It is easy to boast what you believe in, yet at what cost
are you willing to commit to that? If the consequence of doing this will lead
to your own destruction, will you still stick to any of these beliefs? With a
solitary existence, do you have the courage to stand up to the waves of
corruption, and the army of hypocrisy that are so inherent in the world you
exist in? These are the questions that are addressed in ‘Seppuku’ (also known
as ‘Harakiri’, 1962), the absolutely wonderful film by the Japanese director
Masaki Kobayashi!
‘Harakiri’ is a timeless classic, and I can say its power
can be considered on equal terms with any of the greatest Kurosawa classics.
The film won the Special Jury Prize in the Cannes festival, and it has inspired a number
of subsequent directors. Famed for its extreme dramatic intensity, ‘Harakiri’
concerns the final day of the elder ronin Hanshiro Tsugumo’s life, and his
attempt to regain the honor of his family at a corrupt clan known as the House
of Iyi. The melancholy in the story is almost comparable to any Shakespearean
or Greek tragedies, and its universal relevance to our existence makes it one
of the most wonderful human dramas in world cinema. Through a memorable
performance by the smashing actor Tatsuya Nakadai as Hanshiro, the film has
inspired us to have the courage to fight against injustice and to stand firm on
what we believe in, no matter what the cost may be, or how insignificant the
power of a individual is. Since I first watched ‘Harakiri’ in my teenage years,
it has always been a moving film to me, and it has the honor to be my favourite
non-Kurosawa (!!) Asian film of all time. I have always reminded myself that,
if I will be writing about cinema one day, I will definitely write about
‘Harakiri’. I suppose this is a ‘matter of honor’ issue here!
Before we look into the film, I suppose I need to say a few
words about the 2 traditional concepts – ‘Bushido’ and ‘Seppuku / Harakiri’.
While many of the films in the 1960s tend to be critical about the traditional
Bushido code (‘The Way of the Warrior’), I personally do not find to be harsh
towards Bushido. Indeed, I feel that many of the codes in Bushido are still
highly applicable ( I have often wondered if a bushido for writing is
possible?!), and they can really help us to improve ourselves, and become a
greater guy. Yet, just like any rules, we have to understand the context these
codes are based on, and the reason why these codes exist in first place. I
suppose Kobayashi-san’s intention in ‘Harakiri’ is to show the dark side of
bushido, the other side of the story. Even if you find yourselves more inclined
to this revisionist stance, it does not mean that one has to discredit, for
example, Kurosawa’s ‘Seven Samurai’. Only by understanding both the good and
the bad sides of the code, one will really be able to have a holistic view of
the whole issue.
Seppuku (or Harakiri), on the other hand, is something more
hard to appreciate. Harakiri literally means stomach disembowelment, and this
practice is seen as a honorable suicide by the samurai class, a way to redeem
one’s honor. The act is often done in a ceremonial manner, and it starts by the
samurai doing the hara-kiri, and then it is followed by the decapitation
administered by a second member, which is known as . This is done as to give
the a quick kill. Now, viewing it from a modern perspective, this act seems a
bit unthinkable (or even silly). As a fan of B-movies, I can quote a few
examples that can put things into context. Take Rocky III – if Mr. T has
defeated Rocky at the first match, does that mean Rocky has to stroll back to
little Italy
and kill himself? No, as David Sloane from Kickboxer 4 told his nasty nemesis
Tong Po, ‘you just have to beat me in a match and regain your honor’, to avoid
further shame. It is the ‘I’ll be back’ logic that governs all these macho b-s,
or sugar-coated in a way, the ‘matter of honor’ thing. To regain honor, you
need to do is to defeat your opponent in a rematch, as simple as that. Why
would the samurai prefer death rather than dishonor? I feel it is rather tough
to access to this ancient mind-set, though we can have some insights when we
try to link up all these ideas in the next article. Anyway, the easy way out is
to appreciate that, in Kobayashi’s film, the very act of Harakiri is an acid
test to see one is honorable or not.
Through their differing attitudes towards the act of Harakiri, we can
easily see the ones who can truly commit to their own beliefs, in a situation
where almost everyone apparently states that these codes and beliefs are
‘important’ to their own samurai existences.
Hanshiro Tsugumo (Tatsuya Nakadai), an elder ronin, arrived
at the House of Iyi, a samurai clan, in a particular afternoon in 1630. There,
he requested for a place to commit a honorable suicide. The elder clansman,
Saito, invited him for a brief chat. Saito asked whether Hanshiro knew a
younger ronin, known as Motome Chijiwa, as they both seemed to serve at the
same clan years ago. Hanshiro seemed to have no idea who this Chijiwa was.
Saito, stating this was of minor importance, continued with a story about this
young ronin.
Chijiwa, like Hanshiro, actually came to Iyi some time ago,
and also begged fior a place to commit hara-kiri. The clansmen in Iyi discussed
the issue, and some of them believed that Chijiwa’s true intention was to bluff
them, and asked for money in return, or even a position in the samurai clan.
Hikokuro Omodaka (Tetsuro Tamba), a senior retainer, suggested that they should
force Chijiwa to commit Harakiri, so as to serve as an example to those who
might have these intentions in the future. Chijiwa, with no clear idea what his
action might lead himself to, was absolutely surprised when they allowed and
insisted him to commit hara-kiri on spot, and it was all too late for him to
step off. Before the hara-kiri ceremony, the clansmen in Iyi were thrilled to
discover Chijiwa did not even have a real samurai sword – all he had was a
sword made from bamboo. The members of Iyi asked Chijiwa to commit hara-kiri
anyway, by using his bamboo sword. Since the bamboo sword was pretty blunt, it
made the whole experience far more slow and painful, and Chijiwa died with
ultimate dis-honor.
After telling the story, Saito asked Hanshiro if he had any
second thoughts. Hanshiro insisted he would do it, and urged the members in the
house to prepare for the ceremony. He even stated that he would not change into
the light-colored hara-kiri clothing, stating that his dark attire suited the
situation appropriately. Before the ceremony started, Hanshiro had to nominate
for a second who would do the for him. Hanshiro suggested 3 names, yet
interestingly, they were all absent. Hanshiro insisted he would like to have
either one of these members to do , so men were asked to fetch them. In order
to pass time, Hanshiro decided to tell the House of Iyi his life story,
because, ‘What befalls others today, may be your own fate tomorrow.’.
To everyone’s surprise, Hanshiro did have slight acquirancce
with Motome Chijiwa. Motome was actually Hanshiro’s son in law, and he was the
son of Hanshiro’s close friend. Motome married Hanshiro’s daughter, Miho, and
they had a child together. However, after the dissolution of their clan,
Hanshiro and Motome could not find any jobs in the harsh world. It was a time
of peace, and many samurai clans were abolished and the samurais could not find
many opportunities. Hanshiro and Motome could earn for a meager living, yet
when Miho and the child were sick, things went like a downward spiral. With no
money to buy medicine, Motome had to go as far to pawn his real samurai sword
in exchange for money. It was then he went to the House of Iyi to look for
opportunities, but this sowed the seeds for his demise. When the corpse of
Motome was delivered back to Hanshiro and Miho, he was more than horrified to
see the bamboo sword, and felt truly dis-honored by such an act. Soon after,
Miho and succumbed to their illness and passed away. How, Hanshiro was alone,
and he realized the Bushido code would never be able to provide any justice to
the vulnerable one...
Hanshiro blamed Saito and the clansmen for the decision to
kill Motome in such a manner, yet Saito insisted that they have done nothing
wrong and denied any responsibilities. Knowing that he would not be able to
change their opinions, Hanshiro announced that he was ready to join his family
in another world. Before that, he decided to show them ‘one last thing’. They
were the headknots of the 3 absent samurais!
Now, Hanshiro told the clansmen that, he has already taken
action. He stalked down the first two samurais and challenged them to duel. Of
course, Hanshiro defeated both of them easily.
Hikokuro, knowing about Hanshiro’s ordeal, came to his house
and challenged him to a duel. Though Hikokuro was a skillful swordmen, he had
no real war experience like Hanshiro. As Hanshiro commented, ‘Swordsmanship
untested in battle is like the art of swimming mastered on land.’ Eventually,
Hanshiro defeated Hikokuro.
Hanshiro insinuated that, while the House of Iyi claimed
that they followed Bushido, their 3 skillful retainers were so coward to even
come back when they have lost the duel. Consumed with shame, Saito could only
wipe out Hanshiro for good. He ordered the clansmen to kill Hanshiro, and a
wonderful showdown started, which could only been described in images.
After turning Iyi upside down, Hanshiro committed an
anti-establishment act (that’s movie in the 60s) – he threw the samurai statue on
the floor. And, as he has promised, Hanshiro committed hara-kiri.
However, to avoid further shame, gunmen were sent in and Hanshiro was gunned
down as a result. After a messy afternoon, the House of Iyi has taken action
to set things right. They ordered the 3 clansmen to commit hara-kiri, and then
they cleaned up the house, and re-erected the samurai statue. For the record,
they fabricated the whole story as an honorable suicide, and of course skipped
out the shameful part. After that, it seemed nothing has happened at all, and
the House of Iyi was still standing. The clansmen might try hard to forget
Hanshiro, yet, for the audience, we will always remember how a courageous and
wonderful man he was.
(1/2)
by Ed Law
6/11/2017
Film Analysis
