1. Anchalee June Bloxham
Rashomon Essay
To what extent do you agree with the views of either Errol Morris or Roger Ebert
with regard to their views of truth and perception in the film Rashomon?
Sensation and interpretation are the two elements in which perception is composed of
which facilitates us in figuring out whether something is true or false in the real world. Therefore
perception is defined as the awareness of things through our five senses; sight, sound, touch,
taste and smell in which enable us to feel the world and interpret the things we perceived. Due to
the inaccuracy of our senses, the definition of truth differs. Roger Ebert holds an absolutist
viewpoint of truth, whereas on the other end of the spectrum, Errol Morris believes strongly that
there are multiple truths where he claims truth is relative and perception is subjective. Ergo, the
two film critics analyze the Japanese film, Rashomon, by Kurozawa differently. Ebert is more
lenient with the fact that since each individual’s interpretation varies, truth can change but
Morris believes that there is only one absolute truth since there is only one reality. However,
Roger Ebert’s analysis of subjective truth surpasses and seems to best fit with the incident in
Rashomon.
In the film Rashomon directed by Akira Kurosawa, four different stories for a murder
were told from four different people who witnessed or were involved in the crime. As the
audience views the flashbacks of each of the four stories, we can’t help but wonder which story
is true since they’re all different. For example, as brought up during the trial that the dead
husband’s word should be the most reliable since a dead man has no reason to lie, but that end up
not being the case through the woodcutter’s version because the husband lied to protect his
dignity. Another example is the woodcutter’s version that even though the audience expects it to
be the truth since the incident is told in third person point of view without any involvement, the
woodcutter lied because he does not want to be blamed for stealing the dagger. It becomes more
difficult to contemplate the truth of each story while each character is interrogated about the
crime. As a result of the different eye witness testimonies, there never seems to be a certain
answer at the end of the film.

2. Errol Morris argues that no matter how an individual interprets something, there can only
be one absolute truth. This interview by Morris clearly states that Rashomon is “not a movie but
the subjectivity of truth” and that “people see the world differently”, in another word, truth is
relative and thus all witnesses are at fault for changing the testimonies (Morris). Therefore,
Morris shares the same view of absolute truth as Plato. Due to this analysis, Morris goes by the
theory of scientific realism where reality exists independently from our senses (van de Lagemaat
100). Scientific realism is evident in Rashomon that despite the different testimonies, there is
actually one event that happen which exits independently of any interpretations made by the
witnesses (van de Lagemaat 94). Audiences make a connection between Morris and the
woodcutter where they both refuse to believe in the four different accounts told of the same
incident. Nevertheless, Morris’s absolutist view of truth can only be used to explain a limited
aspect of Rashomon, thus Ebert’s viewpoint better fit the movie with more clarity.
On the other hand, Roger Ebert believes that truth is subjective and so we accept multiple
truths. The first line said in the film was “I just don’t understand” said by the woodcutter
demonstrates that he is puzzled about all the different testimonies given (Rashomon). This is
because the four witnesses assume that what they saw was reality when in fact, they reflect on
individual’s mental map (van de Lagemaat 5). Ebert comments that “flashbacks do not agree
with any objective reality” basically means that all the accounts do not really reflect what
happened (Ebert). A very interesting point that Ebert made in his Rashomon critic that connects
to other theories are confirmation bias and false empiricism whereby “They [humans] cannot talk
about themselves without embellishing” (van de Lagemaat 14 and 86 / Ebert). Lastly, Ebert
emphasizes unconscious interpretation and perception, especially that our subconscious mind
usually exclude minor details which could ultimately be useful or significant.
With the two opposite criticisms of truth and perception, Roger Ebert’s interpretation best
explains perception and truth in Rashomon. However, Ebert’s interpretation could not be easily
understood and supported without Morris’s point of view also because Morris’s belief of
scientific realism helps individuals understand that only one reality exists. It is clear that there is
one reality which is that the husband was murdered. Though, how do we know if these eye
witness testimonies depict the truth? Since we do not know the absolute answer, it is better to
accept Ebert’s viewpoint due to his flexibility where individual’s mental maps, confirmation bias

3. and false empiricism are taken in account. Because all of the characters in the Rashomon, the
husband, wife, bandit and the woodcutter claims to murder or is indirectly the cause of the
murder itself, they are not necessary lying but basically just telling what they perceived of the
incident. As a result, there is only one reality for an event but various truths depends upon each
individual.
In conclusion, Roger Ebert’s viewpoint on truth and perception provides the best
explanation for the audience for Kurzawa’s movie, Rashomon. However, this does not mean that
Errol Morris’s ideas are unsupported because his absolutist idea helps enhance us in the
understanding of truth and Ebert’s point of view. Ebert’s idea can also be apply to real life better
than Morris’s because Ebert’s version of truths helps us live with other people with fewer
conflicts. This is because we, humans, have limitations and thus cannot perceive the world and
all around us from every perspective without bias or personal reasons. Therefore, we have to
approach situations in life with open-mindedness and counter belief or argument.