its geographic separation displays most sides of every conflict, forcing the audience to sympathize with the characters. In the process, very few characters come across as genuinely “evil”, and the few that are genuinely “good” tend to meet brutal deaths, so the show essentially tells its audience that “Almost everyone is morally gray and that’s the best way to survive”.
The chronological separation of JJBA forces its author, Araki, to make protagonists form different time periods that stand out from one-another; therefore, the gray morality in its setting and characters is an attempt to differentiate its protagonists. However, JJBA never tells its audience any specific view of morality and never acknowledges “goodness” as a weakness.
Time Frames and The Convergence of Storylines
These two series have many storylines, and it’s become a frequent occurrence for many characters from these storylines to meet each other in ways that make logical sense for all parties involved. However, the shows have two different ways of going about this.
With GoT, the geographic separation necessitates that major events in each storyline occur simultaneously, or at least in similar frames of time. This makes sense, as having different time frames occur for events being presented together would inevitably confuse some audience members. For an example of this confusion, I’m going to focus on RWBY, a web series inspired by anime and the many conventions of anime.
All that you need to know about the series is that it focuses on four teenage protagonists (Ruby, Blake, Weiss and Yang), and that Volume 3 ends with them being separated in a downer ending. The next two Volumes took a rather…strange direction in having all of the characters reunite.
Specifically, Blake has her own storyline throughout Volumes 4 and 5, but in Volume 5, the other three (Ruby, Weiss and Yang) all reunite with one-another. In the penultimate episode of Volume 5 (which takes place over the course of only a few days), Blake resolves to set sail with some new allies and help her friends, a journey that will take a few weeks at most. As she makes this resolution, her friends are in an intense battle with the antagonists.
Come the next episode, the Volume 5 finale, and Blake…arrives? While it might seem as if she made a weeks-long trip in only a few hours, it turns out, Volumes 4 and 5 were presented out of chronological order. While Ruby, Weiss and Yang all had their own storylines that eventually converged, and all of these storylines occurred in a relatively easy-to-understand chronological order; Blake’s storyline was seemingly set weeks before any of the other events. Her making a vow to help her friends occurred weeks before her friends even found one-another, and we are left with the implication that as she sailed across the ocean to find her friends, every other major battle and event of the last two volumes was occurring during her trip.
This was a strange story structure, but one I could follow. However, the writers retroactively changing the timeline of events that occurred across two years (each Volume is released roughly a year apart) confused many other fans. This is a rather long example, but it demonstrates why having multiple stories spread out across the same world can be confusing if different time frames are used.
In the GoT, the same events that the audience sees and the order in which they see them are meant to be the rough chronological order in which they occurred, in no small part because the showrunners formatted Seasons 3-6 specifically with this model to avoid confusion.
However, this creates a rather interesting dynamic when characters from distinct storylines meet. For example, Sansa and Jon reuniting in early Season 6.
Sansa has spent the last couple of years (since late Season 1) being a puppet and battered trophy wife for a number of families, from the Lannister’s, to the Tyrells, and, most recently, the Bolton’s. As these years have passed, Jon has gone on his own adventures, becoming a double agent for the Wildlings and even Lord Commander of the Night’s Watch.
When Sansa reunites with Jon, her own storyline doesn’t come to an end; instead, it continues. Rather than these being two distinct plots (“Sansa’s Travels” and “Jon’s Battles”), these two plots fuse together into one massive, joint plotline that both characters play key roles in. After all, fans of Sansa would be angered if her own character development and significance ended simply by being in proximity of a family member.
Comparatively, JJBA has a much different format when it comes to recurring characters in multiple plotlines, in no small part because it covers many stories across several generations.
See, here’s the thing about the Parts in JJBA. A new protagonist, which necessitates that Araki wrap up the storyline of the previous protagonist before he introduces a new one, corresponds with a switch in Parts; after all, he wouldn’t want fans of the last protagonist/Part to be “cheated” out of a story by not wrapping up the last protagonist’s arc and their story.
(On a side note: this is a major reason why each Part has a new Big Bad. In many works of fiction, especially anime/manga, the hero’s arc often ends with the defeat of the villain, so if Araki wants to give his characters in one time period a satisfying end before he moves to a new time period and introduces a new protagonist, he almost always has to kill that Part’s villain).
As a result, the reintroduction of past characters in later Parts of JJBA almost always portray individuals after they’ve accomplished their goals and undergone character development.
For example, Jotaro Kujo’s goal in Part 3 is to defeat Dio, therefore saving his mother, Holly Kujo. His goal is fulfilled, and he defeats Dio at the end of SDC; once we see him again in Part 4, we’re witnessing a Jotaro whose storyline has already ended. Without this goal, Jotaro is no longer the central character of his own story, but a supporting character in someone else’s story (in this case, he serves a mentor figure to his relative Josuke, the protagonist of DiU).
Furthermore, because only a few days have passed between Sansa escaping Ramsay and finding Jon, nothing in her personality has fundamentally changed, and nothing has changed in his either. This can oftentimes be the joy in watching these storylines converge: because the audience has already become familiar with the people in each part of Martin’s world, and there’s no reason to assume the characters will change in a short period of time, we can anticipate and predict how their personalities will clash upon working together.
By comparison, one of the most rewarding aspects of being a longtime JJBA reader is watching how characters change over time. Jotaro and Joseph are the two best examples of this. As longtime watchers/readers, we are witnesses not only to Jotaro’s evolution (going from a brutal teenage delinquent with anger issues to a much calmer, more responsible adult and father), but the new bonds he makes along the way, such as with his daughter Jolyne. Similarly, we are also witnesses to Joseph’s development: he goes from being a hotheaded, insensitive, often rude teenager in Part 2 to a caring, kind father and grandfather in Part 3, but by Part 4, he’s a shell of his former self, now senile and with memory and hearing problems.
Essentially, in GoT, storylines never truly end, they just converge and combine together, allowing the same personalities we’ve grown to love interact with one-another; but in JJBA, storylines have a definite beginning and end, so central characters with their own storylines that reappear in later Parts are destined to become supporting characters for someone else’s story, allowing them time to change in personality as well.
The Theme of Family and Family Names
Both series have many characters that emerge from the same family, and oftentimes, these families spread out; in this, the overlap in the themes of the respective series becomes clear.
With GoT, we have the Stark family as a designated “hero family”. All of the characters directly related to the family are heroic and have their own storylines. The most morally ambiguous character in the family is Arya, but even then, she isn’t a villainous character; her goal of seeking revenge is never one that is considered skewed or misdirected, and she maintains a strong sense of morality, even when with more amoral characters such as Sandor Clegane.
With JJBA, the obvious family is the Joestar family. This is the heroic family that guides the entire story, and even their most morally ambiguous characters (Giorno, Johnny, Gappy) are still heroic.
What’s interesting about the Stark family is that GoT spends a lot of time focusing on the fracturing of this family; all of the 6 Stark siblings (Jon, Robb, Sansa, Arya, Bran and Rickon) are spread out as the fighting worsens. This makes sense, after all: the death of Ned Stark spreads his children across the world, which allows for the show to explore storylines using these kids (such as using Bran’s journey as a tool to explore the history of the White Walkers).
Comparatively, the generational storylines of JJBA allow for the audience to witness the family evolve and grow stronger over time. However, there is another side to this:
With the Starks, all of the events of GoT take place a few years after their separation. Therefore, all of them still retain their name, even if the events the series spread them thin. With the Joestars, the events of JJBA take place over many generations, so while the individual members of the family grow strong, the name “Joestar” becomes somewhat archaic. (To put this in perspective, after 8 Parts and one universal reboot, there are still only 3 protagonists named “Joestar”: Jonathan, Joseph, and Johnny).
In essence, the geographic separation of GoT spreads out the heroic Stark family, fracturing and weakening them, but the relatively short time span allows them to retain their family name, which still holds significance. In JJBA, the chronological separation spreads the heroic Joestar family across time, and while they evolve and strengthen, the name of “Joestar” itself becomes lost to time and memory.
Death and Its Impact
Just as both series dwell on morality, they also dwell on mortality.
Game of Thrones has no shortage of death; it’s practically a trademark of the series at this point. There are two main reasons for this: the series has a massive body count, and the impacts of each death are felt throughout.
In GoT, death is felt throughout space. When Robert Baratheon dies, Daenerys is relieved on the other side of the world, feeling satisfaction that the man who slaughtered her family has finally met his own death. When Ned Stark is beheaded, Jon Snow has to be physically restrained by his friends from leaving the Wall to avenge him, hundreds of miles away.
With these deaths, we not only feel the death itself, because we follow and have been following the characters that died; but we witness the reactions of this death from other characters we’ve also followed.
In JJBA, death is felt throughout time. Each Part has a singular protagonist, so oftentimes the first reaction to the death of a major character is the protagonist’s own reaction. However, if the death is significant enough, we also feel it in other future Parts.
In the 1930s, Erina Pendleton is still reeling from the loss of her husband, Jonathan, 5 decades earlier. Similarly, Lisa Lisa is motivated by the loss of her parents during the climax of Part 1. The most peculiar, notable example of this is Dio. Everyone who knew him feels his death over 20 years after his death. Part 4 is set in motion with the Stand-granting arrow Dio used, Part 5 opens with Koichi searching for his son on behalf of Jotaro, and the antagonist of Part 6 is motivated by Dio’s death.
Conclusion
I actually find it rather fitting I arrived on the themes I did for these two series.
Game of Thrones is a series all about space. Its characters are spread out over space and every action from one character in one city has the potential to affect somebody (or anybody) else in another part of this expansive world.
Some of the most iconic scenes of the show take advantage of space: the Battle of the Bastards, Blackwater, Hardhome, the Long Night…all of these are massive battle scenes filled with hundreds, if not thousands, of soldiers.
JoJo’s Bizarre Adventure is a series all about time. Its characters are spread out over time, and the actions of one character has the potential to affect somebody years down the road.
Some of the most iconic parts of the anime and manga are about time, specifically as they relate to villains. Dio’s main power in Part 3 is to stop time, and Jotaro develops this same power; the final fight between these two ultra-powerful, time-stopping titans has become one of the most iconic moments in manga and anime history, on par with Goku vs Frieza, Midoriya vs Todoroki, and Naruto vs Sasuke. In Part 4, Kira develops the ability to maintain stable, temporary time loops. In Part 5, Diavolo can “erase” time, influencing the memories of his opponents and predicting their actions. In Part 6, Pucci can accelerate time, a part of his final plan.
Both of these series use these two polar opposite themes in many of their most iconic scenes, and they form the crux for their polar opposite storytelling methods and the resulting effects of these methods.
Comments
Post a Comment