Peace is War and War is Peace

In the film Patlabor 2, police officials get caught up in a struggle of authority between civil and military levels of power, during a terrorist attack. The film’s director Mamoru Oshii takes us on a journey of theoretical mind games in which he uses the antagonist Tsuge, a former Japanese military hero turned rogue, to create chaos against his own country in order for political change to occur and a new form of peace to be established. Society often looks highly upon the idea that there is such a concept as global peace; however in “Patlabor 2” Oshii metaphorically counters this idea with a theory that war is peace and peace is war, that you must have one in order to have the other. This theory goes against traditional theory that peace is accomplished by the idea that war is non-existent; Oshii uses various situations and characters in Patlabor 2 to convince his audience that “war is so called peace, and so called peace is the dormant seed in every war.” We can see evidence in both the film and political theory that supports Oshii’s theory that war and peace coincide. In the film we see Oshii use characters as a main way to depict his theories through dialogue of Arakawa and Captain Gota, as well as the character development of Tsuge. We will also be comparing the theory of Immanuel Kant with the theories/ideas presented in Patlabor 2, in order to solidify Oshii’s theory. Throughout this paper we will discuss the issues of war and peace and how they coincide with each other, and whether or not there is such a thing as a just war and an unjust peace.

War and peace are two very different things when compared with each other, the idea of peace does not usually mesh well with the idea of war; however the idea that war and peace must occur and coincide together is not an idea/theory that is widely accepted by the norm of people, because peace is usually regarded as the result of the absence of war, and war is usually regarded as the action that prevents peace. Oshii portrays his theory that war and peace are very similar and in many ways coincide with each other. We see this many times throughout the film, however one scene specifically provides dialogue that provides the viewer with evidence that war and peace are results of each other; the scene is between Arakawa and Gota when they are on the boat dock discussing the actual thing they are trying to protect:

Arakawa: “We’re a rich country. And what is our wealth built on? The bloody corpses in all these wars. They’re the foundation of our peace. We now put the same effort into indifference that our parents put into war. Other countries comfortably far away pay the price for our prosperous peace. We’ve learned very well how to ignore their suffering.”

Arakawa’s dialogue with Gota portrays a very interesting idea that peace is built on the results of war, and that the reason they have peace within their country is because there are foreign nations fighting wars in order for them to maintain their peaceful way of living; this compliments Oshii’s theory very well in which he shows his audience through this dialogue that peace is not the absence of war, but in fact the result of war. I believe that Oshii uses this dialogue as a pivotal point to show the audience that peace is built because of war; Arakawa clearly states that peace is built on the bloody corpses of war; which gives the audience an insight on what Oshii really feels about the issue of peace. The dialogue is almost a metaphorical way of portraying Oshii’s belief that peace is not always a good thing, that there could be a peace that is unjust; and that unjust peace is the direct result of a war that occurred for the wrong reasons such as: for wealth, natural resources, land, etc. Another quote from the same dialogue specifically targets the idea of just wars versus an unjust peace:

Captain Gota: “And yet it seems to me that the line between a just war and a unjust peace is very faint indeed. If the just war is a lie, is the unjust peace less of a lie? We are told there is peace but we look around us and even if we cannot give it words our lives tell us we cannot believe what we are being told. In the end every war gives way to peace so-called, and every so-called peace is the dormant seed of war.”

Once again Arakawa’s dialogue with Gota shows Oshii’s theory that war and peace coincide with each other, that every form of peace is a result of war and every war is the result of some pursuit of peace. In this portion of the dialogue Oshii presents a new idea within his theory, the idea of whether or not a just peace is actually possible. I think that this part of his theory is very interesting because society views all forms of peace as a positive and just thing; however according to Oshii all peace is the result of every war, so does that imply that every war is just? This scene is also the first time the audience is introduced to the idea that although Japan is not in war its peace is almost fake and unjust as a result of the sovereign rule of the U.S. (result of WWII). I believe that Oshii uses Tsuge’s character to answer that question in which he uses his experiences in the peacekeeping of southeast Asia (beginning scene of the film) to show his viewers what a unjust war is. I believe the opening scene depicts an unjust war. In the opening scene of Patlabor 2 Tsuge leads a platoon of Japanese labors on patrol Southeast Asia; shortly into the scene they were attacked by enemies and could not defend themselves because of direct orders from the UN, which led to the massacre of Tsuge’s men. The reason why Tsuge’s platoon could not fire back and defend themselves against an attacking enemy was a direct result of Japan’s actions during World War II. After World War II the US rewrote Japan’s constitution in which it stated that the nation could not have an organized army and could not participate in combat against other nations. This change in their constitution led to the unjust slaughter of Tsuge’s platoon; Oshii uses this incident as a pivotal way to confirm his theory by showing that peace is always a good thing, but it is not always a result of a just war. (“Peace and War from Patlabor 2”, “Japan after World War II”).

Oshii uses the main antagonist, Yukihito Tsuge, as one of his metaphorical portrayals of peace and war coinciding. The character of Yukihito Tsuge is a rogue ex-lieutenant colonel who went missing after his UN Labor platoon was attacked by armed guerrillas in the Southeast Asian forests (first scene of the film); he plotted the terrorist attacks that occurred during the film which caused the military chaos. Oshii uses Tsuge’s character as a vessel to portray this idea/theory that peace stems from war; Tsuge is the terrorist that wages internal war with his own country (Japan) in order to gain peace within him, and to create a political system that is beneficial to Japan.


(Figure 1)

Tsuge’s bitterness and desire for revenge drives him to create war; however when we analyze his character more we realize that Tsuge is not a villain in which he is naturally evil or that he hates Japan, but rather that he felt like he was done a disservice/he was betrayed by his own country, so in order to regain peace within himself for the death of his platoon he seeks revenge by attacking the soil of the authority that could have saved his men. The reason for Tsuge’s revenge can be explained in two parts; the first is the responsibility his character feels for the death of his platoon, Tsuge feels obligated to avenge the deaths of his platoon, because he felt that he should have given them the right to defend themselves against enemy attacks; the second is the unjust political rule that didn’t allow his men to protect themselves when they really needed to (result of the new constitution of Japan).

The experiences that Tsuge endured would confirm Oshii’s theory that any kind of peace just or unjust is a result of war, and that peace and war are the result of each other. Tsuge believes that the only way for Japan to understand that they need to change their constitution to better their nation is to experience the same thing he and his platoon experienced; this is the underlying reason why he wages war on his own country. Arakawa: “Tsuge's putting us in the same position he was in three years ago: no backup. No rules of engagement. That's how bitter he is.” Tsuge believed that in order for Japan to understand that it living in an unjust peace and a peace that could be threatened without defense, he literally showed them through terrorist attacks that they needed a way to defend themselves, they needed an organized army.


(Figure 2)

At this point in the movie Japan was defenseless, because they couldn’t engage in any form of war/combat with anyone outside of their own country; this is why Tsuge uses an American fighter plane to cause confusion and chaos amongst civil and military officials. Tsuge uses these terrorist attacks to show Japan that they are v[ul]nerable unless they install a form of defense; the reaction he gets is obviously portrayed in a negative way, because it is chaotic. However in the end the audience gets an idea of what Oshii uses Tsuge’s character for. Although Tsuge put Japan under high alert and chaos it was meant as more of a wake-up call to military and political officials; Tsuge uses an American fighter plane to show that Japans security is compromised by its alliance with the U.S. and is a direct result of Japan's security and safety being undermined by the U.S. Tsuge makes a point to civil and military officials that if they don’t want to see innocent lives lost then they need to change the no military engagement rule in the new form of rule. Tsuge uses this dramatic chaos to provide a political stance that would provide a better and safer Japan for the future. Oshii uses Tsuge as an antagonist, but he truly serves as an undercover protagonist, because the normal reaction of hatred towards a terrorist is not actively present, because he reveals Tsuge’s true desire. Tsuge: “Perhaps there is a part of me that wants to see a little more.” This was Tsuge’s answer to the pilot that asked him why he didn’t kill himself after all the chaos he caused. Oshii uses Tsuge’s answer to show the audience that Tsuge’s motives were to create a protected Japan, a Japan that lived off a just peace instead of an unjust war (Anderson 84).

Oshii uses Patlabor 2 into a debate amongst viewers through the topic of peace and war coinciding, and whether or not there is such a thing as a just peace. This topic can be turned into a debate, because viewers are shown both sides of the coin. On one hand it is hard not to be on the side of the UN, because there needs to be a form of global peacekeeping in order to prevent another world war from occurring; however you can’t help but sympathize with Tsuge and his goal to restore Japan to its former glory, because every country needs to have the right to defend itself, because without sovereignty over your own nation you depend on the judgment of other nations for the peace and lives of your people. The drama Oshii creates through this debate is clear in which the audience does not know exactly which side is right and which side is wrong, because although the initial response would be to side with the UN, however seeing Tsuge’s point of view makes you question whether or not the peacekeeping and restrictions the UN and US placed on Japan was legitimate or even in the benefit of the Japan as a nation.

Oshii uses a couple of scenes to reveal this debate, specifically the scene in the control room where the Japanese are confused on whether the not the American plane in pursuit is theirs or not. This scene shows that Japan was in a state of confusion, which resulted from the restrictions put on them by the U.S. They had no identity anymore and didn’t even know what planes belonged to them and what didn’t belonged to them; this shows the audience’s first hesitation on the legitimacy of Japanese defense (the exact thing Tsuge eventually tries to fix); this scene confirms the one side of the coin that supports Tsuge’s terrorist attacks in which Japan needs to break away from UN/US control in order to have a legitimate defense and maintain a just peace. A scene that Oshii uses to show the other side of the coin is the opening scene when Tsuge’s platoon comes under attack, this scene reveals the process in which the UN operates in which attacking back is the second option and waiting for reinforcements and confirmation that it is okay to attack should be the priority. The argument that Oshii provides with the drama of the two scenes is that, should global peace be considered just over an unjust war. The most pivotal scene that wraps the two together would have to be when Tsuge is arrested in the chopper and he reveals that he wants to see the changes Japan makes, because of all the chaos he caused, I believe Oshii solves this debate for us by showing his audience that peace is a result of war and not every peace is just and not every war is unjust. It can be argued over and over what Tsuge did was wrong, however if the end result turned out to help the nation of Japan, can anyone say that it was truly unjust?

Once Tsuge takes his actions against Japan, the nation as a whole is thrown into this political confusion between military and civil officials in which they have no idea whether or not the American aircraft was theirs or was this a terrorist attack from the U.S. Oshii shows chaos and panic in many ways, from the levels of civil power to the levels of military power; Oshii portrays Japan as a nation that was so consumed in their unjust peace that acknowledging an attack on their soil was unthinkable (think how the US felt after 9/11). The reactions from the characters of the film truly portray Tsuge’s actions as positive rather negative, but only after they understand Tsuge’s true motive for his terrorist attacks. Tsuge’s motives were to help Japan realize that they were living in an unjust peace and that in order for them to truly maintain a just peace they must come out of the shadow the U.S. and become a sovereign state again, with their own army and unique constitution. The audience can tell that Tsuge becomes an unordinary antagonist through Oshii’s artistic portrayal of certain scenes that Tsuge is a part of; one specific scene is when he is getting arrested and all the birds fly up in the air. This can be seen as a burden being lifted off of Tsuge in which the birds represent revenge and burden and when his task is finally done and the military and civil authority finally realize his motives the birds fly away as if his burden was gone and he is now at peace. Oshii uses this scene as a way to express his agreement Tsuge’s actions and that he acknowledges that his terrorist actions may have been wrong, but his ideology and belief that Japan needed to change the way they govern themselves is correct. Oshii uses the character of Shinobu Nagumo, a former colleague of Tsuge, to show that the characters in the film understand why he did it, but have to punish his actions because it was still wrong. The audience can see the sadness of Nagumo as she arrests Tsuge, because she knows he is right in the way he wants to better Japan, it was just the way he did it in gives her no choice as a police officer, but to put him under arrest.

The topic of an unjust peace and a just war is a topic brought up many times throughout this essay as well as seen many times throughout the film Patlabor 2; however what real evidence do we have to ensure us that Oshii’s theory is even a relevant theory? Philosopher Immanuel Kant believed in a similar theory to Oshii in which he believed that “a war is only won only by the side that is comprehensively stronger, and since victory and defeat depend solely on relative power, reason declares that war as a procedure for determining rights is absolutely condemned.” If the reason of war is already condemned before it has started then does it not make it right to wage war on a country you already know you can defeat? Kant questions the legitimacy of war and the reasoning behind it; Kant brings up a valid point throughout his writings in which he theorizes that if nations waged war against a nation they knew they could already defeat, then would it not be easier just to solve their disputes in a court of law, and was actual war really necessary? Kant and Oshii’s theory do not stray far from each other; in another part of Kant’s writing he answers his question on the legitimacy of waging war with the idea that war is necessary in order to maintain peace: “asserting that war, not only peace, is absolutely necessary, since war is linked with peace and the moral sanity of a people, he claims that perpetual peace would reduce all peoples perpetual silence”; this quote can confirm Oshii’s theory that they must exist together in order to exist at all. Kant believed that people naturally have different opinions and that war is used to express these opinions, and in order for just peace to truly occur we must go to war to make sure that the opinions of a people is heard and executed.

In Patlabor 2, we can see Kant’s philosophy relevant through the actions of Tsuge in which he felt that war was necessary in order to achieve peace; creating chaos in Japan was the underlying purpose to show that the Nation was vulnerable and that they needed to become their own sovereign nation. During post-world war II Japan was taken over by the U.S. in more ways then one, the U.S. set up military posts on Japanese soil, assimilated them to the U.S. culture, created a new constitution for them, and rebuilt and ran their country as if it was the United States. Tsuge’s actions against Japan can be seen as a people’s voice being heard through war. It is no secret that even though the U.S. was part of the reason of the destruction and reconstruction of Japan, that the way they did it was not exactly to the Japanese liking. Patlabor 2, compliments Kant’s theory really well; however there are aspects of the film that do not necessarily agree completely with his theory; Kant believed that war was necessary to keep peace amongst a people, because war acts as the voice of opinion for a people, however in Patlabor 2, Oshii shows that peace is obtained by being a sovereign nation, it is once again showed through Tsuge’s ideology that if Japan were to maintain some form of peace and be in war they must be sovereign in order to carry out their own ambitions instead of another nations (Hoffe 156, 192).

In conclusion, Oshii metaphorically theorizes that peace and war whether just or unjust must exist with each other, that in order for one to occur the other must as well. We see this theory being portrayed through the dialogue of Arakawa and Captain Gota and the character development of Tsuge; we also can confirm that Oshii’s theory is relevant because it is similar to that of philosopher Immanuel Kant. After researching the topic of peace and war, I can confidently conclude that the idea of peace can only exist as a result of war; I conclude this because we see through many modern day events such as 9/11 that peace comes as a result of war; when a nation is put under chaos and answers back with a resolution it maintains its peace once again. I understand and agree with Kant’s philosophy that war serves as a reality check amongst a people, because sometimes it takes war to show what peace really is, and whether or not a nation has obtained it. Oshii uses Tsuge’s actions of terrorism to portray Japan in a light that many didn’t really see, in which they were at peace, because they were no longer in war, however they lived in an unjust peace, because they were being controlled by the U.S. Oshii showed that sovereignty is an important part of obtaining a just peace in which he uses Tsuge to show that being controlled by another nation can result in a form of peace, but when you have no control of your own state, then this peace is irrelevant because when you are attacked and when you need to defend yourself, you have no say in it. Patlabor 2 provides viewers with an intellectual challenge of norms and average societal thinking, in which it challenges its viewers to think outside of the box, and to focus on whether or not violence (war) is the result of peace, and peace is the underlying creation of war; regardless if it is the type of war that is seen on TV between militaries, or the war with self revenge, every type of war is in the pursuit of some sort of peace, and every type of peace exists because of some action of war.



BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson, Mark. "Oshii Mamoru's Patlabor 2: Terror, Theatricality, and Exceptions That Prove the Rule." (2009): 75-109. Web. 2 June 2011.

Bolton, Christopher, Istvan Csicsery-Ronay, and Takayuki Tatsumi. "Patlabor 2 and the Phenomenology of Anime." Robot Ghosts and Wired Dreams: Japanese Science Fiction from Origins to Anime. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2007. Print.

Höffe, Otfried. Kant's Cosmopolitan Theory of Law and Peace. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2006. Print.

Market, Mark T. "Peace and War from Patlabor 2 « The Critical Thinker(tm)." Web. 1 May 2011. .

Patlabor 2. Dir. Mamoru Oshii. 1993. DVD.

Site of Potentiality: Creating New Spaces Through Alienation and Redefinition in The Sky Crawlers

Introduction

Based on a series of books by Mori Hiroshi, Mamoru Oshii’s film The Sky Crawlers tells a tale about a world that is essentially at peace, wherein wars have once again become the domain of contracted mercenary groups who fight in the name of their corporations. In order to maintain peace, “Kildren,” long-lived beings who are not quite human, are specifically created to fight in these air battles. While these dogfights provide “peace” for the rest of the world, the Kildren suffer from feelings of alienation and purposelessness that are produced by their knowledge of their inevitable short lifespan, their inability to age, and their inability to form an identity or a coherent past. We can see how these feelings of alienation and purposelessness produce patterns self-destructiveness, as we see habits of smoking, drinking, and the contemplation of suicide among the Kildren, especially within Suito Kusanagi’s actions. However, on the other hand, Yuichi Kannami, who is also a Kildren, forms a different attitude about his condition. Rather than falling into a state of complacency or self-destructiveness (with the exception of the habit of smoking), Yuichi believes that the Kildren have the potential to change their destiny by trying to defeat the “undefeatable” enemy, ‘Teacher.’

Interdependence of Communality and Struggle

Yuichi’s mentality of trying to find new meaning in one’s existence through one’s struggle against the inevitable resembles Albert Camus’ existentialist novel, The Plague. The Plague presents life as a battle between death and the preservation of life rather than the conventional moral battle between good and evil. After living life solely focused on their personal gain and without the slightest thought of their mortality, the residents of Oran are forced to acknowledge the transiency of their temporal lives when confronted with the plague. As the disease claims more victims, their individual hopes for the future dwindle and they eventually realize the futility of trying to strive for separate goals. Although the plague destroys individual meaning because of the realization it brings of the inevitability of death, it offers a collective meaning in the participation of the united struggle against its eternal reign. The irony is that the force that the narrator is so adamantly fighting against (plague/death) is necessary for acquiring what is needed to fight against it (unity) and thus necessary for what is needed to find meaning in life. We can also see the interdependence of communality and struggle in other traumatic situations like the aftermath of the 1980s Kobe earthquake in Japan, where different groups of people came together in a collective effort to rebuild.

Like Dr. Rieux in The Plague, Yuichi declares a communal call to arms in the fight against Teacher to break the cycle of the Kildren’s exploited existence. However, while The Plague reveals the interdependence of struggle and communality based on the lack of community in Oran before being infected by the plague and the enhanced sense of community after being infected by the plague, The Sky Crawlers presents the Kildren as in a state of struggle/alienation ever since the time they came into existence. Furthermore, we can see how this struggle/alienation produces increasingly self-destructive behavior in Kusanagi, and how she only starts to change when Yuichi decides to change his and his fellow Kildrens’ destiny by trying to shoot down Teacher, ultimately risking his own life. Kusanagi’s reliance on Yuichi’s act of self-sacrifice and encouragement rather than her own alienation/struggle to change, complicates the notion of what exactly elicits communality. The fact that Kusanagi’s alienation and Yuichi’s love cause Kusanagi to change towards a new sense of communal commitment, demonstrates the how both struggle and amity or this private space between two individuals produce communality.

“Communality”: Multitude vs. Subtle Potentiality

In his article, “Bathing in the Multitude,” Michael Hardt describes a type of “communality” as this type of “love” in the air at great political demonstrations. He describes this communality as a “political feeling of love” when “we recognize together what we can share in common, what power we have together, and what we can do with each other.” When we think of communality in this sense, we imagine a sense of solidarity within a multitude of people with similar cause. For example, in The Sky Crawlers, we would imagine communality as all the Kildren banding together to break the cycle that they are trapped in. However, the communality that I am referring to in this paper is more subtle and one of potentiality. It is one that can be seen in both Yuichi sacrifice and encouragement, in Kusanagi’s new hopeful attitude at the end of the film, and in this private erotic space shared between both characters.

Repetition

Repetition in The Sky Crawlers reveals the inescapable cyclical nature of the Kildrens’ condition. From the very beginning when we are introduced to Yuichi’s character, Yuichi finds certain things eerily familiar even though he is a new pilot at his corporation. He is particularly haunted by the ghost of his past, Jinroh, the pilot that he comes to replace. For example, Yuichi is pleasantly surprised to discover that his predecessor’s plane fits him like a glove, even though it is his first time riding it. Other things also trigger a sense of familiarity such as the taste of meat pies from a local restaurant. When his friend Naofumi asks him what he thought about the meat pies, Yuichi replies, “It was good. It was like I’d tasted one somewhere before” (22:37). Later in the film, Yuichi eventually realizes that he is the reincarnation of Jinroh. He sees this process of repetition and replacement for himself, when he sees how Aihara has taken the place of his former teammate, Yudagawa, after Yudagawa gets shot down. His new teammate has the identical appearance and habits as his former teammate. They both have the same white hair, the same facial features, and they even have the same way of folding their newspapers after they read it. Right after Yudagawa’s reincarnation leaves the room, we can see how this reality of the cycle that he and the other Kildren are caught in, finally sinks into his mind when the camera zooms into his face and Yuichi ‘s face has the expression of someone just having discovered something shocking (1:34:32).


(Figure 1)

After the camera zooms in on Yuichi’s face a montage of scenes appear on the film. These scenes depict all the experiences that he had experienced before as Jinroh and in the present as Yuichi. The montage is like a flashback and realization of these cyclical memories for both Yuichi and the audience, as we realize the repetitiveness of these images throughout the film, such as the dog sniffing the broken match on the ground, Kusanagi smoking and looking out the window, Naofumi playfully greeting Yuichi, being in bed with Fuko, and the mechanic carrying the sleeping dog (1:34:43-1:35:53). This is a pivotal scene in the film because it is only after Yuichi fully realizes the extent of his entrapment that he tries to take action and break the cycle.

The undefeatable enemy, ‘Teacher,’ also demonstrates the inescapable cyclical nature of the Kildrens’ condition. Unlike the other fighters, Teacher is an adult man. This fact makes him an unmatched skilled fighter because unlike the Kildren, he is able to retain the coherence of his fighting experiences. Kusanagi explains to Yuichi how an undefeatable enemy like Teacher contributes to maintaining the exploitative ‘game’ in which the Kildren are forced to participate. She states, “Because our war is a game that is not supposed to ever end, some rules are needed. For example, there must be an enemy who cannot be defeated” (1:28:16-1:28:30). Hence, the name ‘teacher’ is ironic because he usually shoots the Kildren down and kills them, which ends up erasing their memory and experiences, rather than adding to their memory and experiences like an actual teacher. Furthermore, it is only when Kusanagi reveals to Yuichi that ‘Teacher’ is the “undefeatable enemy,” that we can see Yuichi’s first attempt to figure out a way to break the cycle. Yuichi asks Kusanagi, “If I shoot down Teacher, will something change? Something like destiny? Or limits?” and Kusanagi replies, “Maybe. But nobody can shoot him down” (87:03-87:18). Thus, the fact that Yuichi increasingly conveys a desire to take action the more he realizes the extent of his trapped condition demonstrates the potentiality of alienation.

Alienation

Although the Kildren are specifically created to fight for the corporations in these aerial dogfights, Kusanagi’s detachment throughout the film and Mitsuya’s emotional breakdown indicate their sense of alienation and suffering. Kusanagi is first shown in the film inside her office looking outside the window. The bright sunlight that comes through the window starkly contrasts with the darkness of her office. Despite the emotionless expression on her face, we can see how she yearns for Yuichi as she traces her finger across the window to his location outside by the plane. As she drops her finger and her head in a dejected manner, the camera zooms out, creating a lonesome scene as we see Kusanagi as a small lonely shadow deprived of the bright blue sky behind her. There are many other scenes throughout the film where Kusanagi is staring out the window into the bright outdoors from inside the dark building. In all these scenes, she is alone and pensive.


(Figure 2)


(Figure 3)



(Figure 4)


(Figure 5)

The fact that she is constantly staring out the window reflects her sense of being trapped, not inside the building, but inside the repetitive cycle of her existence as a Kildren.

Mitsuya, another Kildren, articulates her sense of estrangement and frustration because of her condition to Yuichi. While she buries her head into her hands, she cries, “Somehow, anything and everything is a fragmentary mess to me. I’m not certain that I’ve really experienced anything! No sense of solidarity at all!” (1:42:14-142:22). The desperation in her voice and her loss of a sense of a coherent identity all exhibit her suffering and alienation because of her condition as a Kildren. The extent of both Kusanagi’s and Mitsuya’s sense of alienation lead them to taking action in hopes to some way break the cycle. Other than Kusanagi and Yuichi, Mitsuya is the only other Kildren that tries to do something outside of the norm. After her emotional confessions to Yuichi, the next scene shows Mitsuya about to shoot Kusanagi with a gun. Although she does not give a clear explanation as to why she is trying to kill Kusanagi, she tells Yuichi, “If you want to get killed, go ahead” after he successfully takes away her gun (106:14). We can infer from Mitsuya’s response that she was trying to kill Kusanagi to prevent her from killing Yuichi, like she did to his predecessor, Jinroh. In her own way, Mitsuya also tries to break the cycle by preventing the repetition of Jinroh/Yuichi’s murder. The fact that this scene happens after Mitsuya’s emotional breakdown demonstrates the potentiality of alienation. Furthermore, in the following sections, we will see how the extent of Kusanagi’s alienation also contributes to her own change of attitude from complacency to hopefulness and determination.

Complacency and Self-destruction

The Kildrens’ habits of smoking, drinking and contemplating suicide portray how these feelings of estrangement cause self-destructive patterns. We can see all the Kildren smoking constantly throughout the film. Towards the beginning and towards the middle of the film, the camera zooms in on Kusanagi’s ashtray full of cigarettes and her cigarette box and lighter (27:39, 55:49).


(Figure 6)


(Figure 7)

The abundance of smoked cigarettes in the ashtray and the emphasis that the camera gives to these images clearly indicates the extent of Kusanagi’s habit of smoking, and thus it’s destructiveness. We can also see Kusanagi’s self-destructiveness in her excessive drinking. For example, when she and Yuichi have a conversation at a restaurant towards the end of the film, she drinks until she is unable to walk on her own. When they come out of the restaurant, Yuichi has to support Kusanagi with both hands just to keep her from falling down. The ultimate self-destructive behavior can be seen through Kusanagi’s habit of contemplating suicide. Tokino, Yuichi’s friend and teammate, warns him about how Kusanagi always carries around a gun. The first scene that zooms in on Kusanagi’s ashtray full of cigarettes that I mention also places as much emphasis on her gun, which is right next to the cigarettes. We also learn that Kusanagi was the one that killed Jinroh to grant freedom from their repetitive cycle. She also takes out her gun and points it at Yuichi’s temple after she becomes drunk and asks him, “Do you want me to kill you? Or will you do me a favor and kill me? Or else nothing will ever change for us” (1:30-1:30:15). She also tries to commit suicide towards the end of the film but Yuichi stops her from doing so.
The fact that many of these examples of self-destructive behavior are displayed in Kusanagi’s actions is not a coincidence, as she experiences more alienation than other Kildren because of her abnormally high survival rate and because of the fact that she has to deal with mothering a human child who will eventually exceed her in age. Because Kusanagi has lived longer than the other Kildren, she has had more exposure to living with the knowledge of the Kildren’s repetitive exploited existence. Her longer life span has also put her in the position of living with constant loss and having to reform relationships. Although the other Kildren also experience alienation and struggle from having to deal with these things, their shorter life spans make their feelings of estrangement brief in comparison with Kusanagi. Furthermore, Kusanagi experiences a unique struggle and alienation from mothering her human child. As Kusanagi will forever remain an adolescent and fight for her corporation, her human daughter will eventually surpass her in age and even in memories and having a history if Kusanagi dies in a battle. The inevitability of Kusanagi’s daughter exceeding her in age and the possibility of Kusanagi forgetting her daughter’s existence after dying and reincarnating, reveal how she can never have a normal relationship with her child where neither of those things would be issues. Thus, the fact that she knows that her relationship with her child can never be normal adds to her sense of alienation and struggle.

Motivation

In contrast to Kusanagi and Mitsuya, Yuichi does not openly exhibit feelings of suffering or alienation. He even displays signs of happiness in the film. For example, we can see the contrast in Kusanagi and Yuichi’s approach to looking out the window. Rather than staring out the window pensively from the inside, Yuichi opens the window and sticks his head outside, smiling, enjoying the breeze (9:23). Although Yuichi seems oblivious to feelings of estrangement, both Kusanagi and Mitsuya are strangely drawn to him. Both girls, although relatively appearing detached towards the rest of the public, open up to Yuichi and share their pain and confusion. Mitsuya even admits that Yuichi is the only one that she feels she can trust. When both girls open up to Yuichi, he does not seem too affected by the things that they tell him. Even when Mitsuya directly reveals to him his status as the reincarnation of Jinroh and the inescapable cyclical exploitation of their kind, Yuichi merely thanks her for the “interesting chat” and asks how her coffee was (1:43:55-1:44:07). His detachment in the conversation could possibly be the outcome of his own sense of alienation as he realizes the state of his condition when he how Aihara replaces Yudagawa right before his eyes. However, right after his conversation with Mitsuya, Yuichi displays a sense of hope as he stops Kusanagi from killing herself and commands her, “You have to live. Until you can find a way to change things” (1:47:05-1:47:09). When Yuichi starts embracing Kusanagi, we can see her usual tough and detached exterior crumbling as she begins to cry and embrace him back (1:47:30-1:47:41).


(Figure 8)

The intensity of her features and crying reveals her own breaking point and foreshadows her own desire to change things for the Kildren and herself and Yuichi. This scene also clearly demonstrates the extent of their deeply personal connection. We can connect this scene with other scenes that hint at their romantic relationship, such as when Kusanagi goes in Yuichi’s room (Jinroh’s old room) and rests her head on his bed and smells it longingly (28:36-28:43). Their romantic attachment is important to acknowledge because of the significant part it plays in both Kusanagi’s transformation from an attitude of detachment to one of communality and Yuichi’s motivation towards breaking the exploitative cycle.

After their emotional interaction, Yuichi sacrifices his life to shoot down Teacher to try to break the exploitative cycle. In the mean time, the scene back at the plane base shows Kusanagi stopping herself from smoking. After she puts the cigarette in her mouth and keeps it there for a few seconds, Kusanagi takes it out and her widened eyes and slight lifting of the head shows us that she has came to her own realization of a need to break the cycle (1:54:20-1:54:41).


(Figure 9)

By refusing to smoke, Kusanagi exhibits her own change of attitude, her new sense of hope, and a sign of commitment to a new communal fight against the exploitation of her fellow Kildren, as Yuichi did. Furthermore, in the final scene after the credits when the new reincarnation of Yuichi comes into Kusanagi’s office, we see a different Kusanagi as she takes off her glasses and reveals a new brightness in her eyes and a slight smile in her mouth. Her expression reveals a new welcoming demeanor than her previous state of aloofness while she states in a determined manner, “I’ve been waiting for you” (2:00:45-2:00:53). Oshii’s decision to put this particular scene at the very end after the credits raises some interesting questions. If seen together with the fighting scene before the opening credits begin, is it possible to assume that Oshii is creating another space by using the credits as a set of boundaries? And if so, does this mean that he is trying to show us how the repetitive cycle can be broken by creating this other space?


(Figure 10)

Conclusion

The fact that Kusanagi is detachment from the rest of the Kildren change only after Yuichi’s encouragement and act of self-sacrifice complicates the idea of the interdependence of communality and struggle. Furthermore, the unique erotic aspect of their relationship also adds another dimension to what elicits communality. However, like the instances of the interdependence of communality and struggle in Camus’ The Plague, we can still see the potentiality of struggle in The Sky Crawlers, as alienation incites subversive action in Yuichi and Misuya, and a change of attitude from complacency to determination in Kusanagi.


WORKS CITED

Camus, Albert. The Plague. Trans. Stuart Gilbert. New York: Vintage Books, 1991.

Hardt, Michael. “Bathing in the Multitude”. Crowds. Ed. Jeffery T. Schnapp and Matthew Tiews. Stanford: Stanford UP, 2006.

Karatani, Kojin, “How Catastrophe Heralds a New Japan”. Counter Punch. Ed. Alexander Cockburn and Jeffery St.Claire. March 24, 2011. http://www.counterpunch.org/karatani03 242011.html

The Sky Crawlers. Screenplay by Chihiro Ito. Dir. Mamoru Oshii. Perf. Ryo Kase, Rinko Kikuchi. Warner Bros. Japan, 2008. Film.

Political Meaning in Barefoot Gen

In many anime films like Patlabor 2, Sky Crawlers, and to a degree, Metropolis, one of the most apparent motifs in anime has been the portrayal of Japan as an isolated body, which constantly faces certain disaster, destruction, and rebirth as a society. Mori Masaki’s Barefoot Gen, which is based on the semi-autobiographical manga series by Keiji Nakazawa, also employs the portrayal of Japan as an isolated body, helpless to disaster and exploitation through the eyes of a survivor of the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima. Although the film is littered with horrific renderings of what actually happened in Hiroshima, its seemingly hopeful ending despite near complete death and destruction seems to portray life, unity, and rebirth after the disaster. Upon further investigation and comprehension through the use of sources such as Jeff Adams, Sheng-Mei Ma, and Harry Harootunian, however, the film can be seen as both a political criticism of Japan and the United States during the Second World War by Masaki and Nakazawa as well as a bittersweet underlying portrayal of Japan’s unwaveringly traditional nationalism against foreign intrusion.

One of the most striking and memorable scenes in Barefoot Gen is the scene that portrays the bombing of Hiroshima. The sequence features various views of pain and torture caused to the people of Hiroshima by the bombing, such as a young girl holding a red balloon, a mother with a young child, and an old man vaporized by the extreme heat of the blast (Images 1, 2, 3, and 4).


(Figure 1)


(Figure 2)


(Figure 3)


(Figure 4)

The deaths of the young girl, soldier, old man, and mother and child represent not only the horrific deaths caused by the bombings, but also enunciate the disaster’s toll on civilians. Masaki’s decision to show the brutal deaths of these specific subjects intensify his political message. Rather than showing a images of massive amounts of citizens dying, which would be more realistic than showing only a handful of victims, Masaki highlights his political message that the bombs targeted and killed the citizens of Japan rather than the military. The fact that the backgrounds of the images during the bombing scene also change so drastically in color represents a sort of shift in reality from the artist’s perspective where the images may not necessarily correspond to what the atmosphere would have actually looked like during the bombing, but are rather meant to create a sort of mood in the audience toward the subject matter. Images 5 and 6, for example, show the city of Hiroshima during the initial detonation of the bomb. The colors of the buildings, sky, and general atmosphere in these images exist in order to convey more of a nightmarish view of the situation than to represent the reality of what the detonation actually would have looked like to a witness. Thus, one can see that although the bombing scene is fairly realistic in the ways it shows people dying; it also contains a large amount of political imagery from the perspective of the director which intends to illustrate the political and moral problems caused by the bombing.


(Figure 5)


(Figure 6)

Another visually striking and politically subverted aspect of the sequence portrays the Americans who flew the planes and dropped the bombs. The short sequence shows two American pilots, clearly drawn differently than the Japanese characters and meant to appear foreign to the viewer (Images 7 and 8), flying in the Enola Gay and speaking military jargon to each other while eventually pushing the button that drops the bomb. The images of the Americans are significant because they politically characterize the enemy, the United States, as essentially the “other” of Japan. The Americans clearly contrast the Japanese in terms of the ways they are represented: the ways the Americans are drawn are fundamentally very differently, they speak English (with Japanese subtitles), their eyes are never shown, and they move differently than the more traditionally “anime” Japanese characters. The “otherness” of the American soldiers can be interpreted as a vilifying of intervention in Japan from outside forces. The differences in characteristics between the Americans and the Japanese serve as a way for Masaki to clearly portray Japan’s enemy in the movie, but also to reinforce Japan’s traditional nationalistic sense of identity. The sharp difference between Japan and America in this sense later leads to the film’s departing images of Japanese nationalism and solidarity against foreign influence, which I will discuss later.


(Figure 7)


(Figure 8)

Clearly the events of the bombing scene, the way it is animated with constant shift in perspective, and the distortions of color and sound are meant to emphasize the director’s political message to the audience. The colors change drastically in a way that can only be described as hellish in order for Masaki to represent the true gravity of the events through animated drawings. The scene is so graphic that it is hard to watch and not particularly enjoyable or pleasant, but also impossible to look away. The final image in the scene is perhaps the most intriguing image of all because it seems to be a color photo of the actual Hiroshima bombing (Image 9).


(Figure 9)

In contrast to the hand-drawn images present throughout the rest of the film, the use of the actual photograph (the only photograph in the film) to end the scene is very peculiar and can only further represent the difference between Masaki’s message through the drawings and the actual reality of the situation. Thus, the use of the photo after the artistic images of death and destruction serves to separate the events and images of the film from reality, while still implying that the bombing was a huge disaster. In Jeff Adam’s article, “The pedagogy of the image text: Nakazawa, Sebald, and Spiegelman recount social traumas,” Adams discusses the use of photographic imagery to characterize traumatic events. The following passage is particularly interesting in terms of Barefoot Gen’s use of the Hiroshima bombing photo:

Photographs, drawn or otherwise, act to condition the receptivity of the reader to the possibility of a continuity with a traumatic history, existing outside of the narrative of past and present, and yet belonging to both of them…The signifier, the photograph itself, could be overlooked (invisible), or seen through to the referent – in this case straight through to the person, suggesting a direct link by virtue of the (perceived authenticity of the chemical impression, enabling its reception as a means of learning and knowing of past trauma. (Adams 41)

In Barefoot Gen, the use of the actual photograph of the Hiroshima bombing after the hand-drawn rendering of the scene embodies Adams’ idea of “a continuity with a traumatic history, existing outside of past and present, and yet belonging to both of them” (Adams 41). The photo surely exists outside of the film, which was produced in 1983, and serves as a means of connecting the reality portrayed in the photo with the political imagery conveyed in the film. The near 40 year gap between the events the film is based on and the production of the film itself leave a gap between the actual events and the meanings of Masaki’s interpretation nearly 40 years later. The destruction that can be seen in the photograph links the artist’s earlier portrayal of the events to the actual events of the bombing themselves, creating a gap between realism and artistic (and political) meaning. The ending of the film only further encourages speculation on the true political meaning of the film and why the film was produced such a long time after the events actually happened.

Like the bombing scene, the final two scenes of Barefoot Gen contain a large amount of political imagery intended to produce emotionally nationalistic feelings in the audience. Image 11 shows what maybe be the most important shot in the film in terms of Masaki’s overall message of the film. Although by this point in the plot, the family has lived through near complete death and destruction, it is clear that Gen and the rest of the family are very hopeful toward the future. Gen is portrayed as fulfilling a goal he had with his now deceased brother to float a hand-made boat (which, incidentally, has a Japanese flag on it) down the river. On one hand this shot could be interpreted as conveying Masaki’s political message of Japan’s need for solidarity and nationalism in order to overcome the events of destruction. This argument is plausible because the rest of the film points toward a bright future for Japan, as seen in Image 10 which deals with an inexplicable sprouting of the family’s wheat crop just one year after the bombing.


(Figure 10)

On the other hand, however Image 11 also appears to have some underlying darkness in terms of its message. The atmosphere of the characters, which was of extreme importance in the bombing scene, is essentially a nuclear wasteland. Although the field appears to be sprouting wheat in the previous scene (Image 10), Image 11 only shows dead trees and dust (as well as the contaminated river that kills many people earlier in the film.


(Figure 11)

The sun is also portrayed as setting throughout the final scene of the movie, which is not exactly conducive to Masaki’s idea of a seemingly bright Japanese future and the idea of Japan as “land of the rising sun.” The underlying darkness present in the final scene of the movie serves to send out two separate messages: in order to survive Japan must rely on its traditional form of solidarity and nationalism, but also that as a small and isolated country, modern Japan would be subjected to obeying the wills of larger and more powerful countries like the United States.

The inexplicable growth of wheat at on the family farm one year after the bombing raises yet another level of speculation and meaning. Obviously it is impossible that such a miracle could happen so quickly after a disaster as huge as the Hiroshima bombing, so the wheat scene and Gen’s flashback to his father can only serve as another layer of political meaning. Sheng-Mei Ma raises an interesting point about this scene in her article, “Three Views of the Rising Sun, Obliquely” when she states the following:

The never-ending search for food focuses on the staple of the Japanese diet, rice, against which is the Nakaoka icon of wheat, as if the cartoonist deliberately chooses an atypical Japanese food to embody the antiwar, dissenting spirit of the Nakaokas. The erstwhile un-Japanese sentiment comes to be embraced wholeheartedly in postwar Japan. (Ma 187).

Ma’s generalization of Gen’s family as “atypical Japanese” (187) resonates throughout the first half of the movie and can be seen when Gen’s father tells Gen, “This war can’t be right…but it’s only the cowards like me who dare say it. If there were only a few more like us. You know, sometimes it takes more courage not to fight than to fight, to not want to kill…when all around you are calling for blood. That’s real courage in my book” (Barefoot Gen). The characterization of the Nakaokas as dissidents of the government appears to make sense in terms of Masaki’s political message because of the fates of the parents. The father, who stands as the most outspoken critic of the war in the film, ultimately pays for his anti-nationalistic views by burning to death shortly after the bombing. Although the father’s beliefs may appear to be acceptable to the viewer, the fact that he is killed indicates a failed idealistic point of view. When Gen’s father appears again in the flashback and tells Gen (referring to wheat), “Its life begins in the coldest season of the year. The rain pounds it, the wind blows it…it’s crushed beneath people’s feet…but still the wheat spreads its roots and grows. It survives. Learn from it, boys” (Barefoot Gen), it can be seen as a sort of reprisal of the father’s idealism that is killed when he is killed. Although his message in the flashback is meant to encourage Gen to never give up on life, which could be interpreted as Masaki’s message on a more national level, the fact that the father is killed in such a brutal fashion suggests that his ideals of social dissent from government should not be followed by the public. Thus, the flashback differs from the original quote from the father because it endorses more of a national mantra of solidarity and nationalism than the message of dissent and individual alienation from pre-bombing society and the government.

The fact that Gen’s family represents a dissident view of the war and the Japanese government raises even more pertinent questions about Masaki’s message in the film. Although Gen’s father can be seen as a dissident through some of his remarks about the war, the seemingly loving and functional way the family is shown could suggest a separate level of “normality” in Japanese society before the nuclear attack, untrusting and cautious towards foreign wars and the policies of the government. While the idea of “normality” in this sense defined by dissidence is an interesting idea, everything about the film seeks to generalize the Nakaoka as being a political anomaly to the nationalistic society. The separation from the Nakaoaka family and the rest of society can be seen early on in the movie, when there is a parade for Japanese soldiers that chants the following:

Banzai! Banzai! Banzai! Because I swore to win bravely and left my hometown, how can I die without doing great deeds? Every time I hear the marching trumpet, my mind recalls the waves of your flags. Banzai! Banzai! Banzai! (Barefoot Gen)

This nationalistic chant by the large group of people is then undermined by Gen and his brother Shinji when they sing their own chant which goes “Don’t you hate the military? Metal bowls and metal chopsticks. I’m not Buddha. One meal a day is pathetic” (Barefoot Gen). This sequence, which is the first sequence of the film after the theme song, sets the difference between the traditional nationalistic values of Japan embodied through the parade in this case, and the more modern political views of the Nakaoaka family (through the director, Masaki) of dissidence to war and the government.

On a broader level, the wheat scene further elaborates another aspect of the film that deserves a little attention: the constant cycle of life, death, and regeneration. Ma explains the motif in the following passage:

The motif of death and rebirth repeats itself in the manner of a fugue from the wheat imagery to numerous “reincarnations.” Gen and his mother Kimie survive the blast purely by chance, protected by a concrete wall and in the attic. Having witnessed three members of her family burned to death, Kimie gives birth to Tomoko amid the rubble, yet Tomoko dies in her infancy due to either malnutrition or the radiation-caused cancer. Gen also rescues [Gen’s brother’s] lookalike, Ryuta…Regeneration graces Gen himself…when he finds a fuzz covering his bald head… This gallery of monstrocities…illustrates Gen’s picaresque journey through hell. These supporting characters around Gen emerge and vanish in the narrative without much logic, akin to the chaos in Hiroshima. (Ma 186)

The seemingly unrelenting tragedies that follow Gen throughout the second half of the film always seem to be resolved by a sort of rebirth. One example is the appearance of Ryuta, who appears shortly after Gen’s father, sister, and brother are killed in a fire shortly after the bombing. Ryuta perfectly resembles Gen’s dead brother Shinji in virtually every way. This “rebirth” of Shenji not only represents the sort of hopefulness of life illustrated in the final scene of the film, but it also further emphasizes the subverted message of hopelessly uncontrolled sovereignty. Like the final scene of the film, which at the same time represents hopefulness toward the future and helplessness to the outside world, Shenji essentially exists amidst both the hopeless and hopeful ascepts of Masaki’s message.

Researching the film and, more generally, postwar Japan brings the argument that Barefoot Gen both endorses traditional Japanese nationalism and criticizes foreign involvement in Japan even more speculation. Harry Harootunian’s article “Japan’s Long Postwar” contains a few interesting ideas that are relevant to a discussion of postwar Japan. The following passage is particularly interesting:

As a mnemonic device for recall, the memory of living through the postwar, the nation in defeat, instead of the war itself, or indeed the vast complex history before the war, was coupled with the idea of culture to construct an endless present, more spatial than temporal, much like the commodity form that colonized Japanese life before the war as thoroughly as the U.S. Occupation. What I mean is that remembering the postwar in the 1990s worked to recall not the experience of wartime Japan, which the various discourses inspired by the Occupation and the enshrinement of Hiroshima effectively displaced, but rather the experience of a time when others, notably the Americans, prevented Japanese from actually forgetting their continuing status as a defeated nation. (Harootunian, 720)

Harootunian’s argument is relevant because it deals with one central question regarding the production of Barefoot Gen: why was it produced nearly 40 years after the actual bombing occurred? Through Harootunian’s argument it can be understood that Masaki directed the film from the perspective of someone who lived through the experience of postwar Japan. The view portrayal of the bombings, the use of the actual photo of the bombings, and the inexplicably hopefully ending of the film cannot help but be told from the perspective of a person looking back upon memories rather than reporting a witness’s testimony. The discrepancy in time between when the events occurred and when the film was actually produced indicate a political message influenced by a Japan that has long been controlled by foreign and U.S. influence.

One of the most important questions that can come out of this discussion is how does the film use the events of the past to comment upon modern Japan? Personally, I believe the evidence of both hopefulness toward the future and helplessness toward outside influence in the film set the stage for the Japan of 1983, the year Barefoot Gen was produced. At that time still controlled by U.S. interests, the Japan of 1983 was essentially the Japan that the film leaves us with: a rebuilding society centered on extreme cultural isolation, social unity, and the desire to be self-governing rather than controlled by foreign influences. Although Barefoot Gen may seem deceptively simple upon the first viewing, subsequent viewings reveal layer after layer of subversive political messages and imagery. While on one hand the film seems to clearly acknowledge the American enemy and the hopeful future of Japan, on the other hand it suggests an underlying message of Japan’s helplessness to outside influence and sovereignty. The fact that the film was produced nearly 40 years after the events it is based on only further causes us to question the message of the film and how it applies to modern Japanese society. The dual meanings of the film can only lead to the interpretation of the film as a truly indefinable, enigmatic piece of anime.

Politicizing Art in the Age of Information and Communications Technologies

Patlabor 2 (1993, Kidô keisatsu Patoreibaa 2 the Movie) starts with a battle scene in which a platoon of hostile resistance fighters engages fire against UN mechas using RPG’s. The army fighters destroy the industrialized weapons leaving peacekeeper Kiichi Gotoh bare to witness the rain falling on the Angkor Wat in Cambodia. A crucial shot in the anime film is the close up of Gotoh as he gets out of the industrialized weapon to look at the natural jungles of Cambodia still littered with mines placed by the Khmer Rouge. In the background the jungle sits still while he takes off his helmet only to keep his eyes shut to take in what has happened. As he opens them the lector is able to see a swollen eye along with cuts and profuse bleeding revealing the state of shock that his body is in. The view of the camera then switches focus bringing to the foreground the vast jungle through the eyes of Gotoh as he scans the area during ceasefire. In this reversal between foreground and background the view of the camera takes on a free-floating consciousness embodied in the gaze of the Bayon statue that towers above him. Holding his wounded arm Gotoh looks over his shoulder and gets startled at discovering the immense temples of the Khmer empire. This state of shock that Gotoh is in together with the presence of sacred objects in their natural state produces an aesthetic experience in him that becomes hyper accelerated by its contrast to the overwhelming experience of war. It is in this moment that Gotoh is able to experience the Sublime in a war torn region, a peace outside the realm of war that is not defined by the absence of war but, rather, reveals the limits of war and peace as understood by the United Nations.

As a critique international human rights work carried out by international organizations such as the UN whose stated aims are to spread and gain support in international law, the anime film shows the ways in which the suffering of individuals and groups is intensified by the perpetual warfare required to implement and maintain a certain image of justice. He was one of the early directors that experimented with the upcoming technology of 3D computer graphics. Blending 2D cell-shaded animation and computer graphics his experimental use mixes cel film, a transparent sheet of celluloid or similar material that is drawn on and used in the production of anime films, and 3D computer graphics of his time to draw out the political implications in the technologies of reproducibility of the time. Using the existing technologies of reproducibility of the 90’s and submitting to the conventions of his time (the aesthetic dimension of the present: film animation as a medium, anime as a genre) the director Mamoru Oshii limns the overwhelming complications associated with forcing a particular idea of international human rights on other people. With the presence of the UN in countries such as Thailand and Cambodia, the attempt at establishing human rights becomes uncertain and confused as different groups and organizations pursue their own agenda that does not fit the political schema of the UN and its supporters. The task at hand then for human beings in the position to assist in “stanching the flow of human blood, diminishing cries of human pain, unbending the crouch of human fear…” as Wendy Brown puts it, is not as clear cut and simple as it may seem (Human Rights p. 452). Human rights are supposed to improve living conditions for human beings in extreme situations around the world. However, the crisis that stems from international human rights efforts is that it is not enough nor will it ever be. In supporting lives in underdeveloped countries what were really doing is letting them live longer to struggle; we keep the problem alive at the expense of human lives in order to keep our capitalist life style. Brown’s piece “‘The Most we can Hope for…’: Human Rights and the Politics of Fatalism deals with the some of the same issues present in Oshii’s anime film as well. She writes in regards to human rights,

“human rights are vague and unforeseeable; their content is infinitely malleable; they are more symbolic than substantive; they cannot be grounded in any ontological truth or philosophical principle; in their primordial individualism; they conflict with cultural integrity and are a form of liberal imperialism; they are a guise in which the globalization of capital drapes itself; they entail secular idolatry of the human and are thus as much a religious creed as any other” (p.451).

In other words, human rights cannot be reduced to one maxim, to a categorical imperative in which one would do one thing and one thing only in all circumstances: every situation has its own historical and ontological properties as opposed to Kant who argued that one should act according to the maxim that can be willed universal by everyone in a similar situation, which will always be in accordance to the State Law. Similarly, organizations that attempt to universalize a particular notion of human rights in other countries take for granted what it is that allows for the pursuit of such a goal. The pursuit of an ethical peace is not found in reducing human rights to an ultimate principle but, rather, by producing a breed of human rights activism that does not negate other possible ways of dealing with the crisis at hand.

In the film, the process of restricting human suffering that the UN undertakes perpetuates the very thing it seeks to prohibit: the use of violence will secure the State a sovereign space within which the people who’s rights are protected are able to inhabit, but this space is always something that has to be policed at the expense of other humans whose rights cannot be recognized or grieved as lives. Rather than questioning the system and finding other ways of being politically involved, peacekeepers resort to war in order to keep peace, the terms of war having to strip the intelligibility of some bodies in order to justify the rights of some by necessarily excluding others: the war apparatus remains working within the same system of capital or symbolic surplus rather than trying other ways of handling the crisis, which may require the negotiation of the very terms of liberal rights discourse that is particular to the state. The presence of UN peacekeepers in a country that does not recognize international law only aggravates the situation in creating more human suffering that could have been avoided had they not been there. According to Brown, “…human rights activism is valuable not because it is founded on some transcendent truth, advances some ultimate principle… but rather simply because it is effective in limiting political violence and reducing misery” (452-453). For this reason, the Kantian categorical imperative cannot be used as a justification for the existence of rights discourse, but only the need of considering each crisis in its historical specificity, without generalizations or abstractions into universal laws that often impede the political will towards action. Oshii clearly depicts the exacerbation of the problem and the contradictions of keeping peace through war when we see the objects that symbolize peace being destroyed by the resistant military wing. The function of peacekeepers being sent to patrol foreign countries is to maintain stability and improve the lives of the people. However, the peacekeepers ignite and create more conflicts, more blood flow as in the case with Gotoh and more chaos as a result of conflicts between international law and the various organized militias groups in the area. Additionally, rather than approaching it other ways that can lessen and even end unnecessary human pain, the UN works within the closed system of perpetual violence and it is this working within the dichotomy of war and peace that the UN forces its discourse onto autonomous regions that creates more situations in which dangerous conflicts can break out. As a result, the effects intended by the various activist groups only reproduce the system that creates the conditions for war. Instead of questioning the root problem (liberal imperialism) political organizations keep the system alive in a perpetual state of peace through war.

The first scene that takes place in Cambodia abruptly cuts from a close up of the Bayon head to the 0.98 Labor Operating System training simulation set in Japan for the new Shinohara Heavy Industry Corporation Patrol Labor. Oshii takes us on an excursion from one extreme to the other; from the aesthetic experience that Gotoh has in the still shot of the Bayon face to the transition to Japan’s technologically driven society at the height of its urban sprawl. This juxtaposition of the organic sublime to the inauthenticity of the modern aestheticizes the surreal world of Japan’s futuristic society at the same time that it draws out the aesthetic impression of the Angkor Wat. It brings to the fore the differences between the natural and laborious production in Cambodia to the automated, impersonal and highly technologized world of Japan’s industrial society, creating an ethereal experience characteristic of the modern in this juxtaposition of the late-modern and post-industrial urban scape to its obscene and sustaining underside: the result is precisely the Sublime of the Real trauma as the experience of a primordial jouissance through this play of life and death, peace and war. Indeed, this juxtaposition is quite brilliantly illustrated in the “cyborg” like character of the mecha, a natural and organic character extended in space and time, made more efficient through its technological appendeges which become inextricable from the function of the human in late-modernity:



(Figure 1)[1]


Oshii raises the doubt that improving technology is a solution to the problems found in the first scene. He questions whether we need to improve our technology in order to be able to fight and end conflicts through war more efficiently, since for him they seem to merely extend conflict into previously unfathomable spaces that are the result of technological proliferation itself. In the movie, the technological innovations that take place after the battle between UN mechas and the militia group are supposed to be a solution to the problem, the idea being more powerful weapons will instantiate a universal peace. However, Oshii seems to be proposing the opposite in critiquing the strategies that are undertaken by industrialized nations such as the U.S. who attempt to implement an idea of what peace “is”. Their use of industrialized weaponry to reify the idea of international human rights in other countries fails altogether once the cure to the problem becomes the very disease. If the production and expansion of discourse produces and proliferates the very means of resistance to that discursive assemblage, then Oshii’s critique can be read in a Foucauldian light since the new technologies that are meant to suppress the insurgency simply create new spaces and, thus, new means of resistance that are enabled through technological expansion itself. In starting the film off in Cambodia Oshii questions the U.S. role as an international police unit. The recent violent history of Cambodia dates back to the Vietnam War when the war spread into Cambodia. During the Vietnam War the U.S. bombed the Vietcong along with the parts of Cambodia, their pretext being that Cambodia was a hiding place used by the Vietnam’s People’s Army. The U.S. government viewed involvement in the war as a way to prevent a communist takeover of South Vietnam and, as a result, Cambodia got pulled into the war. The war to fight communism ended with heavy U.S. casualties along with heavy civilian casualties from the bombardment of the Vietcong. After the U.S. pulled out of the war civilian casualties in Cambodia rose to the millions. The Khmer Rouge’s leader Pol Pot took advantage of the countries vulnerability and of the scared citizens after the war as he promised protection and refused Western influence. However, the outcome turned out different. Pol Pot’s plan was to erase the history of Cambodia by killing all the intellectuals, brain washing the youth and starting genocide that led to a death of an estimated 1.5 to 1.7 million.

Incorporating a country that has shown a history of violence and oppression is significant in contextualizing modern international efforts for human rights since the anime film was released in 1993 soon after the Gulf War, which has become characteristic of late-modern conflicts. The Iran-Iraq War began when Iraq launched an invasion of Iran on September 20 1980. Iraq’s air forces attacked Iranian airfields with the intent to destroy the Iranian Air Force base. Saddam Hussein’s reason for invading was a supposed assassination attempt to kill the Foreign Minister of Iraq, Tariq Aziz. The war ended once the UN negotiated ceasefire but this only lasted a few years until the Gulf War began as a result of border conflicts between Iran and Iraq. Both Cambodian history and Middle Eastern history have had border disputes. In the case of the Gulf War the U.S. led the war and called all other nations to join the front against Saddam Hussein and his regime. Cambodia’s history is full of border disputes that date back to the 1400-century. In incorporating Cambodia and its history, Oshii questions U.S. involvement in the Gulf War and their absence in not only Cambodia, but other countries where there is there genocide going on. He questions their role as global police and draws out the contradictions in their global agenda and its effectiveness. Places like Cambodia, Africa and other underdeveloped nations that have had it worse have yet to be aided by the U.S. How can some lives like the lives of Iraqi citizens be recognized as grievable[2] and how can others not be considered lives at all like the Khmer people that have been suffering for centuries as a result of the agenda of other countries. In Frames of War Judith Butler distinguishes between lives that are considered grievable and lives that are not recognized as lives. She writes, “Normative schemes are interrupted by one another, they emerge and fade depending on broader operations of power, and very often come up against spectral versions of what it is they claim to know: thus, there are subjects, and there are “lives” that are not quite recognizable as subjects, and there are “lives” that are not quit – or indeed, are never – recognized as lives (p. 7). In the anime film, the normative schemes set up by the U.S. global policy do not recognize certain lives as grievable as opposed to lives that are in our interest to save. A big question regarding U.S. involvement in the Gulf War and the more recent Iraq war focuses on and asks about the oil that the liberal imperialist society of the U.S. benefits from. Oshii engages in that widespread critique of U.S. intentions which asks whether or not the U.S. political agenda is based on its own self-interest. Given the history of underdeveloped countries such as Africa and other struggling nations like Cambodia, it seems as if the U.S. picks and chooses which lives are worth a life and uses it to normalize and justify human rights efforts.

By the end of the anime movie the technological innovations clearly function to complicate and blur the problems caused by technology and its limitations. As Captain Gotoh finds himself entangled in the political crisis as Yukihito Tsuge, an angry war veteran of the Japanese Self-Defense Force leads a military terrorist group into a violent assault against Tokyo and blows up the Yokohama Bay Bridge. Pat labor 2 draws police commanders Kiichi Gotoh into the chase after Tsuge. But the investigation into the crisis is protected by secrets both personal and political. Oshii uses the technologies of mechanical reproduction particular to his time to politicize art and creates new modes of political life in the age of information and electronic technologies. In the piece "The Work of Art in the Age of Technological Reproducibility" Walter Benjamin is writing at a time when film begins to emerge as a pervasive and accessible medium and technology particular to its time. He argues that man, while limited to the means of technological reproduction of a time, is also capable of rearticulating the uses of those technologies and finding a new means of previously unforeseen modes of political life. In doing so, Benjamin notes that while the aesthetic technologies of time are limiting, they also enable a timeless and constant revolutionizing that cannot be confined to those technologies, effectively equating art to politics. Oshii meets the revolutionary demands that Benjamin seems to be calling for in using computer graphics and cel film animation to depict through art and film the political implications of the world in which the film is imbedded. In this Oshii creates new modes of being involved with politics that were not possible before the invention of the technologies of reproducibility that he uses.


NOTES

1. The new Shinohara Industry Patrol Labor in the anime film is a result of an upgrade from the Hiishii Industries AL97B Hannibal, which is the mecha that Kiichi is in when he gets shot. It is supposed to improve the efficiency and efficacy of international human rights efforts.

2. Professor Judith Butler in Frames of War: The Politics of Ungrievable Life explores the way that recent US-led wars have enforced a distinction between those lives that are recognized as grievable, and those that are not.


BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Benjamin, Walter. "The Work of Art in the Age of Its Technological Reproducibility, and Other Writings on Media." Selected Writings. Vol. 4. Cambridge, MA: Belknap of Harvard UP, 2008. 250-83. Print. 1938-1940.

2. Butler, Judith. Frames of War: When Is Life Grievable? London: verso, 2009. Print.

3. Brown, Wendy. "Human Rights and the Politics of Fatalism." The South Atlantic Quarterly 103 (2004): 251-63. Print.

Cat Shit One: Zoomorphism, Obstruction and Reattachment

Motofumi, creator of Cat Shit One, juxtaposes the necessity for a detachment against reattachment within our physical and metaphysical bodies by the overcoming of obstacles, such as alienation through warfare seen through the actions of Packy and Botasky. The actions of these two bunny soldiers are interwoven with the motivations of humans causing for new form of reattachment to occur for these zoomorphic friends. Within this short animated film, the audience is originally presented in the setting of a destroyed village during the Iraq War, which camels took control of in order to repel the American USA GI’s.[1] While Packy and Botasky are hiding in the exterior of the compound, they find out back-up is “available in 30 minutes” to assist in the rescue of these ‘canaries’. While Botasky invades to rescue the hostages and to eliminate the terrorists, Packy decides to stay watch because he is scared. As Botasky enters, Packy calls for aid because he is “under rapid fire” by the camels. As the situation is being resolved, Botasky becomes a hero by rescuing the canaries and ordering Packy to carry the hostages towards the exterior perimeter. Concurrently, Botasky continues to eliminate the terrorists, yet surprisingly Packy comes back to aid his partner. As their victory heightens, three back-up trucks enter to ambush these two soldiers. Finally, the helicopter ‘Angel One’, flown by a bunny, comes and kills the terrorists therefore enabling these armed animals to walk out of war peacefully.

Motofumi parodies an earlier work of his own, Apocalypse Meow, a three part series of manga, depicting the physiological feelings of American soldiers during the Vietnam War. In this parody, he juxtaposes real situations and people with surrealistic animals. This reoccurrence of alienation reinstates the creator’s ideologies about the physiological effects of war with this physically altered piece; CatShitOne challenges the limitations of perception in regards to identity of the self and the other in order to form a reattachment to society. Motofumi enables for a detachment from our environment, permitting for reattachment after an obstacle or alienation. Furthermore, he offers various methods of reattachment like teamwork or escape, which enables one to redefine their surroundings. This reattachment makes a stronger impact after a detachment is felt physically and metaphysical because the loss creates greater gain. Therefore, I want to forward his claim about challenging the human perception of identity and self-awareness through redefinition of identity, teamwork and satire between these two bunny soldiers. Additionally, I want to prove that this satiric medium, represented by exposed emotional feelings between the two, enables several methods to be openly reconsidered. Furthermore, this reattachment enables for a conscious connection to be made between the creator and the viewer likewise the characters to aid in reattaching after an obstacle or alienation.

When considering the identity of these characters, the audience needs to consider the structure of the narrative. This involves understanding the surroundings that Motofumi establishes thus providing the audience with the limitations of the characters. These limitations create a sense of identity because they are regarded


(Figure 1)

as functional products. These protagonists’ soldiers are engaging in war against camels from the Middle East. Within this world, animals are the primary form of animate[2] beings. This surrealistic approach allows for a better analysis of the detachment animate beings have in an isolated setting.

As these two characters enter combat, Botasky says to Packy, “If we don’t do it now, those two canaries are going


(Figure 2)

to die.” The use of the word ‘canary’ creates a double pun the meaning of an American hostage and a bird - which these are rabbits. Thus, ‘Canary’ identifies various stages of their own kind, which makes identification difficult for the viewer. Additionally, the animals reference themselves as “armed animals”. Therefore this language is breaking the personification that is originally perceived as humanistic animals. A world filled with various animal nations[3] creates a new attachment to these armed animals. This surrealistic relationship between animal nations redefines their detachment from the people they are fighting for; Both bunnies appear to be fighting alone, escalating self-pressure, furthermore detaching them from their purpose. This creates a new form of reattachment through identity by the function and the characteristic of the animals. This human-animal analogy traps the viewer to believe this is a world of self-aware beings, which become a challenge to define. Cat Shit One portrays a new form of identity, which is moving away from the individual and is moving towards a communal lifestyle.

Moving along, Motofumi creates this setting with the aim of showing various methods of reattaching after an obstacle or alienation. The first glimpse of this rebuilding is through teamwork, which enables for both


(Figure 3)

characters to gain self awareness within a bigger unit, their team. Botasky provides security and leadership while saying to Packy “You can hide if you want, but I’m in the middle of their territory.” This enlightens us to the diverse ways of coping in order to reattach ourselves to our environment and purpose; Botasky takes action, while Packy alienates himself during struggles. Concerning these obstacles, Motofumi creates a challenge with both positive and negative consequences. Later, their teamwork is strengthened by redefining themselves in order to cope with the adaptability of warfare. An example is when Packy, usually scared, aids Botasky while stating “we should go there, only 1km away. Two targets down!” As Packy overcomes his fear, it is necessary to


(Figure 4)

redefine of himself and his team. Motofumi encourages this redefinition of themselves and their team in order to adjust and adapt to their new ever-changing surroundings. I believe this is the first coping mechanism to aid in providing a reattachment after alienation through warfare, teamwork.

Another method Motofumi uses to encourage reattachment is through exposing their relationship and obstacles through a filter of parody. Throughout the film, parody evokes many patterns of reattachment for Packy and


(Figure 5)

Botasky by exposing their relationship for its surrealistic quality. Seen through the parody lens, Packy and Botasky create juxtaposing positions about the function of their weapons. Additionally, these character’s distinct points of view create a detachment from one another. While Packy loves his scope, Botasky inputs his opinion, “You get worn out because of how much you gun weighs.” However, Packy remains stubborn, “But it looks so cool like this.” Thus no change occurs until a re-identification with their weapons.[4] Another cycle of detachment occurs in order to realign and assimilate back into a proper representation. Moreover, the parodied relationship in regards to the gun exposes both points of view and enables for various paths available in order to understand what needs to be fixed for a functioning environment.

Near the ending, Packy is in close combat with a camel and uses his “useless” scope to protect himself from being


(Figure 6)

seriously injured. I believe Motofumi uses this parody to expose this reshaping of attachment in order to teach that primal instincts are necessary to survive and to adapt during warfare. In other words, Botasky’s original opinion shifts in order for his teammate to remain alive; this is a clear relationship of the impact detachment and reattachment has on our physical bodies while we cope with alienation. Botasky’s final words about the scope to Packy are, “my God you are stubborn.” This reinstates the necessity for redefinition because these two juxtaposing ideas of the gun conclude with a positive action, which saves Packy’s life. Caused by the use of parody to distance the characters in the film, Motofumi uses surreal scenes of war with bunnies in order for the audience to detach themselves physically and the question the exposure and limitations of this relationship.
In the closing scene, the soldiers finally receive back-up from ‘Angel One’ in order to regain life for another day of fighting. The reattachment of the characters into a peaceful war is seen through the pastel colors and


(Figure 7)

relaxed posture of themselves and their environment. This reattachment by conscious connections enables Packy to cope with his alienation in order to move into the future. This capability of zoomorphic animate beings to reshape their definitions of their surroundings enables them to overcome their detachment and reattach with a more refined idea. It is impossible for a traumatic event to create a sense of alienation and dystopia for all its characters; therefore some characters can become alienate, yet they are capable of regaining their life. Furthermore, the dichotomy of this scene lies within its parody. The language used during the last scene reinstates this juxtaposing of a peacefully war because Botasky says, “Packy, I didn’t order you to come back. Now you need a punishment.”[5] Contrary to the displeasure of Packy disobeying, this scene also comments upon the rewards of the current war by Botasky being a compassionate creature.

Cat Shit One evokes the detachment and reattachment of our physical and


(Figure 8)

metaphysical bodies in order for time to move along, yet more important is the conscious connections made during times of hardship, which lift our spirits.

When exploring anthropomorphism, I found a connection between Metropolis, and Cat Shit One in regards to the concept of redefining your identity in order to adapt to a new structure. In a futuristic city-state of Metropolis, Tima[6] is pressured about her identity because she is part-human, part-robot. Thus the doctor’s punishment is for her to loose her face -identity. This shows a necessary detachment in order to understand what she was made of. Furthermore, this detachment enables for a new definition of her identity. For the case of perception, Tima is no longer just a


(Figure 9)

human, but also a machine. This new identification enables the community to alienate her from the rest, thus she was treated as the face of the problem. Furthermore, Tima is reattached to the environment of the electronic world thus she is no longer an able human, but a fixed piece of machinery. Additionally, this same process of reattachment is seen in Cat Shit One. The reattachment of a peaceful war evokes Packy to find his identity with his teammate. A note about this reattachment, it is necessary for more than one party to be involved to have this inter-dialogue seen in the effects of behavior and representation. These parallels seen in Metropolis and Cat Shit One allow for the audience to correlate the causes and effects of this alienation through redefining the identity of Tima and Packy. Both of these films elaborate upon the identity of the self as well as the community after a struggle of alienation and reinstate a new form of identification.

While Cat Shit One and Metropolis create a secure space to redefine their self identity within a community, these films go about this task in two distinct ways. Tima, from Metropolis, is cyborg resulting in an ideology to form that she is capable of achievements humans can’t. In result, she comments on the technological revolution and how it affects our human detachment from nature. Such an example is the strong face to face contact that gets her in to trouble to begin with. Contrary, Cat Shit One reattaches this process of identity towards the natural world. These armed animals are personified in order to resonate with our origins of nature. These primal instincts create our tendencies to correlate with animals. Furthermore, this relation permits the imagination to explore new methods of coping with various forms of alienation.

Throughout my research, I grew interested in zoomorphism and “The Animated Beast”[7] as well as the implications of this imagination and redefinition. Paul Wells’s analysis on the anthropomorphic value of animals is represented as human vehicles with a philosophical agenda. He states “I want to further suggest that the facility for animals to work as a form, which privileges imagination- not quite human, not quite animal- enables us to stake a claim in expression, illustration and performance of this philosophical agenda” (136). This clearly shows the inter-dialogue between the human interpretation and the imagination of these satiric animals. Additionally, he claims there are five types of animals; Cat Shit One contains “satiric beings”. These beings, “shed light on the critical and analytical address that characterizes satire and informs its targets and outlook” (160). Moreover, these vehicles play off our ignorance, simple-minded fantasies to exploit the limitations of humans understanding. Cat Shit One evokes its parody in order to expose these physical and metaphysical limitations set by the limitations of the human interpretation.

More over, this ability for animate beings to be able to redefine their identity and their community enables for a conscious connection to be made between the creator and the audience. Paralleling the relationship of Botasky and Packy, Motofumi interjects his ideologies about animals onto the characters in order for the audience to be validated by the reactions they receive. Anthropomorphism enables the viewer to create a connection in regards to the physiology of the alterations of these animals. This convention which alters humanistic traits provokes our personification of animals. This connection gives power to our self-awareness allowing for ourselves to make choices about what methods we use to overcome alienation.

Through the overcoming of this juxtaposition of identity, the structure creates a reattachment towards the audience as analogies of the bunnies, yet this detachment must occur first. Therefore, the reattachment will need to branch off the audiences original physiological feelings of what detached them, like unrealistic warfare or emotional concerns of bunnies and canaries. This unrealistic aspect of warfare aids in understanding the detachment and reattachment of the audience to various aspects of physical and metaphysical world. Additionally, the exposure of parody creates for an open connection to be seen without any limitations of perception, which is classical of the human perception. Motofumi portrays Botasky and Packy as surrealistic characters, which are taken to the extreme have no connection with their environment. I believe that because of this surrealism,[8] Motofumi challenges the awareness of our perception in order to facilitate other ideas for overcoming this juxtaposition. In other words, the social function of this film is to enable all people to feel a conscious connection that may have been distanced in the past. The parody emphasizes this distance, while the strong bond of teamwork brings together all nations of people in order to overcome common anxieties we face in our current world, such as warfare and alienation.

Motofumi parodies his original work, Apocalypse Meow, in order to provide a coping mechanism that can be used during a time of warfare. Cat Shit One portrays two armed animals in combat with armed camels in order to show the audience the detachment from warfare that is provided throughout this satire. Furthermore, he also evokes the premise of a reattachment by the strong use of parody to recreate silly, abstract concepts that can be overcome physically by redefining the current surroundings and beings within this environment. First, I question the identification of these armed animals in order to understand the structure of their surroundings. Next, I look through the alienation and find teamwork as juxtaposition. Furthermore, this conflict enables for the audience to understand in an anagogical terms what is occurring during this alienation and various ways of coping. Additionally, Motofumi provides the film with numerous ways, such as teamwork, re-defining, through the reattachment of our physical bodies into our new current surroundings. In conclusion, Motofumi created CatShitOne in order to provide his audience with a conscious connection between himself, the creator and the audience for overcoming obstacles like alienation and warfare in a more parody environment. This parody strengthens this detachment and reattachment through the strong feelings that parody exposes without giving any logical conclusion other than the audiences reconstruction.


NOTES

1. The depiction of Americans as rabbits is actually a pun on the Japanese word for rabbit. The Japanese word for rabbit is "うさぎ", which can be romanized as "usagi", or USA GI.

2. The manga depicts the characters as different animals according to their nationality as follows: American – Rabbit Vietnamese – Cat French – Pig Chinese – Panda Japanese – Monkey.

3. Interestingly, the language of the camels is never identified causing for their perception to be foreign. This forwards the camel’s identity as a terrorist because they appear as people of an uncivilized nation.

4. The distinction in Packy and Botasky’s points of view causes for a necessity of reshaping their team identity.

5. This punishment occurs because Packy decided to come back and aid his teammate out of war. The irony of the punishment forces Packy to be displeased, but able to reattach towards this new social experience.

6. A robot modeled and named after Duke Red's deceased daughter. She is unique in that she appears human, a trait that no other robot shares. However, after she is activated, she has no memory or knowledge about who or what she is.

7. Wells, Paul. “Anthropomorphism, Practice, Narrative.” The Animated Bestiary. Animals, Cartoons and Culture. British Library, y. 2009.

8. Anime Critic: “There is however no blood shown in this anime series which kind of tones it down.”