Read on Twitter
The "Kami/God/Popo taught Goku to respect the sanctity of life" thread that may or may not show up in a video some day...
So obviously a line I put in yesterday's DBD was meant to tweak noses, when I teased about Goku's lackadaisical attitude towards killing Boo's minions being out of step with the fan theory of "Goku stopped killing people after God and Popo taught him it was wrong."
I expected to ruffle some feathers, but I freely admit I didn't expect people to defend the change. That's simply because I'd never encountered the defense. I've frequently heard that he grows to respect life, but never, "Oh, actually, he later learned that killing is good."
Personally, it seems a little silly to me, if there is a purposeful character arc, to totally walk it back without any real nuance. I mean, it's one thing to grow to "there are situations where killing is necessary" but another to shrug off murdering magic-controlled non-threats.
I don't think there's any purpose to it. HOWEVER, I was greatly impressed by the justifications for it. Namely, that there were any: Vegeta berating Goku for being soft, Goku's regret when he kills Freeza, telling Trunks he was too soft on Freeza, encouraging Gohan to kill Cell.
It's why I used that Bobbidi clone thing to launch into a larger discussion about interpreting text and praised fans' imaginations for creating their own logical extrapolations even if it is not the author's intention. And this is everything the "sanctity of life" theory is not.
Here, there is an actual dilemma in the text: is Goku right or Vegeta? And that storyline ends with Goku (seemingly) forced to take a life, Vegeta-style. Not sure I agree with the supposition, but there are actual dots that can be connected to support this interpretation.
The "sanctity of life" theory has absolutely nothing. No character criticizes Goku killing enemies. Never mentioned in his training. Fans simply see him kill Piccolo and then spare Piccolo. Going to God's is literally the only thing in between, so that's their rationalization.
Heck, Goku has to stop God from killing Piccolo, so he must be the "do as I say, not as I do" kind of mentor. As always, the lack of defined roles for gods in Dragon Ball means that fans imbue them with whatever attributes they see in a god. In this case "thou shalt not kill."
To be clear, you never have to justify your theories to me. However it makes you happy to interpret the text is your own business and harms nobody. I only get annoyed when it gets tossed in my face as this "obvious fact" despite having no actual evidence.
So, as always, thanks for sharing your ideas and interpretations with me. I was impressed, and I had not thought of it that way before. And that, in turn, inspired me to write this thread, which I also enjoyed significantly.
Because this comparison just popped in my head, let me elaborate on what I mean by nuance. The Lion King is a movie with a somewhat recursive character journey. Simba starts out wanting to be king. Then he doesn't. Then he does. But he ends the movie in a different place.
Act 1 Simba is an entitled crotch nugget who wants to be king to lord over everyone and get his way. Act 2 Simba prefers a life anonymity due to his guilt. The culmination is somewhere in between: be king, but be humble and responsible. His trials illuminate his true path.
I don't know if I can get behind this "kill/no-kill/kill again" theory because there's not really a purpose to the journey. For Goku to kill mind-controlled mooks doesn't illustrate to me he's learned to kill when necessary, or nuance. He's just right back where he started.
Basically it's "I Just Can't Wait to be King" Simba becoming king, which kind of renders the entire journey moot. Was God wrong? Is the lesson that killing is fun as long as fighting is fun? I don't really get the takeaway here.
