HUNTER X HUNTER #10 - - Watch & Learn

Topic started by No_name_here on Sept. 19, 2013. Last post by Marshal Victory 1 year, 6 months ago.
Post by No_name_here (868 posts) See mini bio Level 11

In a weird way, this show is starting to remind me a little of this obscure American comic, MISTER A. Essentially, the strip starred a superhero devised by Spider-Man’s co-creator, Steve Ditko, as a mouthpiece for his extreme and uncompromising objectivist beliefs. Supposedly, he kept trying to insert these values into Spidey’s adventures, but Marvel Comics kept refusing to allow their star character to go down such… unusual philosophical directions.

Eventually, Ditko would go on to work in the independents where, uninhibited by editorial restrictions, he was free to craft a strip that was less superheroic serial and more illustrated treatise. As you’d expect, the titular Mister A was a personification of objectivism (Rorschach from WATCHMEN is a milder tribute to him, FYI) who didn’t adventure so much as just solve situations designed to serve his rhetorical point.

I’ve drawn this extended comparison because I’m really tickled by the notion that HUNTER X HUNTER might actually be a platform for Togashi to explore… potentially intense notions that he might’ve only gotten to hint at in YU YU HAKUSHO. While I was already playing with this idea after Tonpa’s admission of sabotage, the illustrated monologue he goes on here (about the inherent treachery of the ‘Rule by Majority’ system) really makes it seem like Togashi is trying to weave a larger point about competent people being weighed down by incompetent peers.

And the drawn-out bet about our blue bad guy’s state of consciousness only just strengthens this theory. While you can certainly make the case that Togashi is trying to mix his heroes’ conflicts up by throwing challenges at them which can’t be solved with punches and kicks, it still doesn’t seem coincidental that the most consistent threats to Gon’s band are quitters.

These aren’t fearsome and mighty bullies like Toguro or Shinobu: these are weasels trying to cheat our heroes out of victory because they possess no worthwhile talents themselves. And if Tonpa continues to bedevil them like this, it’ll all but prove my theory.

Watch this episode, Trick × To × The Trick" here and decide for yourself, then read my comments on the previous episode here.

About the Author

Tom Pinchuk’s a writer and personality with a large number of comics, videos and features like this to his credit. Visit his website - - - - and follow his Twitter: @tompinchuk
Post by Marshal Victory (2,973 posts) See mini bio Level 14

Inteded or unintended meaning is intresting to think about. also to back what Tom is saying here about Steve Ditko.Well worth the watch.

Few things i would note. In a world where religons of peace kill ,where those who cry themselves defenders of freedom would enslave your own freedoms.Then yes is unusal.But in a real sence its not.It sares many foudnations with as well as

Tom may well be onto somtheing with Togashi . But consider the example with the ‘Rule by Majority’ system.It could well be a illustration of how democracy fails.The old example of democracy is simply a angry mob. embeding was truned off :/

Course two foxs an a chicken desiding whats for dinner is even older.

Back to Mr A for a final thought.The card an black an white there is only wrong or right thing.Thats only a perspective of one who zooms out in perspective. Those that look closer can see the shades of grey where the white an black meet.

Post by rubberluffy (602 posts) See mini bio Level 16

I think the objectivist slant is reaching. There's enough evidence later in the series to disprove it (a lot of stuff about relying on others, you can't do everything yourself, being selfish can get you or your friends killed).

Post by zaldar (1,363 posts) See mini bio Level 15

@Marshal Victory: Objectivism exists just to allow people to think being greedy is ok. Certainly democracy needs limits and protection of the minority (hence the US constitution) but a dog eat dog world where everyone is always out only for themselves and that is OK, is if you think about it long enough not one you would want to live in. Really objectivism has more in common with anarchy than even libertarianism. The friend I have who worked for awhile at the Ann Rand Institute is one of the biggest Jerks I know...(and this is from someone who doesn't want America to turn into Europe with a crazy overdone social safety net)

Post by Marshal Victory (2,973 posts) See mini bio Level 14

@zaldar: Had few friends over the years who were objectivits actualy.looked into it in my post high school years actauly.They tho were nothing as you discribe.Some of the most kindest generous people i have known.But The U.S was set up as a represenative republic.True democracy is just as the old saying two foxes an a chicken desiding on whats for dinner.The minority eventualy in a democracy will always be stomped on.Or mobed with pickforks an torches.

@rubberluffy: I dont think Tom is saying Tonpa is a objectivist .But he is seeing a larger meaning an themes in his work that may reflect a personal view.Thus the Steve Ditko example.Tho i caution again Inteded or unintended meaning is intresting to think about.It does not mean what one views in a work to be intended or even subjective to ones own views.

Top Editors
Top Posters
Marshal Victory
23 posts
17 posts
15 posts
12 posts
10 posts
9 posts
8 posts
8 posts
5 posts
4 posts
Mandatory Network

Submissions can take several hours to be approved.

Save ChangesCancel