Next to the previous topic ‘bout Vongola Primo was a (or used to be) reckless, childish, emotional young man.
We have Cozart as the same, too.
(Just not as emotional as him, I’ll explain later. But on the craziness level, boy.)
Again, onto the very first memory of their meeting.
Let us reconfirm something before we get to this scene: The founder trio (Giotto - G - Cozart) lived in what was called “paradise of outlaws” and they didn’t know each other beforehand.
Now, just insert yourself in Cozart’s position here. Just imagine there is a stranger chasing you for god-know time and distance in a street notorious for crime or something, that is enough to make you run for your life whatever purpose your chaser claims.
And let hear about their purpose: to give you back a wallet you just DROPPED AWAY AS A CHARITY. Logic thinking in that case should be: 1, they stole my wallet from Pablo or 2, they fake my wallet, now they are approaching me with god-known intention. Because let's face it, someone from the paradise of outlaws says they're gonna give you back your wallet. Not everyone who lives on a crime street is a criminal, but better safe than sorry. Better safe than sorry, so the logical action in this scene is to walk away. Right?
Simon Cozart, definitely a teen: no precaution whatsoever. Dunno if they are gangsters, let's stop and chat.
If Giotto was lucky Cozart was not a gang member so he could chase the redhead without any consequence of getting himself in trouble, Cozart was also lucky in this scene that Giotto and G were indeed good people and had no intention further than giving him back the wallet.
He was the first one suggesting the trio be vigilantes.
Of course, there was nothing wrong with that, no.
If we let it slide that there was a collapsed house and a dead body in front of them, Cozart himself holding two children and he still suggested yes they were gonna fight them.
I think even the stupidest person on Earth at that time must realize that this was not kid kicking and screaming in sandbox, this is life-and-death fight. And people who could kill someone for not discounting the mechandise (by 90%, what a nonsense proposal) of course would not hesitate to do the same to the one who opposed them.
There is nothing wrong with Cozart suggesting, I repeat. Treating violence by using violence is not the best way to resolve violence, but it is a resonable way that when time calls, we need to use it. Besides, when you are surrounded by a criminal and you live so goody-two-shoes, you will soon be kicked out figuratively and literally of the community you live in. It sounds ironic, but violence in the case of the Primos was a way of fitting in.
But Cozart’s suggestion is not the main point. The thing I want to mention here is his ATTITUDE when he suggested it.
He was so goddamn sure, so sure like how he thought Giotto can be a good leader at such a young age, that they were gonna fight, AND SURVIVE.
Cozart said that they would protect their people, they couldn't protect people if they died as a useless meatshied right at the very first moment they showed their face to the bad guys, right? So when Cozart said fight he meant fight AND SURVIVE.
Now let's revive the situation.
Their opponents were like, all the gang threatening their hometown. At least had enough bomb/dynamite to completely destroy a brick house. And what about the founder trio? 14, maybe around that. Aka again, kids. Yet Cozart was still so confident that yes, they would kick their ass, they could protect the people they loved, they could win against those bad bastards.
I tell you, if Vongola Primo was reckless 'cause he founded Vongola in 14, the one who gave him that idea undoubtedly must be much, more, reckless.
There is a chance, a small possibility, that Giotto already led a gang (or at least a number of people) at that time, so Cozart had the chance to witness his friend’s leadership to be so confident like that. But in that case, was it a little absurd about Cozart’s words, “Noone else will help us”, or Giotto’s helplessly fiery attitude and action of refusing to see the town being suffered? Like, Giotto’s leading a gang meant that he had his own people, his own force who would help him in need, why he had to act so helplessly and why Cozart had not to mention them? So I’m gonna stick with the founder trio, around-14, as teenagers who had absolutely nothing on their hand other than a mad and fiery stubbornness and later a flame blazing when they chose to fight against the larger gangs who abused their town.
By the way, with that attitude, there was no way Cozart (and by extension, Giotto and G too, 'cause Cozart included them) had not fought before. Be street fight or home-trained, he definitely must fight before, and a lot, to have a cornerstone to trust in their strength like that. (I may go with street-fight experience, because Cozart’s choice of weapon is a glove, close-ranged combat. Home-trained fighting in an old family should be long-ranged one like swords, right?) No information to talk about their flame, but enough hints that, talking about fighting experience, the founder trio had a handful of that before deciding to be vigilante.
Coming back to the first memory, they stopping to talk when knowing absolutely nothing about others also meant they were confident of their ability to at least defend themselves if things went bad.
The third memory. God, I absolutely have no words to tell you how speechless I am at this scene.
Because, simply conclude, Simon Cozart,
What the flying fuck was wrong with you?
He realized it! Realize it was not Giotto who wrote the letter! That the letter was fake! That there was something wrong! Then why did he still go???
I know later on he reasoned that he was worried about Giotto because he realized Vongola had a traitor. But that had nothing to do with him heading straight to the battlefield? Anyone can see a better option that Cozart could visit Vongola as a friend to check up on Giotto’s situation. Don’t blame the letter, the letter said absolutely nothing of Giotto being in that battlefield. And even if that was the case, why did Cozart have to stay so long on that damn land to the point of being injured so much like that if he thought Giotto was on the battlefield? He could just… come and quick check, right?
And if Adelheid’s story was true, (at least true on the part of Cozart bringing 50 men with him) Simon Primo had brought 50 men versus an army of 20,000 people - 400 times larger than the Simon in number, let aside power. So, choose your preference. That either Simon Cozart was a war maniac or he was suicidal, or both. No other explanation.
Finally, onto the oath, which, now we can all agree that outside the purpose of binding two families together, was a completely reckless gamble with more than 70% of going so down.
Before getting in: no, I understand Cozart’s logic of suggesting the Simon “going in the dark.” Let’s keep aside the matter of him thinking for Giotto, not pushing his dear friend into choosing between him, the Simon family, and Daemon, Giotto’s guardian. Yeah, keep that aside. First, if G and Giotto chose to punish Daemon, Vongola couldn't take it. Vongola couldn’t afford for a fight within the family itself when it was at war with numerous enemies. Second, if the enemies knew Giotto sent one of his guardians - one of his most trusted people - just to rescue a family, they definitely gonna knew that this "family" must be something special. Be Vongola Primo's weakness or just a special mystery, Vongola's enemy was definitely gonna attack the Simon too. No one wanted his family being targeted like that, especially when the whole family and even the boss himself just got out of a life-and-death situation.
So yes, "going into the dark" was the most logical way to sort things out at that time. And no one could even think Daemon could live that long, more than a century. (The oath flame was NOT born to be the trump card against Daemon. Simon stated its purpose is to prove that two families had become friends again)
So yes, I understand Cozart's way of thinking about keeping quiet pretending that they all died.
But don’t misunderstand me, what the hell was the cruel fate Cozart brought into his children’s fate?
Vindice warned. That if the oath was broken, there would be fight, and they would imprison the losers 'til the day of death. Cozart was still okay with that. Even confidently let the Vindice to "free to do what they want".
This is not even reckless anymore. This is borderline crazy. (And yes I'm looking at you too Giotto, where was your hesitation moment before?)
I would not talking about how Cozart not left a note or something to warn his children that don't fight Vongola. Maybe Daemon as Julie erased it. Or it was lost in time, more than century had gone by. Either ways, in this bet, Cozart was lucky Tsuna wanted to save Enma, or else this gonna be a complete lost.
See, Simon's Primo screen time was so little but he appeared to be complete crazy and reckless. And you know what is the scariest part? That Simon Cozart inside may be completely reckless and crazy but he appeared so calm and collected. Calm and collected, as the rule of manga drawing - in eight memories, the number of times he had pointed dialogue bubbles, showing he was on high of emotion, was so few, to the point of non-existent. Even when Cozart thought Daemon's men were going to kill him, this was his words and expression:
He only raised his voice in ONE sentence. Every words other than that was spoken in such fluent and calm attitude, as the bubble dialogues were round and no words was missed.
Most of his bubble dialogues were round, showing a calm demeanour, and three times he talked the most was when he reasoning - one was to found a vigilante gang, two was the above scene when he explained why he knew of the Vongola traitor, and three was when suggesting “going into the dark.” Cozart appeared to be someone reasonable and collected, that only applied when we didn't look into his actions.
Vongola Primo was fierce. He was a blazing flame. And that blazing flame had, out of total bewilderment, shouted two times at this person's face. Not to mention being drove to speechless one. That said a lot about the level of craziness and who is more reckless than who in this relationship.
One more note: Enma definitely inherited his ancestor’s risk-taker gene.
This Simon Decimo participated in two arcs. The very debut arc, he, with six people, six CHILDREN, waged a war with the top family of the mafia world. He didn't give a damn about Vindice when Vindice entered the island. Then in the next arc, he soloed 1 vs 4 trained assassins of Varia despite being, you know, kid.
This runs in the family I stand no objections.
ellievsbear
discoholicmusic
pixelskylines
vaporwave
theartofmadeline
yousharknotpass
snowghoul
s-u-f-j-a-n-s-t-e-v-e-n-s
