At least in that show, although Sokka was often the comic relief, he was also often shown as heroic and intelligent. The man with the plan, to whose authority the others often deferred during the hardest times. He wasn't just a jester used to ridicule men and manhood as a whole.
Legend of Korra has far too many things wrong with it to be redeemable. It may have had some potential with some of its plot points, but they were all badly handled and concluded. It was also utterly filled with retcons and Mary Sue / girlboss moments, to the point that you couldn't ever get a good sense of who characters were, what relationships they had between each others, and what abilities they had. It was just a trash show in general.
Sokka also was a very good lesson of a character in the difference between assuming authority, because you are the oldest, the man, etc, and having to earn it through actions and leadership prowess.
That's something most of us this side of the culture probably need to learn at some point.
That too. He was a complex character, constantly worried about having to protect his clan, his family and those he loves, while trying to pull his weight in their group, despite not having the same kind of magical abilities over elements that the others possessed.
Meanwhile, in Korra, nearly every character was either one-dimensional, or an anthropomorphised trope, or a plot device. Even Korra herself would conveniently forget she had abilities she'd displayed before, just because if she'd been competent and consistent, then the antagonists would have been defeated within minutes of their first encounters. She would fail or succeed challenges, not because it made sense narratively, but just because the plot demanded it.
It's hard to fathom that the same writer wrote on both shows, considering the vast difference in quality between the two.
At least in that show, although Sokka was often the comic relief, he was also often shown as heroic and intelligent. The man with the plan, to whose authority the others often deferred during the hardest times. He wasn't just a jester used to ridicule men and manhood as a whole.
Legend of Korra has far too many things wrong with it to be redeemable. It may have had some potential with some of its plot points, but they were all badly handled and concluded. It was also utterly filled with retcons and Mary Sue / girlboss moments, to the point that you couldn't ever get a good sense of who characters were, what relationships they had between each others, and what abilities they had. It was just a trash show in general.
Sokka also was a very good lesson of a character in the difference between assuming authority, because you are the oldest, the man, etc, and having to earn it through actions and leadership prowess.
That's something most of us this side of the culture probably need to learn at some point.
You could argue Sokka was a clown to hide his insecurities over his lack of waterbending ability.
That too. He was a complex character, constantly worried about having to protect his clan, his family and those he loves, while trying to pull his weight in their group, despite not having the same kind of magical abilities over elements that the others possessed.
Meanwhile, in Korra, nearly every character was either one-dimensional, or an anthropomorphised trope, or a plot device. Even Korra herself would conveniently forget she had abilities she'd displayed before, just because if she'd been competent and consistent, then the antagonists would have been defeated within minutes of their first encounters. She would fail or succeed challenges, not because it made sense narratively, but just because the plot demanded it.
It's hard to fathom that the same writer wrote on both shows, considering the vast difference in quality between the two.