«

»

Sep 26 2017

Some questions in Candy Candy Final Story

 

This post is my promise to a new friend I met lately, Alex. She left a comment, asking for feedback or answers to her following questions about Candy Candy Final Story (CCFS). For those who might not know her, she has thoroughly read both Japanese (the original) version and the official Italian version, and she plans to write (or in the process of writing) an analysis of CCFS. Without further ado, here are her questions (which I haven’t made any change):

1. Is Candy actually married in the 1930s? Is there any clear-cut and indisputable mention of the word ‘husband’ or anything slightly as relevant to wedlock? From my part, I even resorted to using my software to scan the entire CCFS texts (I’ve converted all CCFS texts into pdf for exclusive personal use due to copyright law) for words and/or phrased which could relate to Candy’s wedlock or possible spouse but to no avail.
2. Is there any clear indication in the CCFS that Albert had signed adoption papers or was it simply a signed letter of consent regarding his proposed guardianship of Candy? What George appears to be reading to Aunt Elroy is simply a hand-written letter of consent. Afterwards, Aunt Elroy acts in concert with the Lagans to dispute and nullify the aforementioned consent by William Albert Ardlay. (CCFS/ Volume 1/ Chapters 18-20). Further on in the UK, Stear and Archie also specify to Terry how ‘wobbly’ the whole ‘adoption’ case really is. Besides, this is the reason why Terry renounced his father’s surname and begged the headmistress not to report anything to William Ardlay (CCFS/ Volume 2/ Chapters 16-17). The sentiment that this whole so-called ‘adoption’ is rather shallow appears to permeate the CCFS even more than the older CC versions (manga and novels). What do you think?
3. Have you found out anything about Terry’s precise age in the CCFS text apart from the unofficial and inaccurate estimates circulating on the internet? We get to know that he’s ‘too young’ to take Candy with him but that’s too vague. Is there anything more specific in the CCFS text? My only estimate is that he’s less than 17 when he leaves St Paul’s.
4. There also appears to be a controversy regarding the ages of Candy, Stear and Archie. The CCFS reader would probably assume that Annie and Patty are roughly the same age with Candy since they’re classmates at St Paul’s. Nagita has made it clear that Anthony was 15 when he died; Candy was almost 13 when she was taken to the Lagans; and Albert was 17 when he met Candy for the first time at Pony’s Hill (she was 6 at the time). I am wondering whether Candy was exactly 13 or 14 when William Ardlay redacted his guardianship consent. Was Albert 24 or 25 years of age when he redacted and signed the aforesaid consent? Not that it makes too much of a difference legal-wise (he’s still far too young to be a dad anyway..), but I simply want to maintain the accuracy of my analysis (yes, I am horrifically pedantic and persistent when it comes to utmost precision even with minute details). I also find this age gap regarding Stear as problematic. If Stear is 4 years older than Candy, he should be at uni and not at school. If Candy is 14, then Stear would be 18 which is the age one is at uni. My rough estimate was that Candy was ‘adopted’ at the age of 13; Albert was 24 at the time (13+11=24); Anthony and Terry were around the same age (that would make Candy 14 at the May Fest and Terry 16); Archie was about the same age with Candy (14-15), and he was about 2 years younger than Stear (which would make him around the same age as Terry-, circa 16-17). Is this correct? Please let me know if it’s not correct and if some details have escaped my notice.
5. Is there any unbiased and impartial indication of the time (date) Terry’s terse letter (CCFS/Volume 2/Section 3/Letters) to Candy had been written, or sent to, or even received (by Candy)? Is there any indication that Terry’s surname is ‘Granchester’ after he had renounced that surname severing all ties with his father? In all references following Terry’s departure from St Paul’s, Terry appears to be addressed as ‘Terrence Graham’ (or T.G.) and never as ‘Granchester’ (T.G.G.) or ‘Baker’. Even in his farewell letter to Candy at St Paul’s, he closed his brief note to her simply as ‘Terrence’ (CCFS/Volume 2/Chapter 20). Moreover, I have to specify that in Terry’s brief letter to Candy in Section 3 (Letters/Volume 2), he simply signs off as T.G. In all the newspaper clippings, Candy reads his surname as ‘Graham’ and never as ‘Granchester’. Furthermore, Terry does not mention ‘feelings’ in the aforesaid brief letter to Candy in either the original Japanese nor translated Italian texts (CCFS/Volume 2/ Section 3/Letters). Instead, he ends the letter by stating verbatim: ‘I am not changed.’ In the Italian translation, it appears to be roughly albeit not exactly the same: ‘Nothing has changed for me’ or ‘Nothing has changed me.’ (CCFS/Volume 2/Section 3/Letters). Therefore, the pseudo-translation which tends to circulate in some websites in which Terry allegedly conveys his feelings of ‘love’ to his intended recipient (‘My feelings/love for you have/has not changed..’) is absolutely false. Bottom line, Terry is not using the word ‘feelings’/’love’ or ’emotions’ at all. Have you found anything different to that in other translations?

I would appreciate your feedback here if convenient for you. I’ll await your response prior to my CCFS review and analysis as my intention is to obliterate even the slightest doubt or query in order to maintain 100% accuracy. It’s simply a matter of personal integrity for me to always maintain utmost accuracy and veracity even if that makes me acutely pedantic..;-)

Looking forward to your feedback and suggestions!

Thanks in Advance,
Alex

Alex, I will try to respond to these questions with details as soon as possible. Meanwhile, I would briefly say that even though there is seemingly not any word about wedding or marriage, the implications are there. For example, Candy told Anthony that she wore a smile because she lived with the person she loved. When he returned at the end of the book, she said おかえりなさい!, the polite form of “Welcome home!”, with immense joy and excitement. That simple gesture showed her love and respect for him. Back in that era cohabitation wasn’t common, right? (Correct me if I’m wrong. 😛 ) After all, Candy was raised by two religious ladies. 💓 Besides, I believe Anohito had married her because he gave her the family heirloom. What’s more, Candy’s letter to Vincent Brown in CCFS speaks volumes of who she was and where she lived.

About the ages of the character, a Japanese fan has made a chart based on her own interpretation (scroll all the way down). I’m not saying she must be correct, but this might serve as a reference for you? Interestingly, this fan didn’t mention Terry’s age in CCFS, but according to her, Archie was Anthony’s age, two years younger than Stear. I must confess that I didn’t pay much attention to their ages except for Candy. I believe she was around fifteen when she returned to America as a stowaway, but I will double check that.

About Terry’s letter to Candy, I’ve written quite a few posts in the past. For your interest, you can read this one, Terry’s brief letter to Candy (Part 2).

Last but not the least, the adoption. It’s vague in CCFS, just as your said, but at least Albert admitted in his letter of complaint (in the epilogue) that he was indeed Candy’s adoptive father and she was his adopted daughter. Perhaps, he did sign some papers to give Candy his surname? If not, his aunt, who despised Candy so much, could have denied her in the beginning, but Great Aunt Elroy didn’t do that until after Anthony’s accident. But I think you as the lawyer should know much more than I do. 🙂

33 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. Lynn

    Hi Ms Puddle,
    I’ll agree with Yel that Albert is always associated with azure (sky and water) and Terry with the smell of grass and yellow flowers. I’ve noticed that Anthony, his mother, and Stear are associated with the wind (gentle breeze). So, we could be talking about the 4 elements-Albert (water and sunlight), Terry (earth and fire), and Anthony (air). But in CCFS Albert is the one who’s described as emitting a light of his own and Terry as a passionate man with burning rage but a very dark gaze dwelling in dark and lonely spaces. I think that Terry has been misconstrued as a man of light because of his fiery character and that whole daffodil thing. In the manga Terry is always in dark areas and Albert is shining a light of his own. Terry gets the spot light or some sun light on him but Albert is the one who shines whether it’s daytime or night. Albert is drawn with sun rays behind him when in front of the hospital window and when he finally reveals his true identity to Candy at Lakewood. In the manga the evening sky is clear when Albert is around and he and Candy often share starry nights together near the lake or in the forest. Albert’s eyes in CCFS are described as clear blue skies emitting a light of their own. Yel’s right that we never find out about Terry’s eye color but we get constant references to Albert’s blue eyes and radiance even though he tries to hide his identity by dying his hair dark, wearing dark sun-glasses, and growing a long beard. In the final paragraph of CCFS, Candy is in the dark and suddenly anohito opens the door with sun rays behind him just like the way it was when Albert revealed himself as WAA to Candy at Lakewood.
    Thank you for your amazing blog!

    1. Ms Puddle

      Hi Lynn, yes I also agree with you and Yel about the associations between the characters and things or symbols. Very interesting thought about the characters and elements, Lynn.

      In addition to what you listed, I think Anthony is always associated with roses too and Stear with inventions, in particular the music box that Candy mentioned again and again.

      About Albert and bright lights, the several scenes you’ve described are actually among my favorite ones in the manga, especially the grand revelation near the end. Yes indeed, despite his best efforts, Albert could hardly conceal his radiance, just as you have described.

      But at the end of CCFS, Anohito turned on the lights because it was already dimmed, so no sun rays per se. Still, light filled the room because of his presence. 😀

      Thank you for writing and glad you enjoyed my blog. 😘 Thanks for your encouragement 🤗

  2. Yel

    Ah, in the old letter to Anthony Candy tells him about Albert, but from her personal memories and point of view. In the letter of CCFS she describes Albert to Anthony, but she tell him about events that Albert, previously, talked to her. It’s a little difference, but significant, I guess.

    1. Ms Puddle

      Yes Yel, I totally agree with you! I personally like Candy’s letter to Anthony in CCFS more. It’s more emotional, and I like how she described the appearance of Prince on the Hill to Anthony in details, as though Anthony didn’t know what he looked like. 😁 I read a blog by a Japanese fan, who prefers Terry. She mentioned this particular letter and said the details Candy used to describe Albert’s looks made this blogger uncomfortable.

      I also like how Candy told Anthony about his mother’s love story from Albert’s mouth. I bet Anthony had never heard it from his late mother.

      Thank you very much for your encouraging words, Yel 😘

  3. Yel

    Hi Ms Puddle, i’m italian and I read CCFS in official italian version. In “Did Candy find her happiness – Part 6” you wonder what Candy by “eyes like the clear blue color like the newborn morning sky” means.
    In the Second Volume of CCFS, Candy (following the stable’s incident at the Saint Paul School)) is reflecting about her feelings for Terry, and realizes that love has different forms and is like a light that passes through a prism: each emotion/love has a particolar color, and this color depends on the person you are in love with. So, Candy understand that the color of Antony didn’t lose his nouance and intensity in her heart, and she also understand that she will be always in love with him. But she feels that the vivid color of Terry, at the same time, take her brath away. (Page 99 Vol. 2 italian edition).

    Now, the color of Anthony is delicate, a pink-withe nouance, the color of Terry is Gold, the color of Albert is Blue. Always, in CCFS, when Nagita tells about those characters uses these colors to describe them or the surroundings where they are.
    So, ad example, when Terry leaves England the boat is wrapped in a gold light, his white shirt in Scotland seems to be gold, and so on…Albert is always associated with lake, river ( Zoo Blue River), the color of his eyes is always mentioned as “light blue like the lake in the morning”, or “light blue like the sky in the morning” etc..(No mention in CCFS about Terry’s eyes color.) When anohito is coming back home at the end of the Novel, the room “is wrappeed in the light blue of the dusk.”
    I guess, it’s not a coincidence.
    Thanks for your great work, Ms Puddle! All best!

    1. Ms Puddle

      Ciao Yel, piacere di conoscerti! 🙂

      Glad to hear your thoughts and analysis, and I like Candy’s usage of colors to represent her different love interests. 💞

      Yes, Albert is always associated with the color blue and river, lake, etc.

      About his eyes having the color of the newborn morning sky, I wonder which blue color? Light blue or darker blue? 🤔 No matter what, it was a blue color that’s beautiful and always mesmerized Candy, whether she was 6, 13 or a lot older. 😀

      Very interesting thought about the room being basked in light blue of dusk… Right! I didn’t notice it before. Grazie! 👏👏

      I don’t think it’s coincidence either, Yel! What did Nagita want to tell her readers? 🤗

  4. Argie

    Hi Ms Puddle! I would like to ask you an opinion about two questions:

    Is Candy married in 1930?
    No, In FS there’s no mention of a word or phrase related to wedlock. But Candy is very religious and Albert too (he writes it to Candy in his last letter to her): it’s possible that they may have been married only with religious rite, maybe in a little church in the middle of a wood, or on the top of the Pony’s Hill. It’s possible, isn’t it?

    My second question concerns the Avon river: I was looking at the Scotland’s map,and I noticed that in the Falkirk council area flows a river that’s called Avon. Is a little river, but is close enough to Edinburg. In FS Nagita wrote that the Ardley’s scottish residence, where Eliza organizes her Party in White (a villa with a great terrace, very similar to the Candy’s terrace overlooking the Avon river in the present day) is located in the vicinity of Edinburgh. Terry needs a horse to reach the villa, so i suppose that the Ardley’s residence is not very close to the summer school dormitory, where Terry meets Candy and discovers that she had not been invited to the party. Furthermore, in FS Candy says that the scottish landscape is very similar to Lakewood.

    What do you think about my questions/ intuitions/discoveries?
    Thanks in advance for your answer.
    All best!

    1. Ms Puddle

      Hello Argie, nice to meet you!

      Glad that you agreed that Candy was married, if I understand you correctly.

      As I explained earlier in my post and comments, I believe Candy was already married in her thirties, whether to Albert (to produce legitimate offsprings) or Terry (suffered as an illegitimate child).

      Other than the religious reasons you said, I think the family heirloom is a significant clue. Remember Candy’s reason of not taking the jewelry box? It was because it was valuable. If she wasn’t married, Anohito wouldn’t be able to convince her to accept it from him because it was an expensive heirloom for generations. That’s my two cents 😀

      About Avon river in Falkirk, that’s probably the closest one in Scotland to Edinburgh, but according to Google’s map it’s about 7 hours of walking distance in between.

      But thank you so much for your inputs and insights, Argie. ☺️ In fact, with help from Alex, I’m going to start a new series soon, and I’ll start by talking about Avon rivers in UK. Please stay tuned 😍

      1. Sarah

        Hi Ms Puddles-I checked chapter 13 from volume 2 and there’s no mention of a river but a lake on the outskirts of Edinburgh. I also checked Google map and Falkirk is about an hour away from Edinburgh even by car. Back then it must have taken more time to get there. Another thing is that I don’t think Terry or Albert are religious in a traditional church-going sense. They both seem to be religious in a spiritual sense based more on their personal faith. At the catholic school in England, Terry mocked the authorities but he expressed to Candy in his farewell letter that he’ll be praying for her happiness. Albert also preferred a personal connection with God by meditating in nature rather than inside a church. When Keiko Nagita speaks of religion she’s probably describing a more universal spiritual faith instead of something ecclesiastical. This may be the reason why the author doesn’t mention a husband but a man Candy loves because it’s based on a union free from ecclesiastical authorities. Candy keeps a crucifix as a gift from her directors but that doesn’t mean she’s religious herself or at least not as religious as Ms Pony and Sister Lane. My opinion is that religion in this book means something more spiritual which unites all faiths and comes from within. There seems to be a reason why the author doesn’t even hint at a wedding or kids otherwise she would have provided a slight hint but she doesn’t. I’m not saying that Candy isn’t married or religious but I just find it odd that there’s no mention at all about her being a wife with kids. Whether she’s single or married remains open to interpretation. Cheers! Sarah

        1. reeka

          Hello, Sarah.
          May I give my two cents regarding whether Candy being married or not in her 30s?
          First, at this point we should have noticed that CCFS was intentionally written with a few of hints/clues here and there and Nagita/Mizuki obviously also left some events in manga unmentioned in CCFS that one of the reasons for doing so was it would reveal too much emotion and Anohito’s identity could be obvious.
          Second, I think none in CC story were clearly told as religious person excepts the sisters in St Paul and Candy’s two mothers, but to be married in a church does not need someone to be religious. My two cents, of course. It’s more like a tradition. And if we want to believe she married WAA, I am very much sure they had married the way a Patriarch from prominent family should have done. A ceremony in a church ( could be in the biggest church in Chicago or a simple church in the land of Pony’s home), then a wedding party ( could be in Chicago mansion or Lakewood villa). Nothing stopped them for doing so anyway. Some evidences in CCFS told us that yes, their path might not have been easy at first but Albert was the patriarch who made sure he worked so hard to all his family’s welfare , so when he wanted to marry the woman he loved, no one would against them.
          And why Nagita/Mizuki did not mention Candy being a wife with kids, I think the very last scene was clear that she lived with her husband? It was not mentioned, yes, but I think as Ms Puddle have said, some evidences had been mentioned and they had led us to an idea that they had married. The jewellery box, and Candy’s letter to Captain Vincent Brown. And I also don’t think Aunt Elroy would let them live together and had children without married ( she could have a heart attack just thinking about the idea, I guess hahaha).
          For Candy’s children, to me, a mere mention of the kids could easily reveal the mystery of Anohito. If a kid was mentioned, I imagine Nagita/Mizuki had to describe one or two attributes of the kid. Moreover the kid’s name. So my guess, the kids were not mentioned simply because Mizuki didn’t want to complicate the story as she had to stick to her notion of keeping Candy’s husband ambiguous.
          Cheers.

  5. Sarah

    Hi Alex-I find your comments intelligent and balanced. I like the way you search for evidence instead of opinion. I can’t answer all your questions but I think Candy was 13 when she was adopted and she was 14 when she ran away from the boarding school in England. I remember reading vol 1 where she mentioned her age when she met Anthony for the first time in front of the gate of roses. She had mistaken him for POTH. She said that 7 years had passed since she last saw POTH. There’s no age given for the other characters except for Annie, Anthony and Albert. The ages differ in the manga and the anime. It’s confusing. And you’re right about no mention of Candy being married in CCFS. There’s no mention of children either. Maybe she’s married. Who knows? The author doesn’t make this clear in her short message in the Italian preface either. Maybe she’s engaged. Terry lived with Susanna for years just being engaged to her so why not Candy? Maybe Albert was too busy to arrange an earlier wedding and wanted to marry Candy when they moved to England. They could have been engaged for a while. Maybe the stock market crash in America delayed their marriage. Either way it’s not made clear and you’re right about that. I’m looking forward to your next comment. Bye for now, Sarah
    P.S. I think Albert’s aunt wanted to ruin the adoption but she cared about him so much that she didn’t have the heart to do it knowing it would hurt him. She would get mad at him for being such a rebel Prince but then she would soften her stance when she calmed down. My guess is the Great Aunt had a soft spot for her beautiful nephew. Who wouldn’t?

    1. Alex

      Hello Sarah,

      Thanks for your feedback and information provided. It appears that certain vague points will remain as Nagita hasn’t provided clear-cut data. Perhaps this is her intention. Besides, she did specify that the CCFS is far from ‘perfect’..;-)

      All Best,
      Alex

  6. reeka

    Hello Alex & Ms Puddle,

    Gosh, it’s been long time since we made analysis on CCFS, right, Ms Puddle? 🙂

    Alex, I think I agree with everything Ms Puddle answered you above because I have been here with her discussing a lot since … 2014? Yes, I am sure it was early 2014, so it’s been almost 4 years I’ve known her and been engaging on her blog ever since. Pretty much obsessed, aren’t we? 😉

    Anyhow, let me see each question and I’d like giving quick and personal response.

    1. from what I have read and understood, yes, Candy was married to Anohito. Sure they had been living together as family for some times by year 1930s. I also believed she already had children at that time. The opening of our dear friend QueViva Candy’s fan fiction describes the situation perfectly, as my imagination. And as we all here believe her partner is William Albert Ardley, I am even more sure they were married, that they lived across the ocean because economic situation in America and the expansion of their business in the old continent. A person like WAA, I believe, would not live with Candy out of wedlock. No, he would not do that to her, assuming in that era, it was still something unacceptable by most society. And yes, her mothers would not allow it. They would not accept Sir Ardley’s generous gift ( the land of Pony’s Home and the reconstruction) as well if they weren’t married, yet lived together.

    2. likewise with Ms Puddle, the weight of this issue for Albert as he had told Candy in his letter ( he didn’t like to be called Dad), I think it quite told us something. If the adoption was not made legal, or it’s simply a letter of consent, I think he should not have bothered much about it.

    3 & 4. I am not quite sure what’s been told in CCFS. But I always think, if Candy was 13, Anny and Patty were also 13, Anthony and Archie 14, Stear 15, Terry either 14 or 15, Albert was 24. Eliza was 13, Neal was 14.

    5. Alex, you really should read Ms Puddle suggested post about this Terry’s letter. 😉 It’s fascinating to say the least.

    Cheers,

    Reeka

    1. Alex

      Hello Ms Puddle and Reeka!

      Thank you, Ms Puddle, for kindly posting my (otherwise pedantic..) queries on your fascinating blog. This is most appreciated. I would also like to thank both Ms Puddle and Reeka for their insightful commentary and feedback.

      As mentioned previously, the aforesaid five questions are simply some details which appear to remain vague (and/or open to interpretation) throughout the CCFS. In my analysis and review of the 2010 (original Japanese) CCFS text, I specify that these points remain vague (at least for me) as I have not found indisputable evidence for them. If I stand corrected on this, please let me know. From my part, I’ll continue to abide by the original Japanese 2010 CCFS text and not the Italian one, the latter being read by me simply out of curiosity to ascertain the discrepancies between the original and translated texts. To reiterate, as my analysis of the 2010 (original Japanese) CCFS text focuses on historical facts and legal ramifications surrounding late C19th-early C20th CCFS-related issues, the above mentioned five questions have not altered my assessment of the CCFS. Again, thank you for taking the time to post my queries and providing your most helpful feedback.

      In response to Ms Puddle’s question concerning the phenomenon of cohabitation during late C19th-early-C20th, the answer is actually-yes-it sure did exist and much earlier than the C19th as well (albeit not as common as it is nowadays, apparently), especially amongst the following socio-economic groups in North America and more noticeable (and acceptable) in Britain:
      1. Working-class and destitute people (mainly, albeit not exclusively, due to the fact that couples in poverty couldn’t afford matrimonial expenditure and further expenses);
      2. Upper-class and acutely affluent magnates (simply because they didn’t care about social norms and were considered as ‘untouchables’ by any social outrage due to their power and opulence-it was a bit of a ‘statement’ of theirs that they couldn’t care less what society demanded since they regarded themselves as ‘above’ everyone else);
      3. Artists, Poets/Writers, and Thespians/Actors/Actresses (it was an ‘avant garde’ and highly ‘romanticised’ way of life as well as ‘fashionable’ to live rebelliously and against ecclesiastical authority, taking into account that most artists/writers/Thespians challenged ecclesiastical authority (not necessarily religion or personal faith but definitely the Church) and identified with left-leaning trade unions and ideologies). The post-World War I Jazz Age (circa 1918 onwards) as well as the renowned (if not notorious) bohemian lifestyle also contributed to this ‘trend’ which, nonetheless, also bore undercurrents of socio-political antagonism against the status quo.

      Here are just a few online sources (I’ll be glad to provide more if you wish) which also provide scholarly literature for further reading into the issue of cohabitation in C18th/C19th-C20th North America and Britain (the first link is very long due to it being currently under reconstruction):

      http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-2230.12083/abstract?systemMessage=Wiley+Online+Library+will+be+unavailable+on+Saturday+7th+Oct+from+03.00+EDT+/+08:00+BST+/+12:30+IST+/+15.00+SGT+to+08.00+EDT+/+13.00+BST+/+17:30+IST+/+20.00+SGT+and+Sunday+8th+Oct+from+03.00+EDT+/+08:00+BST+/+12:30+IST+/+15.00+SGT+to+06.00+EDT+/+11.00+BST+/+15:30+IST+/+18.00+SGT+for+essential+maintenance.+Apologies+for+the+inconvenience+caused+.

      http://www.ehs.org.uk/press/happy-families-realities-of-family-life-in-twentieth-century-britain

      https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Sexual_Revolution_in_Early_America.html?id=2YqziSLv9bgC&redir_esc=y

      http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/830

      http://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences-and-law/law/law/cohabitation

      http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1081602X.2015.1067240

      This one is quite ‘fun’ including some anecdotal references of the aforementioned time:
      http://www.victorianlondon.org/frame-women.htm

      Ms Puddle and Reeka, thank you again for your feedback and for the further links provided. Yes, I surely have read Ms Puddle’s astute work regarding that controversial and rather ‘moot’ letter ascribed to Terry. I was just wondering whether Nagita had provided some minor detail or indication (as in the case of all the other letters in CCFS) regarding date/time and it had escaped my notice..

      Moreover, concerning Albert’s overt annoyance in being called (and mocking his own self by using that term) ‘adoptive father’, ‘Grand Uncle William’, etc, one could construe that’s not due to the legal status or implications revolving the alleged ‘adoption’ but due to the fact that Albert absolutely detests being called ‘old’. Folks, throughout all the versions of CC (novels, manga, anime-you name it!) and CCFS, this guy gets really ‘triggered’ when called ‘old’. Candy has noticed this and she ‘trolls’ him as Terry used to ‘troll’ her by triggering her about her freckles and snub nose. The common denominator in all CC/CCFS versions is that Albert abhors being regarded as old via his immediate protest and reminder that he’s in his 20s (as in the case of Lakewood when he had first encountered and saved Candy and later on in London when he reunites with Candy). As a highly intelligent and academically educated guy in law and business administration (I would consider that Nagita does not deploy these two fields of study randomly for Albert in particular), Albert is well aware of the procedures required to validate or nullify an adoption. It’s not his alleged status as ‘adoptive father’ which vexes him but something else which I’ll explain further on..;-)))

      Besides, the term ‘adoptive mother/father’ tend to be deployed as legal or diplomatic ‘shorthand’ and nothing more than that; something like an ‘umbrella’ term for a guardian or foster parent. I’ll explain all these procedures and ramifications of various forms of adoption (yes, there are actually various forms of adoption depending on one’s age and status) and guardianship in C19th-C20th North America and Britain later on.

      As for Aunt Elroy, I’ll also explain in my further post the reasons why she could have easily disputed (if not declare null and void) the aforementioned alleged ‘adoption’ but didn’t..

      That’s me for now. Thanks again, Ms Puddle and Reeka, for your feedback and suggestions. I really enjoy discussing with you!

      [Please, ignore any typos. I’m back from a very long day’s work and knackered..]

      All Best,
      Alex

      1. Ms Puddle

        Hello Alex, your questions make sense and I see the value of publishing them all in a post, so no need to thank me. I actually should thank you for the contributions! I’m truly looking forward to reading your analysis, considering your serious attitude and the extent you’ve gone to check every minute detail if possible! Bravo 👏👏

        I’m actually glad that you will base your analysis on the original Japanese text ( I was told that the Italian translator has made some mistakes ).

        About cohabitation, no doubt it wasn’t something new ( as shown in your references ), but back in that era, it wasn’t widely accepted like nowadays, especially not in the religious circle. As I mentioned before, Candy was raised a Catholic after all.

        Like Reeka said, if Anohito is indeed WAA, being the sole heir he had to get married to produce offsprings. Not to mention that I couldn’t see him not marrying Candy. I strongly believe he would marry her ( following his late sister Rosemary’s example ). I know in some fanfics Albert took Candy as his mistress, but to me that is undoubtedly out of character.

        Even if Anohito is Terry I think he would marry Candy too. He himself had suffered being an illegitimate child (born out of wedlock), so I don’t think he would want the same to happen to his own kid(s).

        Just my two cents, of course. 😁😀

        About Terry’s letter to Candy, I think Nagita has intentionally kept it vague, and you see how it stirred Terry fans beyond reasons. Thank you for your kind words about my previous posts, Alex! 😘

        So glad you brought up the topic of Candy acting like Terry when she “teased” Albert about being old. Yes, to me that’s a solid proof that he wasn’t a father figure to her. She was already in love with A but her feelings had to be bottled up… Sigh… Albert on the other hand wasn’t pleased and yet he asked her for forgiveness again and again. LOL 😅

        I’d like to read your views on adoption and Great Aunt’s reactions, but I’ll be patiently waiting. 😀

        Talk to you later 🙂

        1. Alex

          Hello Ms Puddle,

          Thanks for your feedback. Scanning texts is second-nature to me due to my job in the legal research (boring and interesting..) stuff. As for the CCFS, the level of Japanese isn’t anything advanced or sublime. As I mentioned in a previous post of mine, Nagita is neither Marcel Proust nor James Joyce. In the CCFS, she appears to want to get rid of the Candy’n’friends story and move on. From my part, I simply want to get all the (literary) facts up-to-scratch before posting the CCFS-related legal implications on adoption and consensual nullification of such acts and cut the material down to size (not more than a page long). At the end of the day, there’s no issue if something escapes one’s notice..;-)

          Concerning the Italian translation, yeah, it’s way below par. And imagine that both volumes are so expensive for such poor quality. Talking about getting short-changed.. Glad I didn’t buy them! On the other hand, the original Japanese volumes are sensibly priced.

          Having taken into consideration your astute analysis on CCFS, I’ve got two questions:
          1. How long you do think Susanna and Terry had been engaged and/or living together?
          2. Have you ever considered that perhaps Terry had sent his terse letter to Albert’s official address knowing that he could entrust him that this letter will be handed over to Candy? Terry has never concealed his utmost trust in and respect for Albert, irrespective of his underlying antagonistic and insecure feelings about Albert’s relationship with Candy. Following the official announcement of Albert’s identity (Terry reads the papers as well..), it wouldn’t be too difficult for Terry to find out Albert’s professional address (for example, one of his main offices) or his personal address (for instance, his estate in Chicago). There is also a possibility that Terry had begun to feel rather uneasy about the relationship between Candy and Albert. Terry’s no fool; he knows that a woman could easily fall for such a tall, athletic, beautiful and intelligent man as Albert. Who knows what Terry’s reaction was when he saw Albert looking smoking hot in his official and expensive attire during his debut as the head patriarch of the Ardlay magnate power.. Let’s not forget that Terry would go absolutely mental simply by listening to the name of a dead lad’s name (Anthony); imagine his reaction when being informed by the papers that Candy had been living with an even more gorgeous and awesome dude for circa 2 years! Terry’s not a naïve guy and he’s aware that all the adoption stuff is simply rubbish.. He also knows the profound influence Albert has over Candy and how much she adores him in return. The Terry-fans may wish to reduce Albert (sure..) but Terry himself is no idiot and he would never underestimate Albert in any way whatsoever. Indeed, Terry may revere Albert but he also ‘fears’ him and knows that he’s one hell of a mighty opponent.

          My theory is that if Terry had to choose among the landlady at Magnolia, the directors at the orphanage, and Albert himself, Terry would choose the one he feels more comfortable and respects the most -and that is clearly Albert. Furthermore, I consider that Terry would want to send the letter to Albert’s address as an act of ‘in your face, bro, I’m still here and it’s not over yet’. If this is the case, Nagita has made a lousy job in developing an otherwise fascinating narrative. She could have created two scenarios in which Candy will have to arrive at the crossroads and make a firm, responsible and life-determining decision. If we follow this theory (again, just tentatively speaking here), then we know that Terry and Albert have made their decision; Terry decides to take the risk and send the letter to Albert and, in turn, Albert decides to take the risk and hand the letter directly to Candy. From there on, it clearly depends what Candy wants and with whom she intends to share the rest of her life. Nonetheless, the ending of CCFS clearly defines Candy’s choice regarding these two controversial and profoundly complex men and I’ll explain this further on.

          What do you think? Again, this is simply a hypothesis and nothing more than that.

          (By all means, ignore any typos as I’m typing as fast as a bullet..)

          All Best,
          Alex

          1. Ms Puddle

            Hello Alex,

            First and foremost, I’m curious about what you meant by “get rid of Candy and friends story and move on”?

            Now, to answer your first question about Terry and Susanna:

            1. It’s unclear how long Terry and Susanna had been engaged, but my gut feeling is that happened when he returned to her after emerging from his depression in Rockstown. Candy in her unsent letter mentioned how much Susanna supported Terry, etc. Remember? I think that was probably the time the engagement took place.

            About how long they lived together… Possibly started around the same time too? I don’t know… Your earlier references about artists and cohabitation made me realize that this might be why Terry and Susanna lived together but didn’t get married. I don’t know. Just a wild guess.

            Now, Hamlet likely happened after the engagement… what do you think? Say Terry spent some time to regain his position in Stratford after his return, and later he even got the coveted role, which led to the first real success in his career. Meanwhile, Susanna was also doing well as a playwright, not for one play but at least a handful, because several of which had been selected for performance.

            All of that couldn’t possibly take place within a year, so she must be healthy for some years before she contracted some unknown medical problems.

            What do you think, Alex?

            1. Alex

              Hello Ms Puddle,

              Thanks for your reply and information provided, both of which are highly appreciated.

              To clarify, by ‘getting rid of Candy’n’friends’, I meant that infamously long-term and horridly embittered legal battle between Nagita and Igarashi which led to Nagita stating that she had arrived to the point where she ‘didn’t want to write anything about CC/CCFS characters ever again’; even though she wanted to emotionally, the aforesaid legal battle simply drained her physically and psychologically. I remember when working in Japan a few years ago, this legal battle was covered by the media. It was also an additional significant topic for discussion with my colleagues at work due to the controversial issues emerging which comprise intricate copyright law logistics and dynamics. Have you heard about the additional legal issues Igarashi has had with other writers as well? She’s superbly talented-no doubt, however, she has crossed many a boundary with regards to copyright law. Have you seen the stunt she’s pulled with her subsequent anime/manga project called ‘Lady Lady’? Igarashi claims that ‘all similarities to CC/CCFS characters are mere coincidences..’ (No comment..).

              Even though Nagita keeps on winning all legal battles (and rightfully so according to Japanese Copyright Law), Igarashi continues to hound and troll her by not accepting the official court hearings and finalised verdict. The Nagita-Igarashi copyright law case has been sparking-if not igniting-loads of debates within the Japanese legal circles on issues of copyright infringement and intellectual property and the ways in which copyright law in Japan must become just as strict and definitive as UK/USA copyright laws so as to protect the rightful owners of their intellectual property. Nonetheless, I’ll refrain from burdening your fascinating blog with all this tedious and pedantic legal stuff..;-)

              Resuming to Terry’s issue (or multiple issues, in his case..;-)), some bloggers claim that Terry and Susanna lived together for over 8 years and they’re actually sure about this exact arithmetic conclusion even though Nagita has made no such clear-cut numeric reference. Where did they get this info from? My question is rhetorical, btw..

              Anyway, my theory is that Terry’s terse letter means absolutely nothing; Nagita has inserted it as a ‘bathos’. I’ll elaborate about this further on in my next post. It is crystal-clear that Terry ceases to be a dynamic character in the CCFS the moment he leaves St Paul’s. Nagita stops developing and building upon Terry’s character following his departure from St Paul’s. Much akin to Anthony, Terry also becomes an ‘apparition’ who is more or less ‘immortalised’ within Candy’s psyche because all she’s got are memories of Terry and the anticipation that perhaps she may see him again. Nothing more, nothing less..

              By all means, I am not saying at all that Terry is insignificant per se. On the contrary, Terry is as profound and complex a character as Albert. Irrespective of their differences, these two men also share many similarities (I’ll discuss this later). However, Terry stops being a dynamic character in Candy’s life and she, in turn, is no longer a dynamic character in his life as they both go entirely separate ways in all aspects of human life. This data is essential for all fandom irrespective of personal preferences to fully comprehend. This has nothing to do with Terry being better than Albert or Albert being better than Terry. This is NOT a contest or beauty pageant. It’s simply a matter of inevitable reality depending on given circumstances and how one deals with such events. Terry could have easily been in the place of Albert and Albert could have easily been in the place of Terry. However, as the legal and intellectual ‘mother’ of CC/CCFS, Nagita is the one calling the shots and for specific reasons of her own she wants Terry to be in the position he’s in and Albert the position he’s in. For Nagita’s reasons alone, she did not want to further develop the relationship between Terry and Candy; she kept it stillborn as the one between Anthony and Candy. Besides, the duration of the Terry-Candy relationship was less than 9 months (during their mid-teens) and the relationship between Anthony and Candy was less than 5 months (during their early teens).

              Death is not the only insurmountable impediment to a developing relationship; when two people go their separate ways and their paths no longer coincide and especially are no longer in parallel, then no matter how intense their affections are, the development has stopped. End of. That said, what separated and what really put an end to the Candy-Terry relationship was NOT Susanna but Eliza. Eliza is the one who torpedoed their relationship by terminating their daily contact. Whether it’s Terry or Albert or anyone else, in order for a relationship to thrive and sustain any prospect for further development, the couple needs to spend ample and quality time with each another, especially as people become adults and gradually more mature and demanding as relationships become more and more complex and dependant upon daily human contact and interpersonal interaction.

              The reason why the Terry-Candy relationship is dead is simply because Nagita put an end to it via her own narrative device and ultimate decision. For reasons of her own, this is what Nagita wants and I respect that irrespective of other peoples’ preferences or biases. Had Nagita wanted to ‘kill off’ the Candy-Albert relationship, I would have respected that as well since this is what the author herself would have wanted. Nagita doesn’t want that, however. Instead, she keeps on developing and building upon the intricate and intimate Candy-Albert relationship by further delving into Albert’s immensely ineffable character. It could have happened the other way around and Nagita could have formed such series of circumstances which would have benefited the character development of Terry instead of Albert. But she doesn’t do that, folks..

              Ms Puddle, thanks again for providing such a great platform where we all democratically discuss and debate our theories. My ‘CCFS Myth-Busters’ posts are done and have been cut down to circa a page each. If anyone wants more sources and/or evidence, I’ll be glad to provide this info upon request as I wouldn’t want to ‘bombard’ your blog with too many bibliographical sources/citations.

              Thanks again for all your help and support!

              All Best,
              Alex

              1. Ms Puddle

                Alex, again we should thank you for all your interesting information and contributions! 😘 Of course we have heard of the lawsuits and battles between Igarashi and Nagita, but this is the first time I actually hear it from someone who knows it firsthand. Even better, you have your legal perspectives, so it’s intriguing to say the least. 👍

                About Terry and Susanna, yeah, I truly wonder how these people came up with an exact figure… 🤔

                In fact, some people strongly believe that by the time Candy learned about the obituary, she was happily married for a while. Therefore, Candy with the kind heart cried not only for Susanna but also Terry. She was genuinely sad for them both and her reactions evidently proved that Candy wasn’t “hoping/waiting” for their split.

                Like you, contrary to what some other people have wished, I agree that Terry’s letter plays no significant role in Candy’s life, regardless of when it was sent. I won’t repeat my arguments here, and for those who are interested they can read my old posts. 😅

                My sentiments exactly concerning Nagita’s choice of character development in her story. She, as the author, has the absolute right to determine the fate of her own beloved characters. Well said, my friend, and I couldn’t have agreed more.

                As I mentioned again and again, Candy Candy is a story between Candy and her Prince on the Hill. They had both grown up and transformed into better people despite their adversities.

                Have you noticed that when Candy was with the other characters, she was always the stronger person (hiding her feelings even from Terry)? Whereas when she was with Albert, she was willing to let her true weaknesses show. That speaks volumes of how much she trusted Albert.

                Regarding Candy’s age, I think she was fifteen when she studied in Mary Jane nursing school. Soon after that WWI began (1914) and she moved to St. Joanna’s in Chicago, where she ran into Albert. What do you think?

                I’ll double check CCFS when I find the time. 🙂

                1. Alex

                  Hello Ms Puddle,

                  Thank you for your kind words and insightful feedback. Your comments always constitute food for thought and further (re-)consideration.

                  Having re-read your intelligent and well-balanced analysis regarding Terry’s terse letter, especially the fact that he’s signing off as ‘T.G.’ (there’s neither his usual ‘humour’ nor any other infinitesimal form of intimacy in his message), appears to further confirm your theory rather than mine; in other words, Terry had probably sent that letter to Candy thinking she’s still at St Paul’s, instead of my theory that he had sent it to Albert’s estate (or head office) following Albert’s debut as WAA. Considering it more carefully and sensibly, sending it as a form of implicit ‘trolling’ to Albert would have been too vulgar even for Terry, the latter being a violent and brusque guy but never vulgar. Terry has loads of flaws but he’s neither as low as Neil nor filthy and cheap as Eliza.

                  Indeed, having re-read your analysis, I’m inclining towards your hypothesis as it bears the strongest logical infrastructure so far with regards to that letter Terry had allegedly sent to Candy. His concern whether that letter will actually reach her adds to the supposition that it wasn’t sent directly to her but via some form of third party (for instance, the headmistress of St Paul’s or other relevant staff members).

                  Nonetheless, I will only ask the following question as a thought has struck my mind concerning Nagita’s intense persistence with keeping utmost accuracy and precision to essential points and key moments in time-in particular, important dates and indication of seasons (the passage of time-change-development); both the CC and CCFS emphasise the significance of the emergence of World War I (28 July 1914) underpinning the profound and life-shaping/changing as well as detrimental effects this global war had on the CC/CCFS characters. Taking into consideration that Terry specifies that it took him about a year and a half to send his letter to Candy, I’m wondering whether the declaration of WWI constituted the impetus for his decision to send this letter. Understandably so, Terry would be horrified by this global war-as everyone worldwide-and would be in severe angst regarding Candy’s welfare in England (he wouldn’t know that she had left the UK). He would also be consumed by guilt that he had left her at the mercy of this global war. Now, by saying ‘a year has gone by since then..’, perhaps Terry could mean either the May Fest or the day they first met on the ship (around January after the Christmas holiday). This could perhaps explain the one and a half year gap (or circa two years) which had passed since both of them left the UK and have been thus apart. I’ll go a bit further here by (again tentatively speaking) by suggesting that perhaps this letter was included in the material handed over to WAA (Candy’s diary and Terry’s letter). When did WAA get all this stuff though? I don’t know.. Perhaps all this material was sent via post to his estate or head office prior to or after his life-threatening injury. Again, there’s no clear indication of any of this by Nagita.

                  What do you think? Could WWI have prompted Terry to have sent that letter to Candy considering that she’s still in England? Perhaps by saying ‘a year has passed since then..’ he means the day they first met on the ship and not the uncomfortable events which had taken place during the May Fest (even though his memory would ‘select’ only the moments he deemed somewhat pleasant)?

                  All Best,
                  Alex

                2. Ms Puddle

                  Alex, so glad you’re in agreement with my hypothesis concerning this famous letter from Terry. 🤗 This is very encouraging, especially from someone so brilliant like you.

                  Yes, I don’t see Terry sending this letter to Albert as a challenge. As you said, Terry wasn’t as bad as the Lagan siblings.

                  Now, since Terry’s letter’s content is so plain and emotionless, I kinda doubt that it was sent because of something horrid like war. Yet, I won’t rule out this possibility at all, Alex. What you said is plausible too, and after all, nobody knows for sure except Nagita herself. 😁

                  Although I must say I’m inclined to believe Terry used あれ to refer to their first kiss, which happened during May festival. My imagination is when he had settled down in New York, he decided to get in touch with Candy on their first “anniversary”

                  His sentence starting with 一年たったら is quite ambiguous… It could mean that he had the idea to contact Candy way before May… but he wavered, and time just flew by. Here, the time elapsed since an unnamed incident is not necessarily 1.5 year exact. You see what I’m trying to get at?

                  That’s just my two cents, of course. ☺️ Yet, please do feel free not to adopt this in your analysis. 👍

            2. Alex

              Hello Ms Puddle,

              Thank you for your message and further feedback. Yes, I do consider your analysis regarding that vague letter to be the most insightful one. Nagita has decided to keep it vague. Otherwise, she would have provided some form of leverage as she has done with all the significant aspects of her novel. As mentioned previously, this letter functions as a form of ‘bathos’ within the CCFS narrative; nothing more, nothing less.

              My theory on Terry’s attitude in his terse letter is that he had to maintain such a formal and distant demeanour because he was aware of the strong possibility Candy’s correspondence is being monitored by St Paul’s staff members (following the alleged scandal between those two teens). Terry’s a guy who easily loses control going full-blown primate manure and succumbs to booze far too often, however, he is far more cautious and less naïve than Candy (at least when he’s sober..). Terry’s not an adept decision-maker; on the contrary, he’s a severe procrastinator (no wonder he was so successful in his Hamlet role). Terry always needs a strong driving force in order to get him moving and that’s why I consider that the declaration of World War I constituted the impetus for him redacting and sending that letter to Candy (again, tentatively speaking here). By leaving St Paul’s boarding school following the aforesaid scandal, Terry had decided to cut all ties with his past, including Candy. By all means, he wanted to see her again but he’s nowhere near as romantic and sentimental as Candy; instead, he’s far more realistic and pragmatic knowing that such chances are slim due to them having been driven apart by unforeseeable and insurmountable circumstances. The guy simply wanted to move on.. Albeit open to interpretation and given the fact that this terse letter is too vague to derive anything specific or indisputable, I’ll just leave this theory of mine as a further possibility and nothing more than that. Besides, my CCFS analysis and review focus on legal and historical facts in which such vague letters simply cannot be included as they have no specifically documented date/time/historical reference. Even if that letter had been sent after Susanna’s death as certain fans want to believe, it still bears neither weight nor any significance whatsoever as Nagita just let this letter/message/whatever fall flat like a dud..

              In stark contrast to the exciting and fast-paced CC manga/novelised manga, the CCFS is rather disappointing work not due to certain alleged ambiguities (that’s not always a problem if treated adroitly by the writer), but due to the sheer lack of literary ‘vigour’ from the writer’s part. As explained previously, it appears that the long-term and severely embittered legal battle between Nagita and Igarashi had a detrimental effect on any form of further creative content from all relevant parties involved. This is such a pity because the further collaboration between these two highly talented ladies would have most certainly brought forth subsequent successful ventures.

              I’ll post a second message in response to another astute point you’ve made in due time..

              All Best,
              Alex

              1. Ms Puddle

                Hello Alex, about that particular letter of Terry, once again it’s my honor that you find my analysis insightful 💞. I still remember the very moment when that idea struck me. 😁

                But I’m not entirely sure what you meant by “bathos” in CCFS… If you mean it functions as an anticlimax, then yes, I think so too.

                Not only that, it gave (still does, even to this day) so many Terry fans false hope too… For this reason I feel somewhat sorry for them, occasionally, because honestly I think Nagita was a bit cruel by adding this so-called “clue” in the story.

                Your description of Terry and his success of being Hamlet made me laugh again. Truly it’s fascinating to read your comment, Alex. I mostly agree with what you said, especially his departure from London had essentially driven Candy away from his life. The fact that he left without a trace really speaks volumes of his determination of leaving everything behind, including Candy. Sigh…

                That also explains why he didn’t bother to clarify anything when there was rumor about him and Susanna, not even to the beautiful actress herself. After all, he really was not tied with the blond girl back in London. However, her unexpected reappearance shook his world.

                Even though they started writing letters to each other ever since that “reunion”, strictly speaking they were not boyfriend girlfriend yet, although I know some people insist that they were in a courtship then.

                About the two talented ladies, I do sincerely wish that they would reconcile one day. However, I heard that Igarashi has problems with the other writers too, so the chance that Nagita and Igarashi would collaborate again might be very slim. 😓😓

                Best wishes to you 💕

          2. Ms Puddle

            This is to answer your second question about Terry’s letter.

            Once again, it’s entertaining to read your analysis and insights, especially how jealous Terry could be. I absolutely agree with you about Terry not being dumb at all, and he should know the strong friendship between Candy and Albert. In other words, WAA was a real rival indeed.

            However, in some of my previous posts I’ve already explained why I highly doubt it was sent after Susanna’s death.

            Remember, the letters in CCFS are not necessarily shown in chronological order, and some are not from Candy’s jewellery box (for example, her letters to Georges or Dr. Martin).

            Therefore, some even suspect that Candy had never received this brief letter from Terry. I’m not sure about this though.

            In this post I’ve already attached the link to one of my old posts to explain why I have a hunch that Terry might have sent this letter way before the breakup.

            It would be nice that Nagita indeed showed us whether Candy had received such letter from Terry. What’s more, I’d love to read her reactions too!

            However, I believe her last letter to Albert can’t be more clear. She had deliberately left her diary untouched and decided to give that to Albert.

            All the best to you too! 💓

        2. Alex

          Hello Again!

          Before ‘signing off’, I almost forgot to reply to your astute comment regarding the ways in which Candy unveiled her vulnerable side only to Albert whilst she maintained a firmer stance with and distance from all the other CC/CCFS characters (including Anthony and Terry). This is an interesting point because it got me thinking about the parallel structure between Candy and Susanna regarding the ways in which their emotions manifest and develop further. Both Candy and Susanna are strong and firm with everyone else but display their vulnerable and often ‘silly’ sides to a particular man. A characteristic example is the way Susanna chases after Terry and the way in which Candy chases after Albert (and Terry in the past). Apparently, Candy doesn’t hide letters like Susanna has done, but then again, Candy never had to deal with a rival in Albert’s case (or Terry’s case) as Susanna has had to deal with a rival in Terry’s case. If a letter from Susanna to Terry had fallen into Candy’s hands, would she deliver it to him or would she hide it from him? Who knows? In all versions of the CC/CCFS, Candy admits that she understands and even empathises with Susanna, more than implying that she would have probably done the same if in her position. As Susanna has expressed her jealousy for Candy, Candy has also expressed her jealousy for Susanna, often regarding the latter as a stunningly beautiful and highly successful career Thespian who spends loads of quality time with Terry. As Susanna has criticised herself for losing her own dignity due to her passion for Terry, Candy has also behaved in reckless ways (for example, leaving her post at the hospital in order to chase after Terry). Candy has chased not only Terry but also Albert, and she has often wondered what on earth has possessed her to go after and beg Albert to such an extent, hence, getting herself into trouble with her employer and colleagues leading to her losing her job at the hospital. Yes, Albert may have saved her arse a couple of times, but that still doesn’t explain the reasons why Candy chases after and fights for him so much. At least in Susanna’s case, she actually knows the identity and whereabouts of Terry, whereas Candy doesn’t really have much of a clue who Albert really is. As Susanna cannot let Terry go, Candy cannot let Albert go. Albeit not identical (as no two elements or phenomena in life are), there is an intriguing parallel structure between these two ladies in their pursuit of a particular guy..;-)

          Last but not least, if some biased fandom considers Albert to be a non-sexual, unattractive, or a mere ‘friend-zoned’ guy, then why did the CC anime/TOEI producers do everything possible to keep Candy and Albert apart during their flat-sharing at the Magnolia? In the CC anime, Candy is always sent somewhere as far as possible from Albert; she’s even sent to stay for a while at Karen’s (Susanna’a rival in the acting business) place. It’s so easy to notice that the TOEI folk were not at all comfortable with the fact that a pretty lass was flat-sharing with such a stunning looking guy. I have a question for this biased fandom: Let’s say that these fans had to live apart from their boyfriend/girlfriend for a while.. Would they be fine if their boyfriend/girlfriend suddenly announced to them that they would be flat-sharing with someone who looks like Taylor Swift, Karlie Kloss, Brad Pitt, or Ryan Gosling, eliminating even the slightest possibility that an iota or scintilla of mutual attraction would be impossible? This fandom should not forget that Nagita has made it impossible for Candy and Albert to define an ‘alleged adoption’ or socio-economic stratification distance between them as neither of them know the identity of the other (Nagita has turned Albert into an amnesiac, folks..). Nagita turned Albert into an amnesiac and ‘forced’ him upon Candy’s path so as to eliminate the ‘wall’ and safe distance he had initially created. That said, Candy is a smart and pretty young woman and Albert is an intelligent and astonishingly beautiful young man-and this time, without having that long beard and dark-dyed hair plus sunglasses which had been covering his beautiful young face. Even in the CC anime, Candy/Stear/Archie/Annie/Patty are all assessing Albert’s beauty while the poor guy is in his worst possible state at the hospital. Nagita has the man ‘shining like sunlight’ on his own hospital bed by removing all his attempts to conceal his identity (and sheer beauty, ironically). Terry had also considered Albert to be an attractive guy and without having seen him in his genuine youthful-blonde-beauty form. Had he actually seen Albert as he really is, his protest against the Candy-Albert cohabitation would have been far more vocal. Bottom line, folks, by saying that a beautiful swan like Albert could ever be friend-zoned, is like a heterosexual guy saying that a beauty like Taylor Swift or Karlie Kloss could ever be friend-zoned. Right. There’s a greater chance for all the ice to melt on Pluto than for such ‘friend-zoning’ to ever occur..;-)

          All Best,
          Alex

          1. Sarah

            Love your final comment-Alex! The problem is that most fans know about the anime without reading the manga. Even fewer people know about the books. The anime is more popular because it circulated in so many countries. But the Italians completely changed the ending and they also cut most of the Magnolia sections from the manga. I agree with Ms Puddles about that fight between Terry and Albert in Chicago (anime). I didn’t like that episode at all. They made Albert look too violent which is so not like him. I’m glad that distasteful scene doesn’t exist in the manga and it isn’t included in the Final Story either. I agree with you that we should focus on what Keiko Nagita wants and not the cartoon creators. Cheers! Sarah

            1. Ms Puddle

              Hello Sarah, some people speculated that Nagita only allowed one official translation (Italian) because of the reasons that you listed about what the Italian publishers have done to her works. They showed no respect to the author’s decisions, misleading many people. 😓

              Yes, like you, the anime episode in which Albert had to beat up Terry was not my cup of tea either. The Rockstown scene in the manga is superior, IMHO, in every aspect. 👍👍

              1. Sarah

                Hi Ms Puddles-I’ve heard about that too. I guess the Italians want their Terry at all costs! In the anime Albert was borderline violent to Candy when hospitalized in Chicago for his amnesia. Do you remember that episode? It’s where Candy tries to help Albert during his panic attack and he almost strikes her. He apologizes immediately after that but it’s still an awfully inaccurate way to illustrate Albert. No way would he do such a thing! I’ve heard that Keiko Nagita disapproved of those scenes because Albert is such a peaceful and kind man. I agree with you and Alex that we should focus on what the author wants and not translators or cartoonists. Cheers! Sarah

          2. Ms Puddle

            Alex, seriously, “signing off”? 😅 We do that on a regular basis too… LOL. So I guess you have to do the same in your field 👍

            Very entertaining and insightful comparisons between Candy and Susanna. Indeed, Candy chased after Terry as well as Albert. How could some people be so blind not to understand the reasons behind Candy’s odd behaviour after Albert had vanished in her life, especially in the manga?

            Well said about Albert’s extraordinary looks, Alex! 👏👏👏 LOL about ice melting in Pluto… 🤣😂 Yes, if Albert looked good in repose, imagine his appearance when he was healthy and wide awake! Also, he must have kept his ‘beauty’ all these years… Because Candy had absolutely no doubt, accepting him as her charming Prince on the Hill! 💕

            In addition to the convincing analogies and real life examples you’ve given, I want to say that Candy and Albert had been seeing each other day in day out for two years or so! Not to mention they saw each other’s worst possible moments, like bad hair days, ‘improper’ sleeping positions, and what not. 😁😅 But after he had gone, she missed him rather than feeling relieved.

            As you said, one was handsome and the other pretty, mutual attraction would eventually occur. What about physical touch? Candy was never shy when hugging him. What’s more, their endearing personalities would undoubtedly draw them closer and closer towards the other.

            Best wishes 😗

            1. Alex

              Hello Ms Puddle!

              Hehehe-That phrase ‘signing off’ is just a joke my colleagues and I use when we’re done for today and thus head back home to stretch our legs after a long day’s work.. Apologies, I should have have specified this in my previous post.

              Yeah, even we geeky/nerdy academic folk try to find some time for a bit of humour..;-)))

              This ‘signing off’ phrase was actually termed by my office-mates who always see me head off with helmet in hand straight for my motorcycle (parked outside the office) to ride back home from work. My colleagues and I at the office here at uni have given each other a nick-name and the one given to me is ‘Earhart’ (from Amelia Earhart) due to my (vintage) motorcycle and ‘bomber’/aviation-like jacket. Some of my colleagues say that I look like her (I think they’re a bit too kind and also in need of specs..). Anyway, my colleagues and I do engage in all sort of such ‘silly’ humour stuff and banter. It alleviates all the stress at work especially now with our hectic overtime work during registration and module coordination period.

              By the way, we’ve got a colleague here at work who looks so much like Albert (the manga version-especially when he gets a hair-cut) in appearance as well as character. He’s engaged to a beautiful lady from Japan. She currently works as a lecturer back in Tokyo and he visits her as much as possible. They’re an adorable couple. This guy’s personality is so superb. He’s such an intelligent, hard-working and ethical colleague. I’m glad, nonetheless, I don’t share the same office with him. The ladies who do share the same office with him get too distracted and can’t up with the rest of us at work..;-)

              Anyway, here’s me ‘signing off’ (for now, at least..).

              All Best,
              Alex

              1. Sarah

                Hi Alex-I could imagine how popular your colleague must be around students too! I’m sure his classes are packed. If a lecturer looked like Albert where I’m studying, I wouldn’t be able to focus on working either. Good luck with registration week! Sarah

              2. Ms Puddle

                Hello Alex, in my field whenever I’m done with my work we have to go through the review process and get our tasks “signed off”. When I got your comment I was in the middle of waiting for an approval… LOL 😅

                Now that we have glimpses of your daily routines with your colleagues, I can’t help imagining Amelia Earhart as Alex in my mind. 😁 Sounds like you all have a sense of humor, far from being nerds. 👍

                How I envy you to have a colleague who looks like real life Albert! I can easily visualize how tough it is for the ladies around him to focus at work with an eye candy in close proximity… 🤣😂

                Wish you all the best during this hectic time of the year!

                1. Alex

                  Hello Ms Puddle and Hello Sarah!

                  Thank you for your kind words and wishes, both of which are most appreciated.

                  Yes, it’s been immensely hectic here at uni during registration period and module coordination but everything appears to be running smoothly (at least for the time-being..).

                  Ms Puddle, thank you again for embracing our dialogues and thought-provoking debates here at your magnificent blog and we’re all looking forward to your subsequent inspiring and insightful post.

                  All Best,
                  Alex

I would like to hear from you!

Translate »
%d bloggers like this: