Welcome back to This American Death, Multiversity’s monthly annotations column on Jonathan Hickman & Nick Dragotta’s “East of West” from Image Comics. I’ll be taking you through each issue of and explaining references, tossing out theories, and keeping track of some of the major events while giving them context. Since I won’t catch nearly everything the book has to offer and have been wrong plenty of times in my life, I’d love to see your thoughts and theories pop up in the comments section below.

Special thanks to the incomparable Tim Daniel for the great banner we’ve been using!

Don’t forget that this article is full of spoilers, so tread lightly and read your copy of the issue before reading.

East of West #15

My reading of the theme of this issue of “East of West” can be summed up beautifully with the following panel:

“East of West” #15 really only has 2 major sequences. They really couldn’t be more different, plotwise, but the subtext of “offspring” exists in both of them. As has been the case for the last several issues, we are on the dawn of a large scale war across the Seven Nations.

The first sequence is Xiaolian in PRA headquarters, preparing for battle, revealing her secret aces-in-the-hole, and reminiscing about the words of her father that she’s carrying into battle today. Why is this so significant? We discussed in earlier installments that, while Xiaolian considered her father an enemy, she is becoming more and more like him as time goes on. When her father perished and she ascended to his position, she did so at his expense, rather than in his honor. She also has different motivations for her rule, to be sure. Yet when she accepted her rightful place, some of her first words were almost identical to something we had seen her father say in a previous issue. Surely not an accident on Hickman’s part.

Here again, she actually spends much of her page time either repeating her father’s lessons or thinking on them. Is she even aware of how closely she resembles her father at this point? I think it’s fascinating, what Hickman has done here. It’s a slow-building power trip in action. Her father saw it in her, if the above quote is any indication. It’s a classic theme in literature: we become our parents without even realizing it. I wonder what Death would think of her right now.

I tried to look into “Xhing” and the quote (seen below) that the fictional Mao II is said to have liked, but nothing came up. I guess Hickman made it up, which is yet another testament to the man’s abilities, because it totally sounds like some whacked-out ancient philosophy. The world is alone in the universe – how do we know this to be true? We don’t. Where did it come from? It’s an orphan, with no mother or father and yet it became something magnificent seemingly on its own. This is how Mao II looks at Mao III. This is how Mao III sees Xiaolian. Again, the son becomes the father. That coincides with the first panel I included in the piece here, where Mao III wonders whether children truly need their parents? Just like his parents before him, he sees his own daughter grow defiant and independent beyond his control and seems troubled by it. And look where Xiaolian is now.

The rest of the issue takes place in and around the lair of “The Beast”, and quite frankly gives us a hell of a lot of insight into the nature of his character, in addition to playing around with the subject of “offspring” again. First, let’s get to know the little guy some more:

Up until now, the 4 Horsemen were the seemingly unstoppable forces of nature to be feared in the world of “East of West.” I believe that what Jonathan Hickman is very clearly trying to accomplish in this issue is to establish The Beast as something far more fearsome than we’ve yet seen. He pits them against the 3 horsemen that have been traveling together. It’s worth noting that they have spent the last couple issues, including this one, taking The Beast pretty lightly – planning its death with a skip in their step. That turns out to be a huge mistake, as The Beast has already figured out that he only has a 2% failure rate in getting out of this situation he’s in.

Continued below

This tells us a few things about The Beast. He’s cold and analytical – we already knew this. But he still shows human tendencies, even if they’re incredibly guarded and come from a place that he probably doesn’t even recognize. Perhaps I’m reading into this part too deeply, but he’s given the statistic of a 2% probability of death. These are staggeringly good odds that anyone would take in any sort of scenario. 98% success might as well be a statistical certainty. Yet, he can’t help but say to himself: “I died roughly 3,000 times.” The actual bulk number of deaths only depends on the number of times the simulation was run. The fact that it was 3,000 is very small relative to the far greater number of times he must have survived that scenario. Someone who knows basic stats knows that the percentage is really what matters in a probability scenario. It is very human to feel the weight of the number of deaths in a scenario where the bulk of them (98%) were survivals.

But aside from that, he’s incredibly pragmatic. He sees Conquest as weak. Despite ages and ages of battles waged in the world, “Conquest” metaphysically present at every one, The Beast only sees the ones that Conquest has kept alive. No doubt he sees this as a weakness (ironic – considering he ends up leaving them alive), along with the other “motherly” weaknesses he notes. Another reference to the usefulness (or weakness and perceived lack of usefulness, of needing a parent).

Beyond being merely physically and mentally powerful, he’s also got the advent of technology on his side – tapping into the Union grid and launching some nukes from their base (much to Antonia LeVay’s delicious dismay). By now, Hickman has presented him as an imposing figure in nearly every facet, able to act as a more than worthy foe for the 4 horsemen, and an agent of chaos in a burgeoning war. All in the guise of a precocious – aw hell, downright adorable – kid.

His trusty Balloon suggests the name “Babylon”, which carries more biblical implications with it than Led Zeppelin songs contain “Lord of the Rings” references. Thankfully for this column and my fading ability to write coherently, Balloon pretty much straight up explains “what” it means to be called Babylon. Babylon was not literally someone’s name, but take what the balloon thing says literally as far as an explanation goes. It’s worth noting that Balloon’s story ties into the issue’s greater theme. “Babylon” was said to be an orphan of sorts, with no known origin. The same was said of the world in Xhing’s quote. In fact, in some interpretations, “Babylon” actually means “the world”, so Xhing and Balloon are talking about the very same thing.

For The Beast, “the world” has awfully big shoes for him to fill. And if the end of the issue is any indication, like Babylon, The Beast intends to build a world to his liking – letting nothing stand in his way. But as Xhing’s poem said “look how high she rose before the fall.” Another interesting twist could be in reference to the “Whore of Babylon” – the biblical “mother of prostitutes and abominations of the Earth.” Is The Beast the “Whore of Babylon” – an abomination whose rise will be soon met by a fall?

Previous Issues: #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10, #11, #12, #13, #14