Yamikin Ushjima-kun & existentialism : 3 questions it raises

Hey guys! Today I won’t talk about some books or films or series I have recently enjoyed. Instead, let’s talk about manga! I bet that some of you share the same interest as I do in them.

Why? Because it is a manga so from Japan and another society so it is a way to know if a western philosophy can be applied to Eastern ones. Plus, manga are usually exaggerated – on purpose but this is out of question – so i may be easier to come up with a complete analysis. Oh, and it actually appears a lot funnier to me. After books and films, now time has come to talk about the manga. I think of it that it is another way to apply the philosophical subject we are supposed to learn in class. I hope you feel the same about it. Still, this manga is very special, because it is different from traditional shônen that usually represent fights and strong friendship (nakama) or shojo (which now are reduced to relationships between the kohai and the sempai).

I guess you are now eager to know what manga I am talking about. Let me present this manga briefly, entitled Yamikin Ushijima-kun. I think the translation of the title is sufficient to understand the global storyline. Yamikin Ushijima-kun means “Ushijima the Loan Shark”.  Basically, Ushijima is a callous usurer who has to struggle in order to get his money back when people get indebted and can’t pay back. Darkness pervades the atmosphere of the whole storyline.

Instead of just listing the elements that make Yamikin Ushijima-kun an existential piece of art, I’d rather list the elements that provide a new insight to the class lessons. Yamikin Ushijima-kun has a lot to offer to one equipped with a broad mind, I will prove it to you.

N°1: How does existentialism apply when there is no rule?

I think it is a very interesting question that no one ever answered properly. After all, philosophers usually study universal values that can apply to a large number of people. Of course, it is logical, for philosophy’s main purpose is to give clues to understand our world in general.

But I think that because the devil is in the detail, we should extend those general principles to concrete situations, and it appears all the more accurate when it comes to existentialism.

Existentialism supposes that they are social rules ruling our world. When Nietzsche talks about morality, he talks about bout social principles. He can pull off a theory on the basis of universal values.

But what if there is no obvious rule? Back in the prehistoric times, there were no philosophers, because no one had nothing to analyse.

In Yukimin Ushujima-kun, the protagonist’s world has no rules at all, except earning as much money as possible, by all means. He uses his own employees’ families, he uses desperate women to make some cash, and he entices his customers to get more indebted so that he can get more pay. His only goal is to make people pay before they make him pay.

As you can see, what is interesting is that Ushijima takes actions. By doing so, he is not afraid to be free, though what he does for a living is completely immoral. The classic definition of morality doesn't apply to his situation, he can only act. 

Another example would be responsability. In Sartre’s mind, ambiguity is a principle of action. When one says “it is okay if I …” he potentially determines the fate of all humanity because he says it is okay if everyone does the same. When it comes to something rather bad, for instance “It is okay if I rob …” you basically authorize people to rob you. But when they do, you’ll be upset, and that is the ambiguity. However, there is no ambiguity for Ushijima. If someone robs him, they have the right to do so, but Ushijima will do whatever he can to get his money back. It lives in a world where unexpectedness is the key word. His world’s bases are fragile, moving, he cannot take anything for granted. Of course, I doubt that he was happy to be manipulated by a swindler in the first tome, but I couldn’t see any trace of surprise on his face. 

Of course, there are a few rules, making existentialism relevant. Every new client lives in an ab-surd manner, from the young woman who wants to live above her means to the genius despising society. Plus, Ushijima never believes in what customers say, but rather in what they do. He judges their personality from their actions and not on their words. This is directly related to Sartrean existentialism, isn't it? 

N°2: Is ethics a part of existentialism?

I think it is an excellent question. Tell me what you think in the comments; I do want to know your opinion on that because we never talk about it. I commented something very similar on a post dealing with Groundhog Day but it is the occasion to push one step further this interrogation. When I ask the question, some of you may think I already provide an answer because if ethics were a part of existentialism then I wouldn’t event bother to ask. But this a real question I’ve always wondered since I discovered existentialism!

If you have a closer look to the material we were told to watch/read, only a few, and even none, talks about the goodness of being immoral. I don’t think being immoral is good, but each time a character is immoral, he is being ab-surd and therefore it is bad.

In Yamikin Ushijima-kun, the main character doesn’t care about morality. But it does not mean he is immoral. At the beginning of the manga, one would think he is being totally immoral, but then everything changes in tome 2. In tome 2, Ushijima takes care of a young man that was having problems with a bike gang. This young man, named Murasa, will work for Ushijima and develop a theory according to which “customers are all worse than cockroaches”. 

But Ushijima-kun confronts him to his own indebted mother and tried to force him take pictures of her naked so that she could sell them and pay him back. He makes Murasa understand that he is not as callous as he claims to be. But Ushijima stays calm; he just wants money and is neither moral nor immoral. More than that, I can't help thinking he understood Beauvoir's ambiguity : there is a paradox at the center of all human life. 

Nietzsche says we should be cautious when it comes to morality, for morale is a social construction that deludes us. According to Nietzsche, morality drifts us away from our true purposes, from the übermench ideal. And I think that’s why Ushijima is trying to do! He wants to stick to the truth that lies beyond moral and religious principles. What he found is that “I have to make them pay before they make me pay”. One may criticize this choice I don’t think It should be taken into account in my demonstration. Anyway, I would be glad to discuss this topic with you in the comments! 

For Kierkegaard, there’s the ethical relation of course, where you take into account that your existence is an on-going process between your soul and body and between the others’ souls and bodies (undergoing the same process as you do).

N°3: “Hell is other people”?

I’ve always thought this phrase was kind of true. We are project – and not object – for we can evolve whereas the mere object can’t do so. BUT, people judge us, they reify us by making a static mental representation of what we are at the moment they meet us. That image is considered universal: it is what we always were, what we are, what we always will be. Not very encouraging.

If we don’t show up our best image, then we’ll be ashamed. Shame is what causes us pain and shame comes from others: others make us suffer. They are like Hell.

What struck me above all was that Ushijima doesn’t care about what people think of him. I wonder if others seem like hell to him. Of course, he admits he fears the customer because no one can predict his or her future movements! Unfortunately, I don’t whether or not this fear can be considered as the fear of others.

I can’t really imagine that Ushijima is so callous that he no longer cares about anyone. After all, he’s human and every human has something (/someone) that gives him a lifetime purpose.

In short, I hope you liked my little pitch on the manga Yamikin Ushikima-kun. I personally can’t stop reading it over and over because the character is so uneasy to understand. I try hard to get through his feelings but the mangaka won’t leave us a single clue. I will probably never know why he’s doing such terrible things.

Don’t hesitate to read the manga yourself if you want, but I must warn you it is an “adult” manga with rough scenes sometimes.

I'd like to discuss the choice of this topic in the comments: tell me if you think we can apply existentialism to manga!