#volume34

The mentioned leaks: 

Mikasa visits Eren’s grave with her husband and child

Mikasa’s husband looks like it is Jean (he is seen from the back)

Paradise Island was destroyed

The titan’s power did not dissapear 

True fact: Volume 34 will have additional pages

If the leaks are true, I suspect they are now all missinterpretated.

About the first two leaks: 

Mikasa visits Eren’s grave with her husband and child

Mikasa’s husband looks like it is Jean (he is seen from the back)

First, Mikasa loved Eren, that much is obvious and has always been obvious. But why are there so many fans that believe that she would never move on after he died?

If she would move on, I believe than Jean would be the most logically choice, canon wise.

Jean has always had a crush on her. From the beginning even. In his daydream (a desired peaceful future) at the start of chapter 127 we can see a black haired women with a child. The woman looks like an older Mikasa.

We also know that Jean still has feelings for her

His concern for Mikasa's wellbeing is obvious when he learns from Armin that Eren had hurt her (chapter 116):

He is the only one who pushes for more information. 

And there are more hints throughout the manga that Jean never stopped loving Mikasa. I think the reason he never acted on it was because of Eren. Mikasa never showed any interest in other men. Her only and main focus was Eren. But Jean never saw her confessing a true love declaration for Eren and Eren has not made a move on Mikasa, as well. The two stick together, but even with all the suspicions that their team companions must have, nothing has been confirmed. So the relationship between Eren and Mikasa is unclear to him.  I think Jean realized that whatever Eren and Mikasa shared is complicated. He keeps his distance, but his affection for her never ceased and it shows throughout the manga. 

Jean dislikes and envies Eren. He is angry with Eren for not making a choice about what he wants with Mikasa. For him being so blind that he doesn’t see Mikasa’s love for him. And Jean envies Eren for Eren has Mikasa’s full attention. 

Jean’s interest in Mikasa is not something new. It was right there at the start of the manga. 

So why wouldn’t he pursue her eventuelly now that Eren is out of the picture?  In chapter 139 (from the Bessatsu Shōnen Magazine) we see Jean grooming his hair. His friends make fun of his vanity. 

Although this is almost the end of the chapter, I think that Isayama wanted to hint here that Jean is doing this because they are going to visit Paradis and will visit Mikasa. 

In my opinion Jean never really acted on his love interest before because of the gentleman he is. Now, after some years, Mikasa will have had time to mourn her loss. He doesn’t know if he has a chance, but he will most likely try. 

The leaks of Jean ending up with Mikasa could be true (I would certainly find them plausible) and would fit the additional chapters. Even in the Path Armin hinted to Eren that it would be easy for Mikasa to find love. Perhaps Armin was referring to Jean. Armin is most perceptive, as we know. I am certain he has knowledge of Jean’s true feelings towards Mikasa. 

As I read the final chapter from the magazine, I always wondered why it not ended with Mikasa being with Jean in the end. I honestly had expected a epilogue bonus chapter with Jean’s future dream sort of coming true. 

From what I’ve noticed, Isyama doesn’t add scenes in the manga for no reason. The scene of Jean thinking about a future life could be left out and it wouldn’t change a thing, it seems. But if this dream had a purpose, like a hint or easter egg meaning, then it would be obvious that he would have drawn it. 

If you re-read the manga after having read chapter 139 there are plenty of hidden easter eggs scenes to be discovered. Even after re-watching the anime I’ve seen several things that I did not notice before and couldn’t have noticed before. 

For me the first two leaks are very plausible. The fuss about eremika not being canon anymore if eventuelly Mikasa ends up with Jean is, bullshit. And that her visiting Eren’s grave with her new husband is ‘sick’ is also something I cannot stomach. The feelings she had for Eren will never dissapear. Jean is not taking Eren’s place. Her feelings for Jean will be different. 

Mikasa can love both men, but differently. It doesn’t mean she is cheating on Eren. 

Jean is the only one who can understand what she’s going through. They trained together, fought together, lost friends together...  The war and everything he saw will have traumatized him for life. Who better than Mikasa to understand him? 

I think for Mikasa to have found love and peace with Jean is beautiful. It will change nothing for her devotion and love for Eren. 

About the last two leaks:

Paradise Island was destroyed

The titan’s power did not dissapear

By the time it was revealed that Volume 34 would have additional pages, it was also mentioned that more details about Armin's time with Eren in the Path would be revealed.

In my opinion these last mentioned leaks are probably related to that.  We know Eren has shown Mikasa a future that he desired. For him and Mikasa living in peace his remaining 4 years. 

As Eren walks through the Path with Armin, explaining things, it felt rushed for me. Like there should be more. Additional pages about Eren and Armin in the Path would make sense.  Eren has stated that the Paradis would not be saved by Erwin, but by Armin. He knows Armin is smart, he knows he needs to explain himself to his friend. And how better to explain, but to allow him to see what would have happened to Paradis and all the Eldians without his cruel intervention?

I haven’t written an analysis about chapter 139, yet, but I mean to. One of the things that has been Eren’s motivation is something that Levi said during the female titan arc. 

Eren can either rely on his friends/comrades or trust only himself. Whatever decission he has to make he must choose one that he will not regret or regret the least no matter what outcome it will result in. 

Up until the Marley Arc, Eren has always relied on his friends. He wanted to believe it was the best choice, but everytime he did, people he cared about lost their lives. 

In the Marley Arc, Eren takes matters in his own hands. From that time, he decides. Having seen in the future he believes that he can change it, but in the end it was just an illusion. He realized that when he saw the things he wanted to prevent happening, happened after all (like when Sasha died). And due to HIS actions. By trying to prevent the dreadful future, he was actually causing it. From that moment he detached himself from his friends and his emotions, realizing he had no other choice, but to move forward. It seemed that whatever choice he was going to make or already had made, the future was already set. He thought he had the freedom to change everything when in fact he was not free at all. 

He knows that what he did cannot be redeemed. He knows Armin will be the future. Armin was once his best friend. The only thing Eren can do, is to show his friend a different kind of future, the one he feared would happen if he would not have done what he did. 

A future where Paradis island was destroyed.  A future where the titans still exist.

By taking away 80% of the human population, Eren has taken away a very huge threat. By removing the titan ability he has given all Eldians a chance to live a normal life. 

By doing something so unthinkable cruel, he gave Armin a chance to ‘talk’. Eren has seen his friend fail before by wanting to talk things over. It must have hurt him to see his friend feeling so hopeless, knowing that physical strength wasn’t Armin’s strength, yet all confrontations ended up in violence every time. 

Now he has given Armin a real chance to do what Armin does best: plea for the survival of all Eldians. 

Eren has removed everything that stood in between this chance of a negotiation. It was the world against Eldia. Eren evened the odds by killing millions of the people that were going to destroy them. And to prevent Eldians from taking the upper hand and have past events of domination by Eldians happen again, he removed the titans. Two enemies, facing eachother on equel ground. The best way to start a negotiation for peace. 

Also, his act is forcing the world and Eldia to fight a common enemy. 

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. 

So are these last two leaks true? Maybe. They are plausible as well, I think.  But I do not think these last two are leaks of a new ending, but the extra information that was missing during the Path scene. 

I have not seen whatever the leaks are based off, so I cannot confirm what is true. This is just my opinion about them. 

*Note: Miyuki used the word iroke... which means sex appeal but uh.

***

This shift in practice cannot be summoned up in one sentence, it has many grades and variants, but the general tendency is that companies instead of governments and their planning departments are starting to create and run cities: concept, investment and funding, development and exploitation – including all services – in short the full package or ‘city in a box’. That is no small thing. In fact it’s grand. The investment involved is without precedent, the risks are substantial (world economy is not very predictable these days), the projects are massive. One could argue that the creation of a city as complete system is a triumph of human ingenuity.

--

実際、この転換は一言で言い切れるようなものじゃない。それには多くのグレードやバリエーションがあるが、一般的な傾向は、政府の変わりに企業、だし、その計画部門は都市を生み出し管理し始めている。コンセプト、投資、そしてファンド、発展と開拓ー全てのサービスを含むー要するにフル・パッケージ、つまり「ひとつの箱の中の都市」だ。これは小さなことじゃなく、実際「でかい」話なのだ。関連する投資は先例を欠くものであり、リスクはかなりのもの（世界経済は近年それほど予期できるものじゃなくなっている）。そしてプロジェクトは大規模だ。都市を完全なシステムとして創造することは人間の想像力の勝利だと言うこともできる。

Again, there is not one formula. In some cases these cities are privately run like mini states, as smoothly functioning alternatives to messy everyday realities. In others it is more about the creation of well-functioning economic hubs, technologically advanced ‘full service’ cities, that can compete for talent and enterprise on a global market.

--

繰り返すが、ひとつの定式はない。これらの都市は、ある場合にはミニステートのように私的に運営され、厄介な日常の現実に対してスムーズに機能するオルタナティヴとして存在しているものもあるにはある。その他の場合は、よく機能する経済的ハブ、グローバルマーケットでの才能と事業を獲得するために争う、技術的に発達した「フル・サービス」の都市が生み出されている。

They come in different guises: the creative industry look of former warehouses and reused industrial buildings, postmodern new urbanist Italianate lake-town romanticism, international finance modernism, and maybe we’ll see hi tech indigenous styled alternatives soon. But that is not the point. The point is that the relation of the individual and his or her surroundings is fundamentally changing.

--

それらは異なった見た目でもって現れる。創造産業はかつての倉庫や再利用される産業建築といった見た目を取るし、イタリアかぶれの新しいポストモダン都市計画はレイクタウン・ロマンチシズムやインターナショナルな金融モダニズムといった様相を帯びる。そして多分そのうちハイテクで土着的スタイルのオルタナティヴが現れて来るだろう。でもそれはどうでも良くて、問題は個々人と彼／彼女の環境との関係が根本的に変化している、ということだ。

Cities are creators of value and wealth. But that is not their only purpose in life. They’re complex expressions of culture and society, aggregates of knowledge, talent and expertise, platforms for individual opportunity and development, places to share and exchange. To approach the city as business primarily, to operate it like a company and make it perform as stock market fund, seems to miss a value or two.

--

都市は価値と富を生み出すものだ。しかしそれは生の唯一の目的じゃない。それは文化と社会との複合的な表現であり、知識、素質、そして専門的見解の集合体であり、個別の機会と発展のためのプラットフォームであり、共有し交換するための場である。ビジネスとして都市にアプローチすることは、つまり企業のように都市を操作し都市を株式ファンドのような形で稼働させるためには、そもそもひとつふたつの価値は失うだろう。

So, there are serious issues involved. This is more than a retreating public sector and the market stepping in. This is a question of whether we want to and can base the organization of society on capitalist principles in full; if we can allow the corporation to take over. The answer to this question may not be as simple as it seems. Western rock solid values like democracy, freedom of choice, individual integrity and let’s not forget social inclusiveness have been challenged for a while now. New technologies, new social patterns, and competing political systems have demonstrated that rock solid may not be as solid as thought. So, if companies can deliver what democratic government cannot, why worry, why bother, why complain?

--

そして、そこには重要な問題が含まれている。それは単に公的機関が後退して市場が介入するという以上のものだ。これは私たちが最大限、資本主義原理を基にして社会組織をしたいのか、し得るのかという問題だ。もし私たちがそれを乗り越えるための恊働を許容できれば、の話ではあるが。この問題に対する答えは、おそらく見た目よりも簡単じゃない。民主主義、選択の自由、個人の完全性、そして忘れちゃいけない社会包摂性といった西欧の確固とした価値は、今、疑義に呈されている。新たな技術、新たな社会分布、そして政治システムに立ち向かうことで、その「確固さ」は思ってるよりも頑丈じゃないということが分かってくる。ということで、もし企業が民主主義的な行政ができないことをやってくれるなら、なぜ心配し、なぜ困惑し、なぜ不満を言うのか？

Let me give a reason or two.

--

ひとつふたつの理由を挙げてみよう。

Maybe hubris is the first thing to tackle. Playing god is not something architects shied away from in the past, but when it comes to New Towns, we have an unhappy history to look back onto. The current generation of New Town is even more ambitious in the all controlled life it offers. What makes current developers confident to succeed where public authority failed?

--

おそらく思い上がりが最初の障害だろう。神を演じるということは建築家が昔からやってきたことだ。しかしニュータウンに関しては、私たちは見返すに幸福な歴史ばかりじゃないことを知っている。ニュータウンの現在世代は、ニュータウンが提供してくれる全てコントロールされた生活の中でよりいっそう野心的になっている。今のデベロッパーはなんでこんなに成功を確信していて、公的権威はどこで失墜してしまったんだろう？

More fundamental is the notion of inclusivity. The entrepreneurial city targets a middle class as consumers and inhabitants. Poorer sectors of society are included as far as needed to serve the ones that create profit. Inclusiveness and building for all is not the ambition nor in the interest of the city-in-a-box developer.

--

より根源的なのは包摂という概念だ。企業家的な都市は消費者や居住者としてミドルクラスをターゲットにしている。社会の中のより貧困な人々は利益を生み出すのに入用だと判断される限りで包摂される。包摂とか、全ての人のための建設とか、そういうことは「ひとつの箱の中の都市」系ディベロッパーの野心でもないし、そもそも彼らはそんなことに関心がない。

And then there is a potential conflict of interest between private and public. The US could have been the first country with a nationwide network of high speed trains, reducing CO2 emissions and pollution caused by traffic drastically. But the car industry prevented this by de-servicing complete rail lines, stations and public transportation systems, to secure its prominent role in transportation. What is good for the company isn’t necessarily good for society.

--

繰り返しになるが、私と公との間に潜在的な利害対立がある。アメリカは高速鉄道の全国的なネットワークを最初に持った国となり得、交通による二酸化炭素排出量や汚染をガクッと削減することができたかもしれなかったわけだが、車産業は輸送業界におけるその支配的な役割を担保するために、鉄道路線全体、駅、そして公共輸送システムに手をかけないことによってそれを退けた。

And in line with this: what society needs may not be offered by the company. Not every public service can be changed into a profit making enterprise. Yet the quality and resilience of a society depends on these too.

--

そして同じように、社会が必要とするものは企業によって提供されないかもしれない。全ての公共サービスが利益を生む企業に取って変わられるわけじゃない。でも社会の質や回復力がそれらにかかっているのも確かなのだ。

There is also an inherent problem. This kind of city development and exploitation is based on exclusivity for the preferred partners. It actually functions as monopoly. That is he axe at the root of capitalist principles, prescribing an open market and competition as prerequisite for its ‘best product at the best price’ promise.

--

他にも長く続く問題がある。この種の都市開発や都市発展は好適なパートナーを排除することに基づいていて、実際にはそれは独占という形で働く。それは資本主義原理の根底における「首切り」であり、それは「適切なものを適切な価格で」という前提のための必要条件としてのオープンマーケットや競争を規定するのだ。

And then, as far as we’re seeing now, these cities can only come about and exist within certain favorable conditions. Land for free, major infrastructural investments in its vicinities, etc.

--

それから、私たちが現状を見る限り、これら都市は一定の望ましい状況下でしか起こり／存在し得ない。土地がタダで、主要なインフラ投資がその地域にある、などなど。

Lastly, we see that in all examples as presented governance is an unsolved issue. For the immediate now it is avoided, postponed to a future when everything is up and running (and basic returns are secured).

--

最後に、私たちが提示した全ての例において、統治というものが未解決の問題であるということが分かる。目下、それは未来に向けて拒否され延期されている。その未来では全てが活発に動いて（で基本的なリターンが担保されている）いる。

Lots of objections and second thoughts. Important issues to address for governments and politics. And let’s not forget the designers who can bring important programmatic issues to the table and present models of integration that are commercially viable, yet less obvious for non-designers. All the more important now its common understanding that society has to be run as a collaboration between private and public entities, and that old oppositions no longer function.

--

反論も多いだろうし、再考も然りだと思う。行政や政治のために伝えるべき重要な問いもある。そして重要なプログラム的問題を俎上に上げ得るデザイナーのことも忘れちゃいけない。それらは商業的にも発展し得るものであり、デザイナーではない人たちにはなかなか見えづらい統合のモデルを提示し得る。そして現在、よりいっそう重要なのは、社会は私的存在と公的存在との恊働として動かされなければならず、古い対立はもはや機能しないということを共通の理解としなければならないということだ。

The problem for the city developers is that tendencies that already surround us to different degrees in many aspects of our lives (lack of real choice, loss of control over ones personal data, and more), all of a sudden are very visibly present in one product, in one environment. It is the condensed way these developments come together in the new towns we present here that is so fascinating: the daring scale, the clever layered business models, non only depending on direct sales, but different types of profit making, commercial chains of hard-  and software, of products and services.

--

都市ディベロッパーにとっての問題は、私たちが生きる様々な場面で、多様な程度で私たちをすでに取り囲んでいる諸々の傾向（実際的な選択肢の欠如や、個人的なデータその他をコントロールできなくなったこと）が、ひとつのプロダクト、ひとつの環境において、急に、かなりはっきりと示されるようになった、ということだ。こうした発展が、私たちがここで示しているニュータウンに結びつく、その凝縮された方法こそが魅力的だ。大胆な規模、堅実な多層的ビジネスモデル、つまり直販にのみ頼らず、様々な利益の上げ方を組み合わせ、ハードとソフト、プロダクトとサービスの商業的なつながりに重きを置くということだ。

A peak preview of future’s urban future?

--

未来の都市未来の最高の予告編、か？

This issue started as a conference, New Towns New Territories, initiated and organized by the International New Town Institute, with the ambition to map out this development. They brought together leading figures from main players in this field of operation, gathered during a day at the NAI in Rotterdam (September 27, 2012). Most of the material included is related to this conference and INTI’s earlier investigations. We thank INTI’s Michelle Provoost and Paul Kroese in particular for their work and contributions.

--

今号はひとつの会議からスタートした。国際ニュータウン協会によって主導され組織された、「ニュータウン、新たな領域」というのがそれで、ニュータウンの発展を綿密に計画しようという試みだ。関連分野におけるメインプレーヤーからとりわけ重要な人物が、2012年9月27日、ロッテルダムNAIに集められた。今号に集められた記事のほとんどはこの会議とINTIの初期に行われた調査に関連している。とりわけINTIのミシェル・プロヴォーストとパウル・クロースに彼らの仕事と貢献を感謝したい。

This issue also features the ‘you talking to me’ insert, a research project in Beirut by the Dutch artists Bik van der Pol, concerning the messy reality of everyday life in the self image of the city. It functions as a reality check on what a city is. Not the ideal, but the real.

--