“NO HE IS NOT DEAD AND HE IS COMING BACK AT THE WORST MOMENT..” WHAT WTF NOOOooooooooooo Oh God Please

“NO HE IS NOT DEAD AND HE IS COMING BACK AT THE WORST MOMENT..” WHAT WTF NOOOooooooooooo oh god please no. I thought I would fine with whether Jeanist is dead or not BUT NOW I just want him dead and to stay dead damn it!

Finally, I will not wait for the “official” translation or whatever because I need to speak about that but the thing is, this whole chapter is a symptom of the “cul entre deux chaises” effect that I was talking about (and yes, I will continue to use the French expression because I like very much the image and the rhythm of it, sorry not sorry). Of course, what I will talk about will be a lot of assumptions on how the author works but I think I’m not too far from the truth given that I saw it coming - the BJ thing when we learned he was alive. 

I think MHA’s main problem is that instead of having one nuanced guiding line for its narration, it has two of them. Because it’s not very clear like that, I will try to explain it further. While reading MHA, I have always had the impression that I was reading two different mangas in one. 

World 1: The Heroes with the kids

World 2: The Villains with the League

You are going to tell me that it is normal and that they can exist at the same time. And given how it is written, I don’t think so. Here is why:

What I call “World 1″ is extremely simplistic in its view of the world, the society. The Heroes are the good guys, the Villains are the bad guys. You have to stop the bad guys. It is easy as that. No question asked. It is a black and white world. There is an idealization of this world by the characters living in this “world”.

What I call “World 2″ is nuanced in how the world works. Most of the Villains in it know that what they are doing IS wrong. They do not pretend that their actions are morally right. But, they point out why they are doing this and how they came to do this. They are not blind to the society they live in. It is a grey world.

And the problem is: they can’t live together well because in general, when you have a black and white version of a fact, it can’t win against a grey version. Why? Because a black and white version is weak and fragile. It can't hold the questions when the grey version can because it accepts that the answers are not clear-cut. For example, Hawks’ actions invalidate “World 1″ because he is a Hero. Thus he should be Good. But it is not the case: it is not clear-cut evil (he can use the greater good justification) but not clear-cut good either (he killed someone for a crime he had not committed yet + it wasn’t his place to be judge and jury and executioner). How to deal with that when you divide the world into GOOD HEROES vs EVIL VILLAINS? You can’t. But it can live in the “Grey” world because his actions are neither entirely good, neither entirely bad. He is a Pro-Hero who had done at best questionable things. It is not possible to just close your eyes and put him in the Good Hero case (nor in the Evil Villain, btw).

So, in this situation, you would think that World 2 has to slowly bleed onto World 1 to paint a complex and not easy world to live in, leaving the whole thing as “the Bad Side is not necessarily utterly bad, pure evil and the Good Side is not necessarily utterly good”... which is normal. Characters with simple views of world have to evolve when said world is not simple. Especially when it is the main protagonists we are talking about.

But it is not the case in this manga: not only World 1 resists but, in the end, it seems to have the last word.

If World 2 was not here being nuanced, it would be okay. But it is not. And because of that, it forces us to have a selective memory. We have to forget that Heroes sent minors to war (yes, it was to evacuate but I am not sure that you can defend that without being of very bad faith) without their parents’ consent (when it was a huge point that they were children and that they had parents, you know - in another manga, you would not care, but not here) because it does not fit in the “Good” case where it should be in World 1 vision. When it could have easily lived in World 2′s vision.

And you are going to tell me that I am negative. That the author is doing this to make a huge reveal and make the Heroes change their mind... It’s nice to be positive but I don’t believe it. Not after so many chapters. Not after so many occasions. Not after a pattern appeared. And chapter 291 is a big example of this pattern.

The author undermines the nuanced speech to sweeten the pill that yes, the Heroes are not Good without questions. Dabi is making a speech on how Hawks killed Twice and Best Jeanist? No, finally Best Jeanist is not dead so he is wrong. No matter that there was still a corpse in the bad. No matter that he killed Twice. There is something not right in his speech so, it is the proof needed to consider it wholly wrong in-universe and undermine its impact for the readers too. I am sorry but it is the case. Of course, it will cause a huge problem in society but still, it is not innocent. It is a conscious choice from the author and ignoring it is not a solution. 

The same technic is also used when it comes to Toya’s backstory. Of course, we have his point of view, but then we have Endeavor’s memory. Why, if not to undermine Toya’s speech? I am not at all against Endeavor’s redemption (or having his point of view btw). I dislike the character but it can be interesting to see. However, it seems to be done at the expense of Toya’s own traumatic experience. Again, just like for Best Jeanist, it is not to say that Toya’s story will not have an impact, but to have the abuser’s point of view just after who lessens significantly Toya’s bad experience (just look at how Dabi says that he was crying every day and how Endeavor’s memories are way nicer)? The place where it was put in the narrative is not innocent. It can’t be.

Is it because the author doesn’t want to destroy the Heroes’ image? But it is too late for that. It is already destroyed if you take attention to what the villains are saying or what some people in the Heroes’ society lived/are living. Is it because the author wants to reassure everyone on Endeavor’s redemption? But it is a redemption: the fact that he has done bad things IS the point. He can still be redeemed even if you don’t lessen the negative perception of what he had done to the readers (in this case, it mostly impacts the readers, not necessarily the characters in-universe, imo... at least for now). We know that Endeavor wants to do better. We do. I even believe it. But if the author really wanted to show the entire truth in its full terrible impact, he would not have done that. It is just done kind of deceitfully because Endeavor’s vision is not inconceivable given that he is responsible for his family situation (it is easy to conceive that he would lessen the problem, even inconsciously, to save himself some guilt). The problem is not that Endeavor sees the past like that. It is really where it is put in the narrative. The timing does a lot.

What Horikoshi is doing is safe in the way that he can still choose what he will do in the end. However, the more it progresses, the more it is dangerous in terms of writing quality. Because he will have to purposely ignore a lot of what had been told and even retcon some important (and morally grey) things. He will have to choose between World 1 and World 2 because they cannot live together. The Heroes Society can not be flawed and flawless at the same time. Of course, it could still change... but after 290 chapters and the tendency to put everything under the carpet... let me be negative.

(I hope what I said was clear. Not sure but here I go anyway. This platform is not meant to write pages and pages anyway.

And I will come back to talk about how this tendency I mentioned is here since the FIRST chapter. The premise of this writing flaw was here since day one. Just hoped it would be more complex than this.)