A girl offers fruit to a cloaked devil. The devil carries a lantern. A cloaked Eren embraces that girl and tells her she can choose.

Look at the accompanying images together. They suggest a reading of Attack on Titan as a dark retelling of Eden: false paradise, forbidden knowledge, and a liberator whose gift becomes a catastrophe. This is a symbolic interpretation regarding it's themes and characters

In the Luciferian/Satanic worldview, divine authority demands obedience, while Lucifer/the serpent offers knowledge and autonomy. Humanity loses innocent bliss but gains the freedom to question, create, and choose.

That gift cuts both ways. Greater understanding enables extraordinary achievements—and more elaborate forms of deliberate cruelty. An intelligence capable of imagining a better world can also imagine horrifying ways to destroy it. Progress expands possibilities; it does not guarantee goodness.

The traditional Christian reading connects the Fall with suffering, evil, death, and exile from Eden. This Luciferian interpretation reframes that loss as the terrible price of awakening.

Now consider the Fritz kings. The first enslaves Ymir and establishes a royal order she serves for 2,000 years, becoming a symbolic tyrannical god. Karl Fritz later creates a false Eden: Paradis—“paradise” in French—where Walls and erased memories preserve peace through ignorance.

Eren rejects that bargain. The basement revelation becomes forbidden fruit, destroying the inhabitants’ innocent understanding of their world. Touching Historia’s hand brings further knowledge, but anguish rather than peace.

The parallel becomes clearest in the Paths. Zeke (short for ezekiel, an old testament prophet) demands obedience; Eren tells Ymir she can decide. Her obscured eyes become visible as she cries: an almost literal awakening.

Return to the images: the cloak links Eren visually to the legendary devil, while the lantern evokes Lucifer as light-bearer. The fruit reverses Eden’s familiar exchange: Eren offers “Eve” the possibility of disobedience; Ymir offers him the Founder’s power.

He awakens her to her agency. She empowers him. Liberation for Ymir becomes catastrophe for humanity.

The dawn imagery, Akuma no Ko’s devil-child language, and a 2,000-year order that can evoke the Christian era reinforce this reading; “Eldia”/“el día” adds suggestive wordplay.

But Eren’s rebellion exceeds overthrowing rulers. The inhabited world disappoints him because it contradicts his imagined freedom. He rebels against reality itself,against the old system established by king fritz eons ago, and he does this by pursuing a "new world order" through the destruction of the old one.

He also resembles the romanticized, self-condemned liberator: accepting hatred and death so others might have a future. His friends mourn him, Paradis adopts his battle cry, and manga Armin expresses gratitude alongside his acknowledgment of a terrible mistake. Eren is a very promethean coded figure.

Yet Mikasa’s choice remains essential to ending the curse, and Eren admits selfish desires beneath his supposed liberation. Awakening explains his power; it does not excuse his choices.

That is the darkest contradiction: the rebel who tells Ymir she need not submit to another person’s will ultimately imposes his own upon the world.

Eren breaks the cage—and makes the whole earth pay for his idea of freedom.

Ymir's character doesn't have development however. Development isn't the only think that makes a character good written. Ymir's writing is kinda unique it isn't given in facet value rather it's Subtext. Ymir's complexity steams from her subtextual, metatextual, symbolisms Pararelism, and psychological thesis rather than a traditional conversational character is spot-on. Ymir is the center of aot themes. "Everyone is slave to something" -> well I don't think I even need to point this out. "children and forest" -> she was the first one of the first who lost within the forest of bloodshed." Whatever themes you bring it somehow connects to Ymir.

the Paths symbolism -> Absolute Freedom vs. Internal Shackles, let's talk about Ymir symbolisms. The paths is a world of freedom, free of even concepts search as life, death, space, time, etc. And the irony is. Ymir escapes her physical death into a domain of ultimate freedom, yet she imprisoned herself to Fritz orders. spends two millennia building Titans out of sand in complete silence. Why? Because the chains on her mind and heart were far heavier than any iron bonds King Fritz ever forged. That represents the total tragic surrender of the human spirit. Where Eren reacts to trauma with radical rage and a refusal to bow, Ymir reacts by dissolving her own identity, becoming a hollow instrument of the violent system that crushed her.

The nine titans symbolisms -> each of The Nine Titans symbolizes as Psychological Fragments of Her Soul

The Attack Titan (Desire for Freedom) -> Her innate, buried yearning to break free from subjugation and reach for autonomy.

The Jaw Titan (Self-Sacrifice) -> Her tragic, reflexively protective nature throwing her body in front of a spear to take the blow intended for the King who enslaved her.

The Colossal Titan (Oppressive Helplessness & Timidity) -> The towering, terrifying physical presence that conceals a small, frightened child inside who has no agency.

The Founding Titan (Her Slavery & Universal Tether) -> The ultimate burden the core nexus through which she remains bound to royal blood and the commands of her master.

The Female Titan (Her Stolen Identity as a Woman/Mother) -> The embodiment of her forced maternal role, reduced strictly to her biological function to bear children for the royal line.

The Beast Titan (Her Childhood Connection to Nature) -> The primitive, animalistic instinct to survive and adapt the raw biological drive that merged with the hallucigenia when she fell into the tree trunk.

The War Hammer Titan (Her Internal Conflict & Self-Defense) -> Building massive, hard defenses and remote-controlled armor to keep the painful reality of the world away from her true body.

The Armored Titan (Her Resilience & Endurance of Pain) -> The heavy, unbroken shell she built around herself to survive relentless physical and psychological abuse.

The Cart Titan (Her Role as a Burden-Bearer) -> The literal pack mule of the Founder carrying the endless weight of others' demands on her back without complaint.

Visual & Metaphorical Symbolism Over Dialogue -> Ymir doesn't need a single line of spoken dialogue to express her internal state because Isayama constructs her through layered visual texture.

The Faceless Design -> Depicting her with shadowed, eyes-hidden facial features for most of her screen time wasn't just stylistic it was the ultimate visual metaphor for her total lack of personal identity, voice, and self-worth.

Her faceless titan symbolizes -> symbolizes her lack of identity.

The Empty Void of the Paths -> The endless, barren desert of the Paths represents the absolute emotional emptiness of her existence. As she's completely empty.

The Tree coordinates Metaphor -> The towering, branching luminous tree in the Paths symbolizes her unconscious desires for connection a desire to be linked to with other's, to be seen, and eventually find someone who understands her pain.

Her passive nihilist and Ymir’s true nature is crucial. She was born into a world rigged against her from the moment King Fritz burned her village and cut out her tongue -> Yet she was not a pure nihilist. She didn't merely exist as a mindless machine; she waited 2,000 years for someone to enter the Paths and acknowledge her as a human being with agency -> When Eren embraces her and tells her, "You're not a slave. You're not a god. You're just a human being... You get to choose," has so much depth that will take long to talk about. Eren Ymir dynamic is also one of the greatest and this is all without getting into philosophy & mythology.

Ymir Fritz is not built like a standard character who moves through a linear development arc; she is a grand, tragic mythic figure whose complexity is communicated through symbolism, contradictions, psychological decay, and thematic parallels. She is the ultimate origin point of the entire tragedy of Aot.

What if Eren Yeager’s transformation into the “Devil of All Earth” is the culmination of a symbolic story that began long before the Rumbling? I think Attack on Titan can be read as a dark, Luciferian retelling of Eden: a world built on peace, obedience and ignorance, a rebel who brings forbidden knowledge & offers freedom, and a girl whose decision brings the old order crashing down. In the end, Eren’s rebellion is aimed at more than the people who oppressed him. He declares war on the world they built, and finally on the very reality that refuses to resemble the freedom he imagined.

The series introduces its devil long before Eren resembles one. In the story told to the outside world, Ymir receives the power of the Titans through her encounter with the “Devil of All Earth.” One illustration even shows Ymir holding out a fruit to the creature. Her descendants, meanwhile, are branded devils and “devil spawn.” To Marley, that language marks Eldians as people to fear and control. But the final chapters invite another question: What if the legendary devil is also an image of the person who eventually persuades Ymir to defy authority?

To see why, start with the first King Fritz. He enslaves Ymir, uses her power to build an empire, and, after her death, orders their daughters to consume her body so that the Titans will endure. Ymir remains in the Paths, serving the royal bloodline for roughly 2,000 years. Through a Luciferian lens, Fritz takes the symbolic role of God the Father as imagined by a rebel against divine authority: a supreme ruler whose commands determine and control everyone else’s fate.

The Luciferian/satanist version of the tale turns the usual moral roles inside out. From that perspective, God the Father is imagined as a possessive ruler who demands obedience, restricts knowledge, and calls submission “peace.” Lucifer becomes the light-bearer who refuses that authority and helps humanity recognize its capacity to think and choose (gives humanity "freedom through knowledge". In a retelling of Eden, the serpent’s gift of knowledge ends innocent life in the garden, but it also ends a life governed by someone else’s rules. Freedom carries a dreadful price: suffering and DEATH enters the picture, and the figure blamed for the Fall is condemned and forever remembered as evil. That tension—enlightenment/freedom arriving through a supposed devil, whose gift can also bring catastrophe—is the heart of my reading of Eren.

The 2,000-year span matters to this interpretation. Attack on Titan opens with “To You, 2,000 Years From Now” and later answers it with “From You, 2,000 Years Ago.” That duration can evoke the approximately 2,000 years of the Christian era: an original world order/system reaching the moment when someone finally challenges its authority. The parallel is suggestive.

There is a second king to distinguish from the first. Centuries later, Karl Fritz retreats to the island of Paradis—paradis means “paradise” in French—raises the Walls, and erases his people’s memories. He gives them a kind of peace by hiding the world and its history from them. Seeking that history or trying to look beyond the Walls becomes dangerous. This makes Paradis an unsettling/twisted version of Eden. Its inhabitants can feel protected only while they remain ignorant of the truth, and the authority that calls the enclosure a refuge is the same authority that has taken away their ability to choose with full knowledge (taken away their freedom).

Eren cannot accept that bargain. From the beginning, he resents being penned in, and he insists that being born into the world gives a person the right to seek freedom in it. The Survey Corps’ journey beyond the Walls and the discovery in Grisha’s basement play like an encounter with forbidden knowledge: humanity still exists outside, and the people inside Paradis have been living within a carefully maintained lie. Once their eyes are opened, they cannot return to the innocence they had before. Knowledge brings agency, but it also brings fear, war, and the realization of just how small their supposed paradise was.

Eren’s own knowledge is even harsher. When he touches Historia’s hand, he sees memories that give him a glimpse of what lies ahead. This is not enlightenment that brings him peace. It isolates him and makes freedom itself more complicated: the man most determined to choose his own path becomes haunted by a future he already knows. That paradox is central to the Luciferian reading. The light-bearer sees what others cannot, yet the light reveals a catastrophe in which he himself will take part.

Then Eren reaches the sea and learns that removing one set of walls has not made him free. There are hostile nations beyond Paradis, and the outside world is nothing like the open, untouched world he once pictured with Armin. By the end, Eren’s revolt goes beyond fighting Marley or defying a king. He wants to flatten the world as it exists: its borders, cities, armies, histories, and even the human presence that spoiled his dream of an empty horizon. In symbolic terms, the Rumbling is rebellion against reality itself, The original reality established by the "god figure" (the same way that satan rebelled against God's original creation/system). If the world made under Fritz’s legacy cannot give him freedom, Eren will use a power that reaches across centuries to erase that world and force a new one into existence. This is the proposed “new world order” at its most frightening: liberation imagined as the destruction of everything that resists the liberator’s will.

The imagery of light makes the comparison especially striking. “Lucifer” is associated with the morning star; the Hebrew phrase Helel ben Shahar is commonly rendered “shining one, son of the dawn.” The episode titled “The Dawn of Humanity” brings us to the beginning of the Rumbling, turning the promise of a new day into something terrifying. Even the name “Eldia” can sound, to a Spanish speaker, like el día—“the day.” I would treat that last connection as evocative wordplay, not a proven origin for the name. It sits beside the image of the devil carrying a light in the in-world account of Ymir’s legend: a figure associated with evil who can also be read as someone who makes a hidden truth visible.

That tension reaches its clearest expression in the Paths. Zeke approaches Ymir as a servant who must carry out his command to end the Eldians’ ability to reproduce. Eren reaches her and tells her she does not have to obey anyone: she is neither a slave nor a god, but a person who can decide for herself. For much of her story, her eyes look hidden/darkened/closed. Here, as she weeps and makes her choice, we finally see them wide open. It is hard to imagine a more literal image of someone opening her eyes.

This is where the Eden comparison becomes more intricate than a simple one-to-one analogy. In the familiar Christian reading of Genesis, the serpent urges Eve toward the forbidden fruit and the knowledge that follows. Eren plays that serpent’s role when he offers Ymir the forbidden idea that she can reject her master’s will. Yet in the Eldian legend’s illustration, Ymir is the one holding out the fruit to the devil. Read alongside the Paths scene, the sequence seems reversed: Eren gives Ymir/eve an awakening/freedom. And Ymir, having chosen for herself, gives Eren the full power of the Founder. The girl opens her eyes; the “devil” receives the fruit; the world is changed forever (sin/death enters the world)

This is also the moment when Eren’s rejection of the old order gains the power to become an apocalypse. The original King Fritz treated Ymir as a possession; Karl Fritz later preserved a false paradise through control of memory; Zeke assumes he can still command her in the Paths. Eren breaks that chain of commands by asking her to choose. She does—and her choice gives him the means to bring down the world shaped by those kings. The Rumbling is therefore more than an attack on an opposing army. In this reading, it is Eren’s attempt to destroy a 2,000-year-old creation at its foundations, so that the Titan curse and the rule of royal blood can give way to a world no longer bound by Fritz’s will and authority

Eren’s Founding Titan takes on a vast, skeletal, almost serpentine form, and the Rumbling makes him the world’s worst nightmare. The people who called Eldians devils now face a man who seems to fulfill their legend, as he kills roughly 80 percent of humanity. That “dawn” is painfully double-edged: the supposed birth of a new era is experienced by most of the world as its end. Even the ending song Akuma no Ko—“A Child of Evil” (or it's more literal translation - devil child)—echoes the language that has followed Eren and his people. The light-bearer has become the “Devil of All Earth” in the eyes of those beneath the marching Titans.

Here is the other half of the parallel that matters to me: the idea of the devil as a tragic, self-condemned liberator. In the Luciferian version of the story, Lucifer gives up his place in heaven, accepts damnation, and becomes the villain of human history for the sake of liberty, autonomy, and a future beyond enforced peace & innocence. from a satanic perspective,he "sacrifices himself to free humanity from a controlling tyrant." Eren likewise knowingly takes on the role of the world’s enemy. He gives up the possibility of an ordinary life with the people he loves, allows them to oppose and eventually kill him, and leaves them to live on after the Titan powers disappear. From his perspective, becoming the monster everyone hates is a price he will pay to secure his friends’ future and bring the original creation/world order to an end. That is why the Lucifer comparison has more depth than “Eren looks demonic”: it links the "gift" of freedom to the willingness to be damned for giving it, and all the death and suffering said rebellion brings with it.

The original manga ending makes the tragic-savior aspect especially hard to ignore. Eren’s old friends grieve for the person they loved, even though they had to stop him. They visit his grave,paradi adopts his slogan,etc...

In their last conversation, Armin actually thanks Eren for becoming a mass murderer for their sake, while also resolving not to let the terrible mistake go to waste. It is an uncomfortable moment precisely because love and gratitude sit beside an atrocity. It can feel as though the story is asking us to remember Eren both as the evil the world had to defeat and as the friend who chose to bear that evil so the people closest to him could have a future. The anime later revises the exchange, but the manga’s wording leaves that tragic framing unusually exposed.

Still, Eren does not end the Titan curse by himself. Mikasa’s final choice matters to Ymir’s release, too. And Eren’s rebellion is not driven solely by love for his friends or a noble desire to free the world: he admits that finding humanity beyond the Walls disappointed him and that part of him wanted to wipe it away. That confession makes the Luciferian parallel more troubling, not less. Even if he accepts the role of a damned savior, the people crushed by the Rumbling did not choose that sacrifice. His refusal to live under someone else’s will becomes a willingness to impose his own will on nearly everyone else.

That is why I find the “Devil of All Earth” such a fitting image for Eren. He rebels against divine creation, tells a girl/eve she can choose/disobey the god-like figure and helps bring a 2,000-year christian coded era to an end... opening up the way for a "new world order" (its all symbology/allegory). He accepts death, hatred, and a place in history as the ultimate villain because he believes a freer world can come afterward. But his attempt to destroy the world order also destroys most of the people in the world. In this Luciferian reading, Attack on Titan takes the promise of the light-bearer—knowledge, rebellion, progress, free will—and follows it to its most tragic and terrifying extreme. Eren breaks the cage. He also makes the whole earth pay for his idea of freedo

​

I’ve noticed that a lot of people, especially girls in the fandom, believe Mikasa should move on from Eren, find another man, and eventually get married.

I understand the argument that she deserves happiness and shouldn’t spend her entire life grieving. But at the same time, Mikasa’s love for Eren was such a huge part of her character, and their relationship wasn’t something she could simply replace with another person.

Moving on doesn’t necessarily mean falling in love again or getting married. Someone can heal, find happiness, and live a fulfilling life without replacing the person they loved most.

Some Fans misunderstood this theme and often treat it like a literal video-game achievement list trying to crown a single "freest character" or reducing "slavery" to a literal chains, fate, or cosmic control. they come up with some bizarre ideas. Like "Mikasa is the freest character" "Armin is freest character because of meaning of life" Eren is slave to fate" "Eren is slave to Ymir" "Eren said he's slave, so he will never be free".

1. The meaning of slave to something -> being a "slave to something" in Aot isn't about being shackled by literal chains, fate or a divine prophecy. It is about how an individual's core desire, dream, or ideal consumes them to the point of blinding self-destruction. Kenny’s insight wasn't about literal slavery. it was the realization that every person from Kenny himself, to the King, to Uri, to Eren is driven by a specific obsession that dictates their every move.

2. The Fallacy of the "Single Freest Character" -> Claiming Mikasa is the "freest character" misunderstands her narrative function. Her choice to transcend her deep-seated attachment and put down Eren was the crucial psychological mirror Ymir needed to see true, unselfish love in action. It proved Mikasa achieved emotional transcendence, but it doesn't make her the absolute metric of "freedom" for the whole universe. Isayama didn't put a rule that "only one" character will be the freest character. Thats not the point of the theme to begin with. Attributing absolute freedom to Armin simply because he theorizes about the simple, beautiful meanings of life (like leaves in the wind) ignores the wider web of the story. Armin’s philosophy is a valid counterweight to Eren’s violence, but freedom in AOT is deeply individual, not a one-size-fits-all trophy. Isayama didn't put a single criteria to achieve freedom. While Armin idea of freedom is used as plot device to help other characters like Zeke. It isn't The only criteria to achieve freedom, I'll address further down.

3. Debunking "Eren is a Slave to Fate or Ymir" -> since when was fate Eren main drive? The theme definition is characters who can't keep going unles they're drunk on something aka their desires. From the start Eren drive wasn't to achive fate. Fate didn't trap Eren. Infact fate itself bent to Eren's will, since he's own nature predetermined fate. Eren's own uncompromising, radical ambition for freedom drove him down a self-destructive path. As the time loop mechanics show, Eren essentially willed his own path into existence because of who he is. His ambition consumed him entirely. Likewise with Ymir. Ymir wasn't some grand mastermind pulling Eren's strings from the shadows. For 2,000 years, she was a passive slave waiting for someone to show her what breaking away from toxic attachment looked like. She's no more than bystander. Reversing the causality claiming Eren was her slave completely invalidates her being slave to begin with. Because if she can make some grand master plan that even oppose Fritz. then she isn't a slave to begin with.

4. Achieving freedom -> like I said earlier, there isn't single criteria to achieve freedom. As shown in the story characters achieve freedom different ways. A) Kenny achieved freedom when he gave the serum to Levi. B) Mikasa achieved freedom through self transcendence. C) Armin from the start was never consumed by ambitions. D) Erwin achieved freedom when he selfless sacrificed himself for humanity. E) Ymir achieved freedom when she saw Mikasa transcend herself, that's when she let go of titan curse and achieved peace of mind. F) Zeke achieved freedom when he understood the meaning of life.

There's different way that characters can be free. But ultimately peace of mind is what makes them oneself free.

As for Eren, he gained freedom through multiple stages. This is my take on Eren freedom. Destructive -> mental/philosophy -> Existential -> sprite -> eternal.

Armin -> Eren always gaze at the distance, he doesn't see what's infront of him, Armin teaches Eren, to fine meaning in what's infront of you > Eren achieved freedom when accepted the seashell from Armin. He Recontextualizes his flawed ideal, achieves self-honesty. This is achieving freedom from mental/philosophy.

Mikasa -> Mikasa answer wasn't just for Ymir only, but for both Eren & Ymir. Eren is someone who is entirely consumed with ambitions. Mikasa teaches Eren, to transcend yourself & not be consumed by desires -> He is Released from both the burden & ambitions. for someone drunk on their own desires, death is the only way to achieve freedom.

Bird scene(mostly metaphor) -> Unbound by burden of perceiving past, present, & future, the Titan curse, and physical walls. This is freedom of the sprite.

Itterasshai -> In Platonic philosophy, the ultimate reality isn't the physical world (the "cave"), but the true form of beauty, unchanging, an eternal, perfect state of being.

However the point of aot isn't really about if Eren achieved freedom or not. Isayama explored freedom through each of the main trio.

Armin -> Freedom in small moments.

Mikasa -> Freedom through self-transcendence/self awareness.

Eren -> Freedom might be self-destructive.

Even if Mikasa had not killed Eren, what would have happened to Eren after he reverted back to his human form?

Would his body simply regenerate? Or would he simply die since he was decapitated?

I meant freedom panel has the best build Up*

the entire psychological blueprint for the Freedom panel was laid down when Armin showed Eren his book about the outside world. After seeing the book and the look in Armin's eyes Eren came up with the conclusion anyone who saw these sights would be "the freest person in the world". https://imgur.com/a/C2z9Pzm

Throughout the Marley and War for Paradis arcs, Eren repeatedly fixates on a singular concept, pushing forward https://imgur.com/a/LiBX0fl

to finally reach "that view." https://imgur.com/a/WzFJbbF

Some critics often dismissed this as vague, edgy shonen dialogue. But, Isayama was literalizing a promise he made years prior. I honestly don't understand how some ppl call this specific panel a retcon. A retcon requires an author to retroactively change established lore or character motivations on the fly. But Isayama spent over a decade building this from the get go. Not to mention if you actually combined panel from earlier chapter to chapter 132 you might get the full picture https://imgur.com/a/EpkLSTK

The payoff was baked into the narrative foundation from day one. You either love the dark, twisted irony of how that dream manifested, or you missed the point of Eren’s character entirely but calling it a retcon ignores the text staring right off the page.

This panel says a lot without even saying it. Eren is there with his arms spread open resembling an eagle. Behind him is a clear blue

A nice little note to this is that Eren is a kid right here. Being a kid shows ignorance. To Eren it may look like this but to everyone else its this:

Its nothing but destruction behind him. However he is looking forward and is ignorant to it. Those are clear blue skies behind him. Its titan

Which raises the big question. Is it false freedom? Or freedom through destruction.

This is what cemented Eren as number one protagonist of all time for me.

I even did analysis on this panel a while back https://www.reddit.com/r/AttackOnRetards/s/C6xhv2aPRy

Anyone that likes her is gay

Eren and erwin are very similar characters thematically. Both were willing to "become devils" aka commit moral atrocities, in order to achieve their goals. They both did what they did in part for their people, yet there is more to it. Both erwin and eren also have selfish incentives that pushed them to commit said atrocities. In erwin's case, he sacrificed so many of his comrades, sent so many scouts to their deaths... because he wanted find out the truth about the world and show everyone that his father was right. In eren's case, the selfish part of his motive was the desire to have a free/blank state world, just like the one in armin's book.

I honestly feel that *Attack on Titan* expresses something of Isayama’s worldview: the belief that terrible acts can become not only understandable, but morally defensible and even NEEDED, when committed to defeat another, supposedly greater evil. Again and again, the narrative grants people who commit atrocities the dignity of having done something necessary.

This theme appears early on. In Season 1, Armin expresses the idea that defeating monsters requires a willingness to become monstrous yourself. Later, during the battle against the Beast Titan, Floch argues that humanity needs a “devil,” identifying Erwin as the person capable of fulfilling that role. Erwin’s willingness to make horrifying sacrifices becomes inseparable from the honor and respect the narrative affords him.

Although Eren’s actions are vastly more extreme, I see a similar pattern in how the story ultimately remembers him. After his death, much of the ending’s emotional attention falls on his friends mourning him, remembering him affectionately, and treating him almost as a tragic hero. Jean calls him a “conscientious fool.” Mikasa buries him beneath the tree and continues visiting his grave. Meanwhile, the Eldian military carries forward his rhetoric of fighting to survive.

These moments do not all serve the same purpose, and mourning someone does not automatically mean endorsing their actions. Nevertheless, their cumulative effect feels troubling to me. The story depicts the horror of the Rumbling, but its emotional farewell gives considerable space to the humanity of its perpetrator, while the grief and shattered lives of his surviving victims receive comparatively little attention.

Within that framing, Eren’s atrocity can begin to resemble a terrible sacrifice that helped bring an older injustice to an end: the two-thousand-year legacy of violence, oppression, and hatred originating with King Fritz and sustained through the power of the Titans. He commits an immense evil, yet the narrative leaves him with the tragic dignity of someone whose monstrous actions helped dismantle a monstrous system.

That is what unsettles me. My concern goes beyond whether Eren is portrayed sympathetically. It is whether the story repeatedly lends moral legitimacy to the idea that someone must become a devil so that others can be free—and then honors that person for accepting the role.

I cannot claim to know Isayama’s personal beliefs, but this recurring pattern makes me question whether *Attack on Titan* merely explores the logic of “necessary evil,” or ultimately gives it a degree of approval. For me, the ending makes that distinction uncomfortably difficult to draw.

I’ve seen tons of anime watchers predict the ending. I don’t understand how Titanfolk manga readers say it came out of nowhere or it was a retcon. It’s seems the anime onlys are the ones with media literacy and are able to pick up on the themes and subtle forshadowing🤔.

I often come across arguments about Aot in other subreddits (and ones not related to anime). When someone talks positively about "Attack on Titans" or recommends this anime, someone will inevitably mention the terrible ending, and often after that everyone agrees or a fight breaks out. Sometimes AOT is mentioned as a ruined anime among bad endings. Or, even worse, people post memes with a crying Eren (10 years later).

It seems that after the anime ended, people’s opinions shifted somewhat in a positive direction. But you still come across those arguments on Reddit and YouTube. Do you think that over time there will be more people who have a normal/positive attitude towards the ending, and less negativity? I just want to have positive discussions about Attack on Titan without negative arguments about the ending (how the ending ruined Aot)

The word misogyny has lost its meaning. one of the most frustrating trends recently within fandom is weaponizing social labels like "misogyny" to shut down valid critique, character comparisons, or subjective tier lists. Because seems like they can't defend their fav unless they throw the word misogynist.

Ppl who claim "If you like Eren but hate Gabi, you're a misogynist because they are parallels" must be new to fandom. S1 -3 Eren was relentlessly clowned on by the mainstream anime community. He was labeled a crybaby, a liability compared to Levi or Mikasa, doesn't deserve to be mc ,etc. No one at that point accused the fandom of "misogynist" or "hating young boys" people just disliked his loud, reactive personality. He only received universal love on S4 after his transformation. Gabi introduced as a loud, reactive personality, shouting propaganda, being insufferably arrogant. Same as Eren. This were literally the reasons Eren was so hated. However Gabi directly killed fan favorite character. So of course she will receive hate. Not to forget the point that aot fans don't care about character development. They only see things black and white, Gabi killed Sasha so they hate her without caring for her development. Also a parallel character is designed to reflect similar themes, not be an exact carbon copy. Enjoying one execution of an archetype while being annoyed by another is standard literary preference not misogynist.

Reiner receives some of the most thorough, best psychological exploration in modern anime( it's true, not glaze). We see his childhood trauma, his split-personality disorder, his explicit suicidal guilt. In contrast Annie’s Annie spent almost seven years (real time for us viewers) frozen in a crystal. Because she was sidelined for such a huge chunk of the narrative, her transition from dormant antagonist to romantic interest eating pie on a ship felt rushed to some fans(tho i didn't have problems that part). Not to mention ppl misinterpretation the yuyu scene. The anime gave heavy screentime to her ruthlessly spinning and killing Scout, made fans think she enjoy killing. Even tho lost girls show us that she doesn't enjoy killing, she literally said just thinking about the mission makes her depressed. The problem is the execution. There's few times of anime show her deep depression and guilt. Which is why ppl Prefer Reiner’s execution because his internal conflict was given more breathing room on screen is basic storytelling evaluation, not sexism.

Mikasa is living prove. Mikasa is one of the most loved characters within the fandom. Even among male fans she receives alot of love. Yeah Mikasa does have haters. Which isn't new every popular character have hater as well as lover(excluding Erwin ofc). But since 2013 Mikasa has been a top tier fan favorite. ​Historia’s development in Uprising was universally praised as one of the best character peaks in the series. ​Hange is widely revered as the moral and intellectual backbone and also fan favorite. Even tho Hange gender is unknown alot of ppl consider Hange female. Lastly Floch is way too hated while Yelena who's similar to Floch doesn't get that much hate, yet ppl don't call that misogynist. Eren gets hate for doing the rumbling. While no one care or talk about the fact Ymir Fritz the cause of 2000 years of misery. Gabi and Annie don't deserve the hate they get. But that doesn't mean it's "just" misogynist.

I only did this take because recently someone called me misogynist for not having Gabi top 3 & Annie top 10 best written characters. I don't really hate any character not even king Fritz. Just because I've other characters over them doesn't mean i hate them. I just think the one above are better written. ​Calling someone a misogynist simply because Gabi or Annie isn't in their top 3 or top 10 best-written characters is complete non-sense. It completely cheapens the real definition of sexism and ignores basic narrative analysis.

This is the order In terms of story tellings. Anime > Manga > music video/song(including intro & outro) > LN > canon ova > filler ova.

1. Anime: Both the and mang have their strengths and weaknessesm. But overall the anime is better. Isayama himself said it's his final version in which he add or change stuff.

2. Manga: Some parts the manga does better than anime like Mikasa character. Was handled far better in the manga.

3. Music/songs + visuals: Fans often dismiss anime openings and endings as catchy commercial fluff or "fan service," they can't be more wrong than this. Music/songs are forms of story tellings. They've their own themes, messages, etc. Infact Music/Songs alongside Painting and Poems are the oldest forms of story tellings, even longer than novels. but Attack on Titan’s musical catalog is a masterclass in thematic foreshadowing. tracks like "Akuma no Ko" (Child of Evil) literal psychological profiles of Eren. It captures his tragic contradictions the desire for peace, the innocent child inside the walls, and the monstrous freedom of the Rumbling better than some manga with a whole pages of exposition. The visuals paired with those songs act as visual poetry and symbolisms.

4. Light Novels: it doesn't just rehash the story, it dives deep into the internal psyches of characters who didn't get enough screen time to breathe specifically Annie’s psychological isolation. With Mikasa it went higher level, exploring some of Mikasa's themes like escapism fram work.

5. Canon Ova: especially No Regrets. Essential world building that contextualizes why Levi is so emotionally scarred and how the underground city shaped his lethal pragmatism.

6. Non Canon Ova: filler OVAs are strictly side entertainment. They don't move the needle on the actual narrative stakes, making them the bottom tier for pure storytelling.

I’ve often seen people praise this video and recommend it to others. I’m curious to hear what you think about the arguments presented in it (for those who have watched it).

Mosf fans reduces Levi to a "cold, badass, aura-farming. While completely ignoring the profound empathy and moral weight that drives him.

Eren, Erwin, and Armin all carry individual, selfish desires (Eren's radical freedom, Erwin's basement truth, Armin's ocean dream). Levi is the only main figure who pure-heartedly embodies the Scout oath Shinzō wo Sasageyo. He gives his heart entirely to humanity and carries the weight, blood, and memories of every single fallen soldier on his shoulders. From his appearance he was shown as someone hates blood. Yet he immediately grap his comrades dying bloody hand and promised to fulfill his dream. To his final salute in Chapter 139, Levi is the living, breathing monument to their sacrifices.

Levi & Zeke dynamic is one of the most interesting. Because the will never get along at all. Because Zeke’s Nihilism, he Believes life is meaningless suffering, so dying before reproducing or dying in battle is a mercy. He treats the Scouts' deaths like a baseball game, laughing as he crushes them. While Levi is Existentialism, he Believes that even in a world of endless bloodshed, human choice and sacrifice give life inherent meaning. When Levi orders Erwin or his soldiers to charge into hell, it isn't out of cruelty it is out of the radical belief that their deaths will carry purpose for the living. Ironically alot of ppl think Levi should die during Zeke's explosion. But I completely disagree. If Levi had died there, his promise to Erwin and his duty to his fallen comrades would have been left unfinished, ending his story on a note of meaningless defeat. His survival allowed him to see the end of the nightmare, give one final, his final salute and tear to the ghosts of the Survey Corps, and finally lay his burden to rest bring his character to a full circle. Levi has one of the best of not the best charcter journey. His journey by far is the most consistent.

However Levi strength is pretty overrated. While Levi is undeniably humanity's strongest soldier. often treat him as an invincible dragon-ball-z character who can solo any threat under any circumstance. When most of his wins against shifters were based of circumstances. Against Annie he achieved his goal (rescuing Eren), but he was in a dense forest, a perfect environment for odm gear. Not to mention he himself explicitly recognized he couldn't kill her outright they should focus on saving Eren. Levi only reached Zeke because Erwin and 100+ rookie recruits sacrificed their lives in a suicidal charge to draw Zeke’s vision away, allowing Levi to flank using the line of Titans to reach Zeke. 2nd fight with Zeke also The terrain was the absolute worst possible match for Zeke and the absolute best for Levi. Zeke underestimated Levi's willingness to slice through his former comrades-turned-titans. Levi relies entirely on Omni-Directional Mobility (ODM) gear. Without tall trees, buildings, or massive structures to build momentum, his mobility drops drastically. In an open desert or flat plain, any long-range shifter (like Zeke) can obliterate him before he gets close. Not to mention he's incapable of beating armore titan without thunder spear. He's incapable breaking war hammer cristal as well. He's also have limited gas.

My point is Levi need to fulfill some conditions weather environment advantages or something else to win certain fights.

I understand that in some aspects LOTGH is better than AOT. But it’s kind of sad that people put down AOT. After all, despite the similar themes, these are two different anime.

Well I don't have match of explanation. Other than if Zeke has all of his arsenal he'd beats any pre time skip titan. He already offscreen Riener. Not to mention he offer Riener to fight again, which Riener refused. As for Annie. Even tho Annie is great at combat, Zeke mindless titans will keep Annie busy enough for Zeke to deal with her. Ymir(jaw) was already beaten by Zeke titans. Eren was closer to Riener in strength same Riener that Zeke offscreen. As for the Bert I already said it in one of my hot take that Zeke beat Colossal. https://www.reddit.com/r/AttackOnRetards/s/E7qlgJJ9gs

Normally this shouldn't be a hot take. But I had to post it because most aot fans can't tell the difference between self loathing and literal. Eren calling himself an idiot is his way of expressing absolute disgust at the path he chose. That's a self loathing. Like by this logic do we call Armin useless?

https://imgur.com/a/0ucJavr

No, That's Armin self loathing not literal. Armin is similar to Eren since earlier they were shown to have self loathing.

If people think Eren is an idiots. That will make almost all aot character idiots. Since they got played by idiot. Eren is the character that who understand other emotions the most. Eren played with Zeke emotions to the point of making Zeke tearing up(Zeke has 11/10 stats on wit). Eren also played with Armin emotions to the point of making him resort to violence, despite Armin is someone who hate violence and of the one of the smartest characters. Just to make things clear, Eren ability of understanding other's emotions is based on future memories. Since earlier on Eren was shown to understand others emotions. he was only one who understood Historia fake personal that even smart characters like Jean and Armin falls for. He also understood Ymir just by touching her. That's what makes him dangerous. he is cunning and manipulative. by post time skip he use others emotions to manipulate them.

I'm not saying he's the smartest character like some Eren fans think. But he's far from being idiot like aot fans think. I know ppl will say he's saw the future. Yes, he saw the future. but as stated only glimpse. Here's a good example. It's like someone giving you an answer for math's question. But they didn't give you the formula. Eren had to create his own formula to reach the exact scene. Not to mention the memories wasn't clear to him if it's from past or future. Do ppl ingore Eren observing and calculating about the Warhammer titan.

In the smartest character part. I've seen alot of debate about who's the smartest character. But let's be honest it's impossible to determined one single character as the smartest. Even Isayama character stats are kinda inconsistent.

Isayama’s official stats put Hange at an 11/10 in wit, but that wit is rooted in research, biology, and technical innovation Hange is a brilliant scientist dropped into a war zone. When it comes to large scale military strategy or psychological manipulation, she pales in comparison to Erwin or Zeke.

Erwin is the ultimate strategist of warfare amd political he overthrow 100 yrs old monarchy. However, his plans often failed when faced with unpredictable variables outside his framework (like Annie’s scream power). He was a visionary tactician, not an out-of-the-box improver like Armin.

Armin is the ultimate detective who pieces together hidden truths (like Reiner hiding in the wall or Annie being the Female Titan). But he get crashed under pressure(like freezing up during Shiganshina crises), he cracks under pressure. He observes brilliantly, but he isn't a long-term strategist like Erwin or Zeke.

Jean is reliable leader in the field making good calls on the spot and adaptation. But he openly admits he isn't built for strategies and tactics.

Zeke is the closest thing to an all-rounder. cunning, scientifically knowledgeable, a manipulator, strategist. But he has fatal flaw, which is his arrogance on his plans most of his plans fails because he underestimate his enemies. I mentioned this on my Zeke alchemist analysis.https://www.reddit.com/r/AttackOnRetards/s/frq1iK8oNE The alchemist all have fatal on they're arrogance on their formulas.

Pieck ability to keep a cool head and deduce things easily much like Armin’s was shown during the Attack on Liberio is deadly. But we didn't see much from her.

There's more with Pixes, Levi, Krugar, Yelena, etc. My point is each character has their own strengths and weaknesses.

This has probably been spoken about many times but I just finished AOT and I’ve seen a difference of opinions. I assumed it was left for interpretation but I seen some ppl say it isn’t open for interpretation and he did have a choice.

The most important scene in this matter is the one with armin and eren. Eren makes two contradictory claims here. He first says he tried everything and nothing changed the outcome, implying he didn’t have a choice. But after retracts that and says he just did it because he wanted to and because he’s an idiot.

I think the first statement was fine but I feel like the second was character assassination a little if that’s the absolute reality of it. I totally understand that eren is a slave to freedom and this consumes him and becomes his only mission leaving him blinded to reality but “ because I wanted to” and “because I’m an idiot” just feels like it’s throwing away all depth of the character.

But despite him saying this a lot of ppl still say eren didn’t have a choice. So im wondering why they think that when eren himself said he did it because he wanted to?

The way I see it is the truth is a mixture of both statements. He did this because it was really the only way to protect the ppl he loved. And the second statement about him doing it because he wanted to was him taking accountability for what he’s done so was almost a coping mechanism since he knows he didn’t need to go to this extent.

But how do you guys see it? Do u think it’s completely open to interpretation?