Introduction to Poke-Terminology
This essay seeks to explore the rhetoric in the popular video game franchise Pokemon, and attempts to show that despite claims from eco-activist groups such as PETA that Pokemon expresses harmful rhetoric to the environment and cultural and fan observations in defense of Pokemon, both sides have equally valid points as backed up by environmental rhetoric scholars and can each be seen as legitimate, but in the end, the intent of Pokemon, at least initially, was not to attack or defend the environment, environmental activists, any form of animal or species, nor is it necessarily meant to defend it or express specific cultural values from Western or Eastern philosophy. Instead, this paper aims to find that Pokemon indirectly supports discussion on these issues, and as the series has evolved over the span of 20 years, has acknowledged and responded to both sides within the game itself, its primary purpose is simply entertainment, and people will extrapolate what they wish, or what proves their arguments, sometimes with justification, and other times forced for a variety of reasons depending on the audience and rhetorician citing the Pokemon games in their arguments.
Pokemon is a franchise of entertainment that started as a handheld video game in the mid 1990s and published by Japanese brand Nintendo. The original games, released in duality as “Blue version” and “Red version” in the United States and “Green version” and “Red version” in Japan became an instant success that set Nintendo as a major player on the modern video game stage.
Since the initial two games, the franchise has expanded to six (as of date) current series or “generations” with many sequels and reboots of existing games, as well as a popular anime (Japanese animation), a trading card game, toys, and others entertainment products. Each generation is said to introduce a new region of the Poke-Universe to fans that explores fictitious creatures called Pokemon, for whom the games are named after. In Pokemon, the player operates a character who traverses the region specified in the game and “captures” or “catches” Pokemon in spheres called Pokeballs and releases them in order to battle other Pokemon in order to fight crime, earn badges, or complete other minor goals. The main two objectives are to earn all 8 badges by defeating their respective “gyms” and to catch every Pokemon in the game.
A key part of winning this game is to stack your “team” or “party” with six Pokemon species of different typing. Each Pokemon is assigned one to two “types” such as Grass types, Fire types, Water types, Electric types, Bug types, Ghost types, Steel types, Poison types… These type classifications determine a Pokemon’s strengths and weaknesses in combat. For example Grass type is weak against Fire because it is flammable, but it is also strong against Water because plants absorb Water. Flying types are strong against Bug types because birds often prey off of insects, and Poison types are strong against Grass types because of presumably poison destroys plant life and nature. This is key to the study of environmental rhetoric in the games. Also, note that some types are more based in nature, such as Grass and Water, some are based on technology such as Electric and Steel, and some are based on the supernatural such as Psychic and Ghost. Many Pokemon, especially according to type, have names inspired by their powers, that in English, are often labeled by puns rather than the original Japanese names; Charizard, for example, is a Fire type lizard Pokemon whose name comes from char(coal) and (li)zard. Also, please note that one of the main recurring side quests in Pokemon games is defeating a notorious gang that influences the region, such as Team Rocket or Team Aqua and Magma. This is also a key point to note both in regards to typing and overall the rhetoric. Rhetoric, in the case that the observed analysts use it, refers to written and verbal language, but also graphics, motions, music, and anything else that portrays an intended message or theme.
The Obvious
To be quite blunt, Pokemon are often treated as slaves. They are literally forced to battle each other until one faints. The Pokemon, once captured battle for their “trainer” or “master” for whom the narrative follows. The protagonist himself (and in later generations sometimes herself) takes the role of trainer come master. In many ways, the Pokemon resemble dogs in a dog fight, which authors Nancy Tuana, Donna Harraway, and M. Jimmie Killingsworth all denounce. “Certainly, however, in the relationship animals and people are constructing a historically specific form of life, and therefore a language” (Harraway 165). While many can say that dog fighting is objectively bad, these theorists take it so far as to say that the teasing the dog by wagging a bone in front of it or talking to it like it’s a toy is immoral (Harraway 165) and displaying a narrative of human/male superiority in a dichotomous narrative.
In many Western stories such as industrial age folk tales (Paul Bunyan and Pecos Bill), in Greek myths (The Iliad and The Odyssey), and in modern filmography (Lost and Jaws) we see a depiction of the literary conflict trope “Man vs. Nature,” and yes particularly “Man,” rather than any genderless term. We have the protagonist Man versus his antagonist Nature in a conflict where only one can “win,” and in the end, the good-protagonist always wins. In the case of Pokemon, you have a conflict of Man and his tamed Nature versus another Man and his tamed Nature. In the cases of Killingsworth and Harraway, this is the type of narrative that they claim Western culture, and all post-colonial culture, has seen too much of.
However, the Poke-Universe is not our own and is not technically “Western.” It was founded in Japan, and of course, it does not take place in real geography. The Poke-Universe has a culture of its own, one in which ten year olds are commonly allowed and expected to go on journeys as a rite of passage and crime bosses/warlords dominated the region. The world has myths of its own, tales of “Legendary Pokemon” somewhat resembling deos-figures, that do not exist in any Earthly pantheon. So, as the proverbial saying goes, “If this is true of the world, what else is?” In Western culture, we do not allow ten year olds to travel from city to city to mature, and we do not worship Lugia: Beast of the Sea or Kyogre and Groudon: Bringers of Flood and Drought. So, in this universe, what is the cultural value of battling Pokemon? While Harraway describes a pet owner she knows who referred to the paw of her dog named Goody-goody[VB1] [A2] : “It may look like Goody-goody’s paw, but it’s really my paw” (Harraway 167) as if the dog and all parts of it are the property of the trainers. In this way, Western critics see this dichotomous ownership that the player has over nature in the Pokemon Universe as a “Fantasy Theme” (Olsen 179) quite literally, in that we live out our fantasies like in the clichéd American Dream and the adage of life, liberty, and property by claiming this domain over nature, and therefore Pokemon. Yet, throughout the game, many of the characters talk heavily about the friendship and bond a trainer forms with their Pokemon throughout their journey. Many locals in the world gush about how much they adore their symbiotic relationship with the critters, and they play with them as they would play with other humans, rather than like babies whom they possess ownership of as Harraway describes.
Radicals such as PETA do not necessarily notice this and continue to chastise Pokemon universe for its abuse of the fictitious animals, and for humans claiming their dominance over them, when many people participating in the Pokemon world culture, and to some extent the Japanese culture, express their perception of the opposite. This suggests that there is a concept that these Western critics are missing of “liminality” or “unique in between state” (Olsen 181) [VB3] that many Westerners do not pick up on. These rituals, as critic Richard Olsen refers to them, are often missed in the Western male narrative that Harraway describes, and therefore misinterpreted and mistranslated by Westerners in their comprehension of Nonwestern texts and rhetorics. While American critics describe Pokemon in the way that Harraway does, one could argue that this is a misrepresentation of Pokemon (and possibly Japanese) culture. Many Pokemon express great happiness in training and battling and fighting in gyms, and the game will often penalize players who abuse their Pokemon and force them into situations in which they faint or get poisoned often. In a way, this game sort of moderates the behavior of what Western culture views as the abuse of other creatures and substitutes it for a new culture in which Pokemon and trainer are seen as a collaborative team, and while the main playable character is human amongst the animals who serve in combat, they are often seen as a collective. “We beat the Elite Four.” “We took down Team Rocket[VB4] .” This grays the situation of a dominant male narrative that the authors describe.
Furthermore, Ancient Japanese myths often have the union between natural elements or natural and human elements that Westerners often see as evil, such as the nekomata, a catlike creature which closely resembles a demon and therefore has a negative connotation in Western interpretation. Yet, in Japanese folklore, the nekomata are seen as spiritual beings whom Japanese people have often celebrated or praised for their protection of cities and for feeding the poor. In fact, many species of Pokemon were actually inspired by nekomata and other Japanese and Chinese mythical creatures. These creatures are often represented in mythologies as autonomous agents (referring back to Harraway) who acted on helping and healing people out of their own accord, and only then when they saw it was best.
Yet, that does not necessarily justify the behavior of battling Pokemon by passing it off as an Eastern cultural norm, but instead gives an alternate perspective. [VB5] There is still evidence that suggests that Pokemon are abused, and that the games do implicate negative rhetoric against their environments. Later Pokemon games only confuse this further. With the introduction of Generation 5 (Black version and White version) the so-called gangsters are not thugs who wreak havoc and control for havoc and control’s sake. Rather, Team Plasma is an eco-activist (or arguably terrorist) group that battles with Pokemon to supposedly liberate said Pokemon from their owners and essentially fight for their rights to return back to nature. [VB6] This ironic turn of events calls into question, what if Pokemon seemingly want to battle? Either for their rights or just to achieve happiness? What if this is part of their culture, and the assumption that Pokemon who battle are doing so because of Western imposition is in fact Western imposition itself? Is this not the incorporation of Western commentary on the unsuccessful movements that Westerners have to approach animal rights? (Anne Todd). [VB7] Perhaps, this serves as a commentary on the radicalization of animal rights groups such as PETA, and supports a more peaceful approach.
To define the Pokemon series as an explicitly Western or Eastern cultured game is to grossly misunderstand the convergence of the two. Harraway herself cites narratives from Native American and African civilizations, often with more female influence as an alternative to the “still masculinist heroic narrative… between sex and gender” (Harraway 172) that has concrete definitions of culture, gender/sex, and other divisions. Yet, Pokemon seems to blur those lines like Harraway [VB8] calls for. Still, Pokemon are literally transported inside metal orbs referred to as “Pokeballs” which are stored inside a literal carrier bag, which does support Harraway’s case, yet often the game tries to defy that, and it has intermittently introduced and done away with Pokemon who walk side by side the trainer, therefore also giving the Pokemon the option in many instances to decide for themselves whether to sit in a carrier bag like the clichéd rich white girl’s Chihuahua or to roam freely and work side by side with a companion human with aims to achieve a common goal. Whether Pokemon are treated as equals to the trainer is an ethical and cultural question that, with centuries of globalization and mixed ethnic identities and thought cannot necessarily be answered by one person. Japan, after all, while one of the farthest eastward countries associated with a continent, has industrialized at an enormous rate since pressured into opening the borders to the US, Great Britain, and Russia at the Turn of the Twentieth Century, especially along with the World Wars. While some nations who were directly imperialized in Africa and the Middle East have retained some of their cultural norms and practices, Japan and China who were made to serve as puppets for the West instead of under the sovereign rule of one particular Western country have Westernized in many ways and forsaken cultural etiquettes and practices for the “newer” ones.
It is difficult to tell how much of what Westerners, or even post-modern Japanese people, see as “Japanese culture,” is authentic prior to the corporatization of said islands. The Pokemon games themselves do have some characteristics that are blatantly Western such as corporate figures, modern science and pseudo-science (i.e. cloning, resurrecting fossils, evolution), as well as Nonwestern features (i.e. mythological Japanese agents and bonds between human and Pokemon species that develop mutual happiness.) The lines are hard to draw, and each argument, in defense of or in disregard of Pokemon is generally a matter of personal preference.
Typing and Classification
Typing and classifying animal species in the real world is a practice in Western science. Yet, the Poke-Universe does this, too, which makes this aspect of the game Western. However, this type-based system blurs together when one realizes that not all of these types exist in nature. In addition to Bug, Flying (bird), Grass, Water, Fire, Ground, Rock, and Ice types, you also get human and technology based types such as Steel, Electric, Ghost, Psychic, Dark, Fighting, Normal, Dragon, Fairy, and Poison.
Some of the natural based ones include Vulpix, a Pokemon based off of a fox with fire type Pokemon with spiritual abilities, and Articuno, a Legendary bird with an Ice-Flying type who is known throughout regional folklore. Then, you have objectively technological and human created Pokemon such as Magnemite, a sentient magnet with a Steel-Electric type and Deoxys, a Psychic type literally inspired by the modern concept of biological DNA. However, some are not as easy to determine. Skarmory, for example, is a bird cloaked in metal protective gear and serves as a Steel-Flying type, and Sudowoodo is a Rock type “golem” like creature made to pretend to be a tree. In some ways, there is no clear good or evil in regards to nature versus man, as plenty of them seem to coexist without destroying each other’s habitats.
There is, however, one exception to this rule: Poison types. In the first two generations, Poison type is the primary go-to Pokemon type that the villainous Team Rocket uses in combat. Team Rocket, a politically charged gang that controls many of the major cities, thrives off of corrupting corporations and public leaders and does so with predominantly Poison type Pokemon, such as Zubat, a Poison-Flying type inspired by a cave dwelling bat species and Weezing, a creature that has literally been created and spawned by the overproduction of toxic gas into the world’s air supply. With this in effect, one of the character’s main sidequests is to defeat the team of gangsters responsible for creating such toxic agents to use as weapons, or at least ‘taming the wilderness,’ [VB9] as SUV critic Richard Olsen calls it. In a way, one could see the fight against these as a fight for the new normalized environment against its struggles through the pollution and politics that are expected in the Poke-Universe. In this way, the colorful environment is a hero.
However, in other ways Pokemon contradicts this natural and human collaboration towards a new normal. In each generation, there are two new Pokemon introduced whom one can only obtain through means of resurrecting the DNA in fossils. This form of life has had its own sphere of debate in regards to Environmental Ethics, and one can see environmental academics and pop culture (most notably Jurassic Park) on both sides of this issue, and is a common issue of debate in the discipline. Some say it is totally unethical from an environmental perspective to resurrect species that have long been extinct and that it causes harm to these species as well as their surrounding ecosystems. Others find it an issue of environmental justice, making right what they see as humanity’s wrong in wiping out certain species (Ancient Greek logos versus pathos and ethos.) Who is to say if this project of recreation of life is seen as Man’s vanity project or an empathy with nature that has been oppressed? Tuana talks about male scientific vanity projects versus empathy and how that in itself conflicts with itself in [VB10] some ways. Regardless, each side of cloning and typing argument makes valid points, and it is difficult to find an objective narrative that determines the ethics of typing, Poison Pokemon, and cloning without running into roadblocks, often from the same author, that would suggest alternative theories.
Conclusion
There are still several issues that one can examine in regards to Pokemon and and its rhetorical framework on the environment, issues including the Safari Zone (an artificial area made to preserve species that cannot be found elsewhere) and the encouraged use of aerosols called Repels and other chemicals to aid in defeating Pokemon and nature, and there are perhaps more issues that other scholars and casual observers can come up with. That said, in the two issues that I study in this essay I find that there is a moral grey-area, and no clear winner or loser as to if Pokemon expresses positive or negative environmental rhetoric. While we are conditioned to put a label on the good or the bad of Pokemon as it relates to the environment, this in itself is the male narrative that Harraway, Killingsworth, and Tuana try to avoid, even though many environmentalists (especially PETA) chastise Pokemon as a villain to the environment.
It seems that, while Pokemon expresses inherent problems towards and solutions in conjunction with environmentalism and multiculturalism, the fact of the matter is that Pokemon, when it comes right down to it, is just a damn good game. It doesn’t seem fair to put such labels as good and bad on it in regards to a “hippie/nerd/tree-hugger” or “capitalist/corporatist/greedy) context. In fact, the only true environmental argument objectively going against the Pokemon games with no rebuttal that I can conceive of is that people need to go outside more and stop analyzing children’s cartoons in depth to fit a political agenda. That said, I am one person, and to say that just because I can or can’t conceive of something else, it is supposedly objective defies my support for Harraway’s argument. And thus I leave the end of this paper open to: prove me wrong. Or prove me right. Or come up with your own theory in harmony with mine that doesn’t seek to support or go against mine. Or not. That is your call. I can’t tell you what to do. You are not a Pokemon, and I am not your trainer.
[VB1]Watch the verb here and maybe add a little more wording to show us that she is quoting someone else, and that she is disagreeing with them.
[VB3]Is this the right theoretical concept for this spot—later on you talk about going to other towns as a ritual for growing up—does this maybe go there?
Maybe it does go here, but you haven’t yet shown how? That’s fine too—just tell me more so I can see the connection.
[VB4]Maybe the theory you want here is actually Tuana?
[VB5]Stronger transition?
[VB6]Maybe this is a good place to bring in Nixon? With the Pokemon being like indigenous people who are exploited or cast aside alongside exploiting natural resources? Or perhaps this is so, but satirically?
[VB7]I need more info here.
[VB8]Here, too, I think we need to see more of what Haraway is claiming…and then that allows you to show more clearly whether or not Pokemon demonstrates the “carrier bag” view of fiction that she is endorsing.
[VB9]Again, I’d like more from the theory—but I wonder if here you couldn’t do this in a footnote/endnote that gives a one or two sentence description of each author’s argument as it relates to your point.
[VB10]Bring Tuana in more specifically, rather than just summarizing.
