The greatest swordsman in the Usagi world?

[shaxper]

He's also turned more sympathetic with the years. Since I began to read later volumes I was rather shocked to read volume two and find out that he basically murdered Gunichi, despite that the latter didn't appear to be an evil man, simply because he had retreated from a battle which was already lost.

While I suppose it was in line with a very strict form of bushido this act still seemed very cruel and unjust compared to the more conflicted and moral older Usagi we've come to know.

I never had a problem with the death of Gunichi. The bushido code seems to call for loyalty to one's master above all else. The very first panel of Usagi #1 suggests that Gunichi was prepared for the duel and understood why it must take place. He's neither alarmed nor angry in that first panel. Simply prepared.

I agree that the "new" Usagi might not agree with the "old" Usagi's actions here, but I personally had no problem with them. Gunichi understood the terms of becoming a samurai and bodyguard from the start. He knew the rules as well as the consequences. Time and again, we've seen fair-weather soldiers turn the tides of war against their masters (whether at Adachigahara or the battle of Dan-No-Ura). Without strict codes regarding abandoners, lordships could never hope to endure the hostilities of war.

[Todd Shogun]

Usagi did not murder Gunichi. It was a fair duel, and one that honor demanded be carried out, because of Gunichi's traitorous and cowardly actions. Gunichi also drew his sword first, meaning to kill Usagi. We have yet to find out what happened just before the duel and if any words were exchanged. Perhaps Stan will enlighten us one day with the story leading up to that fateful duel!

[estee]

Well, I think there is a distinct line that Usagi won't cross when it comes to killing. His encounter was Gunichi was duel plain and simple, both men had swords and both used them.

I remember in Grasscutter II when Ikeda professed his distrust of Chizu and wanted to kill her Usagi was immediately indignant. He considered that murder.

[Shishio]

As for Usagi evolving over time, I think that can be explained by his lifestyle broadening his horizons.

Societies always impose they're own morals on their members. As a child, it was only natural for Usagi to be enamoured by the samurai lifestyle, and his wanting to become a samurai, his adoption of the moral code of bushido, etcetera, is all a natural consequence of that.

But after everything that has happened in his life, Usagi now realizes that not everything is so black and white. And he has adjusted his perspective and moral code accordingly.

[shaxper]

As for Usagi evolving over time, I think that can be explained by his lifestyle broadening his horizons.

Societies always impose they're own morals on their members. As a child, it was only natural for Usagi to be enamoured by the samurai lifestyle, and his wanting to become a samurai, his adoption of the moral code of bushido, etcetera, is all a natural consequence of that.

But after everything that has happened in his life, Usagi now realizes that not everything is so black and white. And he has adjusted his perspective and moral code accordingly.

That's part of it.

Usagi also had several major life-changing experience throughout the course of his first few appearances.

- He fulfils his remaining obligations to Lord Mifune by killing Toda ("The Goblin of Adachigahara") and Gunichi ("Samurai")
-He is given his first(?) opportunity to serve a new lord since Mifune's death and realizes that it is not what he wants ("Lone Rabbit and Child").
- He decides to end his Warrior's Pilgramage, choosing to settle down in his home village instead ("Circles").
- Mariko asks Usagi to leave the village, giving him a new and decidedly different reason to keep wandering ("Circles").

By the time of these last two events, Usagi is already coming across as a more empathetic and uncertain character. We even begin to get those wonderful moments where Usagi's menacing warrior eyes are replaced with adorable little manga-esque dots. He no longer seems to see himself primarily as a samurai, even if he does continue to refer to himself as a ronin.

The next major transition seems to happen toward the middle/end of the Mirage issues and deals primarily with Usagi's abilities as opposed to his personality. In these issues, we see Usagi first defeated by a band of slavers (#11) and then bested by Inazuma (#16). Prior to these two events, Usagi had never been defeated and generally appeared to be the greatest (or at least one of the greatest) swordsmen of his age. The close proximity of these two defeats seemed to reinforce the idea that Usagi was not the perfect swordsman.

By the time we hit the Dark Horse issues, Usagi's characterization and abilities seem pretty consistant. Though the character has grown and changed since then, I see no blatant inconsistancies nor contradictions in what he was at the begining of the Noodles storyline versus what he's become since.

[Todd Shogun]

I still wonder why Ino was considered the best swordsman pre-Inazuma when Usagi defeated him in their first encounter...anoher testament to Usagi's ways -- he doesn't kill unless he absolutely has to. In this case, he defeated Ino but cutting off his nose (as opposed to his head, which may have been easier). Stan????

[Dave]

Usagi did not murder Gunichi. It was a fair duel

One Usagi forced him into wasn't prepared to let him back out of despite that he had to know Gunichi had no chance of surviving his suoperior skills.

and one that honor demanded be carried out, because of Gunichi's traitorous and cowardly actions.

The point is that he wasn't traitorous. Toda was traitorous for turning against his lord. Retreating from a battle already lost isn't traitorous by any known definition. What would he have accomplished by throwing his life away unneccessarily?

He had risked his life repeatedly in service of his lord, including just previously during the assassination attempt and for all these years of self-sacrifice he deserved to be killed?! That's really sick.

Gunichi also drew his sword first, meaning to kill Usagi.

In a duel Usagi apparently forced him into. One of the sides attacking first is standard practice in these stand-offs. The guilty party is the one forcing them to occur in the first place rather than the one using self-defence.

We have yet to find out what happened just before the duel and if any words were exchanged. Perhaps Stan will enlighten us one day with the story leading up to that fateful duel!

Well, I think I'd prefer to have this expanded upon not to put Usagi in such a poor light as it appeared from the scene. It tarnishes my previous impression of him severely.

[Dave]

I never had a problem with the death of Gunichi. The bushido code seems to call for loyalty to one's master above all else. The very first panel of Usagi #1 suggests that Gunichi was prepared for the duel and understood why it must take place. He's neither alarmed nor angry in that first panel. Simply prepared.

He was a weather-torn soldier who knew the stakes when Usagi faced him down with the intent to kill him.

I agree that the "new" Usagi might not agree with the "old" Usagi's actions here, but I personally had no problem with them. Gunichi understood the terms of becoming a samurai and bodyguard from the start. He knew the rules as well as the consequences. Time and again, we've seen fair-weather soldiers turn the tides of war against their masters (whether at Adachigahara or the battle of Dan-No-Ura). Without strict codes regarding abandoners, lordships could never hope to endure the hostilities of war.

This wasn't a situation there was any way out of. It was lost plain and simple. I find the philosophy that loyal soldiers deserve to be assassinated simply because they don't wish to throw their lives away on a lost cause morally repugnant.

Then again the 'Die for the greater glory/power-hunger/callous egomania of this or that thoroughly corrupt lord' is a disgusting notion in itself by more humane standards. It was a different time with different needs.

[Dave]

As for Usagi evolving over time, I think that can be explained by his lifestyle broadening his horizons.

Societies always impose they're own morals on their members. As a child, it was only natural for Usagi to be enamoured by the samurai lifestyle, and his wanting to become a samurai, his adoption of the moral code of bushido, etcetera, is all a natural consequence of that.

But after everything that has happened in his life, Usagi now realizes that not everything is so black and white. And he has adjusted his perspective and moral code accordingly.

Exactly. The later Usagi is a more moral and sympathetic character I've grown to respect. A little retroactive continuity to fill us in on the exact circumstances of the duel actually wouldn't be a bad idea to make his virtue more untarnished.

[Dave]

I still wonder why Ino was considered the best swordsman pre-Inazuma when Usagi defeated him in their first encounter...anoher testament to Usagi's ways -- he doesn't kill unless he absolutely has to. In this case, he defeated Ino but cutting off his nose (as opposed to his head, which may have been easier). Stan????

Maybe it's because Ino was blind, overconfident in his superiority and blinded by rage? He did best Usagi later on you'll remember.

I'm also very curious about whether Ino was the second-greatest swordsperson only in terms of raw skill or with blindness included? Would he be greater than Inazuma if he somehow lost his blindness? Also was Inazuma the greatest before the possession or just afterwards? It was a bit unclear to me.

[shaxper]

I never had a problem with the death of Gunichi. The bushido code seems to call for loyalty to one's master above all else. The very first panel of Usagi #1 suggests that Gunichi was prepared for the duel and understood why it must take place. He's neither alarmed nor angry in that first panel. Simply prepared.

He was a weather-torn soldier who knew the stakes when Usagi faced him down with the intent to kill him.

I guess it's a matter of interpretation.

I agree that the "new" Usagi might not agree with the "old" Usagi's actions here, but I personally had no problem with them. Gunichi understood the terms of becoming a samurai and bodyguard from the start. He knew the rules as well as the consequences. Time and again, we've seen fair-weather soldiers turn the tides of war against their masters (whether at Adachigahara or the battle of Dan-No-Ura). Without strict codes regarding abandoners, lordships could never hope to endure the hostilities of war.

This wasn't a situation there was any way out of. It was lost plain and simple. I find the philosophy that loyal soldiers deserve to be assassinated simply because they don't wish to throw their lives away on a lost cause morally repugnant.

Mifune was still alive. Therefore, Gunichi abandoned him. If there was still any chance for Mifune to be saved, it was his bodyguards' duty to do so (that's why they're bodyguards). Even after Mifune went down, Usagi fulfilled his obligation to take and hide Mifune's head so that it could not be dishonored. Gunichi had plenty of responsibility left to fulfill, even if the battle was lost. If Usagi truly believes that a samurai's first duty is to his lord (and this still seems to hold true for him), then he'd have no tolorence for someone like Gunichi who, no matter how reputable and proven, puts his own life above that of the lord he was sworn to protect. Imagine if the Secret Service did that, and what a threat such an incident would pose to the security of future presidents (as well as the boldness of future assassins).

Usagi might not be the kind of person to kill someone for that these days, but Usagi had a special responsibility to avenge this particular betrayal because Mifune was his master, Mifune might still be alive if not for Gunichi, Usagi might therefore not be a Ronin if not for Gunichi, Gunichi (his friend) abandoned him as well as Mifune, and Usagi was forced to cover for him, lying to Mifune about his abandonement. For all these reasons, I think Usagi's vengeance makes sense.

And, as you've said, it was a different time. I don't think I could respect anyone that's taken a life in the real world (maybe a soldier. I don't know), but Usagi's was a more brutal time period in which ideals like honor and duty were all that kept societies functioning.

[Dave]

Mifune was still alive. Therefore, Gunichi abandoned him. If there was still any chance for Mifune to be saved, it was his bodyguards' duty to do so (that's why they're bodyguards). Even after Mifune went down, Usagi fulfilled his obligation to take and hide Mifune's head so that it could not be dishonored. Gunichi had plenty of responsibility left to fulfill, even if the battle was lost. If Usagi truly believes that a samurai's first duty is to his lord (and this still seems to hold true for him), then he'd have no tolorence for someone like Gunichi who, no matter how reputable and proven, puts his own life above that of the lord he was sworn to protect. Imagine if the Secret Service did that, and what a threat such an incident would pose to the security of future presidents (as well as the boldness of future assassins).

Ok, I can understand that take, but going by his previous actions just a bit earlier (during the assassination attempt) it seems more likely that Gunichi simply didn't think there was any way left for him to save his lord and does one mistake take away all the times you've done good? I don't believe he deserved to be hunted down for that.

Usagi might not be the kind of person to kill someone for that these days, but Usagi had a special responsibility to avenge this particular betrayal because Mifune was his master, Mifune might still be alive if not for Gunichi, Usagi might therefore not be a Ronin if not for Gunichi, Gunichi (his friend) abandoned him as well as Mifune, and Usagi was forced to cover for him, lying to Mifune about his abandonement. For all these reasons, I think Usagi's vengeance makes sense.

Not by my standards it doesn't. Hunting down Toda makes sense, not someone who made a bad call and had behaved impeccably previously. He didn't join the enemy after all. He simply didn't see any way out.

Usagi was more hopeful, but let's face it, he mostly reached Mifune through luck/because the story demanded it. It's not so likely that someone would succeed to get through the enemy ranks to a particular individual in a real battle of that type. If anything Gunichi was a realist in believing that his lord was already lost.

And, as you've said, it was a different time. I don't think I could respect anyone that's taken a life in the real world (maybe a soldier. I don't know), but Usagi's was a more brutal time period in which ideals like honor and duty were all that kept societies functioning.

True but samurai definitions of 'honour' and 'duty' frequently had a very cruel and hypocritical touch to them. The later Usagi seems to have embraced the wider implications of the terms (Treat everyone fairly and protect the virtuous or downtrodden without growing arrogant in the process).

[shaxper]

Ok, I can understand that take, but going by his previous actions just a bit earlier (during the assassination attempt) it seems more likely that Gunichi simply didn't think there was any way left for him to save his lord and does one mistake take away all the times you've done good? I don't believe he deserved to be hunted down for that.

Yes.

He was Mifune's bodyguard. His entire career was based upon preserving the lord's life at all costs. You don't just walk off the battlefield when it looks like your lord's going to lose. If a normal soldier had done this, I don't know whether or not that would be deserving of death (we won't go there), but Gunichi was a bodyguard. His actions were inexcusable.

True but samurai definitions of 'honour' and 'duty' frequently had a very cruel and hypocritical touch to them. The later Usagi seems to have embraced the wider implications of the terms (Treat everyone fairly and protect the virtuous or downtrodden without growing arrogant in the process).

The "new" Usagi behaves more with the ideals of a European knight than a Japanese Samurai. I recall Koji (and, I think, several other samurai) accusing Usagi of being highly un-samurai in his actions and values. To a samurai loyalty and honor come first. That's exactly how Usagi conducted himself in earlier issues. Now he has a value system that more closely resembles our ideals of protecting the innocent and defenseless and preserving life at all costs.

And let's not forget that Samurai was a social rank, which Usagi frequently dips below to consort with and aid the lower class. We applaud these actions, but they are not samurai-like.

[Dave]

Yes.

He saves his lords life multiple times at risk for his own, but makes a false assumption that Mifune was already lost and he deserves to die? I'm sorry, but I just can't respect that.

He was Mifune's bodyguard. His entire career was based upon preserving the lord's life at all costs.

And he had done so repeatedly.

You don't just walk off the battlefield when it looks like your lord's going to lose.

When it was already lost.

If a normal soldier had done this, I don't know whether or not that would be deserving of death (we won't go there), but Gunichi was a bodyguard. His actions were inexcusable.

Not from the perspective that he thought his cause was already lost. Let's face it, that was the realistic conclusion. Usagi really wouldn't have reached the lord unless the story demanded it.

The "new" Usagi behaves more with the ideals of a European knight than a Japanese Samurai.

European knights were just a bad (possibly worse) in this respect as japanese samurai. They generally used, abused and sucked dry their vassals to a hideous level for wholly egoistic reasons. Don't believe the King Arthur myths.

I recall Koji (and, I think, several other samurai) accusing Usagi of being highly un-samurai in his actions and values.

To his credit Usagi doesn't kill any peasants he feels like, nor excuse any wile actions by 'duty' to his lord.

To a samurai loyalty and honor come first.

Loyalty no matter how corrupt the lord, honour only to not loose face/kill anyone who insulted you in the slightest.

That's exactly how Usagi conducted himself in earlier issues.

Not nearly as extreme as some of the other samurai class we've seen.

Now he has a value system that more closely resembles our ideals of protecting the innocent and defenseless and preserving life at all costs.

Well, neither Usagi, nor myself believes in preserving thoroughly evil people.

And let's not forget that Samurai was a social rank, which Usagi frequently dips below to consort with and aid the lower class. We applaud these actions, but they are not samurai-like.

No, he's grown beyond 'Excuse your evil behaviour with that it's custom'.

[shaxper]

Yes.

He saves his lords life multiple times at risk for his own, but makes a false assumption that he was already lost and he deserves to die? I'm sorry, but I just can't respect that.

He was Mifune's bodyguard. His entire career was based upon preserving the lord's life at all costs.

And he had done so repeatedly.

You don't just walk off the battlefield when it looks like your lord's going to lose.

When it was already lost.

If a normal soldier had done this, I don't know whether or not that would be deserving of death (we won't go there), but Gunichi was a bodyguard. His actions were inexcusable.

Not from the perspective that he thought his cause was already lost. Let's face it, that was the realistic conclusion. Usagi really wouldn't have reached the lord unless the story demanded it.

It's not about how the battle is going. Gunichi wasn't a regular soldier and neither was Usagi. Their sole responsibility on the field was to protect Lord Mifune, not to win the battle. Losing was not an acceptable reason for Gunichi to leave. There was still a chance to get Mifune away from the battle, regardless of how probable or improbable that may have seemed. If he was confident Mifune was dead (and I don't see why he would have been), then he should have checked to be absolutely certain. Such was his duty. If he couldn't verify this because he didn't know where Mifune was, then he'd already failed in his duty to stay close to his lord and protect him.

European knights were just a bad (possibly worse) in this respect as japanese samurai. They generally used, abused and sucked dry their vassals to a hideous level for wholly egoistic reasons. Don't believe the King Arthur myths.

I'm not comparing the reality of knights versus samurai, but rather the ideals that guided the two groups. We are, after all, comparing Usagi against the samurai ideal.

I recall Koji (and, I think, several other samurai) accusing Usagi of being highly un-samurai in his actions and values.

To his credit Usagi doesn't kill any peasants he feels like, nor excuse any wile actions by 'duty' to his lord.

Again, Koji was referring to the samurai ideal. I don't exactly think Koji was reprimanding Usagi for not killing peasants. Koji is accurately noting that Usagi does not fall in line with the samurai ideal in his ethics and actions. He acts more with compassion and a respect for the preservation of life, as we tend to in the modern day "global" culture.

To a samurai loyalty and honor come first.

Loyalty no matter how corrupt the lord, honour only to not loose face/kill anyone who insulted you in the slightest.

Yes. That's the samurai way. I'm not saying it aligns particularly well with our beliefs (remember, different time), but that's what the samurai way was and that's the perspective from which Usagi and Gunichi were raised.

That's exactly how Usagi conducted himself in earlier issues.

Not nearly as extreme as some of the other samurai class we've seen.

Again, the ideal rather than the reality. Usagi didn't go around slaying peasants because that was a common samurai practice, not a common samurai ideal. Yes, Usagi dips beneath his class and showed someconcern for unnecessary loss of life in the early issues, but he's still pretty well alligned with the samurai ideals, otherwise.

Now he has a value system that more closely resembles our ideals of protecting the innocent and defenseless and preserving life at all costs.

Well, neither Usagi, nor myself believes in preserving thoroughly evil people.

noted

And let's not forget that Samurai was a social rank, which Usagi frequently dips below to consort with and aid the lower class. We applaud these actions, but they are not samurai-like.

No, he's grown beyond 'Excuse your evil behaviour with that it's custom'.

If your problem is with common samurai practice, then it's irrelevent to this point. If your problem is with the samurai ideal, then there's the answer to your problem with early Usagi Yojimbo. He's a samurai. You like him better when he stops behaving like one. No real debate required beyond that.