Mine Are:

When I think about Larry in AA3 I wonder if the writer suddenly decided they didn't like him that much and decided to make it known in the game to the point where it bleeds to the characters (both Phoenix, especially him! and Edgeworth seem to see him as the 'annoying ass friend') and himself by flanderizing him or if this was an genuine decision to see how a person's life can go downhill over time and tried to make it funny.

Honestly I think it's the former (writers decided they didn't like Larry anymore), because I don't necessarily think Larry's life is going downhill. He found his talent in art with a mentor and he's attempting to become a better person... only for his mentor to then die. If it were anyone else this would spark some sort of meaningful character arc... but it doesn't. The game just turns Larry into more of a laughing stock. I don't get it, truly. They drop so much information about his trauma but it's treated like a joke. Phoenix and Miles don't even act like they care about him as a friend anymore... just why??

Also I do believe writers' attitudes towards characters often bleed into the writing and then bleed into fan perception.

I agree with everything you said, Azalea! Also here's the exact quote from Farewell My Turnabout:

(You really let me down…) When you disappeared, I felt… betrayed. The reason I decided to become a lawyer to begin with… Was because I believed in the things you said to me, all those years ago… And you… You betrayed your own words. That's why… one year ago, I made up my mind. I decided that the Miles Edgeworth I knew had died… …At least, that's what I told myself.

This line from Phoenix is so so interesting and akdjfdjhskjfdgjh I want to sink my teeth into it. One day, I will write a longer analysis on this but...

No matter if Phoenix truly thought Miles was dead or not, I think this quote makes it clear that Phoenix decided that Miles was dead to him. Phoenix couldn't handle the abandonment, the fear that after everything he did people would still inevitably leave him. So he turned to resentment and killed off "the Miles Edgeworth I knew". Because if Miles had always been the "Demon Prosecutor" obsessed with guilty verdicts (which is what Phoenix keeps accusing him of in 2-4), then Phoenix could dismiss his belief in Miles. Phoenix could dismiss all his efforts and desire to save Miles.

So Phoenix wouldn't have to deal with the pain of believing in and being attached to someone so much... only for them to leave him... again (coughs in Dahlia/Iris).

HOT TAKE: Phoenix should have known Edgeworth was still alive during the “chooses death” era. Gumshoe probably would have told him if he had asked, he was just too busy overreacting.

Lmao hello there you :P I know who you are. You probably are expecting this but I'm sorry to say:

Strongly agree | Agree | Neutral | Disagree | Strongly disagree

Yes, it's true, they didn't find Edgeworth's body, but when someone learns about a note that says the person "chooses death" I think it's difficult to say that thinking they're dead is overreacting lol. Edgeworth was gone, he was gone for an entire year, which is a long time for someone to be missing; usually at that point, if the person doesn't turn up, there's a good chance they are dead - and there was the suicide note on top of things. It's not an unreasonable thing to think, and Phoenix was grieving the best he could, so I also don't think it's very fair to expect him to be perfectly rational in those circumstances. Besides, he seems to still be struggling to accept it by the events of JFA, which honestly tracks with the fact he never got closure.

Besides... there are lines in the game implying that Phoenix did think Edgeworth was alive (something like "you were dead to me" if I recall correctly), and that he resented him for leaving, not dying. Personally I think his behaviour screams of repressed grief and denial, but the alternative interpretation is there.

something's gone terribly wrong

(you're all i wanted)

please don’t spend your life convincing yourself that love or joy is reserved for the idealized version of you that only exists in the future

EVERYTHING YOU SAID YES

Notice that Miles never mentions following in MVK's footsteps or the "von Karma creed/blood/name" when talking about his motivations to prosecute. (Compared to Franziska who mentions it as soon as she is introduced in 2-2). Miles only talks about the DL-6 incident and his father's death and punishing himself in relation to why he became a prosecutor instead of a defense attorney.

Now I'm not saying Miles wasn't influenced by MVK, I'm sure he was. But ignoring the reasons that Miles explicitly tells us, and instead claiming brainwashing or abuse, is doing a huge disservice to both Miles's and Manfred's character.

Manfred is a petty, cowardly man who killed a man over a penalty and ruined Miles's life. And considering all the issues Miles and Franziska has, I believe he is also quite a flawed parent. Manfred being abusive, homophobic, sexist, etc however, is not canon (him calling Miles "worthless" is a mistranslation!!).

So yeah, I rest my case. Miles, Franziska, and Manfred are some of my favorite Ace Attorney characters and Manfred not being Pure Evil™️ honestly makes all the angst and pain so much more delicious.

“Manfred von Karma brainwashed Miles into becoming a prosecutor!”

*scratches head*

Not gonna lie, I was one of the people who believed in this claim until a friend told me otherwise and I started replaying Turnabout Goodbyes recently.

It's really wild to me how almost all of Manfred's mischaracterization can be tied back to Miles' mischaracterization from the AA fandom LMAO

Fandom telephone can be such a curse sometimes.

I'm gonna ride the wave here and talk about Rise from the Ashes and why, even though I think it's a good retcon and doesn't involve any contradiction either factual or thematic, I believe it is still undeniably a retcon.

The crux of the matter, I think, is the definition of retcon. Here's what Merriam-Webster has to say about it:

the act, practice, or result of changing an existing fictional narrative by introducing new information in a later work that recontextualizes previously established events, characters, etc.

It has to change the narrative, not the events of the story themselves. It has to recontextualise the events in question. And I'd argue the case does those exact two things by establishing that Miles Edgeworth not only never willfully forged evidence, but was morally against it in the first place, even though the contrary had been implied in the four first cases of the game.

Here's how Miles Edgeworth is introduced in Turnabout Sisters, in the first conversation we have about him with Gumshoe. There are two dialogue options, one where you can say that yes, you do know him, or one where you say that no, you don't.

Here's what Phoenix has to say about Edgeworth if you pick "I know him":

I know him. He's a feared prosecutor. He doesn't feel pain, he doesn't feel remorse. He won't stop until he gets his "guilty" verdict.

And here's what he has to say if you pick "I don't know him:"

(Of course I know him... I was just playing dumb. He's a cold, heartless machine who'll do anything to get a "guilty" verdict! There are rumors of back-alley deals and forged evidence...)

The words "forged evidence" appear only in one of the two options. They're only rumours; there's nothing established. However this is the first discussion of his character; this is the first impression we get of him. The idea we are supposed to get from him is someone ruthless and without scruples, who "hates crime with an abnormal passion."

Later on there is of course the case of the updated autopsy report. The new report is entirely legitimate and treated as such. However it is presented by the narrative as an underhanded trick, with Phoenix exclaiming against it, and further establishes Edgeworth's lack of limits in his prosecuting ethics set up by the conversation with Gumshoe - confirming our bias. We're still talking about narrative intent here, not merely the facts of the story. The updated autopsy report is not an instance of Edgeworth forging evidence, however it showcases his ruthlessness, which by extension serves to corroborate the rumours Phoenix was talking about with Gumshoe - making you believe Edgeworth would indeed tamper with proof without showing him doing so. Edgeworth coaching the witness's testimony and withholding the wiretap has the same effect.

Right before the second trial day, we get to talk with Edgeworth himself, who has come to warn us that even though he knows Phoenix, Phoenix shouldn't expect any mercy from him. Here's what he has to say:

Edgeworth: [...] whatever Mr. White says today, it will be the "absolute truth." No matter how you try to attack his testimony... If I raise an objection, I have it on good faith that the judge will listen to me. Phoenix: (What, does White have the judge in his pocket, too!?) So... you're saying I'm going to be guilty. End of story? Edgeworth: ... I will do anything to get my verdict, Mr. Wright. Anything. Maya: Why... Why!? How can you torment an innocent person like this!? Edgeworth: "Innocent"...? How can we know that? The guilty will always lie, to avoid being found out. There's no way to tell who is guilty and who is innocent! All that I can hope to do is get every defendant declared "guilty"! So I make that my policy.

There is also the climax of the case, where Edgeworth tries to request the trial to be extended one more day:

Edgeworth: Ergo! I would like to request one more day before Phoenix Wright is granted his freedom. I need time to make one more inquiry into this matter. Judge: Hmm...! Phoenix: (Another inquiry...!? This isn't going to be another one of those "updated autopsy reports"! This guy just makes up evidence as he pleases! This is bad...!)

This heightens the stakes and creates tension as Phoenix puts his foot down and requires for the trial to come to an end on that day - and it does thanks to Mia's intervention. Once more Edgeworth forging evidence isn't shown, but is implied in a way that we are meant to take as fact.

So that is the image we have of Edgeworth by the end of case 1-2, our first confrontation with him. Someone ruthless, someone who will do "anything" to get his guilty verdict - even if that involves shady dealings (such as, but not limited to, tampering with evidence). Someone without limits.

Then 1-3 happens, where in the course of the trial Edgeworth realises Will Powers is innocent and helps us corner Dee Vasquez into confessing to being the true killer, therefore throwing his trial and helping us win against him. This is a big deal. This is a cornerstone of the arc of game 1, of Edgeworth's redemption arc. After that we get the infamous "unnecessary feelings" scene, where Edgeworth confirms it: he was shaken by the events of this trial and his first loss in the previous one. This is something new for him.

And afterwards of course is 1-4, where we get to the bottom of Edgeworth's vitriolic hatred for criminals and discover his backstory. We get to meet his mentor von Karma, "twenty times as ruthless as him," and witness him pull all the stops to prevent us winning and making our life really difficult. Interestingly he, too, skirts the line of forging evidence, but that fact pales in comparison to everything he does do: orchestrating a murder and framing Edgeworth for it, destroying the letter that incriminated him, hiding the evidence of DL-6 so that Phoenix cannot have access to anything to solve the case.

(On a side note: von Karma using "faulty evidence" against Gregory Edgeworth is actually an established fact, and I think the way AAI-2 retconned that to introduce Blaise was quite clever, but maybe I'll make a similar post about Manfred after the AAI Collection comes out in September)

So that's Edgeworth's arc, where he is confronted to a world where getting a "guilty verdict" isn't always the morally correct choice to make, and where his worldview is entirely deconstructed to allow him a redemption arc. His return in 2-4 continues that arc with his new motto of the "truth" being the most important thing (implying that hadn't always been at the centre of his considerations).

Now compares this with what he says in 1-5.

Edgeworth: Of course not! I didn't touch the evidence. Yes, I will do anything in my power to win a trial. However... I do have a code, and I follow it faithfully.

This is the first time we hear of Edgeworth having a moral code. This is the first time we hear of Edgeworth having limits to what he allows himself to do to earn his guilty verdicts. Up until now all we heard was "anything," as well as justifications as to why defendants deserve and need to be punished - "anything," by essence, implies not having limits.

It's not a contradiction. But it's a recontextualisation, and therefore a retcon.

I'm not going to give quotes or we'll be here the whole day, but we all know what 1-5 then does; SL-9, the Joe Darke killings, Gant's involvement.

By giving the rumours of forged evidence about Edgeworth a tangible starting point, the case reframes them, from something that he was previously implied to do routinely to a single event, one that was orchestrated behind his back and that he had no bearing on or even any idea it was happening. By establishing that Edgeworth does follow a moral code, his image of fearless prosecutor is deconstructed even further; where in 1-4 we were given a reason for his actions, now we are actually being told his actions weren't as severe as hearsay (and Phoenix's bias) led us to believe.

The case also introduces the idea of "working with the defence" and the search of the truth to Edgeworth, which plants the seed for his eventual return in 2-4 and deepens his character arc a little more.

Thematically, I personally think 1-5 inserts itself very well into the larger narrative. It plays with both themes and facts established by game 1 and teases themes and facts that will come in the next games (2-4, all of game 4). However it does recontextualise Edgeworth's arc by establishing he never willfully forged evidence, contrarily to what was previously implied, and giving him a retroactive caveat to his policy of "anything to achieve his guilty verdict" that hadn't existed before. Therefore, it is a retcon, albeit one that works, in my opinion, well within the larger arc of the games and with Edgeworth's character.

Intro Post ✧

I'm revamping my intro post because it's been a few months since I started this blog and some things have changed.

Hello! My name is Jen and welcome to my fandom blog :) Feel free to DM me to talk about any of my interests!

I'll mainly be posting analysis/meta about whatever my main obsession is...

Ace Attorney ⚖️

Favorite characters: (1) Miles Edgeworth, (2) Phoenix Wright, (3) Franziska von Karma, (4) Manfred von Karma

Favorite ships: (1) Miles/Phoenix (Mitsunaru), (2) Manfred/Gregory (Shingou)

Favorite game: Justice for All <3

I am also a fan of over-villainized/neglected characters, like: Franziska von Karma, Manfred von Karma, Dahlia Hawthorne, Larry Butz, Viola Cadaverini.

My AA related tags:

#jen's aa rambles (just me ranting or gushing about ace attorney)

#jen's aa analysis (actually formatted analysis/meta/arguments about ace attorney)

Other Interests :)

Typology! mainly MBTI (cognitive functions!!) and enneagram

The Legend of Korra (Kuvira, Baatar jr, Baavira)

Avatar The Last Airbender (Azula, Katara)

Genshin Impact (Kujou Sara, Arlecchino, Raiden Shogun)

Other fandoms I'm in (feel free to talk to me about these but I doubt I will post anything about them in the near future): Kpop (but mainly Dreamcatcher), The Hunger Games, Divergent, Six of Crows.

Is it just me or is this piece of advice from Mia, "for a lawyer, the worst of times are when you have to force your biggest smiles", really sad?

Don't get me wrong, there's nothing inherently sad about it. I get that it's about not giving up, pushing through impossible odds and rock bottom for your client. Because for most people, being a lawyer is a just a profession.

But for someone like Phoenix? Someone who hides their pain behind saving others, who never talks about their trauma, who (subconsciously or not) considers being a lawyer not just a job but their entire identity...? All of a sudden, Mia's advice isn't just about the courtroom anymore, because for Phoenix being a lawyer was always about being good enough and able to save people. To Phoenix, Mia's advice is about pretending you're fine, not letting anyone see how you truly feel or else you can't save anyone.

Honestly, to me Manfred seems like he would be too rational to spend time on hating a group of people like that. He's extremely obsessed with "perfection" and looking back on Turnabout Goodbyes, he's also ruthlessly efficient. He prides himself on finishing trials in mere minutes and when Phoenix exposes his crime, all he does it tell the judge to hurry up with putting him away. He only acts irrationally when his "perfection" is threatened, namely when he shot Gregory over a penalty. And he puts a lot of effort into regaining his composure (taking the only vacation of his career after his crime). And adding all that on top of everything OP said about him raising Franziska... Manfred being misogynistic just doesn't seem very consistent with canon.

It's really easy to hate Manfred if you love Miles or Franziska and there is nothing wrong with interpretations, but I would recommend taking a good look at the evidence in canon.

Kinda scared to post this, but this has been on my chest for years and I finally have a platform to air it out. I don’t understand people who think that manfred is misogynistic. I know it’s like the cool thing to do in the aa fandom to hate manfred for fanon reasons, but I think manfred being misogynistic is one of the most unrealistic ones for me. Especially since Franziska turning out to be, well, Franziska, indicates otherwise. Like, Franziska is a loud, outspoken, confident, man-hating lesbian with anger issues that scares tf out of people. Basically everything that men hate. If manfred was misogynistic he would’ve snuffed that out as soon as he could. But he doesn’t. Bc he lives for that shit. I highly doubt he would try to constantly bring her down bc she’s a woman and “manfred wanted a male heir” (a fanon idea I also don’t understand since the competition that she and miles had together was started between them, and not directly initiated by manfred at all). Franziska being the way the she is literally can’t be more fitting of Manfred’s ideal of a von karma.

I just think it’s funny that manfred raised an angry lesbian daughter, is supposedly a wife guy (aai2), and overall has never said anything directly misogynistic in the games and the aa fandom chose him to be the misogynist of all people just bc he’s a villain. Really feels like the only reason people do that is bc they hate him so much they pile quite literally every horrible human trait they can think of onto him, and not bc it’s actually justified based on his character….

Wheels slow, the fumes die There’s nobody left, she’s alone and counting