In Defense/Analysis Of Mahiru And Hiyoko's Relationship

In Defense/Analysis of Mahiru and Hiyoko's Relationship

Criticisms leveled at Mahiru and Hiyoko's relationship are varied; engaging with the fanbase this long has led me to some pretty specific ones, many I’d never even thought about (and that’s saying something because I spend way too much time analyzing those two lmao.) In the interest of not making this post a novel, though, I’ll be focusing on the ones I see most often: “Mahiru never called Hiyoko out on her bullying,” “Mahiru standing up for Hiyoko in 2-2 was hypocritical” and “Mahiru and Hiyoko's relationship is wasted potential because Hiyoko dies in 2-3.”

As can probably be inferred from the title, this write-up aims to counter these criticisms – but if I’m being honest, it doubles as an attempt to explain why I like Mahiru and Hiyoko's dynamic as much as I do. They’re my favorites in the series bar none, so there’s no guarantee my points will be 100% free of bias, but I’ll do my best to consider each argument in good faith.

Cool? Cool.

Turning a Blind Eye:

First thing’s first, the aspect of Mahiru and Hiyoko's relationship that I assume most earns Mahiru the “hypocrite” title: her ignoring Hiyoko’s bullying.

At a glance, I can’t say this criticism rings false. During my first playthrough, I also found myself agitated (and frankly confused) by how Hiyoko’s ill treatment (of everyone, but of Mikan in particular) kept flying under the radar. That said, upon review, I wouldn’t consider it a glaring oversight on the part of the writers the way some fans seem to; I think her behavior is handled as such for a reason – albeit a frustrating one – and that this reason is key to understanding her relationship with Mahiru.

When it comes to the class as a whole, the most straightforward explanation for why Hiyoko's behavior is ignored is that it’s rendered trivial by the killing game. In the midst of life or death, a pipsqueak tossing around juvenile insults is lucky to register as any kind of concern, let alone an urgent one – this made all the more apparent when you comb through her insult scenes and realize that most of them follow the same formula: jab → target’s reaction → another character reroutes the conversation to focus on more pressing issues → rinse and repeat.

Something similar can be said for why Teruteru’s sexual harassment and Kazuichi’s overstepping of Sonia’s boundaries are disregarded in favor of continuing class-wide discussions (and on a more inoffensive note why comic relief moments, courtesy of Ibuki or Gundham, are so fleeting): the threat of the killing game overshadows all else. Only when a threat within the group becomes synonymous with the killing game is it addressed with nearly the same exigency (think Nagito post-chapter 1). Otherwise, it might as well be non-existent.

If insults were the long and short of it, Hiyoko's conduct would be essentially harmless; rude at best and borderline malicious at worst, but overall inconsequential. Except that’s not the case. Why? Because two characters in particular – Mikan and Kazuichi – lack the self-esteem to brush them off as childish drivel. Through this, they become prime targets, and general unpleasantness gives way to full-on bullying…

… whiiich brings us to pitfall #2: while the other characters aren’t oblivious to Mikan and Kazuichi’s sensitivity per se, they aren’t actively mindful of it, either. Hell, in most scenes where Mikan breaks down (pre-trial 3 anyway), Hajime’s inner monologue is something along the lines of, “She doesn’t need to cry and apologize so much” rather than, “Oh no, is she okay?” He’s concerned, just not enough to adjust his approach. The same goes for Kazuichi, particularly when his sensitivity causes him to freak out. Ironically, by choosing those two as her main targets, Hiyoko may be the only person who “acknowledges” their low self-esteem as anything worth treating them differently over (though that’s obviously not to her credit since it’s in the most twisted way possible.)

Of course, just off the top of my head, I can recall more instances of the pervert characters’ comments being called out than I can Hiyoko's, but I wouldn’t consider that an oversight, either. I’ve seen it argued that simply being childish is what gives Hiyoko a “pass” behavior-wise, and while I don’t think that's incorrect, I think it underestimates just how aware she is of the way she’s perceived, i.e., as younger (both physically and mentally) than her classmates. She doesn’t act the way she does and then expect her childlike image to compensate for it automatically; she’s in a constant, deliberate flip-flop between unapproachable and childish, because – while she is a paranoid individual who puts forth her assholish personality to avoid forming connections and facing betrayal – she’s also someone who likes to have her cake and eat it, too.

In Hiyoko's mind, so long as she can be simultaneously unlikable and unthreatening, she needn't fear going too far and making enemies (as opposed to just, y’know, not making friends), and to that end, she turns to her immature looks as a sort of “back-up” – a way of being avoided without being antagonized. This tactic, hinted at a few times in DR2 as well as other canon material, backfires, however, highlighting its fundamental flaw: sure, no one takes her seriously enough to get mad at her insults, but by the same token, no one takes her seriously in general – not even when she wants them to.

That’s not to say this concept is executed perfectly, mind you. As interesting as it may be on paper, even I have trouble suspending my disbelief in scenes where she’s downright cruel and yet no one bats an eye. I think there’s just enough (both in text and subtext) to justify her in-universe perception being what it is, so I can get past this, but I understand why some fans can’t – especially since Mikan and Kazuichi get the short end of the stick regardless.

Again, though, that’s the class as a whole. What about Mahiru specifically? From what I've seen, she’s frequently singled out by the fandom as the character most to blame for Hiyoko’s behavior going unchecked, and this can probably be attributed to a few things:

Her emphasis on good manners and civility

Her friendship with Hiyoko making her a more responsible party for correcting the latter’s behavior

The opening scene of 2-2 in which she defends Hiyoko (dubbed “the restaurant scene” by me because it takes place at the restaurant and I’m uncreative)

The second and third reasons go hand-in-hand, but I have a fair amount to say about the third, so I'll save it for the next section. The first and second I'll talk about here.

Hypocrisy is defined as not practicing what one preaches. One could argue that Mahiru employs hypocrisy when she preaches good manners and civility but a) doesn’t call Hiyoko out for being a bully, and b) ultimately becomes her friend. Does this argument hold water? In my opinion, yes and no. Let me explain.

First, how does Hiyoko’s in-universe perception carry over to her relationship with Mahiru? Well, Mahiru isn’t immune to it; like everyone else, she dismisses Hiyoko as too childish to take seriously. This might seem like a non-starter for their relationship, but I actually think it’s what allows said relationship to work at all.

In terms of personal values, Mahiru and Hiyoko are polar opposites. You don’t have to search far for evidence of this – it’s right there in their profiles, with Mahiru’s stating that she dislikes bad manners and Hiyoko’s that she dislikes being lectured. This contrast isn’t arbitrary. Far from it; it’s deliberate groundwork for a foil. Unlike most foil characters in the series, though, Mahiru and Hiyoko get along swimmingly. Why? Well, I’ll get more into the nitty-gritty of that later, but in short, it’s because – while Mahiru may not be immune to Hiyoko’s flip-flopping – her perception isn’t quite as limited by it as her peers’.

I've seen a few people claim that Hiyoko is “fawned over” by her classmates, but IMO that's not really true. Instances of the others offering Hiyoko comfort/sympathy are pretty much exclusive to the second trial (after her name is cleared; before that they're slinging accusations left and right) and the scene where they discover her shrine (after Chiaki sheds light on its true purpose; before that they're rallying to burn it.) In both, I think it's made fairly clear that they're doing it out of a sense of, “Wow, this killing game sucks and Hiyoko is kind of bearing the brunt of its terribleness right now,” not, “Wow, Hiyoko is so cute and precious.”

That's nothing particular to her; every character who loses a loved one to the killing game is treated with some amount of tenderness afterwards, regardless of who they are or whether the loss is a consequence of their own actions. Where her Mahiru-related suffering isn't concerned, though, Hiyoko’s classmates more or less just tolerate her existence. They go, “Hey, there's the rude little girl we for some reason share a grade with” and continue about the island.

Of course, it’s no one's responsibility to parent their peer, and Hiyoko's other classmates aren't wrong for taking her at face value. But Mahiru is different; she takes responsibility for those around her whether they want her to or not. Her desire to bring out the best in others is what allows her to perceive Hiyoko as a child not just in temperament, but in impressionability, too. In other words, she’s the only one who sees potential in Hiyoko – with a nudge in the right direction – to mature and improve as a person. This is demonstrated when Hiyoko admits the reason behind her smell at the start of 2-2. Here, Mahiru doesn't join her peers in asking why a high schooler can't do something as simple as bathe, nor does she slap a band-aid on the problem and offer to tie Hiyoko’s kimono for her; she offers to teach her how to do it herself.

If Hiyoko were a plain bully with zero (for lack of a better word) embellishments – if there was nothing to bridge the gap between her and Mahiru, like, say, a need for a role model – Mahiru would be more inclined to call her out, yes, but she’d also be less inclined to help her here. And in my opinion? This would hurt both of their characters in the long run. I’ll get to why in the last section.

Granted, this then begs the question: if Mahiru is the only one generous enough to believe Hiyoko can change for the better, why does she demonstrate this generosity only once – in a situation where Hiyoko is vulnerable rather than on the offense no less? Well, I don't think that's an arbitrary decision, either.

See, while it might not be a stretch to call Mahiru and Hiyoko “friends” from the vantage point of the entire Class 77B saga, in DR2 alone, it kind of is. Hiyoko’s quick and fervent attachment to Mahiru starting with the restaurant scene can make it easy to forget that, all told, their relationship on the island spanned only three days. Moreover, the attachment was one-sided; Mahiru was surprised and somewhat exasperated by Hiyoko's clinginess, and while she didn’t outright reject her affections, reciprocating them came very much second to unraveling the secrets of the island – especially once the second motive was introduced.

Hell, eliminate the restaurant scene altogether and only two interactions between them remain: first an optional dialogue in which Mahiru lets Hiyoko drag her to the supermarket but warns that she’s busy and can’t spend too much time with her, then the off-screen meeting that we piece together in 2-2’s Closing Argument. But even following the restaurant scene – arguably the only one in which Mahiru is focused exclusively on Hiyoko – she shows reluctance to help Hiyoko shower and redress right away, considering the upcoming investigation a bigger priority. The morning after, although Hiyoko is still clinging to her, Mahiru doesn't acknowledge her at any point, focused instead on forcing Nekomaru and Kazuichi to give up Nagito’s location. Starting to notice a pattern?

None of this is to diminish the ultimate impact of their relationship (I’m working up to that slowly if you couldn’t tell lol), but it is to say that calling them “friends” within the confines of DR2 is maybe pushing it. I may refer to them as such in write-ups (half for the sake of brevity and half because Danganronpa presents "friend" as a generic term for harmony within the group), but in fact, the only time Mahiru or Hiyoko is called the other’s friend is in 2-3, when Chiaki prompts Hiyoko to consider what Mahiru would say about Fuyuhiko’s seppuku.

Chiaki's observations about her classmates aren't off the mark per se, but they're sometimes lacking in nuance – likely by virtue of her being an AI with a limited framework for understanding people. We as players, on the other hand, can be a bit more discerning: there was a single scene in which Mahiru was focused on Hiyoko and Hiyoko only, and by the time it was over, her attention had already shifted back to the killing game. Two days later, she died. I’d be concerned if anyone besides Chiaki called that friendship.

Consider Fuyuhiko for a moment. The fact that Mahiru has basically double the interactions with him than she does Hiyoko, even prior to the events of the second case, is an immediate tip-off that Hiyoko isn't her #1 concern. She’s on positive terms with Hiyoko, whereas she and Fuyuhiko butt heads constantly, so it should be the other way around, right? Nope. Fuyuhiko represents a threat synonymous with the killing game due to his threats of continuing it (plus his overall lack of cooperation), and so reining him in is automatically higher on her list of priorities.

And that's the thing: despite being a grade-a cunt, Hiyoko is cooperative. She doesn’t create rifts within the group the way Fuyuhiko does pre-chapter 3, let alone entertain the idea of the killing game. She doesn’t try to play the "lone wolf," and while she might not be very useful in investigations, she doesn’t outright refuse to partake in them. Working against the killing game in any way – including just by cooperating – is an immediate incentive for Mahiru to go easier on anyone (yes, even boys). This, coupled with the aforementioned flip-flopping effect, makes it so Hiyoko only shows up on her radar when she starts crying over her kimono in 2-2. Fuyuhiko, meanwhile, shows up the moment he starts threatening to kill someone.

Due to her early death and the fact that – again – she shares so few scenes with Hiyoko to begin with, the number of times Mahiru witnesses the latter bullying Mikan is a comparatively small five: three times in the first trial (one of which is during a Nonstop Debate), once the morning after the trial and once while investigating the abandoned ruins. 

During the first trial, Mahiru is among the students most focused on solving the murder, and only when liabilities to the group’s cooperation (e.g., Fuyuhiko still threatening people, Kazuichi and Nekomaru embarrassing Peko and derailing the discussion about her alibi) become manifest does she feel the need to police anyone's behavior. Hiyoko is a complete and utter bitch to Mikan (and others) here, but given her remarks don't noticeably hamper the discussion, it's unfortunately not hard to see why everyone – Mahiru included – dismisses them as playground nonsense.

Likewise, during the second island investigation, Mahiru is fully immersed in the discussion about the ruins and pays no attention to anything besides it, not even Hiyoko mentioning that they bathed together (something she'd previously expressed embarrassment over). The morning after the trial is definitely the odd-one-out; Mahiru is distraught over the Imposter and Teruteru, but there’s nothing more pressing to attend to, and reprimanding Hiyoko would cost her little in the focus department. Like everyone else, she just doesn't take it seriously. Is her lack of intervention here unjustified? For sure. Is she more at fault for not stepping in than anyone else? I'd argue no.

Kazuichi is a similar case. Mahiru is there for four of the scenes in which he’s bullied: once before the Imposter’s first meeting, twice while investigating the park’s giant timer and once during the first trial. Everything I said about Mikan applies here as well, but there’s the added layer that Mahiru is harder on boys, and so when Hiyoko calls Kazuichi a coward for trying to run away or a loser for insulting others to gain Sonia’s favor, Mahiru may not agree with the form, but she might as well agree with the content. Again, does that make her silence right? No. Just explainable.

All in all, what I’m getting at is that Mahiru’s role modeling (in DR2’s main story anyway) isn’t supposed to extend beyond the restaurant scene. At no point in 2-2 is correcting Hiyoko’s behavior a consistent goal for her, and while I think it's 100% fair to argue that it should've been, I only half-agree – for reasons I'll get into soon. Since I’m not sure I can explain the purpose of Mahiru's guidance in DR2 without repeating myself in the third section, for now I’ll just highlight what it aims to achieve in other installments.

Granted, most spin-off interactions are one-on-one, meaning only the Twilight Syndrome Murder Case and DRS exist to show how Mahiru responds to Hiyoko’s bullying in a non-killing game setting. I’d argue that neither disappoints, however; she’s shown more than once to instruct Hiyoko on how to act in both. What I like about this portrayal is that Mahiru’s gentle approach stays the same; only the urgency with which she addresses Hiyoko’s behavior changes. As far as she's concerned, Hiyoko is still a child in need of teaching, but now – with the stakes that much lower – she’s also evidently a bully in need of reining in.

These scenes make Mahiru one of only a few characters to try to temper Hiyoko’s cruelty at any point in the series. You know who doesn’t ever try, not even outside of the killing game? Most of the DR2 cast, who witness far more frequent and targeted bullying than Mahiru does, simply by virtue of outliving her. These characters include:

the self-appointed leader of the group who either ignores Hiyoko’s comments or finds the ones directed at him funny

the protagonist of the game whose inner monologue consistently acknowledges how terrible Hiyoko’s behavior is, but who never calls it out

the Ultimate Team Manager (who also plays along with insults directed at him) and Princess, whose talents center around order and unity

the Observer AI whose #1 objective is ensuring that everyone gets along no matter what

Of course, how much incentive and/or know-how someone has for stopping a bully is unimportant when a simple “cut it out” from anyone would suffice. At the end of the day, the fact remains that everyone – Mahiru included – turned a blind eye to bullying during the killing game, and there’s no excuse for that. My aim in pointing this out is not to absolve Mahiru altogether, rather, to put into perspective why it may be unfair to saddle her with all, let alone most of the blame.

So at last, with all of that explanation out of the way, is Mahiru a hypocrite when it comes to her handling of Hiyoko vs. others? Well, sure. She’s hypocritical in the sense that she exercises a double standard, i.e., cuts Hiyoko more slack than she does the rest of the class. But is that double standard exclusive to her? Not really. If anything, by not dismissing her as a child through and through, she holds Hiyoko to a higher standard than most of her classmates do, and this gets its chance to shine outside of the killing game. Moreover, her double standard isn’t the product of favoritism; on the contrary, if Hiyoko took precedence over the killing game in her mind, their interactions wouldn’t be so few and far between. Calling Hiyoko out isn’t one of her priorities, but neither is being her friend.

In light of this, I think a better question is whether or not Mahiru’s hypocrisy is conscious. Conscious hypocrisy is when someone regards two or more things as being on the same level, but treats one differently anyway. That isn’t the case with Mahiru, who – alongside her peers – treats Hiyoko’s behavior differently (i.e., more leniently) because she regards it as nickel-and-dime. If you’d consider that unconscious hypocrisy, then fair enough. Again, I just don’t see any merit in singling her out.

Speaking of singling out…

The Restaurant Scene:

The opening scene of 2-2 wherein Mahiru and Hiyoko become “friends” is where I’ve noticed a lot of fans’ ire with their relationship comes from. It’s a fairly popular opinion (as far as I’m aware) to consider Mahiru’s defense of Hiyoko here hypocritical, and honestly? While I disagree, I don’t really blame people for seeing it that way; I had to give her actions some extra thought before they started making sense to me. Here’s my personal reading of the scene and why I’d consider it misunderstood.

Immediately upon entering the restaurant, the brooding atmosphere hits hard; everyone is in silent mourning of the Imposter and Teruteru, too overwhelmed by the events of the night prior to make conversation. Mahiru is no exception; she can hardly muster a “good morning” to Hajime… 

… everyone besides Hiyoko, that is. She starts badmouthing Teruteru, claiming he deserved to die for his crime and shouldn't be mourned. Cue record scratch.

How does Mahiru respond? She doesn't. But her silence isn’t for lack of caring – quite the opposite.

See, the crucial thing to understand about Mahiru (and probably her most glaring flaw) is that, despite her headstrong attitude and emphasis on “doing the right thing,” she doesn’t always know what the right thing is. She lacks the confidence necessary to support her levelheadedness, and so she agonizes and deliberates. This hesitation is the driving force behind most of her actions, and I think the restaurant scene serves to foreshadow its role in her final confrontation with Fuyuhiko.

Consider the things Mahiru jumps down her peers’ throats about: all relatively “simple” moral dilemmas concerning impropriety, threats, reckless decision-making, etc. Then compare all of that to the dilemma Hiyoko posits here. Do the ends justify the means when it comes to reuniting with family? Is trading the lives of 15 strangers for that of one important person right? Mahiru doesn’t know; she’s never had to think about it before. Even if she disagrees on principle, who is she to tell this girl she barely knows that she shouldn’t feel relief over the death of someone who tried to get them all executed? Only later, after giving it ample thought, does she come to terms with this dilemma – and in the meantime, Peko steps in, possibly also foreshadowing her familiarity with topics like execution.

Soon thereafter, Hiyoko is identified as the source of a bad smell, and while most of the comments that follow are born of genuine concern for her hygiene, Gundham and Kazuichi’s are a wee bit insensitive. Mahiru says as much, and here’s where I think some interpretations of the restaurant scene miss the point. Nowhere during this exchange does Mahiru accuse anyone of bullying Hiyoko. The reason she intervenes has everything to do with her flaw regarding moral dilemmas, and – up until her offer to help Hiyoko with her kimono – almost nothing to do with Hiyoko herself. “Is it rude to harp on a sensitive hygiene issue outside of one’s control” is already a dilemma far simpler than “should a murderer be mourned," but the added layer of disregarding a lecture and doing the same thing the next morning makes it a no-brainer. Mahiru doesn’t care that Hiyoko is the target of a few obtuse comments. She cares that the guys didn’t listen to her the night before – something she makes clear by opening her sentence with, “I’ve said it before, but…”

After this is when her intervention starts being about Hiyoko. She says she’ll teach Hiyoko a simple obi knot, to which Hiyoko is elated. Why? Well, the secret lies in her backstory.

Basically, a few in-game clues – combined with her FTEs and Island Mode – reveal that Hiyoko was forced at a young age to leave her parents’ home and move in with her grandmother, who put her to work studying the traditional dance for which the Saionji Clan is famous. Hiyoko's status as the next head of the family made her subject to great cruelty at the hands of jealous rivals, and as a result, she grew to resent it. Her grandmother became aware of this resentment, and to prevent Hiyoko from shirking her responsibilities, she spoiled her into total dependence, neglecting to teach her basic life skills – including though not limited to dressing herself – and ensuring that dance was her only area of proficiency. This led to Hiyoko forming an inferiority complex around her lack of self-sustainability.

Said inferiority complex contextualizes how Mahiru’s offer registers to Hiyoko. To anyone else, it would be a kind gesture and nothing more. To Hiyoko? It was a monumental kindness. Instead of offering to take care of it for her, Mahiru offered to teach her how to take care of it herself, and this meant that Hiyoko not only automatically trusted her, but had every reason to see her as a role model; as someone whose example could be followed. This childlike admiration becomes all the more relevant later.

Honestly, as much as I understand criticisms of the restaurant scene from a “Mahiru should have also defended Mikan/Kazuichi” standpoint, I can't say I do from a “she shouldn’t have helped Hiyoko” one. I've already outlined where I think her blindspots lie in terms of calling Hiyoko out (and how said blindspots aren't unique to her), but of the characters most consistently mindful of Mikan/Kazuichi otherwise, I’d argue she’s up there (although, again, no one is nearly as mindful of them as they should be.)

She’s the only one to insist on helping Mikan up after she falls for the first time; she expresses concern over the floorboards in the abandoned building being a tripping hazard for her; she refuses Ibuki’s suggestion of taking pictures after she falls for the second time; she reprimands Fuyuhiko for threatening to sell her to a whorehouse in the first trial; and when Monokuma pressures the class into playing the TSMC arcade game, she warns her against it. Granted, there aren't as many instances of her sticking up for Kazuichi, but it's worth noting that – despite her prior insistence that he needed to “man up” – she defends him when Fuyuhiko taunts him over his fear of the Monobeasts.

Don’t get me wrong, I do wish she did the additional service of holding Hiyoko accountable for her bullying, but the fact that she didn't doesn't render her intervention in this scene hypocritical IMO. Again, her defense of Hiyoko was prompted by frustration over the guys embarrassing her after they'd already done the same to Peko. In other words, it's something she would have defended any of the girls for, and as highlighted above, she arguably did defend Mikan on the embarrassment front both times she fell.

As for offering Hiyoko help, I don't see the issue with that, either. If the restaurant scene is indicative of anything, it's that Hiyoko – while a rotten bully – is still human at the end of the day. The fact that she's a little shit and the fact that she's so helpless she can't get dressed by herself can coexist. Offering her the bare minimum compassion for the latter isn't giving her free rein to continue being the former – it's just that: the bare minimum compassion. She needed help, and if Mahiru wouldn't give it to her, who would?

More than once in her screentime is Mahiru shown to extend compassion to someone who isn’t an unambiguously good person, something else that becomes all the more relevant later. She makes a genuine effort to sympathize with Teruteru’s motive despite not agreeing with his actions; she brings food to a tied-up Nagito (twice, for that matter) despite the chaos he’d sown the previous chapter; and she laments Natsumi’s murder despite knowing how badly the latter treated others, herself included. In view of this, helping a bully dress herself is not only in-character for Mahiru, but by far the least “extreme” of her acts of compassion. I’d also argue that it pays off in more ways than one.

Why I Think it Works:

So far, I’ve offered explanations for why nothing holds Mahiru and Hiyoko’s relationship back, but I’ve yet to explain what I think pushes it forward. Let me rectify that.

Following the second trial, Hiyoko’s hostility toward her classmates is amped up to 11. The third island investigation has her willfully manipulate Akane into exploring the motel on her behalf, and when Hajime talks to her, not only does she insult him right off the bat, she's openly classist toward him, mockingly comparing the rundown motel to his house. This is low, even for her, and given the events of the previous chapter, it’s not exactly a mystery why.

See, Mahiru's death sets itself apart from others in the series in that it isn't an immediate incentive for the person closest to her to change. Hiyoko doesn't get the tried and true “character loses a friend and is motivated to better themselves as a result” type arc – not toot sweet, anyway – because, unlike, say, Sakura for Aoi, Peko for Fuyuhiko or Tenko for Himiko, Mahiru had no last words, no last message of strength or wisdom for Hiyoko. Her murder was a source of conflict and animosity – nothing more, nothing less.

As is first established following Teruteru’s execution, Hiyoko has a retribution-oriented mindset – not too far off from Fuyuhiko’s “an eye for an eye.” She scoffs at the idea of redemption; she holds onto grudges indefinitely; and most significantly, she believes all killers deserve to die themselves. This mindset is yet another manifestation of her paranoia – of being conditioned to believe that everyone is out to get her. Unlike Fuyuhiko, whose terrible attitude was a mask he wore to compensate for his insecurities about leading his clan, Hiyoko’s is an extension of her paranoid worldview; an ingrained trait.

And honestly? That's why I only half-agree with the argument that Mahiru should have reprimanded her in DR2. Would it have worked to give Mikan/Kazuichi some peace of mind? Absolutely. But to change Hiyoko’s behavior in the long run? I doubt it. It would address the bullying in the moment, but it wouldn’t get to the root of the problem, i.e. the backwards defense mechanism from which it stems. The only reason Mahiru’s guidance outside of DR2 (as underscored earlier) has any effect is that Hiyoko is already in a safe environment with friends whom she trusts, far away from her family and their perilous traditions. Though her lizard brain instinct is still to be as nasty as possible, the proper groundwork is there for her to integrate Mahiru’s guidance and improve her behavior over time… groundwork that's practically non-existent in DR2’s killing game.

But anyway, back to 2-3. Speaking of Fuyuhiko, Hiyoko applies her rigid point of view to him in this chapter. The fact that she considers him an irredeemable killer who took Mahiru from her is only a sliver of the real issue; more relevant is that clear indications of his wanting to turn over a new leaf register to her as attempts to dodge responsibility. No matter how sincere in his resolve he may be, she sees only the worst in him. She sees only the worst in everyone, after all.

Hiyoko’s shrine, while testament to her love for Mahiru, is a kind of… development red herring so to speak. Setting aside her insecurities to perform a task outside her (forced) field of expertise is a feat for her – don't get me wrong – but it isn't really a change; she’d never before hesitated to show vulnerability when it came to Mahiru, whether by saying to her face that she loved her or expressing how much she missed her when she was gone.

It's only when she confronts Fuyuhiko about Mahiru and Peko’s deaths, and he responds by committing seppuku, that we see dynamics start to shift.

Here, Hiyoko is stunned into horrified silence, and that in and of itself speaks volumes. She believes strongly that all killers deserve to die, doesn't she? So then why does she go quiet? Why doesn't she take advantage of Fuyuhiko’s clear instability and get him to finish the job? It’s not because she doesn’t want to die herself; the last trial confirmed beyond a shadow of a doubt that only the person to deliver the killing blow is punished. It's because she realizes something: that isn't what Mahiru would want.

In contrast to both Hiyoko and Fuyuhiko, retribution was never Mahiru's MO. She wished zero harm upon anyone no matter what they'd done; she extended compassion to everyone, even killers; she disapproved of cruel and unusual punishment; and she showed particular distaste for acts of revenge. Of course, in keeping with her fatal flaw, she didn't always go about these ideals in the right way. She covered up a murder in a desperate bid to protect her friend from the yakuza’s twisted “justice,” and she scolded an enraged Fuyuhiko for enacting revenge while he was in the middle of interrogating her about his sister – both shortsighted actions that she paid the ultimate price for.

But by the same token, she kept thinking about Teruteru's actions after the restaurant scene and concluded that he didn’t, in fact, deserve to die for his crime. She forced Nekomaru and Kazuichi to give up Nagito’s location, chastised them for hogtying and starving him and brought him breakfast when nobody else would. She spent days deliberating over how best to make amends with Fuyuhiko, even though his threatening letter – combined with the knowledge of the game’s true ending – would have been more than enough to convince the others to restrain him like Kazuichi wanted (not to mention the most obvious thing to do for her own protection.) If she had thought more like Hiyoko and dismissed Fuyuhiko as an irredeemable murderer from the get-go, the opportunity to lure her to the beach house would have never existed.

The ideals driving these actions, made explicit in her final words to Fuyuhiko, contributed to a lasting legacy, and Hiyoko considering that legacy in order to forgive Fuyuhiko is what makes her arc so powerful to me.

Losing the only person on the island whom she trusted – hell, having that trust taken advantage of by the ones responsible – could have foreclosed all progress right then and there. Mahiru's guidance was limited to a single act of compassion that had (seemingly) nothing to do with what she stood for. Being framed for her murder put Hiyoko in a vulnerable position from which she believed she could only recover by becoming meaner. And as the only one left still personally affected by Fuyuhiko’s actions, she lost her last resource: her footing within the group as the rude but cooperative one. But because Mahiru’s compassion reached her in a fundamental way – because she valued her enough to consider her unspoken ideals – she managed to defy the odds and change anyway. Not because Mahiru told her to, but because she wanted to.

And so at last, that's why I think the way their relationship was written – with a brief but meaningful role model dynamic, limited intervention on Mahiru's side and childlike admiration on Hiyoko's – ultimately worked in both of their favors. It allowed Mahiru's impact to carry on past 2-2 (more extensively anyway, as it would have played into Fuyuhiko’s arc regardless; his desire to make amends using the second chance Peko gave him was no coincidence), and it made it so the sincerity other arcs work hard to convey is there by default with Hiyoko’s – just by virtue of it happening at all. Do I still wish Mahiru called Hiyoko out on her bullying for Mikan and Kazuichi’s sakes? Yep. I just wouldn't change anything else.

As a side note, it’s also why I can’t get behind the idea that Mahiru ever “enabled” Hiyoko. An enabler is someone who, well, enables something – usually a behavior – right? Remove the enabler from the equation, and the enabled behavior should become harder to maintain. So what would become of Hiyoko if she never “befriended” Mahiru? Well… she’d smell worse. She’d like one fewer person. That’s about it. Not receiving Mahiru’s compassion wouldn’t have done much of anything, but receiving it made a world of difference.

Hell, even if we strip away Mahiru's primary impact on Hiyoko, i.e. jumpstarting her development in 2-3, I’d argue that what we’re left with in 2-2 is still unequivocally positive. Helping Hiyoko shower and tie her kimono were both good things that improved the lives of everyone on the island. Nobody had to deal with Hiyoko’s stench anymore, but on top of that, given the option, Hiyoko spent her time clinging to Mahiru instead of going around bullying others. Keep in mind, Hiyoko is someone who believes she doesn't need friends or close contacts. Before Mahiru, she reasoned that, so long as she could learn to be self-sustaining, she’d never have to rely on anyone who might betray her. She could eschew human connection and ensure her safety forevermore. But then Mahiru earned her trust in one fell swoop, and suddenly she was prioritizing the pursuit of friendship over the prevention of betrayal, if with just one person. I don't think that should be understated.

Sorry, I keep getting sidetracked. Back to 2-3.

True to the killing game, though, just because a character experiences a breakthrough doesn't mean it’s all sunshine and rainbows from that point forward. The objective of the first half of Hiyoko’s arc, i.e., forgiving Fuyuhiko, is complete. She’s already well on her way to vanquishing her paranoia – to having her worldview reformed by Mahiru’s ideals and doing away with her defense mechanism in the process. Nothing can stop her from improving further…

… is what we're led to believe. But then comes Nekomaru’s sacrifice. That’s where things take a nosedive.

Seeing the pinnacle of strength that is Nekomaru Nidai try to save his friend and get utterly demolished as a result makes up Hiyoko’s mind once and for all. It convinces her that teamwork, cooperation, friendship? At best, none of it matters. At worst, it all just leads to death. There's a certain irony in this takeaway. After all, if anyone should identify the most with Nekomaru's actions, it's her. She's a firm believer in protecting that which is near and dear. But that's exactly what makes his fate so devastating in her eyes. Mahiru was near and dear to her, but as much as she wanted to protect her, she couldn't. That's forgivable; she's weak. Nekomaru, on the other hand, is strong, and while he succeeded at protecting Akane, it was at the cost of his life. If a force of nature like Nekomaru can be brought to his knees as a direct consequence of protecting someone, then what hope does Hiyoko have of doing the same? How can she possibly protect the people she loves? She can't. Nekomaru is irrefutable proof of that now.

That’s reason number one behind her relapse. Reason number two is fear.

Hiyoko, at her core, has always been a person motivated by fear. Fear of vulnerability, fear of forming connections – fear of a sudden, violent death. That doesn’t mean fear has her completely in its grips; she came closer than ever before to vanquishing it thanks to Mahiru’s ideals. But it does mean that, when given reason to believe that something is synonymous with dying pointlessly – with being betrayed – she's going to disavow it. She started to change because Mahiru’s ideals allowed her to rethink her worldview – to explore the possibility that connections are worth forming. And yet here’s evidence of the contrary staring her right in the face.

Hiyoko’s relapse (and subsequent death) is why I assume her relationship with Mahiru is so often considered a waste. I may be something of an outlier in that I’ve never minded Hiyoko’s send-off from a writing standpoint and think only its incorporation into the case/deadly life is shoddy – but staying with the topic of this write-up, I’ll focus less on why I wouldn’t consider Hiyoko’s character as a whole wasted and more on why I wouldn’t consider her relationship with Mahiru wasted (even if the two go hand-in-hand to some degree).

The morning after Nekomaru's sacrifice, Hiyoko is seen mourning at Mahiru’s shrine. Choosing to talk to her triggers a rant about Nagito and how he pissed her off by lying about seeing Mahiru alive. She tearfully proclaims that she hates being lied to and won’t be satisfied until Nagito is brutalized as punishment, this clearly alluding to her heightened paranoia. It wouldn't even be the first time Nagito has lied to her, but comparing her reaction then vs. now, it becomes apparent just how badly she's spiraling.

After this, the Despair Disease motive is officially introduced by Monokuma, and the afflicted students are brought to the hospital. Those remaining (minus Mikan, who’s tending to the patients) convene in the hospital lobby to discuss a plan of action, and that's when Hiyoko begins to insist on a quarantine.

I was honestly kind of surprised by how satisfied this scene's handling of Hiyoko left me feeling, and the more I analyze why, the more it all ties back to Mahiru.

Perhaps most obvious is her behavior. While still not exactly a joy to be around, she's noticeably mellowed out. Upon review, I can count on one hand the number of times she says something rude:

When Gundham and Kazuichi debate the ethics of Mikan changing Nagito’s clothes (prompting this hilarious line), Hiyoko calls their conversation stupid and tells them to focus

When Hajime questions what she means by “isolate the patients,” she condescendingly asks why he doesn’t get it

When explaining the purpose of the quarantine, she remarks (to no one in particular) that “even a preschooler knows” the only option when a disease is incurable is to stop it from spreading

When Gundham insists that everyone who isn't staying at the hospital station at the motel, she acquiesces with a, “Jeez, how annoying…”

Her nastiest remark by far is “I want them [the patients] to at least have the decency to consider committing suicide before they start bothering us.” Now, don’t get me wrong, this is a hideous thing to say under any circumstances, and there's no excuse for it. It puts a bad taste in my mouth. That said, with how unusually tame the rest of her dialogue is (hell, she refers to Mikan twice without so much as an insult to boot), I don’t think such an extreme comment is included arbitrarily. I think it's part of a deliberate pattern.

The bulk of Hiyoko’s arc this chapter – both positive and negative – has operated on the principle of “show, don’t tell.” This made sense before, but it makes extra sense now: because she’s too afraid to showcase vulnerability outright, the story has to find roundabout ways to convey that she isn’t as heartless as she would prefer to be seen.

Exhibit A: she claimed to believe that all killers deserve death, but given the chance to coerce a killer into suicide, she faltered.

Exhibit B: she callously remarked that Fuyuhiko deserved his injuries, but given the chance not to attend his recovery party, she did anyway. She tried to pass it off as an interest in the party itself, but never before had she established herself as a party-lover – quite the opposite; she called the Imposter’s party in 2-1 “lame” – making this an obvious bluff. So obvious, in fact, that Hajime “I know Nagito has the Liar Disease but I’ll take his words literally” Hinata immediately sees through it.

Exhibit C: at the party, she stressed that Fuyuhiko wasn’t forgiven yet, promising that, if push came to shove, he’d bear the brunt of any dangerous situation. But given the chance to make good on this promise and force him to stay behind at the hospital, the idea didn’t even cross her mind. Instead, it was Fuyuhiko who rose to the occasion.

And finally, Exhibit D: she claims to wish the Despair Disease patients would kill themselves, but given the chance to ditch – to give into her paranoia right away – she takes on a de-facto leader role in the plan to keep the patients safe. She doesn’t just come up with the concept – she spearheads the whole thing, from assigning her classmates different roles to prompting Kazuichi to design a communication method between hospital and motel. The player can’t progress to the next scene without speaking specifically to her.

So then… how does this all tie back to Mahiru? Well, I like to think of it in terms of before vs. after Nekomaru's sacrifice.

Before Nekomaru's sacrifice, it was Mahiru’s ideal of restoration that allowed Hiyoko to forgive Fuyuhiko, thus doing away with some of her paranoia. After, it’s Mahiru’s ideal of teamwork that allows her to help combat the Despair Disease. Recall that, in the sacrifice's aftermath, Hiyoko claimed there was no value in working together and that she didn’t want to be involved in any team efforts. Then why, pray tell, does she collaborate with her peers in this scene? Because it’s a last-ditch effort at honoring Mahiru – at doing what Mahiru would’ve done.

I say “last-ditch" of course, because – no matter which way you slice it – the damage is already done. Hiyoko can work with her classmates to prevent another killing, but she can’t trust them – can’t get close to them. Mahiru’s ideals are strong, but in the face of overwhelming paranoia, they’re only enough for that final bow.

We're given the impression that Hiyoko's subsequent withdrawal from the group is just another act of selfishness – that she's just trying to avoid the Despair Disease – but that turns out to be only part of the reason. Flash-forward to the investigation, we learn that it was yet another last-ditch effort, this time to honor Mahiru by bathing and then tying her kimono the way she was taught. In her now empty motel room, Sonia expresses a regret: she didn’t understand what Hiyoko was going through – not really – and so she gave her some advice about a mirror and left her alone. It all comes together thematically from there.

Because of Hiyoko’s takeaway from Nekomaru’s sacrifice, she closed herself off from her peers (both literally and figuratively), and this furthered the divide between her and Fuyuhiko’s arcs. Nekomaru’s words caused Fuyuhiko to realize that this new life of his wasn’t a spare; it was precious. Nekomaru’s actions, on the other hand, caused Hiyoko to realize that her life was a fragile thing, and instead of becoming self-preserving like Fuyuhiko, she became self-isolating. She believed the only way to avoid a meaningless death was to go it alone, but going it alone – that is, isolating herself to the point where no one could understand her enough to help her – became her undoing.

But was that undoing meaningless? From an overarching narrative standpoint, maybe. Her death has no lasting impact on the rest of the story, and the way it’s tacked onto the mystery of case 3 is downright sloppy. But when it comes to her death by itself – to the individual story it tells – boy oh boy does it have meaning, and the character most to thank for that is undoubtedly Mahiru.

Mahiru is what allows Hiyoko’s death to feel like something built up to, something character-driven, as opposed to a shoehorned-in, hollow chapter 3 death. She makes it so Hiyoko’s “wrong place, wrong time” scenario – while unlucky – is anything but random. The reason Hiyoko finds herself in that wrong place at the wrong time isn't sporadic misfortune; it’s the result of her grief, paranoia, lack of self-sustainability – and even to some extent DR2’s theme of the burden of talent.

Mikan being the one to kill Hiyoko only works as well as it does because of Mahiru, too. She didn't do it out of spite, didn't hunt Hiyoko down or kidnap her. Hiyoko just happened to walk in on her killing Ibuki. But again, while this may be unlucky, it’s not at all random. Hiyoko heads to the music venue in the first place in a bid to prove her independence, yes, but it’s only because Mahiru has become so enmeshed with her idea of independence that this is the case. If being independent were the only thing driving her, she wouldn’t have found herself struggling with her kimono to begin with. She would have weathered the storm and gone without bathing until the Despair Disease passed. She’d done it before, after all. But she was desperate to honor Mahiru, to prove that Mahiru’s death wasn’t in vain because – hey, look – she’s self-sustaining now. Honoring Mahiru became her way of regaining control over not just her hygiene, but her life as well.

Speaking of control, bullying Mikan was one of the few things – squishing ants included – that served to give Hiyoko that sense of control over her life for which she longed. Even at Fuyuhiko's recovery party, she used Mikan as an emotional scapegoat, insulting her to distract from the fact that she’d just forgiven Mahiru’s killer. And yet, here, in her last-ditch effort to prove her independence – to prove her control – Mikan becomes that final, uncontrollable variable. She uses Hiyoko to regain control over things, and Hiyoko is helpless to stop it. This subtle role reversal is a refreshing instance of nuance in an otherwise heavy-handed case; I’d take it over a cliché revenge plotline anyday.

All in all, if a death symbolic of Hiyoko's lifelong demons is what her journey in 2-3 was building to from the start (which I firmly believe it was), then in order for Mahiru's impact to not be wasted, she just had to remain instrumental to that journey until the very end. In that sense, I'd say she succeeded.

Conclusion:

Hear that? That's the sound of my fingers dying.

Well then, it seems we’ve reached the end. Yay. :)

This took me over a month to complete, and I’m honestly happy with how it came out. Having posted this means I won’t be beating the “obsessed with Mahiru and Hiyoko” allegations anytime soon, of course, but I'm alright with that. Hopefully you found some of my points compelling and weren't too overwhelmed by the length.

Thanks for reading!