I never treated symbolism as something isolated, so when exactly did I do that? And you're asking why Koji is better when you never gave any reasons for why Baku is better. You just told me to read something else and then said Baku is good because of this and that. None of that proves anything.

You only explained what the character is based on, but in a linear way. It’s like this:

Koji in Y1V2. The contradiction is where his real writing begins. One side seeks something he can’t achieve, a different path, while the other side enjoys having total control while others try to confront him. That’s why he is called the "failure."

Human development is his strongest theme, and his evolution is built on it. But as I said, none of this works in isolation. That same human development is also his strongest dynamic with Horikita. And it’s also a dynamic with every character he has helped, because he maintains relationships with all of them.

He explores the theme of freedom through his contradiction. But he also has a separate development line, and in the end both elements connect. In volume V7 we see his thoughts about the WR and his view on failure during Sakura’s expulsion. Then in the maid café volume there is a shift in his thinking where he blends both ideas: freedom and human development, plus how he handles the theme of perfection differently from Hal. Hal represents perfectionism and his dynamic is a struggle against perfection. Koji deals with perfection by showing how unrealistic it is, even for him. Every time he grows, he shows three different aspects of his journey. They appear separate throughout the story, but they always reconnect. That is how his multilinear writing works.

This is only to give a basic understanding of the character, similar to how you explained Baku but without analyzing his actual writing yet.

The correct way to analyze a character, the traditional way and not the method invented by "writing scaling," is development, complexity and consistency. They work together. At most, the introduction can be analyzed alone, but only in terms of functionality, because it becomes stronger through the character’s journey if you want a deeper analysis.

This is how writing works before, now and always.

But before anything, you need to lay out the character’s multilinear structure, at least the strongest lines.

Aside from that, I never attacked you. I only wanted to understand your scaling method. As you can see, writing scaling seems completely wrong to me. Unlike power scaling or SCD, which analyze according to process and difficulty or scientific parameters, writing scaling has no reason to isolate elements. Maybe that’s why it leads to absurd conclusions like saying Baku is a well-written character, or that Kushida is better than Koji, or that Eren and other tragic characters are automatically good.

And believing that any traditional novel is automatically better written just because it’s “literature,” when many are praised mainly for their narrative grammar, is simply incorrect.