[On reddit, me and EditorofShamballa got to discussing BH’s ending. It’s not exactly my favourite as I’ve mentioned before. I don’t usually discuss Brotherhood unless specifically asked. Aside from the ending rant and the incomplete rewatch series, I think I’ve only discussed it in response to some sort of query.
But still, I ended up with a weird mixture of both complaining about it and explaining it. I like the stuff I briefly wrote on Ed’s character development in BH though. Here’s their initial questions – (not mine):]
I have some… questions pertaining to the writing quality about Ed’s last transmutation that I invite any knowledgeable fan of FMAB to give a shot at answering:
1) How is Truth (God) changing the laws of Equivalent Exchange seemingly arbitrarily because Ed “solved the puzzle,” (renouncing his arrogance in believing alchemy could solve his problems & declaring, “Even if I lose alchemy, I’ll still have my friends”)…
a) not a literal deus ex machina?
b) not break the hardness of the show’s magic system if EE isn’t based on fixed equivalence but however Truth/God would like it to work at the time?
2) How did Ed know Truth would (let alone could) change the laws of Equivalent Exchange for him? If it’s because Ed was desperate and grasping as straws, then why
a) is Ed so confident it’s going to work (he draws the circle and tells the crowd that, “I’ll be right back. The last transmutation that the Fullmetal Alchemist will ever do,” grinning re-assuredly all the while)?
b) didn’t Ed come up with this that other time he was desperate and grasping at straws (when he finds out the Stone requires human sacrifice) and has ample time comparatively to think of this?
3) How can Ed claim (and thereby persuade Truth to change the laws) Ed was wrong and arrogant to believe alchemy could solve his problems, when Ed uses alchemy (twice) to solve the main problem of getting Al back? Those two times being when Ed
a) draws the human transmutation circle in central and claps his hands
b) claps his hands and touches his gate, transmuting it away
4) Where is Ed’s character arc throughout the series of him overcoming his aforementioned arrogant belief in alchemy to solve his problems?
5) Where is Ed’s character arc of him valuing his friends and friendships significantly more than alchemy? Throughout the series, did Ed not hone alchemy as a means of helping people (like his brother), not for its own sake (like Tucker)?
6) How come when Ed finds out that EE is not governed by actual (fixed) equivalence but by the law of how Truth wants it to work at the time, it does not shatter Ed’s view of/faith in EE?
[Here is my reply. I was in an agreeable and therefore happy to whine sort of mood.]
I have a few issues with Ed’s final transmutation too. Not so much in the logistics of it though – that’s never really bothered me. More in how annoyingly pointless Al’s sacrifice felt – they were surrounded by other people! Father was ambling towards Ed. How was sacrificing Al himself to free Ed from a rock their best option? He or Mei could have broken the rock without trouble using alchemy, I’m sure. Or Greed could have intervened – he’s right there after all and Father really gets defeated when Greed sacrifices himself, not Ed’s punches. And yeah, Ed’s complete confidence that sacrificing his alchemy would work. I thought he’d just learnt to be humble but he’s as sure of himself as ever. Made worse as he’s literally given alternate solutions for him to reject so he can choose the ‘correct answer’. I miss my hell-gates that are beyond human comprehension.
I will offer an answer to 3) and 4) I think:
3) It’s more that alchemy got Al into his armour in his arrogance about trying to bring his mother back. Had Ed never touched alchemy, he and his brother would have both been whole and well – the things he really values are his friendships. It’s in giving up his alchemy that he gets Al back -yes he’s using alchemy to do it but it’s alchemy that caused the problem in the first place.
4) You can see this through Ed’s growing appreciation for Winry throughout the series. He feels useless when a baby is being born in spite of all his alchemy. Winry is a person he respects for her skills as a doctor and mechanic – she helps people. Ed’s speech about how her hands are meant for healing come with the flipside that his own hands are meant for destruction. Ed meets various other strong people who don’t possess alchemy, such as Ling, Lan Fan and Olivier Armstrong. With his alchemy all he’s done is join the military, discover the stone is made from human lives and get used as a human sacrifice, being used in a country-wide transmutation. In Briggs, we get another scene of Winry and Scar where she’s able to get through to him with her kindness, getting him on their side where Ed is again little help because he’s distrusting. His distrust of others is treated as a flaw, such as his refusal to make amends with his father being seen as childish stubborness.
Of course, this suggests to me that Ed is just incredibly uncreative if he can’t see how to use his alchemy for anything constructive – and there are actually very few examples of him using his alchemy for anything constructive – and I absolutely hate the way hohenheim is written in FMAB. I don’t think Brotherhood Ed is nearly as interesting or developed as 03 Ed.
[And their response.]
As far as your issues go, I think you make some great points! I have more issues than just the logic/degree of contrivance of the last transmutation, but that scene is the most densely packed of the writing issues, and that is already a wall of questions.
I know you’re not one to defend FMAB often, but I appreciate you giving counterpoints, so here are mine:
3) In the last transmutation scene, Ed specifically refers to becoming arrogant about alchemy after seeing the Truth inside the Gate, so post-decision to resurrect his mother.
4) I think this is a very fair point, thank you!
It’s not uncommon to hear people complain that it’s annoying to see Ed after the Nina incident be so irrationally emotional. However, even in FMAB, Ed still holds onto his irrational emotional hatred of his father up to the end.
One would think those aforementioned complainers would find this exponentially more annoying because Hohenheim’s “abandoning” their family was so he could save the world from Father who Ed just literally punched into the next dimension. Ed even has the gall to call him “rotten” even after Hohenheim volunteers to sacrifice his own life for Al’s.
Is this similar to the issue(s) you have with how Hohenheim is written in FMAB?
[My response which turned into a rant…]
On 3) Did it really specify that? Well then, it’s especially bad that Brotherhood skipped Ed’s childhood then. The manga is structured with Liore then Yousewell then the battle on the train and then Nina. These first three help to show Ed as arrogant and sure of himself. Then the Nina incident deconstructs this and Ed’s whole arrogant attitude by showing Ed to be really powerless when it matters.
So he felt that by seeing truth and becoming awesome enough to be a State Alchemist, he was better than regular humans. In seeing Truth Ed believes he’s become special. Nina is the start of his character development into learning that he’s not greater leading up to this moment with Truth where he has come to the conclusion that he’s nothing more than a regular human who couldn’t even save a little girl – and that’s alright because regular humans are awesome – like Winry. That’s what I think it’s going for – which Brotherhood kind of messes up by skipping the establishing episodes – with its episode 1 being too busy to spend a proper amount of time on characterising Ed. (I guess he’s still being characterised as arrogant even afterwards but I’m told the Nina incident is meant to be a turning point in him starting to become more caring. He specifically mentions her in his speech to Truth.)
[And here’s where I rant about BH Hohenheim… I just don’t like him and how he’s written.]
Regarding Hohenheim, no not really. I think they frame him as way too heroic actually. From the second he appears in episode 20 of BH, he is scolding Ed for burning the house down, scolding him and calling Ed a child. He offers Pinako the vaguest warning of all time (how nice to warn your friend and no one else about the danger the entire country is in) and doesn’t offer any explanation for his 10 year disappearance. That would all be interesting as I do like exploring flawed characters but I feel as if the show wants me to see him as a good, caring person in how he leaves Ed speechless and that brief moment of him wanting to stroke Ed’s head but unable to do it because he doesn’t consider himself worthy. And then he leaves again without saying goodbye – he’s so infuriating- and after hardly saying anything useful when he could have shared so much more. And then you get that later scene where Ed meets his father again and there’s this bit where Darius asks Ed why he can’t forgive his father already? It’s none of his business! It’s basically signalling that Ed’s being childish for not being interested in reconnecting with a man who’s been gone for most of his life.
Now sure, from Hohenheim’s perspective you could say he had no choice but he’s so terrible at actually communicating. And his big reason for not being there was because he had to spread souls across the land to defeat Father. Did that really take 10 years? Amestris isn’t that big and I think he only had to visit the conflict points. Could he not have visited home occasionally? Could he not have called? Anything? His reason for not being there is stupid in short and it also leads to much of the climax being about him. He was the one to stop Father’s plan. In fact, Father’s plan has no chance of success since before the series even began because Hohenheim’s circle was self-activating (even if he died) and he’d planted most of the souls by the time the series started.
Now, I know he’s supposed to be a good person but I hate every scene he’s in. (Except for the one of him as a Slave in the past – that’s interesting.) I don’t think he’s that well-written. Even his relationship with Trisha came off as weirdly creepy in that one episode where she’s there as a child?? Ed’s even dressing up as Hohenheim at the end to annoy me further. (Not that I mind Edward’s character development ending with him forgiving his father – 03 was the same way. It just felt like less an expectation there.)
Wow, I wrote a lot there… sorry I guess I really like to rant about Hohenheim.
[So that was some problems with Hohenheim and I probably actually have more to say – once you dislike a character, suddenly everything is wrong with them.
I think it should be clear that Edward is my favourite character. Therefore, another thing I didn’t care for so much in the BH finale is how Hohenheim has essentially become its protagonist with the main connection to the villain, being so instrumental in destroying his plan, he’s Father’s foil and he even tanks so many blows before offering his life to save Al and bringing Ed to tears. Then he dies on Trisha’s grave with a smile on his face. It’s his story at this point more than any others and Ed’s importance feels contrived as his punching Father was hardly something anyone couldn’t have done just as well – I feel like he only does it to pay lipservice to the fact that he is nominally the main character even though he’s long been overshadowed by others. This is a personal complaint I have, I’m not sure it counts as anything like a critique but I felt it bears mentioning anyway while I’m sharing some of my issues with Hohenheim.]
Zetalial 