P5 Meta - Blog Posts

Hey, so I don't want to be that guy, but when are we going to acknowledge that Akechi was right?

No, I obviously don't mean about the things he was very clearly wrong about. I'm referring to the things he says in interviews about the Phantom Thieves. I hate how many people switch up after playing through his betrayal who previously agreed with his views, because nothing he said is wrong and nothing he did changes that fact. He speaks in the TV Station on the objective facts that he should know about, and with or without the context of his form of justice those facts stay true. It's a fallacy to claim that his form of justice being universally less approved of makes the Phantom Thieves better by comparison, or discredits anything he said. I don't think the Phantom Thieves are evil, or that they should necessarily be imprisoned, but I do think that they are not morally sound. They're kids. Prior to his betrayal I think he served his purpose well, but it's easy to disregard the validity of his words when you find out that he's a murderer. With the knowledge he SHOULD have had (and that many DID have), everything he says is true. And honestly? It still can be true for basically the entire plot of the game. Mishima's confidant tests the thieves in that way. They could have changed the hearts of anyone who's not a persona user, for any personal reason. It's a slippery slope.

I'll use these three options as an example for why he's right:

"They're justice itself" is just subjective and incorrect, because justice as a concept is individualized and given how each Phantom Thief has different reasons for being one it's ridiculous for even them to say. Their first target was before they even formed a group, and Ann was ready to kill Kamoshida. The others were not even going to step in, and they were going to respect her choice either way. All the members are so different, so this is an insane claim to make.

"They're necessary" is wrong because to say they are necessary is pretty disingenuous to all "justice" that has ever happened BEFORE they existed. I don't believe that the Thieves were a necessity per say, and personally I think their actions can only be judged on a case by case basis. Some Mementos targets for example have issues that stem beyond what they have done. Now they have their desires stolen but still have the issue that pushed them to immortality in the first place, plus a shitton of guilty baggage. The Thieves only help with the atonement, but not the push. How many of those people didn't just go right back to their past behaviors? How many of them got worse in other ways? Think about Futaba, she felt so guilty for something she thought she did, she formed a palace to condemn herself to die alone. To claim the Thieves are necessary to reform society implies that their method is the most effective, and I think that's a lot to claim for something they don't understand.

"They do more than the cops" I almost agree with. Legally the police in Japan in this game anyway (yes I'm aware it extends to reality in many ways, but I'm referring to just the game right now) are corrupt and flawed for the most part, but the thing I don't agree with is that this makes the Thieves a better alternative. They're not. For the same reason Yoshizawa says later, the Thieves can only do so much as vigilantes, and to imply that society should rely on these faceless nameless flawed people to fix society is not any better than what they have now. Especially with the method being unknown, potentially unsafe, and easily exploitable. I cannot be the only one who if the Phantom Thieves were real, would be extremely alarmed by the prospect of a group of vigilantes "changing hearts" right? It's so vague, and the pattern is dystopian. At least police methods are familiar

What I'm saying is that they're kids, and it's kind of insane that this game places Akechi as the narrative foil for the Thieves in their message and then makes it so easy to disregard because "he's an assassin so how could he know anything about justice". The Thieves don't either, and Ann was nearly a murderer. If the bar is "don't commit murder when you're infiltrating someone's mind" then it's far too low. I wouldn't trust a group of adults with this power to reform society, even less a group of teenage vigilantes. I'm 19, and I find this odd. And Strikers frames them as even more righteous, and it bugs me even more in that game. At least Royal has the third semester to give a bit more nuance to how big of a responsibility Ren was given, but that's also very frequently misinterpreted.

I love this game, and I love this fandom, and I have thoughts that get weird and ranty. I apologize, but I hope you all found this as interesting as I did.

Hey, so I don't want to be that guy, but when are we going to acknowledge that Akechi was right?

No, I obviously don't mean about the things he was very clearly wrong about. I'm referring to the things he says in interviews about the Phantom Thieves. I hate how many people switch up after playing through his betrayal who previously agreed with his views, because nothing he said is wrong and nothing he did changes that fact. He speaks in the TV Station on the objective facts that he should know about, and with or without the context of his form of justice those facts stay true. It's a fallacy to claim that his form of justice being universally less approved of makes the Phantom Thieves better by comparison, or discredits anything he said. I don't think the Phantom Thieves are evil, or that they should necessarily be imprisoned, but I do think that they are not morally sound. They're kids. Prior to his betrayal I think he served his purpose well, but it's easy to disregard the validity of his words when you find out that he's a murderer. With the knowledge he SHOULD have had (and that many DID have), everything he says is true. And honestly? It still can be true for basically the entire plot of the game. Mishima's confidant tests the thieves in that way. They could have changed the hearts of anyone who's not a persona user, for any personal reason. It's a slippery slope.

I'll use these three options as an example for why he's right:

"They're justice itself" is just subjective and incorrect, because justice as a concept is individualized and given how each Phantom Thief has different reasons for being one it's ridiculous for even them to say. Their first target was before they even formed a group, and Ann was ready to kill Kamoshida. The others were not even going to step in, and they were going to respect her choice either way. All the members are so different, so this is an insane claim to make.

"They're necessary" is wrong because to say they are necessary is pretty disingenuous to all "justice" that has ever happened BEFORE they existed. I don't believe that the Thieves were a necessity per say, and personally I think their actions can only be judged on a case by case basis. Some Mementos targets for example have issues that stem beyond what they have done. Now they have their desires stolen but still have the issue that pushed them to immortality in the first place, plus a shitton of guilty baggage. The Thieves only help with the atonement, but not the push. How many of those people didn't just go right back to their past behaviors? How many of them got worse in other ways? Think about Futaba, she felt so guilty for something she thought she did, she formed a palace to condemn herself to die alone. To claim the Thieves are necessary to reform society implies that their method is the most effective, and I think that's a lot to claim for something they don't understand.

"They do more than the cops" I almost agree with. Legally the police in Japan in this game anyway (yes I'm aware it extends to reality in many ways, but I'm referring to just the game right now) are corrupt and flawed for the most part, but the thing I don't agree with is that this makes the Thieves a better alternative. They're not. For the same reason Yoshizawa says later, the Thieves can only do so much as vigilantes, and to imply that society should rely on these faceless nameless flawed people to fix society is not any better than what they have now. Especially with the method being unknown, potentially unsafe, and easily exploitable. I cannot be the only one who if the Phantom Thieves were real, would be extremely alarmed by the prospect of a group of vigilantes "changing hearts" right? It's so vague, and the pattern is dystopian. At least police methods are familiar

What I'm saying is that they're kids, and it's kind of insane that this game places Akechi as the narrative foil for the Thieves in their message and then makes it so easy to disregard because "he's an assassin so how could he know anything about justice". The Thieves don't either, and Ann was nearly a murderer. If the bar is "don't commit murder when you're infiltrating someone's mind" then it's far too low. I wouldn't trust a group of adults with this power to reform society, even less a group of teenage vigilantes. I'm 19, and I find this odd. And Strikers frames them as even more righteous, and it bugs me even more in that game. At least Royal has the third semester to give a bit more nuance to how big of a responsibility Ren was given, but that's also very frequently misinterpreted.

I love this game, and I love this fandom, and I have thoughts that get weird and ranty. I apologize, but I hope you all found this as interesting as I did.

I agree with every bit of this and I (somehow) have even more to add. Akechi living is fundamentally not only better for his arc, for Joker's arc, for the theming of the third semester and persona 5 as a whole, but also (and most importantly) for shuake. I'll detail why in this comprehensive essay/hj

For the same reason you said, Akechi went into his plan without believing he could heal or had any semblance of a future. It never mattered to him and was never on his radar. Being forced to forge a future for himself after everything is said and done would be infinitely better for him than dying as a plot device. It also gives Joker the closure he needed, as Akechi was the only one he couldn't save (and arguably in a lot of ways, Joker was the only one who ever even got close to accomplishing). I also add to this saying that Akechi's survival being ambiguous adds to this even more, because instead of tying it into a neat little bow where Joker got the future with Akechi that he wanted and they can heal together, it's more like Joker maybe got a second chance. The possibility of closure is present, and that's more than enough.

Which leads me into the theming of the third semester. The whole point is Maruki doesn't believe that people can heal from trauma and come out better for it. He believes that trauma will always eat away at a person negatively, and erasing it is the only permanent "fix". Just by having the possibility of Akechi's survival, this actually reinforces Ren's choice to reject Maruki. It proves that a happy future for them is still possible. Just like any of the other thieves, Akechi and Ren can both carve the future they want for themselves, even after Akechi never believed he could.

As for shuake, Akechi's survival is arguably the best outcome to represent their bond. The glove was a promise for them to rematch their duel, yes. Which by extension is a promise that they will see each other again. On one hand you have Akechi's death and his glove in Joker's possession as dramatic irony that fate is too cruel to support such a bold promise. But then he shows up in the third semester, therefore facilitating the hope that the glove's symbolism provided. Ren choosing to reject Maruki's reality is him repaying Akechi for continuing to keep the promise for a rematch, basically saying "I choose to respect you because our promise matters to me". Thematically, Akechi's ambiguous survival is the inverse of this. It's the sappy cliche that the glove/promise is set in stone, and not even fate can deprive them of that rematch. The only thing that can do so is the player choosing not to respect their bond. Something something "you know where to find me/I know where to look"

I think one of my problems with the "Akechi dying is better for the themes of P5R and Joker's character growth and mourning" is like... Okay, but what about Akechi? That framing makes Akechi more of an object to Joker's character, IMO, whereas I think that him surviving in the max confidants ending has so much fascinating potential for Akechi having to live with his mistakes and move forward. He went in expecting to die, to have a simple final act of freedom... But I think him being forced to keep living, to face every day one at a time, to find ways to make peace with what he did and live in the world is just infinitely more compelling from a storytelling standpoint. For Akechi, I think it's a better outcome because it's lacking in elegant simplicity. Even if he lives, he was still willing to die for the sake of everyone's freedom. His survival doesn't erase that. It may "lessen" Joker's choice to reject Maruki's reality, but I think it also makes accepting that reality incredibly cruel, when a strong enough bond with him is enough to save his life and make a miracle happen. Mona describes the world itself as cognition. In P5's vanilla ending, he says it was the PT's bonds that allowed him to continue to exist as a cat in the real world. Given the significance of a maxed confidant making him appear in the postcredits, I believe that it is very simple to read his survival being because of that bond. That wish that they both shared, as confirmed by the Royal artbook. If you prefer exploring the grief and mourning, that's completely fair, but I think there are many ways to interpret Royal's themes, and Akechi living in a harsh reality where you can't escape your past but you can heal and do better is still very on point with what P5R is all about. Unlike P3, which centers more heavily on death, P5R simply touches on it as a part of its greater narrative. And even in P3, you can save a certain character from death via player choice and connections. So, yeah. :p

I agree with this completely, but I want to add some things. I think something that I've seen people not realize is that in this framework Maruki has no care for the dead. He never cared about Kasumi, or about the sibling's bond with each other, because if he did he could have just brought Kasumi back or tried even a little bit to understand the underlying truth behind Sumire's grief stricken warped perception of her late sister. Instead, Maruki facilitates what she claims she wants, which is to become this warped perception of her sister. To match the strength she idolized. It's the same with Akechi. Akechi's wishes don't matter, Maruki wants to repay Ren for unintentionally giving him the key to accomplishing his goals, and to an extent he sees himself in Ren. Just like how Maruki didn't attempt to understand the truth behind the bond of the Yoshizawa siblings, he didn't attempt to understand the bond between Ren and Akechi. It's not enough that Akechi is alive and """"happy"""" with Ren, they had a unique dynamic fueled by their experiences, and Maruki's shallow understanding of them and what they "want" could never accurately replicate it. He thinks sanding off Akechi's jaded worldview and trauma will make him easier to love, and we know that's not true. Not to Ren. Akechi's autonomy is not granted to him because it would in Maruki's eyes, defeat the purpose of bringing him back as the perfect companion he thinks Ren always wanted but could never have.

This is a big reason why I have problems with people who claim to love shuake but also believe Maruki is right or prefer the bad ending narrative wise. It's feeding into the same toxicity Maruki does. Maruki doesn't value Akechi individually, he is only present as a ghostly giftwrapped puppet for Ren to love. People tend to fall into the trap that Maruki's reality provides, and that's that "look at this character you have grown attached to. Don't you want them happy?" So they are forced to deal with the cognitive dissonance of safe comfort for the character, or what the character would want. Anyone who claims to love Akechi and Ren together but prefers the bad ending doesn't actually care about the bond they have. It's because they play as Ren and they want his "happiness".

Adding onto this because I've yapped for this long so I might as well, I could apply this to any of the other thieves as well. Someone might spend the entire game wishing for Ann to be happy with Shiho, and then when Maruki provides that of course they would consider accepting the deal. But they seem to forget that the only reason they became attached to Ann in the first place is because of the experiences she went through in the course of the game. The Ann they grew to love is NOT the Ann that has Shiho in Maruki's reality. It's an important distinction to make.

forever thinking about royal’s bad ending. my thing with it is that maruki doesn’t necessarily give anyone what they want most, he gives them what’s most appropriate for them to want within a maruki-approved framework. iirc there’s a really interesting text sequence in the game where he just straight up changes someone’s career because they’re not “good” at it, regardless of whether that’s what they actually want. why struggle at all? ever? right?

and so ultimately i don’t think goro akechi’s greatest wish is necessarily ren. i think it’s a wish for sure, but his greatest wish is his own agency. despite any regrets he has and the fact that shido and yaldabaoth treated him like a pawn, he's generally pretty adamant about owning his choices and their consequences. he doesn't want that erased. and instead, you end up with pleasant boy™ if you take maruki’s deal. maybe maruki (incorrectly) thinks sanding off all of akechi’s rough edges will make him easier for ren to love. but the crux of it is really that maruki has to essentially lobotomize him to preserve the illusion of his perfect reality, because their ideologies are so diametrically opposed that akechi would spend every waking moment fighting back.

this isn’t to undermine ren’s importance to akechi btw — he explicitly acknowledges that he wishes they had met earlier, and there are countless moments throughout their confidant that underscore how much it means to him that they mirror each other so well. he absolutely does want more time with ren, just not under these circumstances.

and that’s also what makes ren’s choice on 2/2 doubly devastating. he knows that either way he loses akechi. and if he takes maruki’s deal, he loses him knowing that his last moments with the real akechi involved the two of them being unforgivably out of sync.