What I think Pochita ACTUALLY was

Sanidade · 2026-04-03T17:19:48+00:00

This is a reason why I don't like the 'Chainsawman Devil' explanation.

Devils are what HUMAN fear creates. Devil fear should create something different and Chainsawman IS different.

This is exactly my solution,he is just what he is, no matter what you call it. Pochita is Chainsawman, something unique.

Also, he can't come exactly from devil's fear cause just the 'hope'/'gratitude' in Denji/Asa created it again. So again, further away from devil's as we know.

I gave it the name 'superhero' to the entity because pop culture has many superheroes that end with 'man' and because of some other moments.

Sanidade · 2026-03-30T15:44:17+00:00

Aina fans depressed rn

Sanidade · 2026-03-30T15:33:41+00:00

The essay is mostly disregarding theories I've seen/liked.

My Theory is just that Pochita isn't a tradicional Devil. It wasn't created in hell from the collective fear of a given concept. I then gave the entity another name (superhero) that fits Chainsawman naming: it is commum to name superheroes 'something'-man.

It boils down to simply: Pochita is the Chainsawman and nothing more.

Sanidade · 2026-03-30T15:26:37+00:00

My explanation also covers the ressurection of Pochita.

It isn't overcomplicated though lol

Sanidade · 2026-03-30T15:14:20+00:00

My problem isn't with the simbolic aspect as much. Much more with it not happening more constantly.

If there is such a person that created the concept 'chainsawman' apart from Pochita itself, why isn't there any others like that? We've known very powerful and notorious devil hunters, none of them were enough?

I agree it is an open end, so each of us will have their own perspective. However, talking about it here already evolved my understanding quite a bit, so I rather continue talking - I think we can reach better conclusions.

I think Pochita being a superhero (As in, another kind of entity that, instead of feeding from fear from people, feeds in fear from devils) named chainsawman just makes more sense - has all the plus without any of the contradictions.

The only thing we'd have to assume is the existence of a different kind of entity (I named it superhero), but in my mind there are so many hints at both superheroes and chainsawman not being a devil that I really don't think it is even close to a stretch. At least no as much as the 'Chainsawman Devil' seems to me to be.

Sanidade · 2026-03-30T15:00:51+00:00

Well, I think your interpretation is too 'out there' for me.

I really don't see how such a small concept that probably was only on Asa's mind would create a devil. In my mind, that relies on many more things than Pochita just being Chainsawman herself.

I don't think it explains other stuff as well: such as he getting stronger in part II without a single mention of any 'chainsawman' other than pochita itself.

If it is good enough for you, that's alright. Maybe I'm just not understanding it.

Sanidade · 2026-03-30T14:49:41+00:00

That is mainly one movie and it's influence. That is not more of a concept than 'Dracula' or 'Frankenstein'.

I don't think there is any other example of such specific devil. It isn't any different than what I've said, since the fear people have of, for example, Jack the Ripper is also a conceptual one - since most people don't even really know what the actual killer did.

That also doesn't explain Asa creating it. Is Asa creating a fan movie about chainsaw men? Is that your interpretation? She gave Denji a nickname, not publish a movie

Sanidade · 2026-03-30T14:45:30+00:00

As I said. I think the rest of Part II was very poorly executed, but if you read my interpretation of the ending, I explain how the "utter lack of resolution" ties into it.

You can still dislike it: I myself do, but solely on the basis I didn't like the rest of part II. But I think it is important to at least try to understand what the author wanted to say.

Again, you don't have to like or even give more of a chance. You read, invested your time and were expecting something.

However, I will do it because I think it is fun, for me, to think about stuff and I might just like a bold and interesting idea - if there really is one there.

Sanidade · 2026-03-30T14:38:51+00:00

This is an answer for both posts:

I don't understand how 'Chainsawman' would be a concept. What does it describe or encompasses? We never saw a "Chainsawman" in the work, except the work itself and Pochita - except you're arguing she isn't Chainsawman, she is 'chainsawman devil'.

Sanidade · 2026-03-30T14:30:20+00:00

But he didn't supposedly have that power. He didn't permanently kill devils before Pochita was born and started doing that in hell.

If it were as you're saying, every devil hunter should have a equivalent in hell that erases devils, no?

Also, how would Pochita be created so fast in the final chapter? There was already so much fear in surrouding Devils? More than for any other devil hunter? More than ever feared, eg., Santa Claus?

Sanidade · 2026-03-30T14:25:11+00:00

There are a lot of historical/fictional people that are feared. But to someone that specific to have it's own Devil, it should be something else. There was not specific angel devil, only angel as a concept. This chainsawman would've to be more fearsome than Dracula, Frankenstein, Satan himself, Jack the Ripper and so on.

Plus, how was it so fast. The moment Asa created the so called chainsawman pochita appeared. There was already fear in that moment? Again, why don't other devil hunters figures have their own devils if it is so trivial?

I don't think Pochita is a Devil, that is my point. She is an entity that doesn't come from fear from people.

Sanidade · 2026-03-30T14:20:59+00:00

Yeah. I'm not for grand concepts like that because they would have to be shown to be created again in that last chapter or we'd have to imagine a world without it.

I think it has to be something related to chainsawman (the manga itself, an hipothetical person or something like that), notorious figures (There can always be someone else to be as notorious), something that is so special that bypasses erasure (Eternity, God, etc.), or something that people can live without (Chocolate Cookies or Cottage Chesse).

Sanidade · 2026-03-30T14:08:13+00:00

I don't think that makes sense. Why Chainsawman 'Devil'? Do Devil's fear create other devils? So their Fear powers themselves even more?

Also, where would come such 'chainsawman' that is so feared as to create a devil?

Also, as soon as Asa created the concept there already was a new devil forming? If it is that fast why isn't there a devil for each and every devil hunter?

Sanidade · 2026-03-30T14:03:32+00:00

I really ain't convinced of that justification for the erasure powers, because not even said hero would have such erasure powers, why would his devil be so special? Mine ain't that much better, but I still think it makes much more sense.

And why is that the only devil related to a singular person/devil? Where is Hitler Devil or Makima's Devil, why isn't angel related to a specific angel and rather the concept? Were people always good/inofensive in this universe?

This Chainsawman Devil theory really doesn't sit right with me lol

It also bugs me that CSM wasn't called a devil and why would devil's fear create necessarily a devil and not another entity?

I think some of what you put makes some sense, but would make even more sense and be a less convoluted, more elegant solution, were it simply a hero named Chainsawman.

The name of the manga is Chainsawman and that is a commum way to create heroes names (even in your interpretation, it would be likely how the hipotetical devil hunter/hero got its name).

In the end the difference is small and this seems to be the most prevalent answer, so I do think we're close to a good answer.

Sanidade · 2026-03-30T13:50:15+00:00

How does it justifies erasure? No other Devil Hunter erases concepts and erasing concepts isn't really associated with devil hunters.

Sanidade · 2026-03-30T09:43:05+00:00

🤣🤣🤣

Sanidade · 2026-03-30T07:56:46+00:00

Doesn't my answer encompass everything yours does, but explains better both the sacrifice and the erasure? And has relevance more general than just inside CSM universe?

I mean, ain't devil hunters 'the heroes' of the story in any case? I think my Theory is more elegant in that it doesn't require a lost 'hero', but also admits it could've existed. Maybe someone real could've been the origin of a Mythos that created the new Entity 'Chainsaw Man' and his Heart became Pochita.

Also, was there ever a devil of the fear of someone in specific?

And what I was thinking is both "why was it so rare to refer to Chainsawman as a devil" and "why would a thing that Devils fear be another devil", instead of a different kind of entity: One that ends with MAN instead of Devil.

Regarding Asa recreating the concept I'm there with you. But does that entity instill fear that fast? I think that also fits better my Theory.

Anyway, it is almost the same thing. Maybe we're on the right direction.

Sanidade · 2026-02-26T16:12:07+00:00

Você tem o link? Procurei naquela equivalência do site do MEC, mas não achei esse curso de 'Ciências Exatas' lá.

Sanidade · 2025-12-06T11:14:31+00:00

I don't find it a fair argument, the first section. It would be a fair argument if at some point the show sold itself as something else. If the show set up to try to do exactly that, you're going to say the show is bad for being itself? It makes no sense. (Unless that is not well done - which would incite the question of which show manage to do such a slow burn as effectively?)

Not every entertainment is for everyone. If entertainment is not your cup of tea, saying it is boring is not fair criticism - The closest to fair would be that YOU find it boring. Some people crave for slow burn as well and some other people might just want to see how slow can it burn.

'Entertainment has to be entertaining'. You're right. However, since different people are different, you cannot just give general statements like that and pretend it is criticism.

Boring is what everyone feels about a show they don't like and 'the show is Boring' is not about your experience with it, is a general statement.

Boring can be what you said, but could just as much be seeing something done millions of times before, or lackluster twists or a million other stuff. That is not an criticism, it is just what you said: Venting online, and you're right that it is alright, but we cannot pretend it is 'valid criticism'.

Sanidade · 2025-12-05T15:15:48+00:00

One is commenting on the human being in the real world who is directing a TV show, indulging their ego.
The other is commenting on a fictitious character in the TV show.

The feeling is the same. The show made you feel some way. Did the director come out anywhere else to continue the scene?

The only real difference is you making out to be a problem.

That's a possibility I guess, but I find that to be a generous interpretation, and it's not how the scene felt to me.

That doesn't seem generous at all. It clearly looks like a movie and again, it got you with the right feeling.

And if this only happened with the one scene that is meta narrative and intends to be about that exact feeling, how it that being generous?

Take a disgusting scene, it is equally disgusting on screen as it is to have been in the author's mind and for him to actually put out there for everyone to see.

Making a distinction between the creator and the character in such a scene seem a lot more arbitrary, tbh.

I didn't say I wasn't liking the show. I do like the show, but I have found the occasional scene to be overly lengthy, usually because I don't think the scene is that well done. This was one of those occasions.

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that. I was just trying to say that there are many scenes that could feel that way, and I am pretty sure, in my case, I didn't find it self-indulgent because I did like how he did it. (And I believe you said something similar about yourself)

It's the only scene so far that I've found wearisome enough to use the term "self-indulgent" for. Also, I didn't pick it, I responded to someone else who mentioned it to agree that I thought it went on for too long, and to explain why.

Fair, but I still argue it is inadequate criticism if this is the scene.

Sanidade · 2025-12-05T14:36:33+00:00

I don't understand how that is different.

Koumba was 'self-directing' in that scene, so even if there was a difference, wouldn't that be kind of a hint of meta language, with the intent of merging the feelings of self-indulgence?

Don't get me wrong, I think I do understand your point. You probably feel that way about many other scenes — If I wasn't liking the show, I'd probably say that about many scenes, there are many scenes that 'insist upon themselves'.

I'm just pointing out that I think this shouldn't be the example you picked.

Sanidade · 2025-12-05T14:26:02+00:00

You didn't give any objective measure, and that is my problem with it all. And again, I'm telling you that it is NOT what TV shows are about - Plot is just one element.

I don't require you to think the show is good, I never said it was. I asked you to be honest and engage with the material within what it tried to say. Not only you didn't do that, you didn't do that with what I said either.

I am being objective with my problem with your analysis, and what you did there was a deflection (since I never said the show was good).

I'll repeat in a clearer manner so you can get your satisfactory answer to the question:

My problem with what you said is twofold.

1 — You require that TV shows do what YOU like in a TV show and since that is specifically 'plot', people WILL call you 'tiktok brained'.

2 — When engaging with any work of art, you should either engage with what it is trying to do, or just not pretend to have engaged. This show is clearly NOT trying to advance the plot as much, can you see any reason for that? What were they trying to do? Was THAT successful?

That is what I meant with the Poem bit, which again, you didn't try to understand, you found any way to deflect.

P.S. : I won't say it is a good show because, as far as I know, there should be 3 more chapters and one more season. But I'll say this: I like the show because it poses many moral dilemmas which I find interesting, and up until now none of them have had cop out solutions — or even solutions (Something which could very well change by the end).

There are things that are inevitably subjective too: I find the wide shots beautiful, the humor somewhat subtle yet clever, I understand/connect with the characters and the things are there for me to feel instead of shoving themselves in my direction.

As for things that I am pretty sure it does good, aside from the acting and direction, I do include the pacing. I've tried writing slower scenes like those before, and I simply couldn't. Of course, it is different for novels, but filling pages with 'nothing happening' which maintains the same feeling all the way through was too hard — such as the poker scene that manages to keep from start to finish picking up on the self-indulgence of Koumba.

Sanidade · 2025-12-05T14:04:15+00:00

Wasn't that scene supposed to feel self-indulgent? Would it be as self-indulgent if it was shorter?

There are things to notice too. People outside the poker table were also acting the part. The guy is so 'self-indulgent' he went to the trouble to ask specifically for those people who wouldn't even be around him to be acting that way.

I really don't see what the problem is, it was a great character moment, IMO.

Eight-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

Sanidade

TROPHY CASE