Editing Princess Mononoke (section)

=== Conflicts of nature, technology, and humanity ===

[[Environmentalism]] is a central theme of ''Princess Mononoke''.{{sfnm|Napier|2018|1p=xiii|2a1=Odell|2a2=Le Blanc|2y=2009|2p=109}} In the war between the forest gods and the people of Irontown, Ashitaka serves as the mediator.{{sfn|Daniels-Lerberg|Lerberg|2018|p=57}} Unlike many Western works with similar themes, the film does not present these positions as complete opposites,{{sfn|Daniels-Lerberg|Lerberg|2018|p=58}} nor does it outright reject modernity and technology.{{sfn|Napier|2005|pp=245–246}} The scholars Tracey Daniels-Lerberg and Matthew Lerberg wrote that it instead {{nowrap|"[embraces]}} the unpredictable outcomes that emerge in the uncertainty that remains."{{sfn|Daniels-Lerberg|Lerberg|2018|p=58}} Both humanity and nature are given equal standing in the film's world, and Napier wrote that the film "offers a vision of life as a densely interwoven design, rather than a simple allegory of dichotomized opposites."{{sfn|Napier|2018|p=185}} Additionally, the film portrays internal strife within parties on both sides of the conflict: the different clans of spirits disagree on how to handle the conflict, and the humans war amongst themselves for various reasons.{{sfnm|1a1=Odell|1a2=Le Blanc|1y=2009|1p=110|Thevenin|2013|2pp=161–162}} Ashitaka's relationships with both parties are volatile and "even dissatisfying at moments", according to Daniels-Lerberg and Lerberg. They attribute this sense of unease to the focus on emotion, rather than strict logic, that the film puts on the conflict.<ref>{{harvnb|Chan|2015|p=93}}, cited in {{harvnb|Daniels-Lerberg|Lerberg|2018|p=57}}.</ref> According to the film critic [[Roger Ebert]], ''Princess Mononoke'' is not a "simplistic tale of good and evil, but the story of how humans, forest animals, and nature gods all fight for their share of the new emerging order."{{sfn|Ebert|1999b}}

The film scholars [[Colin Odell and Michelle Le Blanc]] wrote that the film simultaneously mounts a criticism of humanity's mistreatment of the natural world and "grudgingly admits" that some disputes are inevitable to facilitate technological progress.{{sfn|Odell|Le Blanc|2009|p=109}} While Irontown is shown to be a haven for downtrodden members of society, who have the opportunity to live honest lives and enjoy fair treatment from Eboshi,{{sfnm|Greenberg|2018|1p=137|Thevenin|2013|2p=161}} the conflict arises from the harm that the settlement causes to the surrounding environment. Greenberg identified this dynamic as a marked increase in complexity from Miyazaki's earlier works, which typically presented a [[utopian]] model as an answer to social issues.{{sfn|Greenberg|2018|p=137}} Miyazaki expressed that he "meant to state [his] objection to the way environmental issues are treated",<ref>{{harvnb|Miyazaki|2014|pp=85–86}}, cited in {{harvnb|Denison|2018|p=3}}.</ref> referring to the general exclusion of humanity's role in environmental discourse in Japan.{{sfn|Denison|2018|pp=3–4}} The ecological writings of the historian {{ill|Sasuke Nakao|ja|中尾佐助}}, especially his "evergreen forest culture theory", were greatly influential on Miyazaki when creating the film's forest of the gods.<ref>{{harvnb|Napier|2005|p=242}}; {{harvnb|Miyazaki|2009|p=358}}, cited in {{harvnb|Yoshioka|2018|p=29}}.</ref> Miyazaki stated that {{nowrap|"[Nakao's}} book] taught me what I was the descendent of", and provided him an alternative to many traditional depictions of Japanese history that he disliked.<ref>{{harvnb|Komatsu|1997|p=49}}, cited in {{harvnb|Napier|2005|p=242}}; {{harvnb|Yoshioka|2018|p=29}}.</ref>

Napier saw the film as an "elegy for a lost Japan", a version of the country that predates the modern [[patriarchal]] society and was controlled by nature.{{sfn|Napier|2005|p=232}} Setting the film in the Muromachi period allowed Miyazaki to depict the country before it had been deforested and altered by rice agriculture{{sfn|Denison|2018|p=4}} and positions the film within the moment of history when "humankind pushed nature into submission", according to the animation writers [[Jonathan Clements]] and [[Helen McCarthy]].{{sfn|Clements|McCarthy|2015|p=653}} Miyazaki intended to portray the gods as "living animals, tortured by humans", feeling it to be an important aspect to depict in the relationship between nature and humanity.<ref>{{harvnb|Miyazaki|2014|p=31}}, cited in {{harvnb|Denison|2018|p=2}}.</ref> He was inspired for the film's concept by the [[Epic of Gilgamesh]]{{nbsp}}({{abbr|c.|circa}}{{nbsp}}2100–1200 BCE), an ancient [[epic poem]] that depicts the death of the forest god and the ruin of humanity.{{sfn|Kanō|2006|p=197}} The philosopher [[Takeshi Umehara]], who wrote a stage play titled ''[[Gilgamesh (play)|Gilgamesh]]''{{nbsp}}(1988), had previously suggested that Miyazaki adapt his work into a film; Miyazaki had declined the offer at the time but later stated that he had unconsciously included elements similar to the play in ''Princess Mononoke''.{{sfn|Yoshioka|2018|p=30}} The film shares several themes with the ''Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind'' manga, which Miyazaki had completed in 1994,{{sfn|Napier|2018|pp=176–177}} namely the "environmental catastrophe, the role of technology and warfare, and human interactions with nonhuman species", according to Napier.{{sfn|Napier|2018|p=182}} Clements and McCarthy wrote that the film was conceived partly due to Miyazaki's discontent with the narrative of [[Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind (film)|the manga's film adaptation]]{{nbsp}}(1984), in which the environmental theme was suddenly resolved via a ''[[deus ex machina]]''.{{sfn|Clements|McCarthy|2015|p=653}}

Miyazaki's filmmaking style changed considerably in the 1990s in response to various geopolitical conflicts, including the [[Gulf War]] and the [[Yugoslav Wars]] following the [[dissolution of the Soviet Union]].{{sfn|Yoshioka|2018|p=26}} He was especially critical of Japan's decision to provide military aid in the Gulf War, which he considered a violation of [[Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution]].<ref>{{harvnb|Miyazaki|2009|p=147}}, cited in {{harvnb|Yoshioka|2018|pp=26–27}}.</ref> These events disheartened Miyazaki, who compared them to the [[Causes of World War I|preamble to World War I]] and felt he was watching history repeat itself.<ref>{{harvnb|Miyazaki|2002|p=95}}, cited in {{harvnb|Yoshioka|2018|p=27}}.</ref> In 1995, two disasters occurred in Japan that had a marked negative impact on its culture: the [[Great Hanshin earthquake]], which killed thousands and became the worst on record since 1923, and the [[Tokyo subway sarin attack]] perpetrated by the [[Aum Shinrikyo]] cult. Napier wrote that these had an effect "on both a psychological and an environmental level" and heightened the country's cultural "emptiness" following the [[Japanese asset price bubble]] bursting in 1992.{{sfn|Napier|2018|p=181}} After finishing ''Porco Rosso'', Miyazaki resolved to create a "substantial film" that acknowledged academic discourse, eschewing the [[Escapist fiction|escapist]] philosophy of his earlier works.{{sfn|Yoshioka|2018|pp=27–28}} He instead set out to depict the philosophy that, "no matter how messy things get, we have no choice but to go on living."<ref>{{harvnb|Miyazaki|2009|p=386}}, cited in {{harvnb|Yoshioka|2018|p=27}}.</ref>