Attack on Titan couldn’t escape controversy in the end

After a 12-year ply, Attack on Titan has come to an end. The final examination panels of the manga jumped years after the Rumbling, focusing on a plot conceived by series supporter Eren Yaeger to effectively enact genocide on the populace at large. The finale is a tousle of images, sprinting past plot points that go unresolved to illustrate bumbling imagination of war and peace, and leave the manga ’ s bequest muddled .
While many viewed Hajime Isayama ’ sulfur fib as having a fascist subtext all along — incorporating real-world parallels to the execution of concentration camps and even loyalist nationalism within its body of work — it took the creator ’ s final examination pages for many readers to buy the argument. Some fans took to Twitter to insist that the floor is one that discourages war and remilitarization ; while others lamented that the plot lacked a proper stopping point, even comparing it to the lackluster reception of the finale of Game of Thrones. Somewhat predictably, a request emerged on to change the ending of the series wholly .
attack on Titan ends with the earth at the cusp of a literal rush war, with the Eldians and Marleyans seeing no true solution other than to remilitarize and kill one another until only one group remains. Despite the intention of protagonist Eren Yeager, whose goal was to become history ’ mho villain in ordering to unify people and achieve superficial peace, the Eldians come together under his name and dub themselves “ Yaegerists, ” remilitarizing their state in the years after Eren ’ s end .
During this meter, Armin Arlert, alongside remaining members of the now presumably disbanded Survey Corps, are on their way to discuss peace with the Eldian leaders. Lacking consistency within the narrative model of the series, the final examination spats of exposition quickly unfold, with the ultimate chapter devoting a flashback sequence to Eren disclosing his plan to Armin erstwhile well before the final conflict.

Though riddled with contradictions over the years, Isayama ’ south message of a future dependent on remilitarization seems clearer than always. There is a level of finality in the motto of the Yaegerists, which roughly translates to “ If you can fight you win, if you can not fight you lose ! Fight, fight ! ” with the reigning monarch of the Eldian people, Historia Reiss, ascribing to this soundbox of intend .
One can argue that Isayama ’ mho message is anti-war, given Armin ’ s position and determination to share with the universe the truth of Eren Yaeger ’ s attack at global genocide. But the ending international relations and security network ’ t bold enough to refute the Yaegerists, and rather settles for a charge of ambivalence that sits in contrast to years of pro-imperialist and fascist text that far solidifies a state ’ s indigence for a military. rather of a wind or corruption that could challenge the debate, Isayama opted for silence .

Uniformed people raise their fists and shout, as narration boxes say “If we win, we live. If we lose, we die. If you don’t fight, we can’t win.” in Attack on Titan, Kodansha (2021).

remilitarization is a ceaseless point of discussion in Japan, for both members of the Liberal Democratic Party and japanese citizens. late action on the subject includes a potential rewrite of Article 9, which would allow Japan to officially reinstate its military. Since the resignation of former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe August 2020, talk of revising Article 9 has importantly dwindled, though it ’ randomness remained an objective for the Nippon Kaigi, an ultranationalist group within Japan that has several ties to the current political party, who current Prime Minister Yoshihida Suga is openly affiliated with. however, any rethink of the military remains a indicate of competition among the japanese people ; in a poll taken in June 2020, 69 % of the population opposed the rewrite of Article 9 .
As noted in Attack on Titan psychoanalysis over the years, Isayama has highlighted on his personal blog that the character of Dot Pixis is based on japanese cosmopolitan Akiyama Yoshifuru, whom he praised for his shrewdness. This is crucial when considering the context of Isayama ’ s work, that and the name of Attack on Titan ’ mho deuteragonist, Mikasa Ackerman : Both of these characters are inspired, in some means, by a specific period of the Russo-Japanese War. Yoshifuru was a general in the japanese Imperial army, and Mikasa was the name of a pre-dreadnought battleship that participated in several naval encounters, including the Battle of Tsushima, in which the Japanese navy decisively defeated virtually the entire russian evanesce .
This menstruation saw the japanese empire ’ s farther colonization of Asia, including Korea and other asian nations. additionally, this is when the education of “ bushido ” began as a reimported concept. The code of honor, which never actually exist, was taught in japanese schools to farther push imperialist propaganda that placed commitment to the japanese conglomerate.

A critical theory on Attack on Titan began to form when viewers connected Isayama ’ sulfur pastime in the time period and comparison of Dot Pixis ’ compare to Yoshifuru to a controversy surrounding a Twitter explanation, allegedly belonging to the manga creator, that tweeted about japanese and korean relations during the japanese occupation of Korea. The tweet in motion stated that “ It would be atrocious to think of the military personnel that were there before the formation of South Korea as something comparable to Nazis. The korean people who were governed doubled their population and lifespans. ”
The micro-blog ends with the affirmation that the treatment of the korean people under japanese occupation could not be comparable to the heathen genocide of the jewish people. This impression is common among history revisionist and button-down circles, with cautious groups like the Nippon Kaigi effectively erasing mentions of these war crimes from some japanese history books .
“ It wasn ’ t great, I remember it trending on Twitter for a while. As internet communities do, there were assorted opinions but it was largely strongly voice disappointment. There was incredulity in it, excessively. Some were like ‘ Oh this is unsurprising, have you read it ? ’ ” korean Twitter user Ju-hyun Song said, commenting on the previous controversy. “ It ’ south still even quoted as “ one of those [ manga ], ” or a genre to avoid. They went on to say that the reception to the ending was “ mix, but by and large negative, ” among Attack on Titan ’ sulfur Korean readership .
While journalists have been unable to confirm that the now-locked score belongs to Isayama, the ending of Attack on Titan echoes the sentiments in its own way. In a sequence between Armin and Eren, Eren discloses the feelings of Ymir Fritz the first Titan and wife of Karl Fritz, the erstwhile king of Eldia. And that, despite her status as his slave, it was love that compelled her to protect and ultimately die for him .

Eren tells Armin that Ymir Fritz, the first Titan, loved her royal husband Karl Fritz enough to die for him, even after he burned her village, killed her parents, and pulled out her tongue, in Attack on Titan, Kodansha (2021).

The plot point serves as a sort of “ gotcha ! ” that seeks to sanitize the relationship between a colonize people and their colonizers, and affirms coarse grandiosity employed by history revisionist circles to twist the accuracy around the history of sexual slavery in japanese colonies. In Miki Dezaki ’ s documentary Shushenjo : The Main Battleground of the Comfort Women, members of conservative groups insist that these women were not victims of intimate bondage, which illustrates how these ideas are hush permeant today.

Read more : Umi ga Kikoeru

revisionism is a reproducible subject in Attack on Titan, from the truth of Ymir the First Titan to Eren erasing Armin ’ s memories until his death, so that Armin can then tell the accuracy of his design to the world. And, in some ways, it is about unsurprising that Attack on Titan would end with a triumphant hurrah for remilitarization offset by a passive voice volunteer for peace. The future of the universe within the population of Attack on Titan is uncertain, which is possibly Isayama ’ s intention. The solution of Attack on Titan remains contradictory at best in its intentions. however, the pro-imperialist and fascist underpinnings of the series remain in the form of a push for remilitarization, presented as an essential means to protect a thinly obscure emblem of an island nation from external menace .
assail on Titan leaves readers with an assertion of “ us versus them ” in the Yaegerist ’ south motto, “ If you can fight you win, if you can not fight you lose. ” Peace can, possibly, be obtained, but only through the actions and manipulations of a single man. The divisiveness of this inconclusive ending is another on the number of ten thousand controversies that has plagued the series, casting a long shadow over the actual floor ’ mho dwindling bequest .
The concluding temper of the anime might stir conversation one concluding time, and bring the series back into the forefront and limelight among more avid fans. But when I think of Attack on Titan, it ’ s the controversy that I remember, aboard Isayama ’ mho love and captivation for the historical period in which Imperial Japan began its long era of colonizing other asian countries. That is what Attack on Titan leaves behind — a bequest of imperialism .

source :
Category : Anime

About admin

I am the owner of the website, my purpose is to bring all the most useful information to users.

Check Also


Reiner Braun

This article’s content is marked as MatureThe page Reiner Braun contains mature contented that may …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *