Death Note was (like for many others) one of my first anime experiences ever. The core dynamic between Light and L had me completely hooked the entire way through, but I found the second half to be severely lacking to the point of genuine hate growing for that portion. About 8 months or so back, I decided to give the manga try (having been about 4 years since first watching the anime) and re-evaluate my thoughts on Light's journey at creating an "ideal" world. Now, finally putting the journey to rest, my opinions have evolved into something much more convoluted then I could have imagined.
Perhaps unfair to the series, but for me to really explain my thoughts, I need to view Parts 1 and 2 as separate entities to first lay out my thoughts. Despite my opinion evolving, there's undoubtedly a difference between the two present for me still.
Light Yagami is genuinely one of the most intriguing protagonists I have yet to experience so far in animanga. From just the first few chapters of the series, Light never changes his ideals, philosophical viewpoints, and means of action. By establishing himself as the God of the "New World" he is to create, he creates a level of consistency in his actions that serves as an incredibly solid foundation for the moral conflicts that serve as the main "food for thought" of the series. At the same time though, there's never a moment to easily predict his next action. It's an absolutely perfect balance of execution that only works as well as it does thanks to his rival L, who's similarly fascinating in his background. A lot of similar points I've brought up regarding Light are also applicable to L; there's an argument to be made for L's questionable morals and drive for HIS justice. In the end, when all is said and done, this battle between the two is nothing more than a game for both of them, and never really forces the reader to pick a side. The definition of what it means to truly be just simply does not exist in this world, and it's for the reader to interpret and figure out that answer. Defending an aspect of one character's morals doesn't negate their other actions though; by having the main character be the "worse" character out of the rivalry clearly establishes the fact that there is a line drawn to some extent by the mangaka. That level of ambiguity though is the core of Death Note's specialty, and what I still value the most out of the experience.
It would be a disservice to ignore the impeccable art that the manga version also applies though. It's incredible to believe this is the product of a weekly shounen jump series. The western inspiration for the noir/crime comic artstyle is clearly present and mixes perfectly well with the more Japanese-inspired character designs. It allows for character emotions to be delivered in such a visually expressive and unique manner; while dialogue is a big hint towards how Light is usually feeling, the use of shading is brilliantly applied to show the reader which side of Light we're looking at in any given moment, just from visuals alone. The use of biblical imagery is simply the icing on top of the cake; it's a shame that the anime didn't make a stronger push to apply it more often, because it's such an important core to Death Note's identity. I simply can not gloat more about how much I loved its art.
This is unfortunately where the "ideal" image that the mangakas had for the series blossoms into a product much more troublesome. With how dialogue heavy the series is, there's bound to reach a point where the plot begins to take a hit in pacing and feels more like trudging through a muddy pit to reach the finale. Too many moments, such as Light's memory loss period, became an absolute bore to get through. It's also where the cracks in L and Light's seemingly perfect dynamic began to show.
What is it that makes L and Light's dynamic so compelling? As said earlier, the similarity in morals, lack of right/wrong answers, and the "game-like" structure employed. A lot of these defining points though can purely be boiled down to a conceptual understanding of the characters and their usage though. While these are incredibly profound themes to explore, the dialogue and actual story beats taking place between the two is what the majority of your experience plays out to be though. As I kept reading though, I couldn't get past the point that the plot only progressed in the interesting manner it did because of one critical aspect - both characters are always on the same wavelength of thinking. And if they aren't, it's for short bursts of moments that are soon very quickly patched out. This is a double edged sword - for one, it makes whatever slip up that eventually takes place to make one "beat" the other all that more satisfying. On the other end, it takes away from the cleverness of the writing so much. I loved scenes like their tennis match so much until I began this core component. Are these scenes really that special when for the most part are designed like "One character is presented with a challenge or way to overcome the obstacle, and the other character thinks the exact same thing but the opposite to what the other character plans on doing". You could argue this is even more egregious in the second half when there were simply too many moments where it felt like both characters lacked a unique perspective on the situation and it simply boiled down to "I know what you're thinking, and I'm going to win", for their to only be a handful of times where they differed. It comes off as completely unrealistic and I'd go as far as to say lazy at certain points. This is something I could see my perspective changing on, but at the moment, it makes me feel like I'm being tricked by the reader to think how "clever" and "smart" the dialogue is, when in actuality, isn't truly written that way.
To best end my thoughts off, I need to talk about the second part. I think for the most part (besides the "boring" portions happening way more often here than in the first part, and way more instances where the plot fails to progress in an impactful manner) I liked it a lot, and seeing the downfall of Light felt realistic and incredibly well capped off with the finale.
There's one thing that hasn't changed in my mind though since the first viewing - I still believe that the series would have fared better by ending off with L's death and for Light to win, and it really boils down to one particular grievance. It's not that I believe Light losing to be unrealistic - the complete opposite in fact. At the same time, Light winning fits within the themes of the story in an equally realistic way, so that's not really the issue here. It all boils down to the existence of Near and Mello.
I don't think Near and Mello are particularly bad characters, and I don't think they can be boiled down to simply "L 2.0" (They have SOME unique aspects to differentiate the characters enough). L and Light's dynamic was only so interesting because of the stakes that existed. It truly was the battle between two God-like figures; the winner of the battle was going to be the savior of the world. So when one of the opponents finally comes out victorious, what does the plot decide to do? Introduce a school designed to create the next L's of the world that was not once mentioned through the entirety of the first part. Why do stakes even exist if there's an ENTIRE school of potential L successors that when banded together have the power to defeat arguably anyone that stands in their way?
Does it ruin the plot? Far from it. But does it take so much away from the anticipation and high stakes that arguably make Death Note in the first part what it is? Absolutely.
There's a lot more that could be discussed with Death Note, and despite my harsh critiques towards the end, it's impossible for me to doubt the enjoyment I was able to muster out of the text until the end. There are critiques I could see myself changing my opinion on in the future (Like my issues with how the dialogue/scenes between Light and L aren't as clever as they make themselves out to be), but I'm severely disappointed with the potential that's lost with the existence of Near and Mello's characters. At the least, when all is said and done, Ryuk is a pretty cool character though.
