|Posted by -Rather Die Young; on July 10, 2011 at 3:08 PM|
Okay, I am like really zoned out right now. My sister mailed me this morning like "OMG CHECK THIS OUT" I'm not even going to lie, my sister is easily fascinated so I wasn't to excited to see what she was talking about x) But after I read the "truth" behind Rugrats, I was mindraped and speechless. In case you have no clue as to what i'm talking about, I have posted it in a previous blog post.
I consider myself to be "open-minded" so I began to look at the possibilities. Most of the things in the "truth" could actually reflect the show. At first I was like, "What the hell? No one would ever do that!" And then I began to think about how most shows and songs have a hidden message. And then I remembered how Nickelodeon was never really that "child friendly" considering mainy dirty jokes hidden in shows like Ren & Stimpy as well as Rocko's Modern Life. I then began to believe it, but I then became skeptical.
Alot of the pieces fit together really well. Most say that this theory is not true because Angelica isn't in all of the episodes. This technically doesn't mean anything. There are many shows that don't have their main characters in every episode, even if the show is about them.
Avatar: The Last Airbender - Appa's Lost Days & Zuko Alone.- Aang, Katara, Sokka, & Toph are clearly the main characters in this show, yet the makers took out episodes to focus on other characters. And Appa & Zuko are "supporting leads" Not main characters.
South Park- I forget the name of the episode, but it was the episode when Butter's mom paid him to spy on his father because she assumed he was having an affair. Stan, Kyle, Kenny, or Cartman were NOT in this episode although once again, they are obviously the main characters.
Dragon Tales (Yes, I know the show is old xD) - There was an episode where Emmy went to camp and was not in the episode at all. Her and Matt are clearly the main characters, but Emmy was nowhere to be found in this episode.
Thomas The Train- Yes, another old show, xD But there are COUNTLESS episodes where Thomas is either hardly mentioned or not mentioned at all. It's as though the series were "Chronicles" of the other characters as well. Not focusing on the main character gave the audience time to learn about and study the habits/thoughts of other characters throughout the show.
Anyway, to carry on, main characters dont HAVE to be in every episode to be as relevant as the rest. I believe that Angelica was the bridge, since she was able to communicate with the babies and with the adult. And most of the relationship comparisons in the article are true. Angelica did dislike Dil in the Rugrats series because he was too young to be "afraid" of her, and too young to comprehend and listen to her as well. The character persona's match as well. Chucky's dad was always a nervous wreck and was too quick to try to find love while in Paris. And although being attached to your son after losing your wife seems likely, Chaz cares for Chucky as if he already nearly lost him and is trying to make up for what could have happened. He's skeptical to let him go anywhere or do anything, unless he knows he is going to be with the other kids under "supervision" Also, Stew was forever in that poor basement, constructing toys that Tommy couldn't play with because of his age, or because of the complexity of the object. Maybe the fact that Tommy could hardly play with the toys in the series, reflected upon the fact the Stew never had a son to use his inventions, excluding Dil.
Then again, this theory is always questionable. Could someone have just over analyzed the Rugrats! and made this up? After all, I looked up the date that Angelica "died" and I could not find an article of anyone named "Angelica" who died from drugs at the age of thirteen. I just found the same articles, which was the one I posted previously. There isn't even another article relevant to this one. Its just an exact copy, so that's suspicious too. Either way, this is a questionable topic. Im standing in the middle of the street, swaying on both sides rather. This is just so very interesting to me.