Current Events > This majora's mask analysis is amazing

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://zeldauniverse.net/2011/09/13/the-message-of-majoras-mask/

Halfway through the article. Essentially the stone temple was built to wage war against the sacred realm and the goddesses.

interesting observations:

• the 4 is a motif throughout the game, 4 regions, 4 temples, 4 guardians, and 4 giants. You'll see patterns of 4 repeated in the architecture
• stone temple inhabitants worshipped the 4 giants, and eventually majora which would be their undoing
• the 4 motif is also repeated in phallically looking pillars, specifically in the stone temple. This is important as it establishes a masculine vs feminine theme, the 4 giants vs the goddesses
• Majora is a female. Majora's wrath has a female voice and feminity to it. The eyes of the mask are positioned in such a way to resemble breasts. Markings between its legs that could represent ovaries.
• the masculine side was defeated by a female demon

*hasn't clicked* is this the one where they bring up the genital imagery around Termina and the square blocks in Stone Tower region depicting gargoyles licking their own assholes as an insult to Hyrule's trinity?

Gremlynn posted...

*hasn't clicked* is this the one where they bring up the genital imagery around Termina and the square blocks in Stone Tower region depicting gargoyles licking their own assholes as an insult to Hyrule's trinity?

yeah lol.

Another thing I think this guy missed that supports majora being female is that "majora" is an anatomical part of a woman's vagina

I think the design on Marjora's mask is meant to look like a uterus.

b_nolan posted...

I think the design on Marjora's mask is meant to look like a uterus.

Wow it does.

Just found a whole list of supporting evidence on another forum. Last one is so neat

1. The eyes of Majora's Mask or "coincidentally" placed exactly were breasts would be in female humans, making the eyes resemble them.
2.The pattern around Majora's genital area resembles ovaries
3. Majora has a high pitched, feminine voice.
4.The Moon has traditionally been associated with female Deities
5.''Majora'' is the second word for Labia Majora which are
DISPLAY SPOILER

6.The mask is in the shape of a heart, which is associated with the female gender
7.Majora's colour palette is primary Purple and Red-ish pink, colours that are connected with females.
8. Occasionally, she will spin like a ballerina and her whip is used as a ribbon.
9.Physically, Majora has the build of a woman.
10. Since she seems to be an opposite to the Fierce Deity, who is male, it seems proper that she'd be opposite in gender as well.

WalkingLobsters posted...

yeah lol.

Another thing I think this guy missed that supports majora being female is that "majora" is an anatomical part of a woman's vagina

Man i loved reading that one over like a decade ago. was cool af.

But i'm also pretty sure the labia is not the only part of human anatomy to have a majora and minora.

Wasn't the theory that the Stone Towel Temple itself was built as a big F U to the Goddesses?

b_nolan posted...

Wasn't the theory that the Stone Towel Temple itself was built as a big F U to the Goddesses?

yeah. The hand statue had a finger pointing up towards the sky with its tip ablaze

https://youtu.be/Fze6QhYuBPw?t=115

man i played this game when i was 8 years old. I remember not comprehending any of that story lol. But wow is it dark and sad as hell

I think the area you fight Twinmold in is suppose to be some weird pocket dimension

Best Zelda game imo, reminds me of a From Software

WalkingLobsters posted...

the 4 is a motif throughout the game, 4 regions, 4 temples, 4 guardians, and 4 giants.

All of these things are a consequence of one another so really it's only one appearance of the number four. They weren't going to have 4 regions and 7 temples and 6 giants.

Xethuminra posted...

Best Zelda game imo, reminds me of a From Software

yea for real

i just finished reading the article. Man after getting to know what the game is really about and being an adult I actually feel somewhat positive. It's a nice tie-in with my life, some of my happiest memories were playing this game as a kid, and now revisiting it, it was telling me all along to keep faith regardless of how dire and gloomy life gets

Worst Zelda game imo, reminds me of a dumpster fire

ya know, while we got this MM love-a-thon going on, now is a good time to direct everybody who's never checked him out to Theophany's "Time's End" albums. Both are on Spotify and prolly plenty of other places.

Still cant get over this guy playing majoras mask and having some sort of psychosis where hes seeing dicks everywhere and making a mythology about it. Its one of my favorite niche online things

But... this basically means people will start masturbating to majoras mask though

Didnt read but how are the eyes on the mask gonna be tits

Is that one of those fan theory articles or does it have info from the creators to back any of it up?

MM was way ahead of its time and still is
Not many games are able to convey the themes of the game through their gameplay. You're a hero in MM by playing the game, as opposed to the game telling you you're a hero. Show don't tell.

rexcrk posted...

Is that one of those fan theory articles or does it have info from the creators to back any of it up?

fan theories. I guarantee the directors weren't thinking about vaginas and penises and having a mask symbolize a vagina

People put way more credit in the devs than justified. Chances are 99% of these hidden lore aspects are just what some random dev thought looked cool at the time. People acting like MM which was developed in like 18 months is comparable to something like Dark Souls or Elden Ring in terms of hidden lore.

Ugh. I always hated this tower of babel fanfiction about the game.

I've always tought the majora's mask was based off the artifacts from the pre-columbian marajoara culture (mostly baceause of the similar name), but Aonuma said this wasn't the case

Nintendo did not put enough thought into their Zelda games' lore for any of this to be true. It's why their Zelda timelime is so blatantly an act of retconning.

SHRlKE posted...

People put way more credit in the devs than justified. Chances are 99% of these hidden lore aspects are just what some random dev thought looked cool at the time. People acting like MM which was developed in like 18 months is comparable to something like Dark Souls or Elden Ring in terms of hidden lore.

a dev could put 3 circles around a square and someone would say its some powerful religious reference that symbolizes freedom of the oppressed

Shadowplay posted...

Nintendo did not put enough thought into their Zelda games' lore for any of this to be true. It's why their Zelda timelime is so blatantly an act of retconning.

Except that majority (heh) of the timeline lines up well with how each game was initially marketed at release.

AoL clearly marketed as a direct sequel with backstory in the manual establishing it as the continuing story of the same Link from LoZ.

LttP clearly marketed as a prequel, with box art openly stating that you are playing as Link's ancestor.

LA, bit less clear. only stated to take place after Link saves hyrule, but could easily be LoZ/AoL OR LttP Link. Later stating that it's definitely LttP Link isn't a major retcon.

OoT had TONS of promotional work and Nintendo Power articles and even snippets in its official player's guide talking about how it was the the new earliest point in the timeline and the narrative is clearly the ancient history described in LttP's manual.

MM all but explicitly tells you that it's the continuing adventures of OoT's Link after he is returned to his child form.

OoS/A were actually not stated in marketing or implied via game story, so yeah these two did just get crammed in somewhere easy.

Four Swords, ok i'll give you this one (and Four Swords adventure), they could have just been non-canon spinoffs.

WW is, funny enough, where the devs clearly start taking timelines more seriously AND where fans start denying the existence of a timeline. It was billed as a sequel to OoT with a new Link, and clearly depicts the events of OoT from the the peoples' perspective before describing the events leading to the flood.

sidenote: The devs also had multiple interviews at this time explaining how the ending of OoT created two different branching timelines, one following events after a 17 year old hero clad in green emerges from the abandoned temple and rescues the people of Hyrule from Ganondorf's tyranny only to mysteriously disappear, and one where a strange child with knowledge of the future broke into the Princess's courtyard and told her that her suspicions about Ganondorf were right and her plan to open the Door of Time first gives him what he wants.

MC, this is the first one that honestly does feel like a mess, timeline placement wise. it does a lot to suggest that it's an indirect prequel to OoT, but it really is all over the place with new ideas, trying to push the Four Sword in as canon, introducing races and themes that are never really touched again, using Ezio to suggest that this is where the iconic cap became tradition (later retconed while still allowing this game to hold the place of an OoT prequel). Fun game, contributes nothing.

FSA: already addressed with FS.

TP... this is where we get back on core games that clearly take place in relation to another game and drive that world connection home. It's also the first one to CLEARLY take place in a similar position to an existing game while being totally different, ie: the first to actually utilize the split timeline. It is ALSO the first time that Nintendo seems to have stepped back and not just TOLD US if a core game is a prequel or sequel to another recent game. Anybody who actually pays attention can tell a lot is going on though and make reasonable connections that place it as a distant sequel to OoT, which combined with knowledge of the timeline split makes it obviously a different timeline than WW. Namely the core story tells you that Ganondorf, seeking the triforce, was found out and defeated in a war with Hyrule's armies rather than defeated by a champion.

I could go on with the rest and I might later, but kiddo is getting home and I want to chill with him. I'll cap it off for now by saying that the only thing that felt out of nowhere about the official timeline is the existence of a Hero's Fall timeline. The core of hat timeline itself is still internally consistent with how each game was marketed at release, but also a clear sign that they had no idea how to reconcile LttP and TP and wanted them both to be sequels to OoT without the other getting in the way. Also LttP's backstory actually DOES necessitate a scenario in which Ganondorf actually won.

Gremlynn posted...

Except that majority (heh) of the timeline lines up well with how each game was initially marketed at release.

AoL clearly marketed as a direct sequel with backstory in the manual establishing it as the continuing story of the same Link from LoZ.

LttP clearly marketed as a prequel, with box art openly stating that you are playing as Link's ancestor.

LA, bit less clear. only stated to take place after Link saves hyrule, but could easily be LoZ/AoL OR LttP Link. Later stating that it's definitely LttP Link isn't a major retcon.

OoT had TONS of promotional work and Nintendo Power articles and even snippets in its official player's guide talking about how it was the the new earliest point in the timeline and the narrative is clearly the ancient history described in LttP's manual.

MM all but explicitly tells you that it's the continuing adventures of OoT's Link after he is returned to his child form.

OoS/A were actually not stated in marketing or implied via game story, so yeah these two did just get crammed in somewhere easy.

Four Swords, ok i'll give you this one (and Four Swords adventure), they could have just been non-canon spinoffs.

WW is, funny enough, where the devs clearly start taking timelines more seriously AND where fans start denying the existence of a timeline. It was billed as a sequel to OoT with a new Link, and clearly depicts the events of OoT from the the peoples' perspective before describing the events leading to the flood.

sidenote: The devs also had multiple interviews at this time explaining how the ending of OoT created two different branching timelines, one following events after a 17 year old hero clad in green emerges from the abandoned temple and rescues the people of Hyrule from Ganondorf's tyranny only to mysteriously disappear, and one where a strange child with knowledge of the future broke into the Princess's courtyard and told her that her suspicions about Ganondorf were right and her plan to open the Door of Time first gives him what he wants.

MC, this is the first one that honestly does feel like a mess, timeline placement wise. it does a lot to suggest that it's an indirect prequel to OoT, but it really is all over the place with new ideas, trying to push the Four Sword in as canon, introducing races and themes that are never really touched again, using Ezio to suggest that this is where the iconic cap became tradition (later retconed while still allowing this game to hold the place of an OoT prequel). Fun game, contributes nothing.

FSA: already addressed with FS.

TP... this is where we get back on core games that clearly take place in relation to another game and drive that world connection home. It's also the first one to CLEARLY take place in a similar position to an existing game while being totally different, ie: the first to actually utilize the split timeline. It is ALSO the first time that Nintendo seems to have stepped back and not just TOLD US if a core game is a prequel or sequel to another recent game. Anybody who actually pays attention can tell a lot is going on though and make reasonable connections that place it as a distant sequel to OoT, which combined with knowledge of the timeline split makes it obviously a different timeline than WW. Namely the core story tells you that Ganondorf, seeking the triforce, was found out and defeated in a war with Hyrule's armies rather than defeated by a champion.

I could go on with the rest and I might later, but kiddo is getting home and I want to chill with him. I'll cap it off for now by saying that the only thing that felt out of nowhere about the official timeline is the existence of a Hero's Fall timeline. The core of hat timeline itself is still internally consistent with how each game was marketed at release, but also a clear sign that they had no idea how to reconcile LttP and TP and wanted them both to be sequels to OoT without the other getting in the way. Also LttP's backstory actually DOES necessitate a scenario in which Ganondorf actually won.

I dont think anyone is denying there are links (heh) between some of the games. But certainly not to the extent some of the more hardcore fans like to think there is. Cant deny there isnt some retconning going on especially when you start talking about diverging timelines.

Also the op with that super in-depth analysis of a 18 month development time game is definitely a hell of a reach.

Kudos for Nintendo creating a game series that is celebrated so much and attracts such a hardcore following. But some of the stuff people claim is such a reach.

i mean you can claim it's a reach all you want but you're not going to change my mind. Nintendo is a developer which is very deliberate in how it structures things; it's almost like they hire people exclusively with OCD. They don't just design stuff based on their instincts or whatever immediately springs to mind. There is deliberate thought into music, design, artistry, aesthetic, etc.

Does this spoil games that came out after Majora? I'm going through the whole series (slowly) and haven't even started Wind Waker yet.

GameGodOfAll posted...

Does this spoil games that came out after Majora? I'm going through the whole series (slowly) and haven't even started Wind Waker yet.

no

SHRlKE posted...

I dont think anyone is denying there are links (heh) between some of the games. But certainly not to the extent some of the more hardcore fans like to think there is. Cant deny there isnt some retconning going on especially when you start talking about diverging timelines.

Also the op with that super in-depth analysis of a 18 month development time game is definitely a hell of a reach.

Kudos for Nintendo creating a game series that is celebrated so much and attracts such a hardcore following. But some of the stuff people claim is such a reach.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

SHRlKE posted...

I dont think anyone is denying there are links (heh) between some of the games. But certainly not to the extent some of the more hardcore fans like to think there is. Cant deny there isnt some retconning going on especially when you start talking about diverging timelines.

A lot of the hardcore theorizing about themes and messages and the deeper meaning of a game's story is, yeah, a bit of a reach. But it's also not that different from the same sort of literary analysis of stuff like say, Shakespear, which was mostly lowest common denominator entertainment of the time and not intended to be read too deeply into. But we do it anyways, because it's just fun to do.

As for the connections between games? They are usually explicitly spelled out, and when not it's in a game that does a lot more to flesh out its connections. The point is that the argument "there never was a timeline they just made it up after the fact using fan theories to sell a tie in book!" is blatantly untrue. The timeline clearly always existed.

Shadowplay posted...

Nintendo did not put enough thought into their Zelda games' lore for any of this to be true. It's why their Zelda timelime is so blatantly an act of retconning.

Outside of the dumb Fallen timeline theres no issues.

This was a really good read. Made my work day go by a hell of a lot faster.