Banana Fish is a beautiful story that I hold near and dear to my heart. Now that the anime has ended, I wanted to take this chance to discuss the ending, more specifically, why I don’t like it.
You don’t need a reason to dislike something. Sometimes stuff isn't to your taste. In my case, there is stuff I want to discuss that goes beyond not enjoying it. I do believe that the ending is objectively bad, in that, it did more harm than good.
Whilst there’s no such thing as an unbiased person, I did at least want to make sure I was covering all grounds and looking at it from all perspectives. To do this I made a few twitter polls and created a Google survey. I got so many responses and such great and well thought out answers. Thank you to everyone who participated, you’ve all been a big help.
Some small disclaimers:
The first thing I wanted to discuss is the question itself “is the banana fish ending bad?” because that’s a difficult question to answer since it’s not one question, it’s many.
For example: “Do you think Ash’s death was the best choice?”, “Do you think he should have died?”, “Do you think it’s bad that he did die?” The questions seem similar but the answers will differ greatly depending on the person. Different questions will hold a different weight. For some, the decision to kill Ash was an outright bad one so any other questions don't matter, just to give an example. It is because of the number of questions being packed into one answer, that it's difficult for many to reach a conclusion.
Because of this, I have so much to talk about. So, without further ado, let's get into this.
When discussing Ash’s death, one thing we need to make clear is whether or not he had a choice. Most people seem to think he did but, for those who don't, I want to show why I think that.
The way that Yoshida set it up, there were other options for Ash once he got stabbed. Now, of course, he didn't need to get stabbed in the first place, but I'll discuss that later on.
The common argument I see against this notion is that, of course, a stab wound would kill someone.
First things first, we're talking about Ash Lynx, not an ordinary person. A stab wound in a non-vital organ wouldn't be a huge thing for him. After all, in Volume 15 he took on the Chinese mafia despite being in a wheelchair earlier that evening. His resilience is by no means realistic. As it's stated in Garden of Light, he lived for hours after he was stabbed, so he had the strength and time to get help. So why didn't he?
Ash couldn't go to a hospital. If he went the workers would have to report his injury to the authorities since it's a stab wound. That would lead to the police recognizing him. He's a famous criminal after all, even if they did believe he was dead. But, he is Ash Lynx. He would know a few people who could help treat his wound. He's a gang boss, you kind of need to know someone who can patch you up. What do you think he did before because he certainly didn't go to hospitals. Of course, traipsing around with a stab wound isn't a good idea but he's a smart boy. He'd know the closest place to get help.
This is an even bigger issue if we're talking about the anime since he has a smartphone. He could phone someone to get help.
Much more unrealistic things have happened in Banana Fish to say there was no option for Ash to find help.
Even if you say, "but what if he couldn’t find anyone?" Well, that doesn’t fall into fate's hands, it falls into Yoshida’s.
Now that we’ve established that Ash did have a choice after Lao stabbed him, let’s discuss that decision.
First of all, suicide. Perhaps that’s not the right word to use, but it’s the most fitting that I could think of. Sure, he wasn’t the one who held the knife but he chose death. You could argue that he actually thought he didn't have a choice. That he'd die anyway so he might as well die in a place he loved. But that doesn't really follow his character.
Up until this point, Ash is constantly shown as a fighter. He never gives up. The immediate response against this is that he's also shown to be comfortable with death. I'm not going to deny that but, being comfortable with death is very different from being suicidal. He hinted at being suicidal in the past but, at no point in canon was he actually suicidal.
Ash fought for years for his freedom from Golzine. It's odd for him to give up only after achieving that goal.
Well, that brings us to several other points of discussion. That he may have believed he'd always be a danger to Eiji, that he'd always be on the run and that he'd never be at peace due to his trauma. Following that logic, Ash's only choice was death.
Now let's unpack that, starting with "Ash would always be on the run".
The way the manga leaves it, makes it seem as though all big players in the Banana Fish plot are no longer a threat. That all threats died alongside the banana fish research or along the way. Yut Lung was the only player left who might go after Ash, but it's clearly established that he has no intention of doing so. Ash doesn't know this but it's also made clear, during his talk with Blanca, that he's willing to take Yut Lung on. The only people who would want to go after Ash are people like Lao, (ex)gang members who hold grudges. But none of them have the power to follow Ash to the ends of the world. If Ash wanted, he could very easily disappear, going to Japan was an opening for that (and I'll discuss him going to Japan later on).
He had $60 Million and an IQ of 200. He could do a lot with that money. Including falsifying an identity, which he already did, getting out of New York and living as a new person. This would mean the police and gang members would be off his back.
There is always a chance that others know about and want to go after Ash. As I discussed earlier though, that game of chance is purely up to Yoshida. It would have been very possible for Ash to live as somewhat peaceful life somewhere else.
Going back to the last point on his trauma. Therapy is a thing that exists, even in the 80s, especially for someone with as much money as Ash. Going "well he'll always have demons so death is probably the better option" is pretty rude to trauma survivors. Suicide is never the better option. Of course, memories never go away and trauma leaves a permanent emotional scar, but you can heal from it. It wouldn't be an easy process and, as far as therapy goes, Ash would be reluctant to try but it's a better alternative than death. We continue living for the highs in life, something Ash hasn't had a lot of chance to experience yet. Ash would be able to heal one day. Death wasn't his only option. I'm sure, if Ash was a real person, whilst he may not believe he could heal, he would believe there was a chance to experience more.
That brings us to reason number three, Ash wanting to protect Eiji.
This is a reason that rings true to his character. Ash is willing to die, especially if that means he's protecting Eiji and he does view himself as a threat. There is only one issue here, Eiji's letter.
In Eiji's letter, he tells Ash that he's not a leopard and that he wants to protect Ash's fate. Eiji is telling him that he doesn't need to die and that Ash is as important to him as Eiji is to Ash. How ironic is it that Ash chooses death right after hearing how much Eiji wants him to not die?
Ash's choice ultimately renders Eiji's words meaningless.
Ash did not have a clear motive for choosing to die, at least from my perspective. So why did Yoshida kill him off? Why do so in this way?
For why she killed him off, that's not something we really know. She said in the past that it was because he was a murderer and needed to pay for that, but she still left all the other characters alive. To be perfectly honest, I tend not to pay too much attention to what she says in interviews.
Banana Fish is an old work, her decisions are going to change, her perceptions of life are going to change. She's not the same person she was when she wrote Banana Fish. She wasn't even the same person she was when she started and ended it. For that, her answers are going to change. They're going to contradict themselves. Not to mention, the majority of us are reading a translated interview. Japanese is a very different language than English, things are going to get lost in translation and there will be mistranslations.
She stated before that she always intended to kill Ash. Which is believable since she's said it in multiple interviews. Not to mention most of her inspirations were U.S. LGBT+ movies (from the 60s - 80s) which tended to end in tragedy. The only thing that made her reconsider Ash's fate was the death of 23-year-old actor, River Phoenix. River was the person Ash's mid-to-later character design was based on. He died a little after volume 17 was released in Japan.
Not knowing what to do with your ending that close to it being over is a little worrying. If you're backward and forwards on an ending whilst you're going along, you're adding and dismantling to whatever you want. And it shows. I've already explained why Ash was out of character but this tells us why the circumstance surrounding it felt thrown in. There was development there for Lao having a motive against Ash; however, his main motive was that he didn't want Sing to die. Again, that makes sense as a motive. What doesn't make sense is Lao not realizing they had made up when he was spying on Ash.
Before Ash speaks to Sing, we see Lao is already following Ash. He saw Sing and Ash talking which isn't something you'd expect from two people preparing to kill each other. He had to realize at least something was up.
These very tiny details showed that not a lot of thought went into the ending, at least not to the level we had come to expect.
I'd also like to throw in that even Yoshida's editors didn't like the ending so take that as you will. (Perhaps they meant it from an emotional standpoint, a writing standpoint, a money standpoint, or a combination. It’s not that relevant but I thought I’d share it).
It also explains why the story felt over before Ash was even stabbed. I felt as though it was more obvious in the anime but the story had already concluded. Ash’s talk with Blanca, Club Cod getting exposed, Eiji getting ready to go home. The latter part of Volume 18 and Volume 19 main story were all just tying up necessary loose ends. Ash's death was not a conclusion, it was an addition to a story that had already concluded. In itself that's not a bad thing, it's just another (potential) product of Yoshida's rushed decision.
In summary: Ash's death was originally born out of inspiration from other movies. The poorly executed ending is down to the rushed nature of her final decision. Why she chose to keep her original decision, I'm not entirely sure. Perhaps she just didn't want to stray from a plan she had already built upon. I have a feeling that Yoshida may have been projecting. However, that is speculation and I have nothing to back my idea up.
I want to take a moment to talk about how the scene presents itself.
All is happy and well, everyone is making their peace and deciding where to go next. We, the audience and readers, are now hopeful due to this prospect of new beginnings. Almost all plot-lines have been addressed except Ash and Eiji’s relationship. Then, Ash receives the letter, reads it and becomes hopeful. This leads him to run to Eiji. Ash then gets stabbed whilst running to the airport, crushing the hope the scene had built up. In the meantime, Sing tells Eiji to come back soon and that Ash is looking forward to seeing him again. By this point, we already know this is not going to happen. Ash then accepts death whilst we read Eiji's words telling him he doesn't need to die.
Every single moment of hope is contradicted by what is actually going on. This seems poetic in a rather cruel way until you realize it proves all the "bad guys" right. It renders all his efforts meaningless. What was the point of all Ash's struggles if he was going to die as soon as he'd achieved what he'd worked a decade for. It also renders Eiji's words meaningless. Eiji tells him he isn't the leopard and is able to save his own fate. Ash dies like the leopard and isn't able to save his own fate. In other words; it destroys everything the two worked to achieve. It's not bittersweet. It's straight up depressing.
Now if you find some cruel beauty in that, that's on you. If the story had been shorter I'd most likely be okay with this aspect of the ending. It's the fact that you spend so much time watching them fight, that when it ends like this, you feel cheated.
That's not to say the ending came out of the blue. It was more that it was a bad choice given the circumstances.
I'm not of the mindset that sad = bad. This had more to do with the series destroying what it built up. I'm also not of the mindset that sad = poetic and deep. Some stuff is just sad for the sake of being sad. Some stuff is just bad.
The vast majority who complain about this ending are not upset that their favorite character died. Stop undermining genuine criticism to scoff about people being over emotional. If you think the ending is deep and poetic, then that's your take away from it.
The ending was not necessary to advance the plot. It wasn't needed for the conclusion. It didn’t add to the story. If anything it only created more questions and problems. It makes you ask"what was the point?" What was the point in making Banana Fish follow the trend of killing off its main characters? What good did it serve? What was the point of Ash living to walk free, only to die soon after? What was the point in Eiji's letter? What was the point?
I think it’s time we talk about the elephant in the room, or rather two.
“It sends a bad message to CSA survivors” and “It’s bury your gays”. Let’s start with the first.
The idea “It sends a bad message to CSA survivors” is something I tend to hear in regards to a certain argument defending the ending. That Ash was at peace after death and/or would never have been at peace except for in death. I've also heard it coupled with the fact that Ash died without really getting a chance to live and heal.
There’s even some extra content that further enforces “he was at peace” as though he wouldn't have been in life. Before any of you go “Well that’s just something people say when someone dies” yes, you are right. But he is a fictional character whose death was decided by someone. When extra content and even the creator go on about how he “died with a smile on his face” and that he was “happy and at peace”, it's especially relevant. The idea is that this was the only way he could be happy due to the life he lead. It comes across as romanticizing suicide. Saying it's the only way out, and that it's good.
That's probably a bold claim, I know. But, when you go around trying to make it seem happy and like it was the best ending for him, it comes across like that.
I doubt the intention was that CSA survivors could only find peace in death, but intent does not equal impact. The ending is a huge slap in the face to trauma survivors in general. It tells them that death is the better alternative. Now you may say that is a leap and that’s fine, but a great deal of those saying it was a bad message were CSA survivors themselves.
Intent =/= Impact.
It may not have been Yoshida’s intention to imply this, but it’s the take away many audience members got.
If I have a group of four characters, three are white one is black. I kill off the black character, not because he’s black but because it fits the narrative. If I get backlash for killing them off when the three white kids stay alive, that backlash makes sense regardless of my intent. My intent was not to be racist but my impact said otherwise. To use a more extreme example, I’m sitting with my friend on the roof, I playfully shove them, they fall and die. I wasn’t trying to kill them, but they did still die, I can’t erase my impact.
A creators intent doesn't matter, their impact does.
Now let's talk about the other elephant “bury your gays”.
“Bury your gays” is a term I’m sure we’re all familiar with. In case you don’t know, “bury your gays” is a trope that was coined only a few years ago but it’s a trope that’s been around much, much longer. The trope refers to LGBT+ characters being killed off due to their sexual orientation. This can come in many forms. Killing off your only gay character after announcing they're gay so you get brownie points but don't have to deal with the homophobic backlash. Killing off a character via hate crime because it's dramatic and angsty. It’s difficult to say for sure whether something counts as bury your gays or is simply a case of “they just happened to be a gay character who died”. I think it’s important to note that not all cases of Bury Your Gays comes from a harmful place. Not all writers who included this trope are homophobic, but it is a harmful trope. It should definitely be criticized when used regardless of the creator's intention.
But is Banana Fish apart of the many works which take part in this trope?
Well firstly, is this topic even on the table? Is Ash Lynx an LGBT+ character? In short, he kind of has to be otherwise the whole story becomes incredibly homophobic.
If we say Ash and Eiji are actually straight, the only LGBT+ characters in Banana Fish would be pedophiles. Homosexuality being associated with pedophilia goes incredibly far back. You can find short films from the 60s telling young boys to “be aware of the homosexual” on youtube. As well as other videos painting all MLMs (men loving men) to be pedophiles. This is propaganda that is still used today. If all the LGBT+ characters in Banana Fish were pedophiles, how do you think the story reads from a political standpoint? Banana Fish is an incredibly political story so readers would definitely notice.
Not to mention, Yoshida was inspired by LGBT+ movies when she made it. Ash and Eiji are clearly romantically coded even if they never actually became a couple.
But back to the subject, is Banana Fish bury your gays? The story indiscriminately kills off characters and Ash’s death wasn’t in any way related to homophobia. So it shouldn’t be bury your gays. Right?
Well, before we call it a day, it’s also important to see why some people think it does, in fact, play into this trope.
If we look at Banana Fish on its own, without the context of Yoshida or her other works (including Garden Of Light) the fact is that it’s not bury your gays.
This is a trope that requires context though. If I kill off a character who I introduced earlier on but was on screen for two minutes, that’s fine. If I introduce a character as gay online but then kill him off before I get the chance to actually show that he's gay, that's bury your gays. I introduced a character online for hype from LGBT+ fans but kept it minimal to appease homophobic viewers. Context in this trope does all the talking.
So what about Banana Fish? In short, we’re back to intent =/= impact. I don’t think Yoshida killed Ash off because he was gay but there’s some stuff we need to discuss. Namely, Garden Of Light and Yasha.
In Garden of Light Akira heavily parallels Eiji. Akira comes to the US to escape a stifling life in Japan as is suggested by her uncle, Shunichi Ibe. Her first “adventure” is meeting Sing, a person who, in the beginning, she finds difficult to figure out. Akira is from the normal world and Sing is from the “other” world.
Regardless of what you think of a 13-year-old and 23-year-old being set up as romantic, that is what the story does. Sing and Akira get married and they even have a son.
A short story about a man grieving the loss of his same-sex partner. A short story that is deeply romantic and emotional. This is the exact same story that sets up a heterosexual couple.
A story that kills off half it’s only gay couple. One that does so whilst suggesting two other straight couples have a bright future to look forward to. Only for its sequel chapter to set up yet another straight couple.
Are you seeing how this looks? All the straight couples get out without a scratch. It’s the gay couples that suffer.
Sing never leaves the underworld and actually starts a family with Akira. Don’t say Ash and Eiji living a happy life is unrealistic when Sing runs a whole syndicate whilst maintaining a happy personal life.
At the end of the day, Ash's death ends up playing into an incredibly problematic trope. One that was already common then and still common now.
And Ash and Eiji aren’t the only gay couple in a Yoshida story to meet a tragic end when the straight couples get out fine. In fact, the only two LGBT+ couples in a Yoshida work all have a tragic end.
I’m not going to go into too much detail on Yasha but Yasha is the story of two genetically modified twins, Sei and Rin. Sei is our (straight) main protagonist who has sex with two women during the course of the manga but is suggested to have slept with more. Rin is our bisexual anti-hero who sleeps with a lot of people (About four we see but it’s suggested to be a lot more). Of the two twins, it’s Sei, (who’s constantly compared to Ash by Sing) who makes it alive.
It’s Rin and his best friend (who's also his sexual partner) who meet a tragic end. Meanwhile, the straight members of their party make it out fine.
It’s the fact that we’re seeing so much LGBT+ death and pain whilst coupled with happy straight couples. That’s what makes it bury your gays.
I doubt Yoshida meant it as “If you’re gay that’s wrong so they got what was coming to them”. I do hope you can see why it can be interpreted as problematic though.
On the note of problematic deaths and Yasha, I’d also like to point out that Rin, Yut Lung and Ash all die. All of the abuse victims, where their abuse plays a heavy roll in their character, die.
Even if you don’t think anything I’ve said in this section makes the ending problematic, can you see why there are people who do?
Banana Fish is a beautiful story that talks about topics some works wouldn’t even touch but it’s ending ruined it. The ending dismantles everything the story worked for years to create. Eiji went back to a depressed state and searched for something to give him direction just when he had found it. Ash dies immediately after accepting he may have a future to live for.
The ending is not unique, it had been done 100s of times before. It was for cheap shock factor and just added to the ever growing list of stories that fall into harmful tropes. The ending held no purpose in the narrative and came across as a bad imitation of 1969’s Midnight Cowboy.
The ending did not make Banana Fish famous in Japan. Banana Fish ran for 10 years, it garnered it’s fame during it’s running. In fact, most fans were angry and disappointed with the ending.
The ending may have ruined Banana Fish but it did not ruin the story as a whole. It’s still a story I adore and no doubt will continue to hold a place in my heart for years to come.
Thanks for reading my take on the Banana Fish ending.
You don’t need a reason to dislike something. Sometimes stuff isn't to your taste. In my case, there is stuff I want to discuss that goes beyond not enjoying it. I do believe that the ending is objectively bad, in that, it did more harm than good.
Whilst there’s no such thing as an unbiased person, I did at least want to make sure I was covering all grounds and looking at it from all perspectives. To do this I made a few twitter polls and created a Google survey. I got so many responses and such great and well thought out answers. Thank you to everyone who participated, you’ve all been a big help.
Some small disclaimers:
- I love writing and this was something I wanted to do, but, I am not a qualified writer. This is a hobby, not a career.
- If you still disagree with me after reading this, that’s fine. We’re two different people with different experiences and perceptions.
- This is in no way to hate on Akimi Yoshida, the series’ mangaka. I’m discussing why I think certain creative discussions were unwise. I will be talking about her but I have no ill intent. I do not know her personally nor know her actual reasoning behind her decisions at the time.
- Warning: Since this is on the ending, expect spoilers.
- There will also be spoilers for Yasha.
- I will be discussing CSA and suicide so proceed with caution.
The first thing I wanted to discuss is the question itself “is the banana fish ending bad?” because that’s a difficult question to answer since it’s not one question, it’s many.
For example: “Do you think Ash’s death was the best choice?”, “Do you think he should have died?”, “Do you think it’s bad that he did die?” The questions seem similar but the answers will differ greatly depending on the person. Different questions will hold a different weight. For some, the decision to kill Ash was an outright bad one so any other questions don't matter, just to give an example. It is because of the number of questions being packed into one answer, that it's difficult for many to reach a conclusion.
Because of this, I have so much to talk about. So, without further ado, let's get into this.
Decisions and Things I - Did Ash Have A Choice?
(Angel Eyes Artbook - Ash and Eiji side-by-side looking like fashion icons)
When discussing Ash’s death, one thing we need to make clear is whether or not he had a choice. Most people seem to think he did but, for those who don't, I want to show why I think that.
The way that Yoshida set it up, there were other options for Ash once he got stabbed. Now, of course, he didn't need to get stabbed in the first place, but I'll discuss that later on.
The common argument I see against this notion is that, of course, a stab wound would kill someone.
First things first, we're talking about Ash Lynx, not an ordinary person. A stab wound in a non-vital organ wouldn't be a huge thing for him. After all, in Volume 15 he took on the Chinese mafia despite being in a wheelchair earlier that evening. His resilience is by no means realistic. As it's stated in Garden of Light, he lived for hours after he was stabbed, so he had the strength and time to get help. So why didn't he?
Ash couldn't go to a hospital. If he went the workers would have to report his injury to the authorities since it's a stab wound. That would lead to the police recognizing him. He's a famous criminal after all, even if they did believe he was dead. But, he is Ash Lynx. He would know a few people who could help treat his wound. He's a gang boss, you kind of need to know someone who can patch you up. What do you think he did before because he certainly didn't go to hospitals. Of course, traipsing around with a stab wound isn't a good idea but he's a smart boy. He'd know the closest place to get help.
This is an even bigger issue if we're talking about the anime since he has a smartphone. He could phone someone to get help.
Much more unrealistic things have happened in Banana Fish to say there was no option for Ash to find help.
Even if you say, "but what if he couldn’t find anyone?" Well, that doesn’t fall into fate's hands, it falls into Yoshida’s.
Decisions and Things II - Why Ash Chose Death and Why Yoshida Killed Him Off
(Angel Eyes Artbook - Eiji shaving Ash whilst Ash reads Catcher In The Rye)
Now that we’ve established that Ash did have a choice after Lao stabbed him, let’s discuss that decision.
First of all, suicide. Perhaps that’s not the right word to use, but it’s the most fitting that I could think of. Sure, he wasn’t the one who held the knife but he chose death. You could argue that he actually thought he didn't have a choice. That he'd die anyway so he might as well die in a place he loved. But that doesn't really follow his character.
Up until this point, Ash is constantly shown as a fighter. He never gives up. The immediate response against this is that he's also shown to be comfortable with death. I'm not going to deny that but, being comfortable with death is very different from being suicidal. He hinted at being suicidal in the past but, at no point in canon was he actually suicidal.
Ash fought for years for his freedom from Golzine. It's odd for him to give up only after achieving that goal.
Well, that brings us to several other points of discussion. That he may have believed he'd always be a danger to Eiji, that he'd always be on the run and that he'd never be at peace due to his trauma. Following that logic, Ash's only choice was death.
Now let's unpack that, starting with "Ash would always be on the run".
The way the manga leaves it, makes it seem as though all big players in the Banana Fish plot are no longer a threat. That all threats died alongside the banana fish research or along the way. Yut Lung was the only player left who might go after Ash, but it's clearly established that he has no intention of doing so. Ash doesn't know this but it's also made clear, during his talk with Blanca, that he's willing to take Yut Lung on. The only people who would want to go after Ash are people like Lao, (ex)gang members who hold grudges. But none of them have the power to follow Ash to the ends of the world. If Ash wanted, he could very easily disappear, going to Japan was an opening for that (and I'll discuss him going to Japan later on).
He had $60 Million and an IQ of 200. He could do a lot with that money. Including falsifying an identity, which he already did, getting out of New York and living as a new person. This would mean the police and gang members would be off his back.
There is always a chance that others know about and want to go after Ash. As I discussed earlier though, that game of chance is purely up to Yoshida. It would have been very possible for Ash to live as somewhat peaceful life somewhere else.
Going back to the last point on his trauma. Therapy is a thing that exists, even in the 80s, especially for someone with as much money as Ash. Going "well he'll always have demons so death is probably the better option" is pretty rude to trauma survivors. Suicide is never the better option. Of course, memories never go away and trauma leaves a permanent emotional scar, but you can heal from it. It wouldn't be an easy process and, as far as therapy goes, Ash would be reluctant to try but it's a better alternative than death. We continue living for the highs in life, something Ash hasn't had a lot of chance to experience yet. Ash would be able to heal one day. Death wasn't his only option. I'm sure, if Ash was a real person, whilst he may not believe he could heal, he would believe there was a chance to experience more.
That brings us to reason number three, Ash wanting to protect Eiji.
This is a reason that rings true to his character. Ash is willing to die, especially if that means he's protecting Eiji and he does view himself as a threat. There is only one issue here, Eiji's letter.
(vol. 19 page 30 - Eiji tells Ash he wanted to protect his fate)
In Eiji's letter, he tells Ash that he's not a leopard and that he wants to protect Ash's fate. Eiji is telling him that he doesn't need to die and that Ash is as important to him as Eiji is to Ash. How ironic is it that Ash chooses death right after hearing how much Eiji wants him to not die?
Ash's choice ultimately renders Eiji's words meaningless.
Ash did not have a clear motive for choosing to die, at least from my perspective. So why did Yoshida kill him off? Why do so in this way?
For why she killed him off, that's not something we really know. She said in the past that it was because he was a murderer and needed to pay for that, but she still left all the other characters alive. To be perfectly honest, I tend not to pay too much attention to what she says in interviews.
Banana Fish is an old work, her decisions are going to change, her perceptions of life are going to change. She's not the same person she was when she wrote Banana Fish. She wasn't even the same person she was when she started and ended it. For that, her answers are going to change. They're going to contradict themselves. Not to mention, the majority of us are reading a translated interview. Japanese is a very different language than English, things are going to get lost in translation and there will be mistranslations.
She stated before that she always intended to kill Ash. Which is believable since she's said it in multiple interviews. Not to mention most of her inspirations were U.S. LGBT+ movies (from the 60s - 80s) which tended to end in tragedy. The only thing that made her reconsider Ash's fate was the death of 23-year-old actor, River Phoenix. River was the person Ash's mid-to-later character design was based on. He died a little after volume 17 was released in Japan.
Not knowing what to do with your ending that close to it being over is a little worrying. If you're backward and forwards on an ending whilst you're going along, you're adding and dismantling to whatever you want. And it shows. I've already explained why Ash was out of character but this tells us why the circumstance surrounding it felt thrown in. There was development there for Lao having a motive against Ash; however, his main motive was that he didn't want Sing to die. Again, that makes sense as a motive. What doesn't make sense is Lao not realizing they had made up when he was spying on Ash.
(vol. 19 page 11 - Lao watches Ash from afar)
Before Ash speaks to Sing, we see Lao is already following Ash. He saw Sing and Ash talking which isn't something you'd expect from two people preparing to kill each other. He had to realize at least something was up.
These very tiny details showed that not a lot of thought went into the ending, at least not to the level we had come to expect.
I'd also like to throw in that even Yoshida's editors didn't like the ending so take that as you will. (Perhaps they meant it from an emotional standpoint, a writing standpoint, a money standpoint, or a combination. It’s not that relevant but I thought I’d share it).
It also explains why the story felt over before Ash was even stabbed. I felt as though it was more obvious in the anime but the story had already concluded. Ash’s talk with Blanca, Club Cod getting exposed, Eiji getting ready to go home. The latter part of Volume 18 and Volume 19 main story were all just tying up necessary loose ends. Ash's death was not a conclusion, it was an addition to a story that had already concluded. In itself that's not a bad thing, it's just another (potential) product of Yoshida's rushed decision.
In summary: Ash's death was originally born out of inspiration from other movies. The poorly executed ending is down to the rushed nature of her final decision. Why she chose to keep her original decision, I'm not entirely sure. Perhaps she just didn't want to stray from a plan she had already built upon. I have a feeling that Yoshida may have been projecting. However, that is speculation and I have nothing to back my idea up.
Picture Perfect - How The Scene Presents Itself
(Angel Eyes Artbook - Ash holds Eiji in the most no-homo way possible)
All is happy and well, everyone is making their peace and deciding where to go next. We, the audience and readers, are now hopeful due to this prospect of new beginnings. Almost all plot-lines have been addressed except Ash and Eiji’s relationship. Then, Ash receives the letter, reads it and becomes hopeful. This leads him to run to Eiji. Ash then gets stabbed whilst running to the airport, crushing the hope the scene had built up. In the meantime, Sing tells Eiji to come back soon and that Ash is looking forward to seeing him again. By this point, we already know this is not going to happen. Ash then accepts death whilst we read Eiji's words telling him he doesn't need to die.
Every single moment of hope is contradicted by what is actually going on. This seems poetic in a rather cruel way until you realize it proves all the "bad guys" right. It renders all his efforts meaningless. What was the point of all Ash's struggles if he was going to die as soon as he'd achieved what he'd worked a decade for. It also renders Eiji's words meaningless. Eiji tells him he isn't the leopard and is able to save his own fate. Ash dies like the leopard and isn't able to save his own fate. In other words; it destroys everything the two worked to achieve. It's not bittersweet. It's straight up depressing.
Now if you find some cruel beauty in that, that's on you. If the story had been shorter I'd most likely be okay with this aspect of the ending. It's the fact that you spend so much time watching them fight, that when it ends like this, you feel cheated.
That's not to say the ending came out of the blue. It was more that it was a bad choice given the circumstances.
I'm not of the mindset that sad = bad. This had more to do with the series destroying what it built up. I'm also not of the mindset that sad = poetic and deep. Some stuff is just sad for the sake of being sad. Some stuff is just bad.
The vast majority who complain about this ending are not upset that their favorite character died. Stop undermining genuine criticism to scoff about people being over emotional. If you think the ending is deep and poetic, then that's your take away from it.
The ending was not necessary to advance the plot. It wasn't needed for the conclusion. It didn’t add to the story. If anything it only created more questions and problems. It makes you ask"what was the point?" What was the point in making Banana Fish follow the trend of killing off its main characters? What good did it serve? What was the point of Ash living to walk free, only to die soon after? What was the point in Eiji's letter? What was the point?
Ash and Aslan - The Implications of His Death
(Vol. 1 page 24 - The first time we see Ash)
I think it’s time we talk about the elephant in the room, or rather two.
“It sends a bad message to CSA survivors” and “It’s bury your gays”. Let’s start with the first.
The idea “It sends a bad message to CSA survivors” is something I tend to hear in regards to a certain argument defending the ending. That Ash was at peace after death and/or would never have been at peace except for in death. I've also heard it coupled with the fact that Ash died without really getting a chance to live and heal.
There’s even some extra content that further enforces “he was at peace” as though he wouldn't have been in life. Before any of you go “Well that’s just something people say when someone dies” yes, you are right. But he is a fictional character whose death was decided by someone. When extra content and even the creator go on about how he “died with a smile on his face” and that he was “happy and at peace”, it's especially relevant. The idea is that this was the only way he could be happy due to the life he lead. It comes across as romanticizing suicide. Saying it's the only way out, and that it's good.
That's probably a bold claim, I know. But, when you go around trying to make it seem happy and like it was the best ending for him, it comes across like that.
I doubt the intention was that CSA survivors could only find peace in death, but intent does not equal impact. The ending is a huge slap in the face to trauma survivors in general. It tells them that death is the better alternative. Now you may say that is a leap and that’s fine, but a great deal of those saying it was a bad message were CSA survivors themselves.
Intent =/= Impact.
It may not have been Yoshida’s intention to imply this, but it’s the take away many audience members got.
If I have a group of four characters, three are white one is black. I kill off the black character, not because he’s black but because it fits the narrative. If I get backlash for killing them off when the three white kids stay alive, that backlash makes sense regardless of my intent. My intent was not to be racist but my impact said otherwise. To use a more extreme example, I’m sitting with my friend on the roof, I playfully shove them, they fall and die. I wasn’t trying to kill them, but they did still die, I can’t erase my impact.
A creators intent doesn't matter, their impact does.
(Baby Banana - Because this got really heavy)
“Bury your gays” is a term I’m sure we’re all familiar with. In case you don’t know, “bury your gays” is a trope that was coined only a few years ago but it’s a trope that’s been around much, much longer. The trope refers to LGBT+ characters being killed off due to their sexual orientation. This can come in many forms. Killing off your only gay character after announcing they're gay so you get brownie points but don't have to deal with the homophobic backlash. Killing off a character via hate crime because it's dramatic and angsty. It’s difficult to say for sure whether something counts as bury your gays or is simply a case of “they just happened to be a gay character who died”. I think it’s important to note that not all cases of Bury Your Gays comes from a harmful place. Not all writers who included this trope are homophobic, but it is a harmful trope. It should definitely be criticized when used regardless of the creator's intention.
But is Banana Fish apart of the many works which take part in this trope?
Well firstly, is this topic even on the table? Is Ash Lynx an LGBT+ character? In short, he kind of has to be otherwise the whole story becomes incredibly homophobic.
If we say Ash and Eiji are actually straight, the only LGBT+ characters in Banana Fish would be pedophiles. Homosexuality being associated with pedophilia goes incredibly far back. You can find short films from the 60s telling young boys to “be aware of the homosexual” on youtube. As well as other videos painting all MLMs (men loving men) to be pedophiles. This is propaganda that is still used today. If all the LGBT+ characters in Banana Fish were pedophiles, how do you think the story reads from a political standpoint? Banana Fish is an incredibly political story so readers would definitely notice.
Not to mention, Yoshida was inspired by LGBT+ movies when she made it. Ash and Eiji are clearly romantically coded even if they never actually became a couple.
But back to the subject, is Banana Fish bury your gays? The story indiscriminately kills off characters and Ash’s death wasn’t in any way related to homophobia. So it shouldn’t be bury your gays. Right?
Well, before we call it a day, it’s also important to see why some people think it does, in fact, play into this trope.
If we look at Banana Fish on its own, without the context of Yoshida or her other works (including Garden Of Light) the fact is that it’s not bury your gays.
This is a trope that requires context though. If I kill off a character who I introduced earlier on but was on screen for two minutes, that’s fine. If I introduce a character as gay online but then kill him off before I get the chance to actually show that he's gay, that's bury your gays. I introduced a character online for hype from LGBT+ fans but kept it minimal to appease homophobic viewers. Context in this trope does all the talking.
So what about Banana Fish? In short, we’re back to intent =/= impact. I don’t think Yoshida killed Ash off because he was gay but there’s some stuff we need to discuss. Namely, Garden Of Light and Yasha.
In Garden of Light Akira heavily parallels Eiji. Akira comes to the US to escape a stifling life in Japan as is suggested by her uncle, Shunichi Ibe. Her first “adventure” is meeting Sing, a person who, in the beginning, she finds difficult to figure out. Akira is from the normal world and Sing is from the “other” world.
Regardless of what you think of a 13-year-old and 23-year-old being set up as romantic, that is what the story does. Sing and Akira get married and they even have a son.
(New York Sense - Akira and Sing photographed on their wedding day)
A short story about a man grieving the loss of his same-sex partner. A short story that is deeply romantic and emotional. This is the exact same story that sets up a heterosexual couple.
A story that kills off half it’s only gay couple. One that does so whilst suggesting two other straight couples have a bright future to look forward to. Only for its sequel chapter to set up yet another straight couple.
Are you seeing how this looks? All the straight couples get out without a scratch. It’s the gay couples that suffer.
Sing never leaves the underworld and actually starts a family with Akira. Don’t say Ash and Eiji living a happy life is unrealistic when Sing runs a whole syndicate whilst maintaining a happy personal life.
At the end of the day, Ash's death ends up playing into an incredibly problematic trope. One that was already common then and still common now.
And Ash and Eiji aren’t the only gay couple in a Yoshida story to meet a tragic end when the straight couples get out fine. In fact, the only two LGBT+ couples in a Yoshida work all have a tragic end.
I’m not going to go into too much detail on Yasha but Yasha is the story of two genetically modified twins, Sei and Rin. Sei is our (straight) main protagonist who has sex with two women during the course of the manga but is suggested to have slept with more. Rin is our bisexual anti-hero who sleeps with a lot of people (About four we see but it’s suggested to be a lot more). Of the two twins, it’s Sei, (who’s constantly compared to Ash by Sing) who makes it alive.
It’s Rin and his best friend (who's also his sexual partner) who meet a tragic end. Meanwhile, the straight members of their party make it out fine.
(Yasha - Rin (Left) and Sei (Right))
I doubt Yoshida meant it as “If you’re gay that’s wrong so they got what was coming to them”. I do hope you can see why it can be interpreted as problematic though.
On the note of problematic deaths and Yasha, I’d also like to point out that Rin, Yut Lung and Ash all die. All of the abuse victims, where their abuse plays a heavy roll in their character, die.
Even if you don’t think anything I’ve said in this section makes the ending problematic, can you see why there are people who do?
In Conclusion
(Angel Eyes Artbook - Ash and Eiji looking aesthetic as always)
Banana Fish is a beautiful story that talks about topics some works wouldn’t even touch but it’s ending ruined it. The ending dismantles everything the story worked for years to create. Eiji went back to a depressed state and searched for something to give him direction just when he had found it. Ash dies immediately after accepting he may have a future to live for.
The ending is not unique, it had been done 100s of times before. It was for cheap shock factor and just added to the ever growing list of stories that fall into harmful tropes. The ending held no purpose in the narrative and came across as a bad imitation of 1969’s Midnight Cowboy.
The ending did not make Banana Fish famous in Japan. Banana Fish ran for 10 years, it garnered it’s fame during it’s running. In fact, most fans were angry and disappointed with the ending.
The ending may have ruined Banana Fish but it did not ruin the story as a whole. It’s still a story I adore and no doubt will continue to hold a place in my heart for years to come.
Thanks for reading my take on the Banana Fish ending.
Thank you so much omg
ReplyDelete