u/Gui_Franco

Some years ago when I just started JoJo, I heard about the mythical part 7 with the best JoJo and best villain in the series, including how funny valentine had extremely noble goals and even some people going as far as to say if Johnny wasn't the protagonist and the story wasn't from his perspective then he would be the villain

And now, literally just 5 minutes ago, I finished Part 7. It's amazing, it's the best manga I've ever read, truly peak fiction. But what the fuck were people talking about

Valentine is among the best jojo villains, maybe the best (although I slightly prefer the Diegos) but he is a fucking monster

How can anyone think he is right??? Because of his napkin speech and how much he loves America? Oh yeah man such a good guy, loves his country so much, a country that isn't better or worse than any other and he just so happened to be borned in, that he is willing to let other counties suffer so it can thrive

Valentine is an extreme nationalist with no regard for human life or individuality. Not even for himself. A guy so devoid of of individuality that his stand is able to hop from and to different versions of himself who all immediately share the same memories, personalities and goals and will stop whatever it is they were doing to replace "the main one". And he cannot find individuality in others. He makes the absurd choice of offering Johnny to bring another gyro to this universe as if nothing happened, another Johnny wouldn't lose his best friend and as if this Johnny and the new gyro would be the same people who bonded over the race. Johnny even points it out but is such a fucking mess in that moment that he considers it

Valentine has no redeeming qualities. He loves his country and wants the people in it to thrive. That's great. What about the people he killed in order to get the corpse? All the lives ruined because of one man's ambition?

Valentine is devoid of any humanity. He couldn't care less that his wife was gone and tried to force himself on a 14 year old girl, with threats against her, her guardian Steven Steel and her biological family

The one good thing he did was honour the promise he made Lucy that he wouldn't harm Steven, even when he stopped him from hurting Johnny and gave the heroes a chance to escape with Lucy. But that was just because it was a promise that cost him nothing. After that moment, Steven being dead or alive wouldn't make a single difference so he honours his promise, but he doesn't extend the same courtesy with Johnny. Despite the multiple attempts he made to show Johnny that he is an honourable man and, if given the corpse, he would let him and the other Gyro leave, he had already talked with the alternate Diego and brought a gun to kill Johnny with anyways. Perhaps the tragedy of the moment is that Valentine was willing to keep his word and it was only because, despite Johnny being willing to put everything on the line to trust valentine, valentine couldn't trust Johnny. But I think Valentine always intended to kill Johnny anyways, because he had the power to stop valentine's plan

Valentine being ok with dying as long as his country is ok, as seen with his deal with alternate Diego just shows how truly pathetic he is. It may superficially seem virtuous, but Valentine was willing to trust a man he hated and knew had no real good intentions towards the country he supposedly loves just because he wanted to kill Johnny THAT much and was in a "if I can't have the corpse no one can".

A man so devoid of... Everything, he can't even see himself as a person, just an extension of his country

And valentine has a big ego. He wants to portray himself as selfless, a humble servant of his country with no ambitions of his own, in contrast to the selfish Johnny, and while this is mostly true, Valentine does think extremely highly of himself, thinking the corpse was favouring him specifically, despite the corpse having no real will, just existing and giving power to whoever holds it

Johnny does think valentine's goals are more noble but Johnny is a wreck. He was originally after the corpse in order to learn how to walk again, yes that's selfish, but not anymore than the goals of almost every other character in the series. But after he achieved his goal he would have no other purpose for the corpse, he would not abuse it. He would learn that his life has worth even if he can't walk again, and in the very end, contemplates and almost goes through with handing valentine the corpse, which would mean losing the crutch that could make him walk again with no real effort. Johnny isn't a saint, he was a bastard before being paralyzed, was a bit humbled by his experience and then learned to truly grow as a person through the part. But he if had gone through with giving valentine the corpse, I'd say that would be an equally selfish choice, he would be robbing another Johnny of his best friend and mentor (and possibly of his development) and dooming the rest of the world to misfortune just so the USA could be lucky under Valentine just for the chance to be with gyro again and it wouldn't even be his gyro.

Everyone in this story except maybe Gyro is moved by selfish goals and they can learn to develop from it or not. Johnny did.

Valentine wasn't more noble or selfless than anyone else. Valentine was a uniquely special and interesting villain because of how monstrous he was despite what he made himself and others believe

The 7 princes of Hell is probably the most common depiction of Hellish hierarchy.

I understand why even if it's not my favourite, the 7 deadly sins is one of the most popular "Christian" ideas even if it's never once mentioned in old or new testament and it's a relatively late idea. I don't remember who wrote it but it's not even the first concept of seven princes of hell, that would be the Lanterne of Light, which has (I think in order of hierarchy) Lucifer for Pride, Beelzebub for Envy, Satan for Wrath, Abbadon for Sloth, Mammon for Greed, Belphegor for Gluttony and Asmodeus for Lust.

I think it would be nice if someone used this for the seven princes for variety's sake but it's not my main problem with the concept

My main issue is Lucifer and Satan as separate entities, because most often than not, separating them is a detriment for them more than anything

For those not in the know, Lucifer is not in the bible, not really. Lucifer means star of the morning and it's more often than not a title given to Jesus. The one instance of the name Lucifer comes from someone talking to a king and saying something among the lines of "oh how the mighty have fallen" and the original text really did say star of the morning, in reference to the planet Venus. It wasn't a reference to the devil because the devil wasn't a concept yet

The idea of a devil seems to come later in Judaism, with the earliest texts referencing fallen angels that I can remember being Enoch, with Shameaza and Azazel and the watchers, who fell after sleeping with women and giving birth to horrible giants.

Satan is mentioned once in the old testament, as an angel among God's court who has been walking the earth for some reason and proposes the bet over Job, who Satan accuses of only being righteous because he is favoured by god instead of the opposite, so God allows satan to bring misfortune upon Job to test his faith (not sure what the moral is because Job does eventually get fed up with god and both him and his dipshit friends who accused him of doing something to deserve this are given a talking to but whatever).

No mention of hell, falling from heaven, or even being evil, he is just "the adversary" like his name means. Like a godly prosecutor

The big "antagonist" of the old testament (if there even is one because god in his omnipotence doesn't have any opposition, the major antagonists are people and how they defy god) is the Canaanite god Baal (which just means Lord and is based on a storm god of the pantheon from which Yahweh probably came from from little I remember of Canaanite religion), the false god who eventually became Beelzebub

In the new testament Satan does seem to be evil. He tempts Jesus in the desert, he possesses Judas into betraying Jesus, he is mentioned as being connected with hell, having fallen angels with him and it's said eventually he will have a final battle with heaven in which he will permanently be locked into hell

Now, this is where Lucifer comes from. Because *now* we have a figure who fell from heaven, the quote from earlier seems like an allusion to that character, and since the Latin translation calls the morningstar Lucifer, that name stuck

There's barely anything to satan or Lucifer or hell in bible, at least nothing like what we associate today, so we crafted everything out of folklore and evolution of belief

So when people use the seven princes of hell, with Lucifer and Satan as separate I kind of roll my eyes because it means one of them is going to be a nothing character. Because Lucifer is just a name and Satan is the fallen angel retroactively. Separating the two won't make sense unless you make up lore for one and you can do that. And the result is almost always one of the two having everything and the other being shafted in the split

But I don't think people ever do? Thinking of Hazbin Hotel where, like in most things, Lucifer is given all the characteristics of the character: the serpent in the garden, the fallen angel, the devil. So Satan has nothing. What do they do with satan? He has a cool dragon design to tie up with him being called a dragon in revelation, he is the creator of the most common race in hell. And he mentions that he used to rule hell before Lucifer's fall. That is a really cool idea, that hell existed before the fall from heaven and the existence of sinners, that Satan ruled it and was overthrown or just wasn't as powerful as Lucifer to justify ruling over him. But then Vivziepop said that was a lie in a tweet, not even in the show. He doesn't even seem to really be the judge of hell like in the episode, with this information it seems like he is just taking control because Lucifer doesn't show up. So who is Satan, what is his deal? Idk, the authors took everything that made satan satan and gave it to Lucifer who is just a name that wasn't even there in the original and made them separate characters. Even Beelzebub which is most often than not another name for the devil and that was the big divine antagonist of the old testament as the face of false gods and worshipped by enemies of God and is again mentioned in the new testament as the prince of demons who the pharasees accuse Jesus of taking his power from is one of the lesser demon lords in this, just associated with gluttony

The one exception to my hate for this trope is Shin Megami Tensei. Lucifer is the fallen seraphim, the horned angel who rules hell and commands the infernal legions and who hates god. Satan is now an agent of god like in the book of Job, the ultimate accuser and adversary, but who works for god.

That's a really cool idea if you really have to differentiate the characters instead of making them one and more media should do this but I know they won't

In general I wish that other media who wish to establish a hellish hierarchy come up with something different. A lot of stuff has satan/the devil as the only one running the show and that's fine. DC comics had a shifting hellish triumvirate with Lucifer, Beelzebub and Azazel/Belial in charge for a while and that's fun. Hellboy has the multiple demon princes ruling hell as an oligarchy by exploring lesser demons' slave labour because Satan, the real king of hell, has been in an almost catatonic state in his chambers for millenia after the fall. Dante who most people rip off for their hells really emphasises God as ruling hell and Satan/Lucifer as simply the oldest prisoner in the pit.

Writers could come up with their own ideas or go look at other of the equally valid and vast books about hell out there. The seven princes of hell feel overdone and I don't think I've ever seen it done well, I'm willing to hear suggestions of things that do. Apparently people really like To Make the Exorcist Fall in Love although I can't say I'm familiar with it, and that uses the usual hierarchy of princes