John Perkinson - Essay 2

Dear Dr. McMahon, O.G, and S.A to D.M.,
In studying Japanese Literature, it is clear that the issue of “honor” is a lot more influential on their culture than it is here in the United States. Men are willing to sacrifice their lives, they will kill innocent people, they are willing to give all they have, to lie, and even completely shame themselves in hopes that they can achieve a greater honor.
But what defines honor? Is it different in different places? To us, we do not consider someone killing themself because they got their hair cut off a very honorable thing. If someone I knew got attacked, and the mugger did nothing to him but cut off his hair, I would call him lucky that he wasn’t severely hurt or even dead. It would give me no reason to look down on him. And surely if this friend who was attacked were to go kill himself over the unfortunate haircut, I wouldn’t see that as honorable – I would think it was weird and assume he had some problems that had been unknown to me.
But based on the account in the movie Harakiri, different traditions change other’s outlook on certain situations. When Hanshiro hunts down Omadaka and the other two retainers, he wants nothing more but to bring upon them as much shame as he can. But by cutting off their topknots, he is hitting them with something that is, to them, worse than death. To them, the Samurai, this is the worst thing that can happen. And when Hanshiro asks the house to admit that that might have been wrong, not to confess, but to acknowledge their possible margin for error in the situation of Motome Chijiwa, they attack. To them, they cannot admit their mistake. They would rather fight him to the death and sacrifice some of their best warriors then to admit that there was the possibility on one blemish in the honor of the House of Iyi.
According to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary, the definition of justice is:

“the maintenance or administration of what is just especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishments” (http://www.webster.com)
And part of being honorable is trying to live justly. But if the house of Iyi did not follow through with “the assignment of merited rewards,” could they have had real honor? All Hanshiro wanted was a simple “Maybe,” but they wouldn’t allow that, and when he killed a bunch of their men and then killed himself, they did nothing but lie to cover it up. Now this is ironic because the leader of the house says to Hanshiro that if to him, honor is nothing but superficial, that they wouldn’t be able to hire him anyways (because that is what they mistakenly believe he wants) However, if the house does not act justly, they are masking themselves with a lie and a false sense of honor to the rest of the culture, which is in my opinion, worse than underestimating its overall importance.
Another aspect of this story is the duty of the Samurai, which comes in to play in judging who did the right thing and the wrong. Early on, we see an exchange between Motome and Hanshiro about a ronin who had gone up to a house and asked to commit Seppuku so that he could die in honor. Instead the house had hired him because they saw him as quite honorable and wanted him to be a part of them. Since then, it was told that many ronin had gone bluffing. They were threatening Seppuku in hopes of being hired, not with the real intention to die. Both Motome and Hanshiro saw this as disgraceful and it was a shame that any samurai should ever have to resort to that. However, once Miho and Kingo started to die, and the family was going poor – Motome realized that some things may be more important than his Samurai honor. He realized he had a human duty above his Samurai duty to make sure that the lives of his loved ones were taken care of the best they could be, no matter what it might do to his honor. So he sold his swords, which, as the movie pointed out over and over, were a Samurai’s soul. He also attempted to go work with the peasants, but he was rejected for being a Samurai. So in the end, he realized he had no other option than to bluff his Seppuku. But for him, with no swords, and a family that was dying, this was quite risky. He lied to his family and when he went to the house of Iyi, he bluffed – and they called it. He was then forced to commit the Seppuku with his replacement bamboo swords. For him to bluff the greatest Samurai ritual there was, sell what it meant to be a Samurai, and try to work with the common people, we see that he had realized that there was an overall greater duty than remaining “honorable.”
Another place to examine the idea of “duty” and how it compares to one’s honor is in the story “On the Conduct of Lord Tadanao.” In it we see a man who has been good at things all his life. Lord Tadanao has done nothing but win in everything he has ever competed in. This has led him to believe that he is, in a way, “invincible.” He celebrates and holds large competitions in everything with only the top competitors. But one day, after a duel tournament he has just held, he hears the two toughest competitors he has faced, talking in his garden. Not knowing that he is listening, they are discussing that day’s match and how they intentionally lost after a certain amount of time, not wanting to embarrass Lord Tadanao. Now Lord Tadanao is shocked, and angered. So he decides to hold a real duel match with unprotected spear blades. However, even with this, the men still intentionally lose, hoping that it will please their Lord. Lord Tadanao is furious. Every competition from that point on to him, when he wins, he believed the other person threw the match.
Now this brings up the question – were the retainers, with whom he competed, doing their “duty” in throwing the match? Is there a fine line that one cannot cross based on their moral duty? Is it honorable to lie to someone and give them a false sense of pride and honor in a victory they did not deserve? These men believed they were doing what was pleasing to their Lord, and therefore saw it as an honorable thing for them to do.
Lord Tadanao, is literally driven nuts by this. He begins wondering where his limits are. He wonders how good he really is at everything. Unable to know where the truth ended in his competitive life, and the lies began, he decides to find out. He wants someone to be truthful to him, no matter what it takes. He wants them to do it, not because it’s pleasing to them, but because it’s right. He begins killing people, hoping he will be told that it’s wrong and that someone will resist. He wants someone to stand up to him and tell him: “That’s too far, for even you.” He wants to know what degree of “honor” he is allowed to hold, just how far he can bend – before he breaks. Unfortunately, he does break. He starts ordering people killed by the masses. He even goes so far, that the Shogun take action.
Finally, his mother told him that he should step down, she told him the Shogun would force him to if he didn’t. He was overjoyed to finally know that he had limits. He gave it all up willingly knowing that finally someone had been honest, and that he was not allowed to win and continue this.
After he stepped down, he spent the rest of his days peacefully competing and almost redeeming himself by living among peasants, hearing their tales, and treating them with nothing but respect. It makes one wonder, with all the people he killed, and with no outright apology – can one like him be forgiven? Could a man like him, who killed because he could, redeem himself by actions alone. He never did apologize through words, but I believe that the expression: “Actions speak louder than words.” And that not only can he be forgiven, but like Hanshiro in Harakiri, he can even be seen as honorable.