Who should Ran end up with at the end of DC?

[Peregrinus the Nihilist 4]

Sorry if this has already been done recently, but I didn't spot such a thread (I also skimmed the "Thread Reference Guide"). This is meant as a kind of companion thread to the "Who should Ai end up with at the end of DC" thread.

 

Your reasons for your choice would be appreciated!

 

As for me, I, like most people, think the Ran x Shinichi pairing is the most natural and logical one, but I also find the Ran x Gin and Ran x Bourbon pairings to be fascinating possibilities. They could make for some excellent fanfiction.  

[A.Haibara 34]

I don't think there was a thread about Ran since she doesn't have half as much ships as say, Ai

To be honest, one of her sole purposes in the series is to be with Shinichi, which wrecks the character background a bit since she does have much of a story other than being Shinichi's love interest... However, her characteristics are admirable and I think she has enough credibility to go on as a character herself (alone) but only barely... She being with Shinichi does appeal to me ^-^, me being an usual canon shipper as always! I think because the series does circle around Conan/Shinichi AND Ran is the intended love interest, the logical choice would be Shinichi... 

The main reason I don't ship ConAi (Again, I have nothing against CoAi fans) is because Ran will be by herself. Even though she doesn't have that interesting a character background, I still think she should at least end up with someone.

Just my opinion........... 

[tengaku squared 291]

The main reason I don't ship ConAi (Again, I have nothing against CoAi fans) is because Ran will be by herself. Even though she doesn't have that interesting a character background, I still think she should at least end up with someone.

Then ship Ran with Gin, problem solved~

 

In seriousness, Ran has basically been set up to be Shinichi's love interest. She has no interest in anyone else, and as far as we are aware, no one else has interest in her. Shipping possibilities are a bit scarce with her, just because of how considerably isolated she is in this regard. Logically, Shinichi. But for the shock factor, Gin.

[Kenzi 146]

*Who should Ran end up with?

Anyone you want, though the way Gosho portrays her character really limits her option(s).

Unless you happen to have a wild imagination and want to ship her with Agasa just for the lolz.

(but it's also a reason why fanfics exist)

 

*Who will Ran end up with?

Shinichi.

[RSP 3]

Unless some sort of traumatic event changes her into an entirely different person, I'd really prefer for her to die.

 

Detective Conan is a great series - it's cerebral, complex, and tackles some very interesting themes - however, as time went on, it became clear that it would be doomed to stagnate. Few major changes were made to the series' core, and whenever something did change, it was always an amendment, id est a new character, a short-lived upheaval of the plot, or flashbacks. While this serves the show's meta well, it shifts the focus from the emotional to the intellectual. Rather than caring about a victim's death, viewers immediately attempt to decipher the story told by the various clues Conan uncovers - or, at the very least, watch him do so.

 

This is obviously natural in detective shows, but Detective Conan differs from similar works in the genre in that it also presents a primary plot that is expanded upon each season/volume - specifically, one that revolves around persecution and danger. Sure, Sherlock had Moriarty, but the professor rarely went after Sherlock with physical harm in mind. Even when he did, the sense of potential loss was always real - with characters like Adler disappearing, Mary Watson dying, and Holmes' own famous "death", readers were always wary when guns were cocked and lives threatened, simply because death was now an established reality rather than a plot device. When Gin tried to hunt down Ai, we knew that something would interfere. When Mitsuhiko was stuck in a forest with a dangerous serial killer, we knew that Conan would rescue him. We knew these things because major deaths are unprecedented.

 

Now, there are plenty of arguments for Aoyama's format, and there's nothing inherently wrong with the concept of a purely stoic show, but once such a commitment is made, the audience starts to become emotionally detached from the plot, and what might be written with the intent of creating a sense of dread will no longer feel that way. Put simply, unless this is done in a very deliberate, calculated way, a disconnect starts to emerge between the way a story is written and the way it is read. This only serves to hurt the audience's enjoyment of the story, because the danger is now perceived as openly artificial, and the experience loses its authenticity.

 

As the years went by and the plot twists became increasingly arbitrary, Detective Conan came to suffer from this exact issue - Ran would be kidnapped, but her plot armor would make the kidnapping feel absolutely arbitrary, functioning as a gimmick rather than a genuine part of the story.

 

Thus, my desire to see her dead. Her death would vindicate the series as one of not only ingenuity, but genuine shock and volatility. If Conan ends as habit dictates, it won't feel like the masterpiece we know it to be - rather, it will be a decent series whose creator got distracted by a senseless attempt to feign authenticity.

 

Alternatively, embrace the blatantly pure nature of the show and abandon pathos altogether. Detective Conan is a low-fiction series focusing on the unstoppable might of intellect, the spectrum of morality, and a clearly defined contrast between the ordinary and the extraordinary. These properties are all representative of a stoic format, and would fit it very well.

 

Either way - be it stoicism or classic tragedy, I'd like a commitment. The current mesh of virtual invincibility and artificial danger simply isn't working for me, and I would be very disappointed if the series' inevitable conclusion was tainted by it.

[A.Haibara 34]

Then ship Ran with Gin, problem solved~

 

In seriousness, Ran has basically been set up to be Shinichi's love interest. She has no interest in anyone else, and as far as we are aware, no one else has interest in her. Shipping possibilities are a bit scarce with her, just because of how considerably isolated she is in this regard. Logically, Shinichi. But for the shock factor, Gin.

*is shocked* Made me think who I should ship Gin with...O.O

[Hobgoblin2012 49]

Unless some sort of traumatic event changes her into an entirely different person, I'd really prefer for her to die.

 

I probably should wish the same for YOUR favorite characters, but I don't want to be like all those Ran-haters, as she herself (if she existed) wouldn't have wished this to anybody.

Damn all sad and tragic endings. People usually think that tragedy is the highest fictional genre, as if killing a main character always improves the level of the book/movie etc. In my opinion, tragic endings are usually a sign of poor creativity of the author, who isn't able to creat something new and impressive and is only able to destroy. 

[RSP 3]

I probably should wish the same for YOUR favorite characters, but I don't want to be like all those Ran-haters, as she herself (if she existed) wouldn't have wished this to anybody.

 

Are you seriously trying to argue that a character shouldn't be killed off on the basis that their real-life counterpart wouldn't want it to happen? C'mon, man.

 

Damn all sad and tragic endings. People usually think that tragedy is the highest fictional genre, as if killing a main character always improves the level of the book/movie etc. In my opinion, tragic endings are usually a sign of poor creativity of the author, who isn't able to creat something new and impressive and is only able to destroy. 

 

I don't think people believe that. It's simply that when investing time into a story, folks tend to seek immersion - we read and watch fictional works because we want to relate to the characters and live out their adventures along side them. This is hard to do when the work itself lacks realism or authenticity. When characters are virtually invincible and any harm that might come to them is understood to be an arbitrary illusion for the sake of a spiel, the actions taken to both avoid and inflict said harm lose their meaning.

 

If your characters continuously escape any and all threats posed to them, then said threats will eventually lose their power to captivate the audience, and once that happens, the story is robbed of its emotional impact. It doesn't matter how high the stakes are raised, because in the end, the hero always wins, and nothing of value is lost. That's why folks like tragedies - rather than present an emotional constant, tragedies offer characters whose survival/happiness is not guaranteed, and whose actions matter, which in turn means that the audience is invested in everything that happens. You're not just observing the plot, you're experiencing it.

 

To say that an author lacks creativity for creating an actual story rather than a narrative stasis is delusional. Just to make this clear, you're degrading the work of the likes of Homer, Dante, Saavedra, Doyle, Harris - hell, just about any famous author.

 

Claiming that tragedies are solely about destruction is contradicting the very nature of such works. Tragedies aren't just about death and decrepitude - they're about the creation of beauty, the sacrifice of the established, and the celebration of the flawed. Hamlet might have been a tragic story, but in the end it was an examination of the futility of vengeance and rage. The Odyssey might have told of a thousand deaths, but its purpose was the celebration of Odysseus' journey and the bonds that carried him through it all.

 

You are oversimplifying and defiling one of mankind's greatest artistic achievements, and sloppily at that.

[Hobgoblin2012 49]

Are you seriously trying to argue that a character shouldn't be killed off on the basis that their real-life counterpart wouldn't want it to happen? C'mon, man.

 

 

I don't think people believe that. It's simply that when investing time into a story, folks tend to seek immersion - we read and watch fictional works because we want to relate to the characters and live out their adventures along side them. This is hard to do when the work itself lacks realism or authenticity. When characters are virtually invincible and any harm that might come to them is understood to be an arbitrary illusion for the sake of a spiel, the actions taken to both avoid and inflict said harm lose their meaning.

 

If your characters continuously escape any and all threats posed to them, then said threats will eventually lose their power to captivate the audience, and once that happens, the story is robbed of its emotional impact. It doesn't matter how high the stakes are raised, because in the end, the hero always wins, and nothing of value is lost. That's why folks like tragedies - rather than present an emotional constant, your are presented with characters whose health is not guaranteed, and whose actions matter, which in turn means that the audience is invested in everything that happens. You're not just observing the plot, you're experiencing the plot.

 

To say that an author lacks creativity for creating an actual story rather than a narrative stasis is delusional. Just to make this clear, you're degrading the work of the likes of Homer, Dante, Saavedra, Doyle, Harris - hell, just about any famous author.

 

Claiming that tragedies are solely about destruction is contradicting the very nature of such works. Tragedies aren't just about death and decrepitude - they're about the creation of beauty, the sacrifice of the established, and the celebration of the flawed. Hamlet might have been a tragic story, but in the it was an examination of the futility of vengeance and rage. The Odyssey might have told of a thousand deaths, but its purpose was the celebration of Odysseus' journey.

 

You are oversimplifying and defiling one of mankind's greatest artistic achievements, and sloppily at that.

 

I get your point, but whatever the values of the tragedy genre might be, this specific work of fiction (Detective Conan) is too important to me, and precisely for the fact that I became very used to some characters and like them very much, I wouldn't appreciate their elimination for the sake of "originality" and "suspense" at all. If you think my reasoning is too primitive, then, sorry, I don't care. To me, the priority is that the main characters get a happy ending because there already are too many tragic ones both in real life and fiction. I like dark plots too, I fully realize that sometimes some characters have to be killed, but only when all ends well anyway, at least for the main characters. A dark plot full of suspense will make the happy ending even better, by contrast.

And what's this statement about "narrative stasis"? If the ending is a happy one, it doesn't mean that everything that comes before is primitive, sugar-coated and without suspense.

[Kenzi 146]

I'd really prefer for her to die.

Rather than have her die, I'd prefer to see more character development. Not that it's going to happen though, Ran has been the same person for the past 700+ episodes.

 

Killing her off is going to turn the fanbase into an uproar. While it certainly is an interesting idea, Gosho has shown no pattern of killing off main characters and he isn't likely going to start. It's inevitable that Ran is going to live and end up with Shinichi, whether we want it to happen or not.

[Peregrinus the Nihilist 4]

As the years went by and the plot twists became increasingly arbitrary, Detective Conan came to suffer from this exact issue - Ran would be kidnapped, but her plot armor would make the kidnapping feel absolutely arbitrary, functioning as a gimmick rather than a genuine part of the story.

 

Thus, my desire to see her dead. Her death would vindicate the series as one of not only ingenuity, but genuine shock and volatility. If Conan ends as habit dictates, it won't feel like the masterpiece we know it to be - rather, it will be a decent series whose creator got distracted by a senseless attempt to feign authenticity.

 

While I’m not sure I have a desire to see her die (I am a fan, after all [albeit often a grudging one]), I cannot help but agree with you to some extent. I too can see the potential merits of such a devastating event. That said, I would think that there is more than one way to seal DC as a classic, and that not all of them would entail Ran's death.  

 

Either way - be it stoicism or classic tragedy, I'd like a commitment. The current mesh of virtual invincibility and artificial danger simply isn't working for me, and I would be very disappointed if the series' inevitable conclusion was tainted by it.

 

I think I feel the same way. Also, this brings up a more general question: who will have died by the end of DC? It’s been nearly 750 episodes and not a single major character (or even a relatively minor character, like Miwako Satou [forgive me Satou fans—I like her too!]) has failed to cheat death, in some cases multiple times. Considering the body count that has been racked up to this point, it would be more than a little ridiculous if all of the good guys were to make it to the end unscathed.

 

I'm guessing that Mr. Aoyama is waiting until the last 50-100 episodes or so to orchestrate the obligatory deaths, as the heavily episodic and ritualistic format of the series demands a stable cast of characters. Another possible reason is that Mr. Aoyama was likely unsure how long he would be able to continue the series—supposedly he didn’t expect it to last beyond three months when he first started it. (When you have such a well-established and long-running manga/anime series like DC, you wouldn’t want to kill off any important characters too soon.) By now, he probably has a good idea of how much steam the train has left, and is accordingly making preparations for the last stop.

[magnolia88 2]

It has been so obvious that Ran will end up with Shinichi from the very first page even before Ai has appeared.

 

For Ai's thread because Gosho hasnt decided anything for her so we can only guess.

[RSP 3]

I get your point, but whatever the values of the tragedy genre might be, this specific work of fiction (Detective Conan) is too important to me, and precisely for the fact that I became very used to some characters and like them very much, I wouldn't appreciate their elimination for the sake of "originality" and "suspense" at all.

 

And what's this statement about "narrative stasis"? If the ending is a happy one, it doesn't mean that everything that comes before is primitive, sugar-coated and without suspense.

 

I don't think personal attachment to a character/series is a valid argument. If you applied that principle to all works of art, we would have missed out on some of the most iconic and emotional moments in all of fiction.

 

I think you're missing the point. I'm not saying that a happy ending nullifies the series' merit as a whole - I'm simply saying that there's any portrayal of danger becomes insignificant if nothing ever comes of it.

 

 

That said, I would think that there is more than one way to seal DC as a classic, and that not all of them would entail Ran's death.  

 

 

I think I feel the same way. Also, this brings up a more general question: who will have died by the end of DC? It’s been nearly 750 episodes and not a single major character (or even a relatively minor character, like Miwako Satou [forgive me Satou fans—I like her too!]) has failed to cheat death, in some cases multiple times. Considering the body count that has been racked up to this point, it would be more than a little ridiculous if all of the good guys were to make it to the end unscathed.

 

I'm guessing that Mr. Aoyama is waiting until the last 50-100 episodes or so to orchestrate the obligatory deaths, as the heavily episodic and ritualistic format of the series demands a stable cast of characters. Another possible reason is that Mr. Aoyama was likely unsure how long he would be able to continue the series—supposedly he didn’t expect it to last beyond three months when he first started it. (When you have such a well-established and long-running manga/anime series like DC, you wouldn’t want to kill off any important characters too soon.) By now, he probably has a good idea of how much steam the train has left, and is accordingly making preparations for the last stop.

 

There definitely are various ways to make the series more memorable - for example, Mokrim made a great point regarding the hypothetical death of a DB member,

 

I think a major factor to consider is whether Aoyama even intends to take DC in this direction. Judging solely by the way he has been writing the series so far, it's fairly reasonable to assume that Conan was never intended to ascend into the ranks of a classic. If the series' plot was only ever meant to function as a secondary feature to complement the weekly cases, we might not see any significant deaths at all.

[Kashitsuryu 0]

I'm honestly a Ram hater, but I don't expect or want him to die, actually I suspect and support the theory that Ran will be Eisuke's future wife.

 

Eisuke already said that Ran would not give up and he is a character with a lot of potential and possibilities to return to rescue his sister and deliver the final blow. if kogoro dies, which is very possible that will happen, Eisuke, the unch boy with whom Ran has done well apart from shinichi, will be her sister the best support of her.

[Jemsnixon 0]

I don't think most people have that view. People just desire immersion when they devote time to a tale; we read and watch fiction because we want to identify with the characters and experience their journeys alongside them. When the work itself lacks authenticity or realism, it is difficult to accomplish this. The actions made to both prevent and cause said harm lose their impact because characters are essentially untouchable and any harm that might occur to them is considered to be an artificial fiction for the sake of a spiel.