"Princess Mononoke" and morals

Does the film have a moral vision? Should art be moral?

Briefly explaining what the movie is about, “Princess Mononoke,” directed by Hayao Miyazaki, is about Ashitaka, a former prince and outcast of his village due to his curse, and his struggles between the nature gods, whose main goal is to protect nature, and the humans from Iron Town, whose ambitions are to produce more iron (which for its turn, needs to consume natural resources). This man versus nature conflict then creates a moral vision that shows how these forces cannot coexist because of human ambitions.

When the human characters of the movie are pursuing their goals, even if they think that they’re doing things for the best, it actually shows how they forget the importance of nature for their own selfish needs. Taking Lady Eboshi as an example, although she’s the “only one who looked at [the outcasts] as humans,” her means of making this possible was egocentric, even if to her she was being ethical and following her moral code of conduct (that development is good). When her men are attacked (by the wolf clan) and fall off the cliff, she neglects them and orders the rest to keep moving. Even if they needed to bring the resources to the town as soon as possible, her negligence makes her as cold as the iron she makes. Another instance of human selfishness is with Jiko and his desires to decapitate the Deer God and take its head to the Emperor. Although it might seem that he’s doing it for the so-called greater good (by satisfying the Emperor’s wishes), he is actually only pursuing his personal goals and ambitions. His decision of only returning the head when his life was at stake represents the epitome of human greed and ignorance towards other’s necessities. This makes me wonder, do the ends justify the means? For the individuals they believe that they’re doing the right thing, but how can one define the line between “good” and “bad”? But as this line is so lightly delineated, rather than having compassion between the different forces, there is the predominance of hatred instead.

Ashitaka, the protagonist of the story that attempts to find balance between nature and humans, claims that hatred is the driving force that segregates them and this is seen with both the boar monster from the opening scene and Moro, the wolf god. These two characters were attacked with human weapons, which, as Lady Eboshi said, “isn’t enough to kill a god.” However, even if that might be true, the bullet represents much more than just a projectile. Rather, it symbolizes the hatred and greed in the humans; Eboshi desired to have power and control over Iron Town so she attacked them with her ambitions. This for its turn rots their insides either leading them to a fate as a demon or as directly to death; the gods and nature beings are victims of avarice.

Even if the characters present a strong mindset where they want to pursue their goals (either it’s to protect the forest or to protect Iron Town), it is due to this that the audience can see the flipside of the argument. For example, in the last scenes (*spoilers*), San still feels hatred towards the humans bubbling inside her because she can never forgive them for what they did, but it was only due to this that she was able to have feelings for Ashitaka since he showed how he was different from the rest. This small (yet enormous) change demonstrates how even San, someone who was fixed with the idea that humans were evil and had to be eliminated, was able to change her perception. In other words, the moral visions that each of the characters have can still be changed, which, when seen in the big picture, demonstrates how there is no single definition of right and wrong.

Even if this movie is not set in a real-life scenario, I was still able to take away the message that no one has one fixed moral vision. What you take from art, whether its visual or performing arts, is based on how much you are willing to accept a different view. I think that art should be moral because it’s just another means of expressing one’s thoughts and opinions on a topic. However, I do think that this creates a bias towards the more famous artists and their take on something and diminishes the value of other people’s views. Nonetheless, as art is a means to express oneself, then I believe that there should be a purpose behind that meaning, or else it’s simply “[seeing] with eyes closed” (quote from movie).