Thanks for reading! I'll take a look at your article. I think my argument would have been better served if I'd been a bit more charitable towards alternate readings. I am developing a YouTube video that takes many of these piloted arguments and applies a bit more of the nuance I should have had. Hope you'll consider taking a look at that as well!
I think you are too negative about the philosophy underpinning the new Honmoon, which I see as heavily rooted in Kintsugi and wabi-sabi rather than in Western wokeness. I also think you read more negativity towards the old Honmoon concept than the movie exhibits. The old Honmoon, based on denying demons access to us via our fears and flaws by turning away from and seeking to crush those fears and flaws is portrayed not as ineffectual or wicked but, instead, as having protected the people for centuries.
Further, I think you miss the point that Rumi's inward-looking and hence selfish motivation is a key reason for the failure of the Golden Honmoon project and I think you also miss that Rumi's self-authentication and acceptance by her friends are portrayed as insufficient to defeat Gwi-Ma. He is only beaten when there is genuine sacrifice and a genuine entrusting of souls with the project then being collective not individual.
I agree partially with your critiques. Rumi's and Jinu's character arcs are much more focused on selfishness and selflessness (as opposed to Western ideas of self-acceptance) than I originally gave them credit for. I think it would have been a more interesting thesis to argue that the eastern ideas (such as Kintsugi and wabi-sabi, as you mention) are weaponized through ambiguity to appeal to progressive (and also more Western more generally) audiences. It’s not that the movie is straightforwardly Western progressive (you're right, I do miss that point), it’s that it takes Eastern ideas like Kintsugi and reframes them in a way that progressive audiences can easily read as expressive individualism.
I disagree with the idea that Rumi’s self-acceptance is portrayed as insufficient, because she never truly accepts herself. Instead, the climax turns on exposure + affirmation, which is framed as sufficient to beat Gwi-Ma regardless of whether she internally reconciles with her demonhood.
In the end, I think the film is more confused than coherent in its moral philosophy. That suggests either multiple writers with conflicting worldviews, the loss of clarifying scenes in the editing process, or a deliberate choice to leave things ambiguous so different audiences can project their own values into the story. I suspect the latter.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! I'll definitely leave a comment on your piece.
Interesting argument. I agree with much of it but not all. You might find this reflection on the same film to be of interest: https://andrewlilico.wordpress.com/2025/08/18/kpop-demon-hunters-moral-philosophy-and-why-celine-isnt-wrong/
Thanks for reading! I'll take a look at your article. I think my argument would have been better served if I'd been a bit more charitable towards alternate readings. I am developing a YouTube video that takes many of these piloted arguments and applies a bit more of the nuance I should have had. Hope you'll consider taking a look at that as well!
Splendid. Let me know what you think of my piece - especially where you disagree!
I shall! On that note, what specifically did you disagree with regarding my piece? Was it my take on Jinu as a character?
I think you are too negative about the philosophy underpinning the new Honmoon, which I see as heavily rooted in Kintsugi and wabi-sabi rather than in Western wokeness. I also think you read more negativity towards the old Honmoon concept than the movie exhibits. The old Honmoon, based on denying demons access to us via our fears and flaws by turning away from and seeking to crush those fears and flaws is portrayed not as ineffectual or wicked but, instead, as having protected the people for centuries.
Further, I think you miss the point that Rumi's inward-looking and hence selfish motivation is a key reason for the failure of the Golden Honmoon project and I think you also miss that Rumi's self-authentication and acceptance by her friends are portrayed as insufficient to defeat Gwi-Ma. He is only beaten when there is genuine sacrifice and a genuine entrusting of souls with the project then being collective not individual.
I agree partially with your critiques. Rumi's and Jinu's character arcs are much more focused on selfishness and selflessness (as opposed to Western ideas of self-acceptance) than I originally gave them credit for. I think it would have been a more interesting thesis to argue that the eastern ideas (such as Kintsugi and wabi-sabi, as you mention) are weaponized through ambiguity to appeal to progressive (and also more Western more generally) audiences. It’s not that the movie is straightforwardly Western progressive (you're right, I do miss that point), it’s that it takes Eastern ideas like Kintsugi and reframes them in a way that progressive audiences can easily read as expressive individualism.
I disagree with the idea that Rumi’s self-acceptance is portrayed as insufficient, because she never truly accepts herself. Instead, the climax turns on exposure + affirmation, which is framed as sufficient to beat Gwi-Ma regardless of whether she internally reconciles with her demonhood.
In the end, I think the film is more confused than coherent in its moral philosophy. That suggests either multiple writers with conflicting worldviews, the loss of clarifying scenes in the editing process, or a deliberate choice to leave things ambiguous so different audiences can project their own values into the story. I suspect the latter.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! I'll definitely leave a comment on your piece.
Have a read of my piece and let me know what you think.