In reply to DiMono
They are not identical though.
You think they are because you are dismissive of our evidence and what we see which is a filter you have. But let me make this clear I am not dismissive of your idea out of hand like you come across to us. Rather I have looked at your stuff and cant agree with the idea you have come to.
First the chibi Ruby is an anime thing which there is a lot of it in RWBY but if you noticed Ruby was hand drawn which the hand drawing has left RWBY outside of specific moments where the whole style switches to it such as when Yang is narrating Qrow saving her.
The chibi was an early thing that got dropped as they switched and found their own legs..also possibly legal but that isnt here or now. We dont see Chibi RWBY happen again not because it was a symbol but rather the direction of the show itself changed.
The other things you claim as evidence also fall into this.
Then there is the issue some of it can be editing mistakes or just the people doing it not thinking about it. For example Ruby in vol 4 ending is writing right hand...except in all other volumes she is left.
So some of it is art styles that get changed much like how they moved from Poser to maya a confirmed undeniable thing they did do which has effects on their animations. Others are plain mistakes they didnt realize they did.
The tone shift isnt handled by it being a narration though. But rather POV. All our main characters are students who are unaware of the dangers of the world who suddenly have that danger shoved into their lives. That rather there answers the tone shift because it was a real tone shift much like someone who had a happy home life suddenly has both their mom and dad die they too will experience a tone shift without it being a narrative symbol.
Because their life DID experience a tone shift.
And that is the reason why I look at your theory askance you push it forward like its the ONLY answer when the way the show has been going already presents an answer without it requiring a narrator reliable or otherwise.
The characters we follow shape our views and understandings of the world much like how the words we know do so. For example there is dozens of words for snow in inuit langauge because to them its important to have them.
For us the Members of RWBY and JNPR are our words and they personally dont know better before it all comes crashing down.
The reason why ours are different and not the same is because ours can have some things be wrong and not destroy it.
If one or 2 of the things we see and note turn out to be false or over blown it doesnt kill the theory. For example if it turns out we are wrong and Cinder DID burn Pyrrha to ash considering Ozpin that isnt a theory killer it changes things yes but due to a character that is confirmed it does not kill the idea.
With yours though as soon as ONE of your ideas of Symbols gets shown to be an art sytle and not them doing a subtle Ruby narrative then it calls the other symbols into question.
That is the major difference. Yours requires ALL examples of the symbols to be Ruby recalling this and exaggerating it ours only a few have to be true for Pyrrha to come back.
And what will you do when Pyrrha comes Back? because I am not that type of Jerk
and just to be clear by mistakes I mean the whole yang in the air thing in terms of symbols.
If someone was doing a rule of cool fight they may not realize how long someone being in the air means in terms of velocity and so on. I know for a fact I didnt until I saw the discussion on it.
Also same goes for the Grimm Miles and kerry have FLAT out stated they made a mistake with the grimm they wanted them to be deadly and in fact its one of the reasons they give for Roman was to reestablish that Grimm arent just mooks to tear through like tissue paper.
The creators themselves in the afterbuzz for the Vol 3 finale I think it was said they made a mistake in how they preset the grimm which is oone of the problems with your theory that runs directly counter to it.
And we see in vol 4 Grimm have been made a LOT more deadly.