The Tragedy and Redemption of Akemi Homura (Part 2)

Urobuch presents us with two different tragic characters in Mahou Shoujo Madoka Magica; Miki Sayaka and Akemi Homura. It is important that we compare these two characters in order to achieve a better understanding of the roles they played in the series.



I have proven earlier that both characters are tragic characters who each made their own follies.


Sayaka on the one hand, made two major follies:

1) She destroyed her own self-image by creating a misconception that she had no soul, since she discovered that the soul was moved into the soul gem by the power of Kyubey.

2) She also failed to come to terms with the fact that no matter how much she fought for justice, the people she fought for would never come to recognize her actions and would thus never seek to change their ways. She then lost all hope in the human race and fell into utter despair, because if she could not even use her soulless body as a tool to bring happiness to others, then her life meant nothing.

Homura on the other hand, made one major mistake:

1) She attempted to defy the balance/laws of nature by wishing to save Madoka from and after death.


Sayaka's follies led to her tragic death, and she died a foil; meaning as a defeated character who never redeemed herself from her mistakes.

Homura was indeed defeated by her own mistake as well, except she as saved, in the end, by Madoka, who reversed time and thus saved Homura from becoming a witch.

So why was it that Homura was saved, while Sayaka was not?


Let's figure this out by first looking at what Homura had that Sayaka did not.

1) Homura had a specific person to protect at all costs. Her goal, therefore, was focused.

2) Homura had a friend who also protected her. In the end, Madoka not only gave up her existence as a human being to save all Mahou Shoujo from becoming wtiches, but for the sake of saving Homura as well, her own protector.


When looking at these two things relative to Sayaka, we can see that Sayaka's situation was almost the complete opposite.


Here's what I mean:

1) Sayaka fought to protect her town, at all costs. This involved many people; strangers she did not know individually.

2) Sayaka had no one to protect her or anyone to at least recognize her actions. Madoka did indeed offer to aid Sayaka in any way she could, but Sayaka turned her down, which was another major folly of hers.

Thus, Sayaka fought alone from the shadows.

Homura was saved while Sayaka was not. Homura also had something that Sayaka did not, which was a friend; a friend whom she loved and a friend who loved her back equally. And in the end, this friend saved Homura in return for her love.

Sayaka, on the other hand, had no friend to save her. She pushed away her friend, Madoka, and decided to fight as a lone warrior in the shadows of her town. Indeed, she fought for happiness and justice, but she fought alone.

Perhaps what is being said by Urobuchi is that one's own willpower alone is not enough to save others or to be saved, but that such salvation comes from a love that is mutual between different people. This is because when you are dying, and you are alone, no one will come and save you. And as long as you survive, you can then continue to fight and use your life for what you believe in.

One's own willpower alone is not enough to be save others or to be saved, since salvation comes from a love that is mutual between different people. 

Notice how I only use the words "save" "salvation", because what does it matter if a person is good or evil? As long as that person loves someone, and that someone loves him or her back, then the two will save each other, and therefore share the same fate, no matter what.

Such is the philosophy and message of Urobuchi Gen.

With that said, let me come back to my previous question from Part 1 of this blog.

Is Homura's wish to protect Madoka a selfless wish based on a pure and innocent heart, or was it a foolish wish since it defied nature itself?

The answer is that it was both innocent and foolish. After all, aren't the innocent innocent because of the fact that they are foolish since they know nothing? It is indeed foolish, and a folly, to wish to save her best friend from death. Therefore, she received death and defeat as her reward. But she was saved.


She was saved. 


That is the key point. She was saved because she loved someone, and that someone loved her back and saved her in return. Thus, they both shared the same fate.

Such is the tragedy and redemption of Akemi Homura.

But if this is true, then the other questioned I mentioned in the beginning of Part 1 arises.


Is Akemi Homura a foil, meaning a mistake?


What we know for a fact is that her wish to save someone who has died was a mistake, because such a thing is impossible according to the laws of nature. In this sense, she was a foil, because she failed to save Madoka from dying as a human being.

HOWEVER, (and this is a BIG however), because of the opportunity that was created by Homura as well as the love that she was shown by Homura, Madoka made a decision that was based solely on her very own wish, which was to save all Mahou Shoujo from their fate of becoming witches.

Basically, by the actions of Homura, Madoka finally found her one true wish.

And as a result of her wish, all the Mahou Shoujo in the past, present, and future gained happiness before they died as human beings.

It was because of Homura's actions of love that Madoka found her true wish. Therefore, how could we say that Akemi Homura was a mistake? A foil?

It is a paradox; It was because of Homura's mistake that Madoka found true happiness. So was that mistake a mistake in the first place?

Does Urobuchi truly believe that doing something for the one you love, even if it meant defying the laws of nature, is something that should be done? Something that is actually not a mistake?


Truly loving someone means that you would defy the laws of nature to save the one you love; which is to bring them happiness. 


Is this the philosophy and message of Urobuchi Gen?

Thus, we are now presented with a very intriguing question, and a very interesting way of thinking. Perhaps the only way we could find out Urobuchi's true way of thinking is by asking him himself.