86 vol 1: Poppies, Ego & the Sentient Legion Coexistence
You couldn't live with the current season of anime. Where did that bring you -- back to me.
Sup, it's ya boy, again. You know back when the anime ended a year ago, I promised myself that I would wait for a second season before I start the novels. I just had to wait, ya know. After all, that's just how much of a masterpiece the anime is. I wanted to simmer in its afterglow, to boil over the announcements, and steam in its eventual airing. But ya know what, I cracked. I did. 86 ruined anime for me, man. Every show I watch nowadays I only do so with grey-tinted glasses. I'll watch a good show like last season's "Tenten Kakumei" and rather than just bask in the yuri, I'll instead sit in my rocking chair and exhale into the drifty skies, asking: "where are the days?" Where are my symbolism? Where are the inner demons, the garterbelts? Anime just hasn't been the same man, it just hasn't...
Alright enough of the silly monologue, you guys know the drill. I read book, I analyze book, we discuss and have a good time.
Disclaimer: The following is an essay that focuses on the first volume. Owing to the fact that I have discussed a lot of the themes in the anime, this essay will be additive rather than comprehensive; dwelling more on prose and structure, rather than diving into every plot point. Regardless, somehow this essay is still horrifyingly long and hence at frequent junctures I'll post a word count so as to reduce reading fatigue. Hope you enjoy.
Cour 1 Episode 1-3: How 86 uses dramatic irony. Dramatic irony plays with the information that we the audience possess, and they the characters don't. 86 does this by using the concept of dissociative interaction, making it so that Lena and the Spearheads' experiences are disjointed. It helps cumulate a lot of tension, to which 86 uses to build up to the intense meltdown that is episode 3.
Cour 2 Episode 1-12: When do ideals spill blood. In the first cour, we celebrated the honorable ideals that our spearhead squadron embody in their battles. However, here in the Federacy, things are much better. And perhaps for the first time in their lives, the spearheads had a choice: to lay down their arms, or to fight to the bitter end. Their choice is every much as expected, as it is equally honorable; but there comes a point where we must question then: when does pride go too far? When do ideals spill blood?
https://zxcaderu.blogspot.com/2022/03/86-when-do-ideals-spill-blood.html
Prologue: Perspectives
The prologue of 86 begins by engaging with our auditory senses. However it is worth noting that these aren't simply auditory imagery, but rather, what I like to call, first-person sensory narration. We do not have passages that inform us the origin or nature of these sounds; we do not have descriptions for their static cackles of transmission; we aren't even fed the emotions that belie the words we hear. Instead, at the beginning of the novel -- without even understanding the hows and the whats -- we are bombarded by slew upon slew of mechanical jargons, desperate voices and bitter numbers. Such an opening may be confusing, however the effects may be purposefully disorienting. We aren't meant to understand every context, but rather to feel -- or in this case to hear -- the chaos that our characters themselves are experiencing; the countless blips of enemies, the abrupt losses, the brief goodbyes. And when the signals are lost and the transmission ends, we are finally clued into the true nature of its conflict, and its losses.
... a battlefield littered with flickering flames and the remains of crouching metal beasts and quadruped spiders, mechanical viscera protruding from their frames. Those were the remains of friend, the remains of foe, the remains of everything.
The first thing that stands out to me is Asato Sensei's use of anaphora with her repetition of "remains". It brings about a deep sense of conformity. In the aftermath of war, the faces of friends and enemies are blurred, indistinguishable from one another; all that remain are the dead.
Perhaps a more striking description lies in the use of oxymoron as well with the phrase, "mechanical viscera". Here, the robotic nature of its exterior is force fitted with innards, organs of animals that do not belong in metal shells. In a literal sense, that creates a grotesque and unnatural image. In its figurative sense, the machine can be said to be indistinguishable from the live bodies themselves. After all, if the machines are destroyed and the cockpits are torn open, it naturally follows that the human pilots within would soon follow.
These juxtapositions of the living, the dead and the mechanical is one of the main characteristics to the rest of the prologue. The shape of these robots are likened to insects, but on its back carries artillery canons and armor. They should be soul-less machinery, but they are described to be "crawling along the battlefield, searching for its missing crown". While the anthropomorphic use of "searching" can already imbue a sense of soul, it is perhaps the search of the "missing crown" that carries the strongest sense of humanity. It isn't simply searching for a head, an organ for survival; it is searching for a crown, a symbol of ambition.
These juxtapositions exist not only in the shaping of bodies, but also in its perspectives and allusions. At the beginning, the sunset is shown to illuminate the scene with a "coquelicot glow". However, the light is divisive in how it is perceived. It is said to either have "bathed the dying world in crimson", or "dyed it over by shadow". The first interpretation focuses on the sheer strength of its luminosity, however, the latter focuses on the stark shadows it creates against the corpses -- the light versus the dark.
Similarly, the allusions the coquelicots bring meet at horrible ends as well. The poppies called 'yumeiren' alludes to consort Yu, a concubine to a warlord who faces the blade of a losing war. With a deep love for her spouse, and an enduring respect to her general, she committed suicide so as to not distract him from the insurmountable battles ahead. The poppies that grow on her grave hence carry a meaning of loyalty and sacrifice. These sentiments are carried forward onto its second allusion, (a rough guess for) World War 1 when French soldiers, the brave knights, had to heed their country's call and face against the Germans, the barbarians. However, while the sentiments of loyalty and sacrifice are no doubt sincere, notice the brutality that characterizes them. They aren't shown to be doing great feats, but instead, are "butchered", creating "rivers of blood". In this sense then, the focus seems not to be in the loyalty, but rather the boundless violence that loyalty -- or perhaps a farce of it -- can bring.
This juxtaposition of loyalty and violence is perhaps even more starkly summarized and contrasted at its end, an act that is perhaps as "beautiful as sheer madness".
I think what I gained the most out of Asato Sensei's use of juxtapositions in this prologue is the focus on perspectives. As effective prologues are meant to paint the central themes, I feel as if a conscious effort is made to inform us that this story should be viewed from different perspectives. Characters may have multiple angles to consider; conflicts may be complex and symbols may elude the common. As we move on to our analysis, I want this methodology of perspectives to be our main tool, our lens to which we dissect this story with. With that said, let us jump right in!
Word count: 860 / 14953
1.1 The Bread & the Lamb
Man shall not live on bread alone. These words had been spoken by some patronizing messiah thousands of years ago... (p. 52)
In her subsequent expositions, I think Asato Sensei placed a lot of care in contrasting the different needs, values and perspectives between the Alba citizens and the Eighty-Six. However, I think perhaps the most eclectic symbol that summarizes this concept lies in the allusion to Christ.
Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil.
After fasting forty days and forty nights, He was hungry.
The tempter came to Him and said, "if You are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread."
But Jesus answered, "It is written:
'Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.'"
(Mark 1:12-13; Luke 4:1-13, Berean Standard Bible)
In our allusion, we are given an image of Jesus who was fasting in the Judaean Desert and was tempted by Satan for 40 days. The devil offers a choice to Christ to conjure up bread to satiate His hunger; but rather than focus on food, Christ instead answers that man does not require material alone, but rather the sacred.
The material & the scared -- these are the main classifications we can divide the Eighty-Six and the Albas with. For the spearheads, we see Raiden scavenging for rations; Haruto dragging back live catches; the maintenance crew lecturing about providences. These are basic material needs of food and safety that occupies their routines daily. In contrast, the Albas focus on something beyond the material; they focus on meaning, status, self-actualization. Their screens feed their ego, using buzz words like "humane", "righteous", "defeat the -- evil" (p. 16) to instill a sense of patriotism. Their names and flag praise their equality -- in extension, their superiority -- giving rise to elitist mindsets like Lena's mother. We focus on concepts of justice, nobility, relics that pronounces status and "sweet dreams" (p. 26) and ideals, all concepts that focuses on societal betterment. The difference between the material needs of the Eighty-Six and the sacred needs of the Albas is hence made very clear.
This juxtaposition is emphasized in the perspective of Raiden. See, Raiden looks at the words spoken by Christ and he misinterprets it. He agrees with the statement, in that there has to be something more than the material, but rather than focus on some strange wafer, he talks about "how life needed things like candy or coffee", "games and music" (p. 52) -- comforts that improve our immediate quality of life, rather than feed our esteem. Such an interpretation would've been akin to Christ telling Satan that the rock should turn into a Nintendo Switch instead.
Perhaps more strikingly is when Raiden dives a little deeper. He dissects the sentence, and tries to see it from another perspective. If he puts "quality of life aside", he would still come to the awry conclusion that "people could not live without food to eat" (p. 52). We can understand this misinterpretation if we imagine a conversation between Jesus and Raiden.1.2 The Beauty and Worth of Symbols
However, to say that the Eighty-Six or the spearheads do not care for things like meaning and symbols, is a gross underestimation to the kind of needs that soldiers require out on, and away, the battlefield.
One of the most prominent symbols of war is the coquelicots, the corn poppy. These were flowers that would spring on the blackened soil of shell craters; their seeds thrive in the split sky, the churned soil; they nourish on the nitrogen, the element of death. In those rich, desolate fields, it is hence common for soldiers to see them bloom across, the only signs of blush in a field that was otherwise dyed by shadows. Soldiers look at such a sight and were simply taken by its resilience, its ability to withstand; a bloom to mark their own struggles, a way to tell themselves to fight, to press on. Lieutenant-Colonel John McCrae then shared these sentiments in his poem 'In Flanders Fields', which since have immortalized the poppies as a symbol of remembrance -- a memory of the brave.
In such a context then, while symbols are not strictly sacred (in its religion nor its societal ideals), it no doubt allows soldiers to make sense of the world. They would look at a poppy out in the craters and see it as the strength of the living. They would find hope in the fact that life is not all loss, and out in these bombardments, there still stand. The world, in that moment, would be imbued with a tangible, reachable reason. No longer is the world a place that rains fire; no longer does the world not care for the lives of innocent -- The world had a poppy, and it presented it to you.
Raiden draws a strong image of this when he finds the corpse that rests under the sakura blossom. He recalls precious memories with his comrades; he admires the beauty of the "fluttering petals"; he is moved by the image of the "afterlife", a comforting one, in contrast to the "cold, dark earth" (p. 55). The symbol of the sakura hence evoked the sense of a peaceful departure, and in that moment, the world seemed a little forgiving, a little kinder. And what about the shooting stars? Well, in a world that was "pitch black", the heavens lit the skies with "pale-blue flames", as if "the world had been shattered to pieces and left to crumble" (p. 81). In that moment, Raiden felt an indescribable sense of catharsis, as if the world wasn't just burning his life away; it was burning alongside him, as if his meagre existence had beckoned the end of all.
The idea lies behind a thinly-veiled illusion, that with a well-timed symbol, the world seems to bent itself around your will. It may seem hocus-pocus, and in truth, it is. But it doesn't matter that it's an illusion. It doesn't matter that it's a lie, a trick played by the desperate mind. For all that matters is that, in that moment, it is so mind-blowingly beautiful that it washes away all that is negative. That it is so poignant that you wouldn't mind living in that dream for just a little while longer -- as your body falls into eternal slumber.
Death is a concept that is... difficult to comprehend. Thus far, we have discussed how soldiers can make sense of death using symbols, but what if it wasn't you that death fell upon, but on those around you, those that you care about? Once a young child, Shin struggled with it.
He had neither witnessed his parent's final moments nor seen their remains, so the simple word death couldn't communicate the irreversible totality of this great loss to Shin's young, innocent mind. (p. 153)
I simply love the technique of accumulation Asato Sensei employed with the phrase, "irreversible totality". The concept of totality is already poignant enough in showing that death is complete. But the idea of irreversibility compounds upon it, adding a sense of passage; as if all things beginning are always destined for an end, never the other way around. With such a monumental concept then, it only makes sense that an eight year old Shin wouldn't be able to wrap his head around it. Perhaps with a symbol, a will, last words, a body, a finger, even the gruesome memory of decapitation -- no matter how cruel -- can allow Shin to comprehend it, but he wasn't even allowed that tangibility. Instead, he was left with "a simple word death".
A word, something that everyone defines differently. Something you can't touch, see, hear or smell. When we were young, our parents will tell us that touching a steaming kettle would burn our skin but what does 'burn' even mean? What does it feel like, can we taste it? It is only in our ignorant curiosity did we poke our fingers against the metal surface and get a first-hand experience of it. It is only then did we concretize that pain, that memory, that lesson, into the word 'burn', and from then on, 'burn' is comprehensible. But what about 'death'? We can't just experience 'dying' and then come back the next day and be like "oh man, dying wasn't very fun, maybe I shouldn't ingest tide pods next time". It is the same with 'loss'. We can't just lose a loved one, and by the next day, say that we have experienced loss. No, loss is only experienced within weeks, months, when you think about them everyday and realize how much their absence pains you. When you want to see them, but realize you will never get the chance again.
We are well aware of the five stages of grief. Anju is perhaps one of the most prominent characters that went through this process. A simple and yet wonderfully effective passage conveys the feeling of depression.
"When we first met, he said my hair was pretty. He could tell I was growing it out to hide something, but he said it was pretty and that I should let it grow -- And now Daiya's gone. So I thought that worrying about this any longer would be pointless." (p. 140)
Daiya was very understanding to Anju. He noticed that she held a secret, and thus he didn't pry. And yet, in his delicateness, he still hinted that her scar -- and her attempt to cover it -- was okay; that there is beauty in the hair that hides the scar. But now that he is gone, Anju thought to herself, what is the meaning of even hiding it? He won't be here to see it; he won't be here to understand why I hide it; he won't be here to eventually hold me, and tell me with no uncertain terms, that it is okay, that I am still beautiful with it. Without him, this scar holds no meaning -- neither in its pain, its ugliness, nor its beauty and acceptance. This scar is empty, but a scratch amongst countless others.
Depression is said to be the feeling that the things you love lose all meaning. However at the same time, it shouldn't be misunderstood as the void of all emotions. Naturally, Anju's lips still quivered, her voice cracked, her hands continually combed her hair like caressing a memento (p. 140). Emotions are clearly evident, a possible sign that meaning wasn't lost but simply kept at arms length; at a distance far enough to be detached, yet at the proximity close enough to wish upon wistfully.
"She tends to keep everything bottled up" (p. 148), was how Shin put it. She doesn't vent because then the loss concretizes. The pain becomes unbearably real. And yet keeping it deep within, stirs such a whirl of emotions that she seemed at the edge of fracturing. But what then? If showing sadness makes it real, then does that mean one should never be sad? Perhaps if there is a way, a symbol; so beautiful would it be that it would wash away all that is negative; so poignant would it be that one can believe that there is meaning behind loss.
Flowers of sparks and flames bloomed brilliantly, helping the stars illuminate the dark night sky. Beautiful shades of chemical fire sparkled in transient light before raining down as glittering embers like snow from the sky. (p. 144)
What I love about this passage is how Asato Sensei uses metonymy. This is one of my favorite literary techniques and it simply involves not stating the name, but rather substituting it with its association. The effects can add mystery, but perhaps more importantly, it paints a picture of first-person wonder. You see the flowers blooming in the sky, you picture the embers falling like snow. A word like 'fireworks' can evoke your memories, but is that memory as beautiful as the spearheads "dancing in the afterglow"?
Shin gives a more poignant name to it: "a military artillery salute" (p. 148). One can only wonder what kind of emotions Anju must have when she sees these fireworks. However, perhaps there can be no better name for it than the all-encompassing one, simply 'emotions'. A ball of everything sad, happy and angry, once simply a lump at the throat; which at flowers' bloom, imparted such a sight of magnificence that it escaped out like a gasp of wonder, a tear of relief. Perhaps the meaning of the salute can also inspire such a beautiful illusion that she can believe in the mercy of his departure, the kindness of the world that allowed for the returning of souls. And perhaps it is both, or none at all. Regardless, the fireworks inspired the simplest shift, a trick or not, and that's all it needed to. And thus, be it fireworks, poppies, sakura or shooting stars, the beauty and worth of symbols are sacred for our soldiers.
Word count: 3299 / 14953
2.1 The Ego in our Ideals
Wow, here we are again. Ya know, I thought I was done talking about ideals. I thought I would've gotten sick of it a year ago when I cracked my head against my blood-soil-ideals analysis for two weeks straight. But well, I guess you know the age old adage: you couldn't leave with the current season of anime. Where did that bring you -- back to me.
I think no one better represents the conflict of ideals than our queen Lena. She is the perpetrator, the bystander to her country's sins; she is the bearer, the one that carries their resentment; she is the contradiction, the one torn by two sides within. The ideals that she carries has once been the greatest source of courage, and yet the most excruciating source of guilt. To truly understand Lena, I think our jumping off point is this one label -- "hypocrite" (p. 90). Theo condemns her of this, but what does it truly mean? Well, I think the easiest way to understand it is a person's contradiction -- the difference between their actions and their stated ideals.
As Lena remembered Kirschblute's prideful words, regret and grief pressed against her heart. If only she'd found this map sooner. If only she'd warned her in time... -- "About Kirschblute... I'm -- I'm so sorry. If only I'd been more --" (p. 89)
If only she, if only she, if only I, I -- I, the ego. The use of first-person pronouns here really drive home the thoughts Lena has regarding Kaie's passing. Her focus is not on Kaie per se, but rather more on what she could have done more; on why she is sorry. To Theo's perspective, this must have rubbed him the wrong way. Here they are, all quietly mourning for the loss of their dear friend, and all this bitch has to say is "I'm sorry"? Hello? Who cares about you? This isn't about you. "We don't have the time to indulge your bullshit right now -- read the fucking mood!" (p. 90)
For us, maybe we can say that Theo is a little harsh. When we tell someone that "we are sorry for your lost", it isn't as if we want to make the situation about us; we are simply expressing our condolences. In another perspective, a commander saying that she is sorry for their losses may sound egotistic, but it can be completely unintentional. However, this isn't our first rodeo with the ego that Lena possesses. A little while back, and we find a subtle, and yet telling sign of such.
She posed her next question with a meek, almost resolved tone. It was a voice willing to receive all the condemnation and abuse they might throw at her, since it was her responsibility, after all -- "Kirschblute... Do you... resent us?" (p. 81)
At first glance, this question almost seem saintly. She imagines that the spearheads have a lot of pent up resentment towards the Albas and hence she breaks the ice. She steels herself, giving an opportunity for them to perhaps vent a little. 'I'll be fine', she thinks to herself. I am ready, to carry the responsibility of bearing their hatred.
However on a deeper level, we have to ask: "Well, who asked?" Did the spearheads explicitly state their anger towards the Albas? Of course, there is bad blood, no doubt about that. However, through our interactions with them, we have always learnt that the spearheads don't really focus on that. They simply want nothing to do with the Albas. They see them more like annoying flies that constantly buzz around. It is more of an irritation, that only ever becomes anger when the fly bothers them for too long, especially one which thinks they have the right to -- who thinks she, has the right to.
Similarly, we can dissect the assumptions even further. Even if the spearheads are angry, did they ask for Lena to be the saint who will burden their feelings? No, they didn't. Did they even need this -- what she would refer to as -- "responsibility" towards them? No, they did not. So, at the end of the day, who's really projecting these feelings of resentment? Who's really treating these spearheads as poor little children who needs a mother? Who's really just insecure, and hence is forcing their assumptions on others?
Projection, the forcing of assumptions, the forcing of ideals -- I think these phrases is one of the key concepts we have to look out for when we are dealing with the presence of ego in ideals. Lena's unintentional focus on herself after Kaie's death and her assumptions of the spearheads is a few examples of the ego tainting ideals. In her mind she has an idealized image that the spearheads are pitiful children that needs someone to vent towards. However, she doesn't realize that that is just her ego speaking, and if approached wrongly, can even sully the pride the spearheads embody. Similarly, in her mind she has an idealized image that she should have done better, and that she should apologize to somehow "curb the pain"; only to realize that she was trespassing on a sacred funeral, a moment of silence for their departing comrade.
It should be emphasized that these damages are done through -- at first glance -- seemingly well-meaning gestures. All she did was ask a question. All she did was apologize. Yet it is with how racially tense the relationship between the Albas and the Eighty-Six are that this was all it took; a pig on a tightrope, that tilts upon a breath of air; a bubble that can pop with the slightest of touches, the slightest of misconstrued messages -- And the ego is that breath; the ego is that needle that broke the camel's back.
This sense of self-importance can be crippling on its extreme end, almost too ugly to be recognized. When Annette confronted Lena, she almost seemed like a different person. No longer was she a person that sprouted figurative cat ears, she was a person of spite. She mocked Lena, telling her that what she did "was worse than doing nothing at all." That all she did was "made them live longer" (p. 168), made them suffer longer. And behind those words were neither truth, nor was it well-meaning advice. It was a way to vent, but it was also much, much uglier than that; for when she saw Lena's "beautiful face contort in agony", she was filled with "ecstatic joy, but at the same time, she was consumed by bitter sorrow". It almost sounds sadistic, a joy that derives on the suffering of this girl, a joy of sweet, sweet revenge. It is the ultimate form of the ego, one that pushes others down to elevate oneself up.
But to simply say that its damages ends with just sadism is but a mere drop of bucket to the complex emotions we are witnessing. See, Annette didn't just feel joy, but rather "bitter sorrow". She would go on and mutter, "ah, there, I did it. I did it again" (p. 168), which are such poignant words that exude shock (ah), relief (there), spite (I did it), and yet almost a form of guilt and resignation (I did it again); the word 'again' draws back to her actions towards Shin. To a certain extent, we can see that these words she lashed, might have done as much damage to herself than anyone else. The word 'again' brings about an image of a vicious cycle. Her breaking the mug and telling Lena to never see her again, is perhaps a form of escape. She had once abandoned the young boy; she now had done irreparable damage to her close friend; and now... she just wants to ignore it all, like she always does. Pretend they don't exist, just like her words many weeks back; "this doesn't have to be your job" (p. 36), it doesn't have to be my job, I don't want it to be my problem.
Or perhaps... I am just... afraid of it.
If Annette was truly someone who didn't care, then she would be like Karlstahl. She would say that "ideals are unreachable" (p. 32), she would be able to scold Lena just like an uncle would chastise her foolish niece. She wouldn't feel all this "bitter sorrow". She wouldn't feel all this guilt. But she did -- Because to her, ideals may be unreachable, but she hasn't given up on them.
When she heard about the Undertaker, she had the ideal of bringing him over, for "at the very least, one would survive" (p. 167). And though that action seems no doubt small, it is still noble compared to the many Albas that have done nothing at all. At the end, the ego kicked in. Because she was afraid, and because it was in her personality to always run away, she gave up easily. She had to convince herself, "there, see? I can't save anyone after all", so as to make sure that she never pursue these silly, little ideals of hers ever again. But even then, even now, she is still tortured by the guilt of her powerlessness. She is spiteful, lashing out at her friend, almost as if she is projecting her own weakness onto others. And at the end of the day, what was the result? The fear once again won out, her ugliness once again showed, the ego had once again triumphed over her ideals; over her guilt.
Word count: 4884 / 14953
2.2 Ideals-Guilt-Ego: Three Sides of the Same Coin
When we talk about emotions of guilt, we may come to realize that it is unsuspectingly, very similar to ideals. After all, if ideals are the quest for perfection, then guilt is the quest to rid imperfection.
Alright, we are officially 5000 words into this essay, so let's take a break and play a little game. We are going to look at three characters, Lena, Annette and Karlstahl and we will begin with trying to pinpoint the percentage of ideals they have, followed by their percentage of guilt. Afterwards, we will put them in a familiar scenario, and using those percentages of ideals & guilt, we will try to script out a possible response for them. Sounds good? Alright, let us begin with an example that was given by Asato Sensei.
Shin: If what Laughing Fox said is still bothering you -- Then it shouldn't -- You have no reason to feel guilty just because someone blamed you for not doing something you can't possibly do -- You didn't ask for our names because you didn't need to. (p. 96-97)
Okay for me, I'll say Lena is 100% ideals, 50% guilt. She's of course our Saint Lena, muh queen of ideals so that 100% is obvious. But for guilt, I'll say she's 50/50. She feels like she has wronged the Eighty-Six by being a bystander, and hence you can see her insecurities in her actions like when she assumed the spearheads resented her. However, I won't say she feels too guilty, as to a certain extent she is trying pretty hard. You can tell that she does have some confidence too when attempting to bond with the spearheads, like asking them questions like "what do you want to do when you're discharged?" (p. 74).
As for how she'll answer to Shin, well, Asato Sensei has already given us the answer -- "But... not even trying to learn your names is terribly disrespectful!" (p.97)
In this answer, I think it reflects well the moral righteousness of Lena, the 100% ideals part of her. Shin is giving her many reasons to why she doesn't need to know their names, but Lena insists. Her mind won't be swayed and she even scoffs at the idea, calling it "cowardly" (p. 97). However, you can tell that there is a tinge of that ego, that guilt as well. Her response of "I was a coward... and I don't want to stay that way", tells us a lot about her personal motivations. She is someone who feels guilty and wants to correct her mistakes. She would do so even if she has to beg for it, asking Shin to "please" tell her. If she was someone who is maybe 100% ideals/ 5% guilt, she might not feel that personally offended or affected by Shin's remarks. She might not even beg and would rather counter him with rational logic, rather than a cry for help. All in all, I'll say the 100/50 is a nice way to characterize her.
Now, we get into unknown territory. Feel free to disagree with me btw. Let us start with Annette.
I'll say Annette is 50% ideals, 80% guilt. On the ideals department, she is of course, not as much of a queen, but we have discussed how she does have ideals in our previous section. After all, you can't feel guilty for something if you don't have ideals; you can't want to correct something if you don't have an idea of what its better state is; that is a paradox. On why I assign a 50% value, it's a little iffy. She is clearly better than a lot of Albas (whom I believe is 0% ideals) but almost all of her comments thus far are laced with irony. You can't really tell whether she is speaking the truth when she says "I don't give a rat's ass what happens to a bunch of Eight-Six" (p. 38), because as we have previously shown, she intentionally acts detached as an escape button. So... I'll say it can range anywhere between 30-70% pick and choose. As for guilt, hoo boy, damn does this girl have issues -- 80%, Jesus. Like I don't really have to explain it right? This girl's guilt is so strong that it's self-destructive. She is haunted by what she did a decade ago; she ruins her friendship; and after ruining friendships, she probably looked like she saw death in her eyes. Ya know, she's probably this high as well because she doesn't really try to do anything. You can see Lena running around and at least providing some map data to the Eighty-Six, but Annette is trapped in her lab, which mind you, constantly reminds her of her suicidal, more idealistic father. And let's not forget, a close friend of hers constantly enters the lab as well, further preaching gospels. So yea, 80%; 100% is probably when she turns that Para-RAID synchronization up to a hundred if you get what I'm saying.
As for how she'll answer Shin -- "fOrGive mE ForgiVe Me fOrgIve mE foRgivE Me --"
Oof, sorry, that was a... random black sheep, or ChatGPT. Either one of those.
Based on her personality, she'll probably take Shin's opportunity to run away, saying "you're right. I don't have to learn your names," but then she'll feel guilty that she is ignoring all her problems again. It's a guess to whether she'll cut the call. On a good day, she might speak a few more words. If she feels too guilty after what Theo said, she be like "okay, bye," cuts the call, bottles up her feelings, and then proceed to have many sleepless nights after.
What about Karlstahl? Well, this one isn't that difficult. He's like, 20% ideals, 1% guilt. The 20% ideals is meant to be quite a bit higher than the other Albas specifically because he is aware of all the issues that his country has (p. 170-172). However, awareness is all it amounts to. Just like Annette, this knowledge isn't enough to drive him to do much of anything with it, even though he is in a greater position of power to do so. As for the 1%, this one is pretty clear cut in my opinion. Unlike Annette, he really does, not give rat's ass about the Eighty-Six. When confronted by Lena, he doesn't feel insecure. He just thinks Lena is stupid. Perhaps we can see the anger he showed her as something similar to Annette, but I don't think that's accurate. He was shown to carry a "resigned gaze" with "weariness" (p. 172), and I'll say the anger may come more from being bothered by Lena so damn much instead. Furthermore, notice how his outburst wasn't about how he did anything wrong, but rather how his countrymen was the problem instead. He doesn't feel a single ounce of responsibility for anything. Hence, he stays at a lowly 1% guilt.
As for how he'll respond to Shin -- strangely, I think he will get along with Shin a lot. Of course, if given the choice, they would want nothing to do with each other, but if we speak hypotheticals, Shin and Karlstahl are both practical men. He would agree with him that handlers doesn't need to know the processors' names and he would be so numbed to everything, that anything Theo said to him would be forgotten the next day.
Alright, how's that? Was that fun? Well, it damn well be, because surprise! An extra, unforeseen question at the back of the paper. How would the Laughing Fox, Theo's previous captain, feel about this situation?
Hmm, this one is a little tricky. After all, our previous three characters all come from similar backgrounds. The Laughing Fox however, has been out in the battlefield and fought wars. Even after the Colorata was sentenced to the frontlines, he stayed with. To a certain extent, this was born from pure ideals, simply a thought that "it was messed up that only the Eighty-Six did the fighting" (p. 107). If we have to give a certain percentage to Laughing Fox, what would you give him? I think it is obvious that he would be very high up the list, however, the question lies in whether he is above or below Lena. In a rational sense, he is simply 100%, similar to her; they both believe that it is messed up that the Eighty-Six are out there; they both represent different parts of their five-colored flag pretty well. However, perhaps a gut feeling is telling you that he should be higher than Lena, isn't it? After all, compared to her, he is out there. He is out in the rain of fire, he is out fighting against demonic terrors, he is actually out there. More importantly, he is out there because he "chose to". And he never returned, till he "got himself killed" (p. 108). And to that I say, 1000% ideals. O-motherfucking-7.
Perhaps if you have read my essay on ideals, you may have heard me asked this question: "what makes ideals more than empty words?"
https://zxcaderu.blogspot.com/2021/05/86-when-do-ideals-become-more-than.html
In that essay, my final conclusion remains the same. Choice is what makes ideals more than empty words. That is what makes ideals matter. When you have a reason to choose the easy way out, but you choose otherwise. You choose to fight; you choose to struggle; you choose to scrape for meaning in a meaningless world, and you will continue scraping, even if your nails fall off and all there is is dirt.
Perhaps a synonymous concept is sacrifice as well. If we consider our previous characters, you would realize that all of their ideals percentage is ranked in order of their sacrifice: Laughing Fox > Lena > Annette > Karlstahl. Why we can understanding this order to a intuitive degree, is the same idea that we have discussed many times now. Sacrifice is what concretizes ideals. Think back to our analogy of the burning kettle. We do not comprehend the concept of 'burn' and hence we touch the kettle, imprinting that sensation, and concretizing the word 'burn'. Similarly, how do we understand whether an ideal is powerful? Well, we can look at the Republic and we can laugh at them; look at that their useless flags, their lies, their depravity. They have done nothing, sacrifice nothing to bring their ideals to life. But now, look at the final destination of our spearheads. Every waking moment, they fight for their fallen, they fight in their memories, they carry their will. No one can doubt the amount of sacrifice they have poured into their quest for their final destination. And even if they would rather everyone not have to die to begin with, it is still no doubt beautiful. Their ideals are more real than any of the flags of the Republic.
And now, what about the guilt of the Laughing Fox, what percentage is that? Ahhh, now here's the actual interesting question. You see, we can glance a fair bit of his personality, his ideals, his guilt, his ego from the last few words he spoke. This line is particularly fascinating.
"I only just... knew I could never forgive myself if I let you guys fight for us alone. It scared me. I only came to the battlefield for my sake. So it's only natural you'd never forgive me." (p. 108)
Parallel the first-person pronouns to Lena's, parallel the ideals (fight for us alone); parallel the emotions (scared me) to Annette's, parallel the tinge of guilt (forgive me). Laughing Fox acts as the perfect balance of ideals and guilt that both our heroines possess, except, he actively surpasses them. We have already discussed the idea of sacrifice and how that concretizes ideals. To a certain extent, the fact that he was fearful and yet overcame that fear as opposed to Annette, further solidifies how admirable his ideals truly are. However perhaps a concept that is more interesting to me, is the lack of need for external validation.
This is the last concept we have to unpack before we conclude our ideals-guilt-ego analysis. Validation is the need for affirmation; the need for someone to tell you that what you are doing is just; the need for someone to recognize your efforts, your struggles, the pain you have been through; and perhaps most importantly, the need for someone to praise you. Perhaps then, what we refer to validation, is one of the most basic building blocks for the ego, the self-esteem. However, the interesting point of diversion is that validation can be completely internal in nature -- self-affirmative; you can do a good deed, pat yourself on the back, and go home perfectly happy with everything you have done. Sure, it would be nice if someone else praised you, but that is unnecessary, for your ego is self-sufficient. External validation on the other hand... Well, we will let Annette do the talking.
"Does he, does he still resent me for what I did?" (p.193)
Annette is the biggest seeker of external validation in our story thus far. She cannot forgive herself and hence she seeks for forgiveness from Shin. Her ego is fragile and needs external validation, and hence when Lena goes against her philosophy of passiveness, she felt so personally insulted that she exploded into a destructive rant. This is in contrast to the Laughing Fox, who while harboring similar forms of guilt like Annette, doesn't impose it onto others. He doesn't go up to every Eighty-Six and ask "hey, do you resent me?" He even knew they were talking shit behind his back, but he simply turned the other way because he'd understood they will "never forgive him" (p.108). He didn't need their validation because like he mentioned, he did this for his "own sake". His ego is validated by the self, by his own actions, rather than external sources.
Similarly, Lena is a bit of an attention-seeker herself. We have discussed her inappropriate questions, how she imposes her assumptions on others and disturb a funeral with her need for forgiveness. These are all manifestations of the ego, the need of external validation which crept into both her ideals (her responsibility; p. 81) and her guilt (I'm sorry; p. 89). After Theo's derision, she did improve. A key moment that marks the softening of ego is in this beautiful introspective.
Lena had to stop herself from wishing out loud that she could be there with them. It wasn't a sentiment acceptable for her to express. In truth, if Lena wished it, she could go there as often as she pleased. But they, on the other hand, never wanted to be on that battlefield in the first place. And she couldn't take Shin and the others back with her. Any time spent with them would be a fleeting illusion, so it wasn't a desire she could share. Instead she said: "let's all watch the fireworks in the First Sector someday. I'm sure you'll all laugh at how bad it is."
She understood that she was once insensitive regarding Kaie. In fact, knowing Lena, she probably tossed and turned in her bed all night thinking about it. Hence this time, she picked her words very carefully. She didn't want to say that she wants to be with them because it would be an intrusion on their peace. It would be like a fly that suddenly buzzed around your ear, talking about how she was a human as well. Rather, she told them "let's all watch fireworks in the First Sector someday", a sentiment that emphasizes on the future -- After the war is done and we no longer have to fight, feel free to intrude on me instead. In hindsight, such a sentiment was still insensitive for the spearheads would never be discharged, but at the very least, this was a remark that can be transparently perceived as an unintentional ignorance, as compared to Lena's misconstrued condolences with Theo.
However, one cannot say that Lena's ideals have been completely cleansed of the ego. Unlike the Laughing Fox, she still imposes her ideals onto others, a good example being when she got angry with Shin over his refusal to run, lashing out at him, "why?! why are you always so...?!" like a "sinner who'd accepted his death sentence, but hadn't done anything to deserve this!" (p. 174) However once again, Shin had to remind her, "Major, we're not going there to die." (p. 175) Don't sully our last opportunity for freedom, don't mock our path to our final destination.
To a certain extent, Lena's bafflement is understandable. Seeing the ones that you care for march to their deaths must be harrowing, and even if I have to force my ideals down their throat to change their mind, I would. However it is precisely because of such an approach that Lena has grown even more complex. Once a slave to ego, her ideals fumble. Now, having grown, the contradictions still grapple.
And hence, here we are -- ideals-guilt-ego. We have spent 4,700 words painstakingly turning every stone to this discussion, but I think it is time we collate our findings.
I want you to imagine guilt and ideals as two separate motivators in our mind, with ego being the steering wheel to each of them.
Ideals are the positive motivators, a quest for perfection. Laughing Fox is someone who predominantly operates on these positive motivators. Because his ego is self-sufficient, his steering wheel is also flexible and hence he can drive it in any direction he wants, avoiding himself from imposing on any lanes nobody wants him on. Lena is also someone who drives the positive motivator car, but the main difference is that her ego requires external validation. Her steering wheel is hence somewhat rigid, and she finds herself driving into the middle of a back-alley hood and being met with hostile glances. Now, she has improved. Her ego has gotten better, and the wheels do turn better, but a part of her still thinks whether it is alright for her to leave those suicidal idiots unattended. Hence being a nosy mom, the struggle of her ego and her ideals is a story with more to come.
Guilt on the other hand, are negative motivators, a quest to correct the wrongs. Now these motorcycles right here are a little iffy. On one hand, you have a motorbike like Laughing Fox's. His guilt can be said to be healthy because he didn't really do anybody wrong. He operates on the fact that he doesn't want to feel guilt, a more preventive measure that is much more controllable. To that sense, since he doesn't need to go around begging for forgiveness, his ego doesn't impede as well. This motorbike is hence travelling at a safe 60 miles on the high way with a perfectly functional steering fork. Now, Annette on the other hand... oof. Her guilt is unhealthy because she blames herself for her wrongs against Shin. It has built up for a decade and is self-destructive, almost uncontrollable. Hers is a rusty-ass bike that hasn't received lubrication for years and worst off, her ego needs that validation, meaning her steering fork can only ever drive forward, crashing head first into any target she chooses.
And Karlstahl? Well he doesn't own a bike or a car and can't drive because he's more comfortable sitting on his front chair lawn with his retirement money.
And hence, that is the connection between ideals-guilt-ego. Ideals are inherently healthier motivators than guilt, as guilt is much more susceptible to egotistic tendencies. However, ego has a way of creeping into both of those things, and depending on how much of it there are, it can either reinforce it, or completely derail it. Context matters, as always.
Word count: 8191 / 14959
3.1 My Country -- Nay, My Comrades
Thus far, we have talked about how ego influences our ideals and guilt, but perhaps something we have to mention as well is how our environment comes into play. In our daily lives, our environment quite literally shapes everything about us; our personality, ego, beliefs, ideals, guilt etc. This shouldn't shock anyone because it is the foundation of human psychology and is the reason why some of the age old adage like "nature vs nurture" exist. The 'nurture' is just that big of an influence on us. In this section, I hope to discuss some of the ways our characters have grown so differently due to their environment and upbringing, and hopefully paint a much clearer picture to why some of them act the way they do. And what better way to start, then to begin with muh queen Lena! (I will never get sick of calling her that)
"-- not once have you ever even asked us our names!" (p. 91)
If you really think about it, a name is the single most important symbol to any human being. When you call upon a name, those words would come to embody everything that person is; their history, heritage, race, gender, personality, ambitions, attachments, everything. It is that reason why even in memorials where you see a slew of names, it no doubt is grippingly impactful. Even without knowledge, you understand that there must be a story behind every single one of them. And for those with knowledge -- their family and friends -- the name becomes a treasured memory.
Hence, when Lena failed to ask for the spearheads name, was that the single most disrespectful thing she could've done to them? In my opinion, yes. But honestly, how could she have known? To her it just felt so natural. To be ignorant was the way she has done things ever since she first became a commander. It has been written in her military textbooks; preached by her seniors; it has been ingrained into the very foundation of their military system -- to which she eats the bread and butter off of. That is also just the tip of the iceberg. When you walk out into the streets, you won't see any of the Processors. You can't even talk to them if you aren't connecting via the Para-RAID. When you are physically segregated, without even an image of their faces to associate them by, does it not feel as if the name might slowly, gradually become an afterthought? And perhaps the nail of the coffin is the gelidity between the Albas and the Eighty-Six. Whenever Lena would call, is the first thing that begins the conversation, a "hey, what's your name?" or "hey, how's your day?" No, the first thing she hears is either the sound of cannon fire, or the click of the tongue.
So, what do we get when we layer it all together? Well, for the idea to even reach her mind she has to: one, not be brainwashed by education; two; not be brainwashed by military rule; three, not be influenced by physical absence; four, not be off put by immense awkwardness. That is about four thick layers of brainwashing before the mind can even comprehend that a problem existed.
However, to a certain extent, it can still seem a little strange. Maybe for the typical Alba, the layers, coupled with their willing ignorance, would easily filter out their motivators. But for Lena, she's our queen of ideals, man! How could she look at the streets of Sector 1 and not realize that no Processor has ever returned (p. 157)?
Well, I guess that's just how our minds work. It's no surprise that our brains aren't good at spotting contradictory beliefs. In fact, they actively work against it with things like confirmation bias and being extremely circumstantial; a person for example may believe in equality and yet never bat an eye if it regards the Colorata. Lena already failed the task the moment she believed that "the motherland that had given birth and raised her -- couldn't go that far" (p. 156). To her, confirmation bias coupled with basic rational thinking, tells her that there is no way an entire country would agree to wiping out a quarter of their population. Unfortunately for her, reality is crueler than fiction.
To a certain extent, we can consider how the environment has shaped egos as well. Imagine this scenario: you wake up one day and all your mom would talk about is how half the population are pigs with human faces. You go to work and somehow all the men are drunk, smashing bottles without impedance. You sit down on your desk and out of your ears, all that rings are dying grievances. Nobody sees the problem; nobody understands what you are talking about; everyone thinks you're crazy; and you sit there on your chair, thinking to yourself, am I the only sane person that is left in this world, or did I somehow become the most insane lunatic that has walked on this Earth? Social alienation -- that is the feeling Lena feels every day of her life. When you feel like you are insane, the only thing you seek for is someone to tell you otherwise, someone to validate your values and beliefs. And when that happens, even if that voice hailed from a hundred miles east, beyond some wall, in some barracks nobody is privy to, you cling onto that voice. It feeds your ego, it becomes your only sense of sanity -- that voice is where your home is, and you won't let anybody tell you otherwise.
Parents, social pressure, propaganda and manipulative systems -- these forces constantly crush Lena. Her ideals are constantly challenged and her ego becomes frail. One can only wonder how difficult it is for a person to fight against their upbringing in an environment so hostile. Perhaps now is the perfect time to shift our focus over to the ones that does so on the frontlines everyday -- the Eighty-Six. I believe they can give us a complex picture to how each generation choose to fight against the Republic.
Their parents of the Eighty-Six fought on a priority of "guaranteeing their families' safety and freedom to live decently over toppling the Republic. If they hadn't, their families in the internment camps outside the Gran Mule would have been the first annihilated by the Legion. They had no choice but to cling to the Republic's honeyed words" (p. 159).
The first generation of Eighty-Six had their suspicions. They, whose children had also been thrown under the same battlefield, probably had questioned the heart of their country. "If you want me to fight, then fine! But why do you have to drag my innocent children out along with me?" That is why when they heard the Republic's honeyed words, the emphasis was on the fact that they "had no choice" -- that they had weighed two choices -- rather than the fact that they simply believed in their lies. However at the same time, there is still a glimpse of Lena's misguided faith. The "honeyed words", the enticing promises, means to a certain level their thought process was the same. The Republic is screwed up. However, I have eaten their bread. I have went to their schools. My memories are at once born from its trees, and buried in its soil. They are horrible, but they "couldn't go that far" (p. 156). At the very least, they will restore our rights and protect my children when their foes are vanquished. What we see here then is the same contradiction of mistrust and faith we see in Lena. After all, at the end of the day, the Republic -- a horrible mother or not -- was still their mom. In a practical sense as well, we can also take it that they literally had no choice. At gun point, their children was shoved beyond the walls, out into the tents that can easily be trampled by the Legion. If I don't pick up my rifles now, can I trust that the Albas would pick up theirs? No... I probably can't. The duties to protect my children hence lies on me and me alone. From a wholistic perspective, we hence see three different priorities. The first utmost priority is of course their children, the second is the possibility of restoration and the last is the possibility that their country is lying and that they have to reconsider their options. We can see elements of the environment in each of them. Their children are their most precious members in their immediate environment and hence they are prioritized. Their decades long upbringing in their country are deeply rooted in them, and hence a semblance of faith remains. And only when we break through those first two layers, do we impeach upon the idea of rebellion, the fight against their 'nurture'.
Now, the first generation are annihilated. The next to pick up arms are the siblings, those of thirteen years of age above; teenagers who possess memories of their life in the Republic as well. With their parents dead, they now have lost precious members of their family. What we considered priority number one has weakened, shaved off only to their younger siblings they are left to protect; and for those without siblings, priority number one has been crushed, leaving them with just priority number two, their upbringing. They remember the bread they eat and the education they received; they remember singing their national anthems and waving around the five-colored flag. The Republic's upbringing is perhaps as deeply rooted into them as their parents were. Hence, when they were disgraced and had suffered many losses, a big part of what characterized them is to "prove their loyalty and worth" as "proud citizens who could take back their honor" (p. 159). We already begin to see a shift in priorities as compared to their parents. Their parents focus on preserving their immediate environment, with ideals being more of an afterthought. However, when you take away some of those attachments, incite hatred and challenge their pride, their focus shifts more towards ideals -- how do we defend our worth as citizens. Still, there remains a semblance, the last glimpse of that patriotic upbringing left in them. What happens when you take even that away?
Now, their siblings are dead. The young children below ten years of age have no family members left. Priority number one has been grounded to dust, with no one left but themselves to protect. Similarly, priority number two, their faith in the country, or any form of patriotic pride and ideals, are also missing. They were "too young to remember being transported to the internment camps or days spent safe in that nurtured haven called the Republic. Any memories of living in the cities or being treated like humans were far away and out of reach -- They'd been reduced to pigs before they could develop any kind of awareness or pride as its civilians" (p. 159).
Despite that harrowing reality, it still stands that every single human being are nurtured by their environment. It is a fact that they don't have an education, a safe shelter, or any kind of nationality, but even then, they will still grow up looking to their sides, absorbing their circumstances, molding it into their identity. Maybe the spearheads can say that they have completely detached themselves from their nationality of the Republic, but their environment are still the direct repercussion of their oppressors' deeds. The camps of "barbed wire and minefields" (p. 159) are built by the Albas and they are often there to remind them of that as well. The Albas oppress them; Kurena still remembers her parents' gruesome abuse (p. 80), and Anju's heritage is carved into her skin, a heritage she possesses no memories of (p. 140).
However, even then, we see that they are not merely characterized as poor victims of the Albas or poor victims of their heritage. Doing as such is what will only continue entrapping them into the labels that they are children of the Republic. But that is as far away from the case than the spearheads want it to be. Kurena may be affected by the Albas who she associates with the Republic; however that is trivial to her time in the spearhead squadron, to which she considers to be her "family" (p. 79). Her bubbly personality is the prime example of how she isn't molded by emotions like revenge; she is molded by her comrades, and all the happiness they have given her. Anju's unwanted heritage is imprinted into her very skin; but that had also been painted over by Daiya, who has given her scars a new set of memories, beauty and meaning. Raiden may have seen how the Albas mock the old hag; but his strength didn't come from his hatred of them, his strength comes from the old Alba hag who "sheltered him in the Ninth Sector" (p. 160). It is evident in how his beliefs isn't that all Albas are unanimously evil, but rather on how both races possess "both humanity's despicable vulgarity and its most radiant nobility" (p. 160); that is to say, rather than judge someone on their heritage or race, judge them on their individuality, their words, their actions. Theo once did the opposite, confining the Laughing Fox to his race; but we see even that quickly turned around, with him respecting him as his own person with his own choices. But none of them can speak of this departure as clearly as their spearhead pride.
"If we treated those bastards the way they treated us, we'd just become the same kind of scum. If we have to pick between fighting the Legion and dying or giving up and dying, we may as well fight and survive for as long as we can. We'll never give up or lose our way. That's why we fight -- that's all the proof we need to know we existed... And if we end up protecting the white pigs in the process, well, can't say I like it, but so be it." (p. 161)
We can stand by and do nothing, letting the Legion march into the cities and burn them all down. That must be such sweet, sweet revenge. However, in the process, that is akin to saying that we ourselves are weak; people who will die just for some stupid hatred that ironically chains us to the oppressors we sought to defeat. But we, the spearheads, are not like that. We are our own people. We laugh at the Albas, but we can't stoop as low as them. We hate them silver pigs, but we will never sacrifice our identity as soldiers, as fighters, just for some petty reason like getting back them. We will always prioritize ourselves. We will always honor our comrades. And if doing so means that the Albas get to laugh at us from their castles, then so be it. We are not children of the Republic -- we are the spearheads.
Fiat justitia ruat caelum (Chpt 6 header) -- Let justice be done, though the heavens fall.
Even if heaven should remain perked at its castle, we will still carry out our personal justice.
Fiat justitia, et pereat mundus -- Let justice be done, though the world perish.
Ironically -- or perhaps a story of poetic heroism -- the spearheads' attempt to uphold their own personal justice, have lend them to being the greatest weapon for the fate of their country. Though the world perish?
Nay, let justice be done, and the world be saved.
Word count: 10804 / 14953
4.1 The Fate of the World -- Coexistence
And thus, we finally arrive at our final section. Oh my god, I've hit my head against this volume for the past two weeks. I've put an average of ten hours daily into this essay for the past five days. And we have finally arrived at our finale.
I am Legion, for we are Many (P. 59; Chpt 4 header)
I've waited so long to talk about this! I'm so excited! Strap in boys, we are digging into the centre of the planet!
To be able to break down an allegory-cum-allusion as meaty as this, let us first sit back and tell the story of Jesus, the mad man, the devil and the herd in its entirety.
On the other side of the sea, they arrived in the region of the Gerasenes. As soon as Jesus got out of the boat, He was met by a man with an unclean spirit, who was coming from the tombs. This man had been living in the tombs and could no longer be restrained, even with chains. Though he was often bound with chains and shackles, he had broken the chains and shattered the shackles. Now there was no one with the strength to subdue him. Night and day in the tombs and in the mountains he kept crying out and cutting himself with stones.
When the man saw Jesus from a distance, he ran and fell on his knees before Him. And he shouted in a loud voice, “What do You want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I beg You before God not to torture me!” For Jesus had already declared, “Come out of this man, you unclean spirit!”
“What is your name?” Jesus asked.
“My name is Legion,” he replied, “for we are many.” And he begged Jesus repeatedly not to send them out of that region.
There on the nearby hillside a large herd of pigs was feeding. So the demons begged Jesus, “Send us to the pigs, so that we may enter them.”
He gave them permission, and the unclean spirits came out and went into the pigs, and the herd of about two thousand rushed down the steep bank into the sea and drowned in the water.
Those tending the pigs ran off and reported this in the town and countryside, and the people went out to see what had happened. When they came to Jesus, they saw the man who had been possessed by the legion of demons sitting there, clothed and in his right mind; and they were afraid.
Those who had seen it described what had happened to the demon-possessed man and also to the pigs. And the people began to beg Jesus to leave their region.
As He was getting into the boat, the man who had been possessed by the demons begged to go with Him. But Jesus would not allow him. “Go home to your own people,” He said, “and tell them how much the Lord has done for you, and what mercy He has shown you.”
So the man went away and began to proclaim throughout the Decapolis how much Jesus had done for him. And everyone was amazed.
(Matthew 8:28-34; Luke 8:26-39. Berean Standard Bible)
Before we begin, let us understand what technique Asato Sensei is applying here. The reference to this passage of the bible acts as an allusion first and foremost, that much should be clear. However perhaps more interestingly is how this allusion is being used. Asato Sensei is applying an allegory here; a literary device that posits the events, actions, characters or settings of a particular story, to represent specific abstractions -- or in this, elements that exist in her own text, '86'. What that means is that often times, you can find a lot of hidden subtexts when you connect the intertextual elements of both stories together. Someone like Jesus for example, can be said to draw parallels with Shin, and that will clue us into the kind of character Asato Sensei has scripted, or has laid in stored for us. However at the same time, one should be careful with trying to link every single event, action or character into a 1-for-1 comparison. Because texts are so individualized and complex, sometimes, a character may not necessarily link to another human, but rather be presented as a concept, an idea, an object etc. The key is to think from multiple perspectives, to push forward multiple theories so that you are able to extract as much potential out of the allegory, rather than be fixated into a path that is unintended. Basically -- keep your mind open. With that said, let us feast on this meaty goodness.
Theory 1: Shin the Messiah
Because we are dealing with a biblical passage, it is imperative to begin first with a Christian outlook. Now I am no Christian myself and I want to state that this interpretation of mine, is done more from what I believe a Christian would focus on. Ultimately, it might be wrong and if that is the case, feel free to correct me.
To begin with, we can see the mad man as a sinner, and his inner demons being a metaphor for the sins that oneself has committed. When the man has given into his inner demons, he is led astray and commits self-harm, by cutting himself with stone. Because the body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, whom one receives from God; cutting yourself is akin to harming that temple, disrespecting that gift. In another sense, we go to God to confess our pain and sins. Resolving to self-harm can be seen as a symptom of spiritual oppression. God after all is magnanimous; He sees and understands all our pain. We can connect this back to our other biblical allusion, Jesus and the temptation of Satan. Self-harm is seen as just that -- temptation. We starve now, or grow hungry, but that isn't because God has neglected us. Rather, he has a greater plan; to starve, to humble us, and then when we grow to accept all the emotions that make us who we are, He feeds us with the Lamb, the sacred bread. Such is the case of the mad man and Jesus. The man falls on his knees before Him, and begs for forgiveness. Even though those words may come from the voices of the demons, Jesus remains merciful. He grants them a separate body, one that would leave the tortured man alone. This is ultimately a story of a man who suffers from inner demons, but submits himself to Christ. He receives His grace, and the evil is sent away, leaving him to be free, and desirous of singing His praises.
To connect this back to '86', we can draw a lot of parallels of the mad men and his inner demons, to the shepherds of the Legion. At first, Shin describes the black sheeps' voices as a "clockwork ghost, perpetually replaying that poor girl's final moments like an incessant music box" (p. 125). This gives the impression that the voices are not alive; that there is no soul in the box; that Kaie's cries aren't actually Kaie. It is simply the twisted machinations of the Legion, replaying those voices out as a by-product, rather than any forms of communications whatsoever. However, you stop and then you look at a shepherd like Rei, the Dinosauria. There is no argument towards the fact that Rei was undoubtedly alive. While his attempt to "peel away that frail human shell" (p. 201) of Shin can simply be explained as some twisted evolution that still falls within the confines of artificial intelligence, we cannot explain this --
Then the girl asked: "Are you going to kill him again?"
Little Shin lay still. I... Not again... (P. 204)
Nor can we explain this --
But just as Shin thought they would constrict and strangle him, the touch of those fingers that once tried to kill him became a kind and painfully sad caress.
"... I'm sorry." (P. 208)
To learn, to repent, to grow and to finally accept and apologize -- these are human acts and reflections that are far too emotional for any artificial intelligence to comprehend. Furthermore, before the airstrike, Rei remembered Lena of all things to deliver the lesson. Why would Rei, the robot that plays out last words like a music box, recall Lena? Why would Rei, the artificial intelligence, be able to understand the repercussion of his actions -- without any external impetus -- solely through self-reflection and self-repentance? Well, the only answer is because Rei possesses the functionality of imagination, seeing Lena in the sky; he holds the strength of emotions like pride and loneliness, being "happy and just a bit lonely" (p.,208); and finally, perhaps the most complex functionality of all, he holds the power of guilt, shame and repentance, which involves not just the ability of forethought (to understand repercussions), but also what is essentially a conscience (morality). If by this time, we are still obstinate in saying that an artificial intelligence would be able to grasp all that in its evolution, then the question is no longer geared towards whether Rei is a robot or a human; but whether artificial intelligence had grown to a point where it is psychologically indistinguishable from humans. And hence, with such a strong showing, I think it becomes pretty obvious that the concepts of souls -- or at very least, brains that are replicated well enough to constitute as the purveyor of souls -- are very much real in the '86' universe.
Now to go back to our analysis of the mad men, we have thus established that the Legion is very much cognizant enough to be a good allegorical-link to him and his inner demons. The Legion -- or at the very least, the shepherd -- is hence, in the Christian outlook, a sinner that is waiting for salvation, someone or something that has "a fervent desire to move on" (p. 207). Who then, represents Christ in our story?
The answer is obvious and is of course, Shin. He is the only one who can hear the voices of the Legion, just as Christ can hear the voices of the demons. He is the one that carries a pistol and shoots the dying, allowing them to pass on. Such powers and actions run a very close parallel to Christ.
So what is the role of our Christ named Shin? Well, perhaps he can begin with going around and freeing all the "souls" from the Legion. Perhaps in the future, he will become the Messiah, the one who will save all of humanity from their sins, aka freeing every one of them. And perhaps one day, he may suffer the same fate as Christ. The people will start to grow distrustful of his demonic miracles, and hence seek to nail him to a cross. He may suffer, and perhaps even revive in some tomb in three days time. Who knows, this is just volume 1, my man. I'm no Dr Strange.
It is worth mentioning once again that this theory amounts to nothing more than that, a theory. Like I said in my disclaimer for allegories, we shouldn't make 1-for-1 connections, because often times it's far too rigid and unimaginative. And even if a 1-for-1 is par for the course, Asato Sensei might also be using the allegory as a mere red herring, planning to switch up the story and give us a juicy plot twist whenever she sees fit. Essentially -- take it with a grain of salt.
P.S - Please don't tell me whether I am right or wrong. Don't even allude to whether I am close or not. It's my first time theory-crafting, man, don't take away the surprise from me. If you want to comment on this part, just nod your head and simply say "hm, that's interesting."
Theory 2: The Legion Collective Consciousness
With our Christian outlook, we primarily focused on Jesus and the mad man, but for this theory, I want to switch it up a little bit. Let us consider the perspective of the swine owners.
Those tending the pigs ran off and reported this in the town and countryside, and the people went out to see what had happened. When they came to Jesus, they saw the man who had been possessed by the legion of demons sitting there, clothed and in his right mind; and they were afraid.
Those who had seen it described what had happened to the demon-possessed man and also to the pigs. And the people began to beg Jesus to leave their region.
The swine owners are perhaps the only losers of this victorious exorcism. In our Christian outlook, this may represent those that will come to mistrust Jesus. But if we just consider it from a solely practical perspective, what we have is a town that just lost a herd of two thousands pigs, which can presumably feed them for a whole year, probably even more than that. Ignoring the illogical premise that someone would just have two thousand of them, this is no doubt still a massive loss. In this sense then, does this mean that if one day the Legion would be expelled from their mechanical bodies, someone (or something) may stand to lose from that result? If that's the case, who are they?
My first theory comes from a more literal reading -- collateral damage. The mad man and the demons had nothing to do with the swine or the swine owners. It was just an unfortunate by-product that they would be transported into the herd and cause them to self-destruct. In this theory, we can consider how in the future with our war against the Legion, we may be looking at collateral damages that are near irreparable -- something as serious as throwing an entire town into a possible famine. Lives will no doubt be lost; it is just a question of whose, and how many.
My second theory comes from a looser reading. If we consider the mad man, demons and swine as a single entity, then what we get is the possibility that the owner of the Legion would suffer from this loss. Well, is it Empire? That can't be right, they were said to be annihilated by their own creation. Unless... Hmm... I can't exactly talk about this because I am acting on the front that this is just an essay for volume 1, but in my sweet dreams I do recall visions of a certain little girl by the name of America roasted pork... eh, something like that, I can't really recall well. But if that girl does exist and is the last survivor of the Empire, then perhaps she would have something to lose from the Legion being exorcised.
My last theory comes from an even looser reading, a stretch even. Okay, for this, hear me out. In page 123, we have a certain mysterious passage.
She remembered talking to Annette about her father's accident. About how if one increased the RAID device's nerve stimulation to its theoretical maximum and Resonated with the consciousness of the world itself, with something in the abyss, there would be no coming back. (p. 123)
First off, weird how 'RAID' and 'Resonated' are capitalized. It's almost like Asato Sensei wanted to say "hey look here, look at how weird this word is". Okay, Asato, I'm looking. Since we are dealing with the "abyss", which draws connotations to a location, then it might make a little sense to why the words associated to it is capitalized. The phrase "consciousness of the world" also draws attention to the possibility that the world is somehow a collective entity and is alive with its own will. This "consciousness" and "abyss" is then looser linked to the Legion by Lena's own conjecture.
But then, what if all those who died went back to that world? To the abyss? Perhaps those who had nearly died -- could connect with whatever was down there, just like how Para-RAID connected humans. Could they, for instance connect with those who had died and fallen into the abyss -- Could they connect with ghosts? (p. 123)
It's no doubt just a theory. Maybe even a possible red herring. However if we consider the implications, this means that there is basically a collective consciousness of the world, in this place called the abyss where all souls come from and return to. The question then becomes, is this collective consciousness controlling the Legion, the souls? The Empire might have created the mechanical bodies, but the moment the machines learnt to scan human brains, this collective entity managed to invade these bodies in the forms of black sheep and shepherds. Then with an unknown goal or will, it has now taken over and is using the Legion for its unknown gains.
I hereby dub this entity, the Legion Collective Consciousness.
We can ponder upon the possible goals they have, the simplest being, kill all human beings. All Legion after all, have a directive. They seek to kill humans despite their dead creators. We have established that Rei has his own will in the Dinosauria, but have we considered what really made him so bloodthirsty for his brother, when in fact, his last regret should be to say sorry to him instead? Does someone like Rei, really wanted to kill his brother again, or is that desire to kill, simply a directive that was given from something else, an entity much more powerful than him? At the end, when the dud shell strike the Dinosauria, did it somehow damage the machine enough so that the directive lost a bit of power, giving back Rei enough of his will to caress his brother's cheek, instead of killing him?
At the same time, we also have to consider the fact that maybe the Legion Collective Consciousness is not omnipotent. Is there a chance that the directive is something they can't control as it is still embedded into the codes of the machine?
It's hard to say but for now, but we will wait and see.
Final theory: The Sentient Legion Coexistence
Alright, it's time to get fucking nutty. Like serious drugs down the chimney. Sit down and let me cook.
This final theory takes a psychological perspective. We have pushed forward the theory that the Legion is perhaps a reflection of an ordinary man who has inner demons. The psychological perspective I want to take, sees these inner demons as mental faults or illnesses; things like laziness, social anxiety, an inexplicable desire to drop $500 so I can pull for E6 Seele in Honkai Star Rail -- Hmm, well, couldn't be me... it err... couldn't... Anyway, let us give a hypothetical.
Suppose I have a gambling problem. I am aware that I have a problem; but because my cognitive functions have been so utterly warped by my addiction, even if I am aware, I can't stop it. I need help. I go to a therapist. I sit down in that comfy couch and the therapist asks me: "tell me about your problem. Express yourself."
Expression, the human need to always express ourselves -- Recall the story of the man and the swine. At first the demons could communicate. Using the man's language, his voice, his gestures, it could kneel in front of Jesus and beg for mercy. The demon is hence very much like that of a mental illness. It would go to someone who can provide aid and it would beg for them to cure it. However, the fact remains that if it cannot express itself, use human language, or have a voice, it will neither be able to ask or beg for help. And if that happens, it cannot be cured, for no one can understand or help it.
It is perhaps why for that reason, when the demons was put into the swine, it immediately self-destructed. The swine neither had a voice to speak nor could its stumpy limbs compare to the versatile joints of us humans. Because the demons lack the tools for expression, it immediately lost its mind and killed itself. In essence, because the mental illness could no longer be expressed, it grew too serious and resulted in insanity and death.
Mental illness, Legion; expression -- Think about the traits of the black sheep. They supposedly play out the last words of humans, but all of them express some form of fear, regret, anger; negative emotions. Similarly, the shepherds are an evolution of that, with Rei specifically having regrets for the things he did to his brother. Rei didn't had a chance when he was alive, however, when he became the Dinosauria and gained the ability to speak through the -- what I will temporarily dub -- link between consciousness, he was able to resolve his regrets with Shin by the end of it. Rei was the mad man, the demon, the mental illness; And he successfully expressed his deepest issues with Shin, the therapist, the Messiah.
Souls that pass on seek for a way to express their last words and regrets. With that knowledge, we can ask, if there really is a consciousness of the world with its own will, what does this Legion Collective Consciousness want to express? Is the words of the individual black sheep and shepherds their words? Are they attempting to communicate to humans through these black sheep and shepherds?
In that case, what are they trying to say? Are they seeking salvation like the demons did from Christ? If that's the case, then this isn't just something simple like free my soul from my mechanical body. This may be a much more ground breaking -- like the world is going to self-destruct on X day, you all have to band together to save humanity -- kinda message.
Let us collate all our potential theories thus far.
1) The Legion Collective Consciousness wants to kill all humans, and they issue out directives to these souls within the Legion to do so. Some souls are still cognizant enough like Rei and possess their own will. However, the directive and their will are sometimes at odds with each other, which results in the discrepancies we see with Rei.
2) The Legion Collective Consciousness doesn't want to kill humans, and has control over the directive in the machine, to which they actively issued. The reason is contradictory but perhaps sending out the machines like a horde of zombies is aligned to their ultimate goal somehow.
3) The Legion Collective Consciousness doesn't want to kill humans, but is forced to by the directive in the machines code which they cannot overwrite. They hence continue to communicate through the black sheep and shepherds. We neither understand what they are trying to communicate or whether their communication skills are even advanced enough to reach a level of comprehension. However, establishing communication can lead to talks to discuss how they can overcome this inability to overwrite the directive.
My money is on path number 3. I have no reason to believe it however. I just think the idea of souls versus machine directive is a cool story to have, and in the future you can see things like Legion helping out humans etc.
And that is why I also name this final theory the Sentient Legion Coexistence. Imagine, if in the future, Shin can communicate, not just with shepherds, but with the Legion Collective Consciousness. If Shin can speak with the entity and then establish a communication line through the Para-RAID, then is it possible that we can get some kind of peace talk/negotiation between the Legion & the humans down the line. And if we have spend so much time establishing that certain units like shepherds can regain a soul and have their own will, then is it too far of a stretch to see a future where Legion and humans can coexist?
Crack pot theory btw, but this shit is so nutty, that I will stand on this hill and protect this theory of mine -- Sentient Legion Coexistence is the future, and I will die on this hill.
But once again don't tell me whether I am right, wrong, close or far. Just smile and wave. Smile and wave.
Word Count: Congrats! And thx for reading!
Afterword
Phew, 14953 words. If you would've told me that I will be writing another 15000 words essay after how shit-face I got last time, then I would've -- Well... I would've said that you're probably right. I love 86 too much. This is my favorite anime, and currently my second favorite light novel series (Danmachi being my first), so I gotta say, I really am in it for the long haul.
Well, anyway, I won't go on too long in this afterword. The next essay will be on vol 2 & 3 combined but I haven't read the books yet and these essays take a hell a lot of time so I can't promise a date. Hopefully latest by the end of the year though. But can you imagine if I finish that essay and then the next moment, season 2 gets announced? I'll trade my left nut for that to happen.
.png)
Comments
Post a Comment