ok so i talk a lot about how gay berserk is but i tend to qualify that as my author is dead opinion regardless of miura’s intent which could be anything yadda yadda yadda, and like i exaggerate a lot too and deliberately find subtext that I don’t think is intentional. and like eg when i wrote that big gay analysis I was v careful to say that I’m making no guesses or assumptions about Miura’s intentions.

but yk what i do have some thoughts on Miura’s intent, especially right now after seeing a few ppl in succession complain about how berserk isn’t gay omg, so here’s what i genuinely believe. i’m not saying this is like, 100% inarguable truth lol, this is theorizing, but this is my earnest belief, like, if you asked me my real opinion on Miura’s intent wrt the gay content, this is it:

I think Griffith is absolutely intented to be read as gay, or at the very least in love with and sexually attracted to Guts.

I also think Serpico is intended to be read as gay for that matter though it’s much less relevant and I’m more tentative about this. Like I def get gay vibes from him and fully expect him to never exhibit sexual interest in a woman but I also wouldn’t be too surprised to be proven wrong.

And I think the undertone of sexual desire wrt Guts’ feelings for Griffith is very intentional. I don’t think the general Berserk audience is meant to read Guts as anything other than heterosexual, but yeah I think the gay subtext applies to him as well, purposefully. I think Miura’s intention with that was to a) heighten the intensity of his relationship with Griffith, both friendship and enmity, and b) add to the sense of missed opportunity in the griffguts relationship.

And yeah speaking of, I think the relationship between Guts and Griffith is purposefully layered with romance and suggestions of physical attraction. I don’t think Miura intended it to, say, the degree I wrote about in my giant gay analysis, but I definitely think a lot of it is intentional.

The visual chemistry and romantic atmosphere in certain scenes like the “do I need a reason” scene. The homoerotic tension of their first duel, commented on by the characters. The parallel to the Count and his wife. Casca very nearly telling Guts that Griffith is in love with him several times of course. Casca and Guts’ early relationship having suggestions of romantic rivalry for Griffith. Certain aspects of Guts’ romantic relationship with Casca, eg the way their sex scene parallels significant moments each of them had with Griffith (the final duel in Guts’ case, trying to comfort him in the river in Casca’s). Griffith thinking about Guts while fucking Charlotte. The sensuality of Griffith’s resurrection and Guts’ reaction to it. The extremely suggestive language the hound uses while goading Guts about his “longing for” Griffith.

Like here’s the thing: Guts and Griffith’s relationship and history of betrayal is introduced to us through a parallel to a dude and his wife. 10 minutes after they meet properly for the first time Guts asks if Griffith is gay and Griffith doesn’t answer. Their subsequent duel is extremely deliberately homoerotic and Guts offers himself sexually to Griffith if he loses. A couple chapters later he walks in on Griffith naked, stares at him, then two of their most influential moments follow with Griffith still naked – the waterfight when they start to bond, and Griffith’s imperious speech about his dream. Casca is canonically jealous of Guts’ relationship with Griffith because she has a crush on Griffith. They both have non-consensual traumatic sexual encounters with other men in their histories. Guts’ trauma is referenced when he first meets and duels Griffith in his offer of sexual slavery to him, and Griffith’s trauma is revealed in the same sequence that Casca reveals she’s jealous of Guts and nearly says that Griffith is in love with him directly, which ties those experiences to their current relationship, colours it, and explains why these dudes are so fucking repressed about it.

Berserk is, imho, largely a gay story. It’s not textually gay (except when it comes to predatory stereotypes) but the subtext is purposeful. It’s commented on by the characters. It’s almost as much a gay story as Merry Christmas Mr Lawrence (the movie I use as my #1 example of subtextual gay where the homoeroticism is both purposeful and the whole point) is a gay story. It’s not representation, it’s not all that positive, I’m not praising Miura for this lol, but it is pretty undeniably there.

If I had to guess at the author’s motives, I might hedge my bets and say the subtext is there to heighten the central relationship and make it intense and full of chemistry. Gay subtext is engaging, even when the audience doesn’t pick up on it, or flat-out refuses to. Like, there’s an old hollywood adage that if you want to generate electric chemistry between two friends you play them as lovers.

But hell, if I wasn’t hedging my bets I might just say that Miura just wanted to write a story about two dudes who love each other but are too emotionally repressed and fucked up to do anything about it, and end up destroying each others’ lives because of it, and he’s being published in a seinen magazine so it has to stay mainly subtext.

Like I don’t think the subtext is absolutely integral to the understanding of the story, but I think it exists to add more layers of meaning and more emotional resonance to it, and I honestly think it’s kind of ridiculous to suggest that it’s totally accidental (let alone not even there and solely wishful thinking).