On Death and Pokémon Species

As I've explained in my previous post yesterday, I learned about a term related to the Pokémon main series games that regrettably has a certain controversy about it. The factors related to that controversy were also explained, being creativity that is falsely understood or interpreted. But could there be a third factor? It seems so, as the original discussion regarding the term brought up something that is rarely discussed around Pokémon: death, specifically of the Pokémon species themselves. This topic has its various twists and turns beyond the controversy of the term, but for the term, it seems especially pertinent.

For that, it appears that a prevailing notion seems to exist. The notion is that "Pokémon don't die, they just faint". In many cases, the notion is not only lingering but also out-and-out promoted, even in the direct face of evidence that death can be or is in fact involved, though still not by combat. This notion also seems to be touted as something that makes Pokémon such a kid-friendly franchise, because death is not "presented". I say "presented" in quotes because one would have to latch onto the indirect implication that death is involved, and presumably kids are mostly of the immature sort that would not be able to do so. Yet whether one is a kid or a grown-up, death is rather unavoidably conjectured in any Pokémon representation, though not as a result of combat.

I keep promoting the Pokémon food chain axioms, and they remain to be true in different ways, as in the ever-popular Pidgeotto scooping up a Magikarp with the latter never to return again, most likely becoming consumed and therefore dead. Pokémon will never debrief these relations except in the Pokédex, but for certain intents and purposes, they may be considered to be accepted. Then there are the graveyards for what are understandably Pokémon, and one does not have to look far for these - there's the famous one in Lavender Tower in Lavender Town, and more recently one on one of the islands of Alola. These places convey not much else but a somber aura, one that is in relation to death if nothing else. That becomes something hard to refute even with the notion above remaining true.

Regarding the relation to the term, the promotion of the term above is more likely the reason that the term is downplayed or even attempted to be positioned as "illegal", since the execution of the situation of the term, even at its most simplest with pure willpower, effectively treats Pokémon as "dead", and that's something not to be presented in an in-one's-face manner, at least in the perception of those who possess an official capacity. The supposed "misunderstanding" is therefore an elaborate coverup to prevent further traction of the term and presenting the "wrong image" that combat results in death. While that may be true, it would also present the attempt of denying death in any manner.

The entire controversy surrounding the term and its related matters seems to bring up the possibility that two separate pictures of Pokémon can be (or are in fact being) painted. One of those is in the "wonderland" perspective that is appropriate for children, sidestepping advanced or realist matters, including the above and for example the Distortion World of Giratina. The other one is in the "realist" perspective that implies the above (but still not addressing it outright) and includes difficult or advanced lore. Neither are wrong, certainly; they're right in the eyes of the beholder, but they're just separate views that are reserved for certain understandings - proper, not false.

Evidently, the controversial situation of the term deepens with "death" mired into the mix. This may make it hard for the controversy, misunderstanding, and everything else about the term to be untangled, but at least a discussion helps to elucidate most things if not everything about the term. Outside of the term itself, though, death remains an obscure yet implied aspect for Pokémon that is not hard to make out. Yet it still remains as a "realist" aspect that may be reserved for those ready to make the understanding, as with that term.

One year ago: The State of Nominations, Part 12

Two years ago: The Leek and Pokémon

Three years ago: Cosplay: Isekai

Four years ago: A Merchandise Dream

Five years ago: Unified Centers and Marts