Many believe that Monet’s apparent death scene is one of the most clear-cut cases of a character being killed in One Piece – “heart being stabbed”. I disagree with the usual interpretation of the scene in question and feel Monet’s death is one of the most ambiguous deaths in One Piece, mainly because Oda structured the scene in a way to make it appear as if Caesar had [fully] stabbed Monet’s heart, but in actuality, he only managed to graze the “block of flesh”.
If you notice the scene of Caesar lying unconscious in the chapter following the one where he attacked Monet’s heart, you notice that the item he used as a weapon is lying face up in the ground away from Monet’s heart (not lodged inside). Now why would that be the case?
I highly doubt Caesar used the item to stab the “heart”, pulled it out and then proceeded to force it into the ground next to the heart before passing out. The most logical explanation is as Caesar forced the item down onto the “block of flesh” containing Monet’s heart, it only grazed the side of the “block of flesh” causing the “block of flesh” to slide away and subsequently the item Caesar was using as a weapon ended up being forced into the ground. The “block of flesh” seems to have the quality of being squishy, so it wouldn’t be too surprising if the “block of flesh” slid forward as Caesar tried to stab it. As a result the item Caesar used got lodged into the ground as he passed out from exhaustion (and/or his injuries from Luffy).
One also has to wonder, if Oda had intended for Monet’s character to die, why not show the weapon Caesar used to attack Monet’s heart to be left lodged inside Monet’s heart? Why go out of his way to illustrate the weapon stuck in the ground face-up away from her heart as if to convey that the majority of the force in Caesar’s strike was absorbed by the ground and not Monet’s heart? Surely there must be a reason for why Oda went about illustrating “Monet’s death” scene in such a curious and ambiguous way =/.
As for why Monet coughed out blood and got knocked unconscious when her heart got stabbed, it is mainly due to the force applied to her heart exacerbated by her weakened state after her battle with Zoro and Tashigi. Law also coughed up blood and got knocked unconscious when Caesar applied force to his heart, so regardless of actual physical damage to the heart, a person can be knocked unconscious with just force:
Also regarding the lab collapsing, it wasn’t revealed whether the C-Block collapsed or not. Sure debris was falling in the scene around Monet when she collapsed but that is hardly proof that the C-Block was fully destroyed after the explosion in D-Block, plus no mention of the Shinokuni breaching the C-Block was made by Oda. From the last update of the state of Caesar’s Research Institute, C-Block was revealed to be fine by Oda.
The final state of the C-Block at the end of the events at Punk Hazard wasn’t revealed. So at this point we cannot conclusively say that the C-Block was destroyed along with the rest of the lab.
Everything about Monet’s supposed “death” is ambiguous, including the fact that her heart was left at the one place of Punk Hazard that the Shinokuni gas did not reach. This is why I want to know, if Oda wanted Monet dead, why wasn’t he more clear-cut/conclusive about her death? Why leave open the possibility of her being alive?
Additionally, the oddities and strange circumstances surrounding Monet’s character and the lack of explanation we have gotten regarding her actions and intentions could definitely use with some clarification, which would be quite hard if she were dead.
I am confident Oda just made it appear he killed Monet off when in fact he didn’t have her die.
Furthermore, if you look at all the character who died in One Piece (important or seemingly relevant characters), you will notice how Oda always has another character ready to inherit the dead characters will and carry it into the future. The words Hiluluk stated before his death echoes quite prominently with all the deaths in One Piece:
When does a man die? When he is hit by a bullet? No! When he suffers a disease? No! When he ate a soup made out of a poisonous mushroom? No! A man dies when he is forgotten!
- Gol D. Roger – Luffy
- Kuina – Zoro
- Banchina – Usopp
- Bell-mère – Nami + Nojiko
- Hiluluk – Tony Tony Chopper/Dr. Kureha
- Nefertari Titi – Nefertari Vivi
- Montblanc Noland – Montblanc Cricket
- Calgara and the Shandian Ancestors – Wiper + the Shandians
- Tom – Franky/Iceburg
- Nico Olivia/Jaguar D. Saul/Clover/Ohara residents – Nico Robin
- Yorki and the Rumbar Pirates – Brook
- Portgas D. Rouge – Portgas D. Ace
- Portgas D. Ace – Luffy/Sabo
- Edward Newgate (Whitebeard) – Marco and the Whitebeard Pirates
- Vander Decken – Vander Deckan IX
- Fisher Tiger – Jinbe/Koala
- Otohime – Shirahoshi/Jinbe
- Joy Boy – Luffy
- Scarlett – Rebecca/Viola
- Donquixote Homing and his wife – Donquixote Rosinante
- Donquixote Rosinante/Law’s parents/Lami/Flevance residents – Trafalgar D. Water Law
- Lucian/Gimlett – Senor Pink
Who would inherit Vergo and Monet’s will/remember them if they were really dead? Doflamingo? Somehow I doubt someone as selfish and heartless as him would spend his time thinking about another persons will let alone keep the memory of them alive even if they were his subordinates. Therefore, with no one to inherit Vergo and Monet’s will, the chances of them actually being dead on Punk Hazard are almost certainly zero. Oda just doesn’t cold-heartedly kill off characters, it isn’t his style, there is always a ray of sunshine waiting to illuminate a tragic moment.
>>Evidence against Monet being dead