[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations [Archive] - Page 118

Kealym

2012-06-22, 21:09

Did anyone also notice in Ep 7 George was the only one who Will didn't use his ability on.
Well, he didn't use it all, almost. Only used it Jessica on accident - I assume Bern pushed a button somewhere because she enjoyed that part of the story. XD

The only incident I can think of happening the same day if Battler didn't return would be Shannon, George and Kanon's sudden disappearance or something. After all, Yasu had already decided to accept George's proposal. Then again, we can't be sure if she intended to confess the truth about her\himself or not. Either way, even eloping with George bore the risk of bringing about an unpleasant outcome.
So, about the day'
1. Battler returns in 1985, she isn't too serious with George yet. No drama.
2. Battler returns in 1986, lolexplosion.
3. Battler returns in 1987, she's already married to George. No drama.

Do note that all endings end in an exchange that goes like "What about Jessica?" "...what about who?

Also, I believe Ryu said in an interview once that Shannon wasn't really going to "confess" anything, per se', but rather ... let George inevitably figure it out. The part that makes you go "aww" is that she really really really worried about it, but Ryu claims George probably wouldn't have minded. And they would adopt or something, I guess.

We have to remember that this is not the only thing that was given a deadline by 1986.
The death of Kinzô would have also come to light and it would surely at least have led to a scandal. Maybe people wouldn't get killed over it, though I wouldn't bet my money on anybody from that family if it came to that, but at least there'd be an "incident" to speak of. Probably the family would have covered up Kinzô's death either way, because their share of the inheritance would have been in danger...

Oh my, speaking of inheritance, there was none without the gold. Krauss' investments basically left the household broke if not in serious debts. Making it appear as if Kinzô died would have been the only way to collect any life insurance and escape that situation in case no gold was found.

We have to remember that at least Eva and Kyrie already suspected Kinzo's death during the conference in '85. There is no way that they would have let this situation of not being able to meet with him slide way after '86.

Well, putting aside that 1986 isn't really a "deadline" for exposing Kinzo's death, it's as you say - the siblings are pretty much willing to ignore Krauss's crimes if he'd acquiesce a bit with his attitude. It's also my opinion that when Krauss is described as broke, he's being called broke relative to how wealthy the family USUALLY is. I mean, he still has enough money to pay 7-ish servants, maintain the house, and put on some superficial airs, presumably.

GuestSpeaker

2012-06-22, 21:18

also come to light and it would surely at least have led to a scandal.

Except the scene with Claire and Will doesn't really seem to be talking about that, it seems more personally related to Claire.

it's impossible to get away with it.

Unless there actually was a (highly unlikely) mass murder, in which case they totally did. Though a theme from almost all four first games is that the killer can only get away with something like this is if they are thought to be dead, or actually are dead.

So much detail on Beato getting those two to comply with her plans

Very much needed info, when you take into account their personalities and situation.

Asuka0NK

2012-06-22, 21:51

Well, he didn't use it all, almost. Only used it Jessica on accident - I assume Bern pushed a button somewhere because she enjoyed that part of the story. XD

What I mean is that George is the only cousin who Will doesn't use it on accident or not. He used it on both Maria and Jessica but not George.

GuestSpeaker

2012-06-22, 22:03

On an unrelated note, there is a theory I have been tossing around but haven't developed yet. I don't know if it has bee said yet, but in terms of what Angie read in the diary I still think there are more things it could contain than her parents being the killers. Yes we've all mentioned truly knowing no-one would come back, and I'd even thrown in knowing nothing, but I think it doesn't have to say her parents started killing people to say the incident was her parents' fault.

We know Kyrie and Eva suspected that Kinzo was dead, and in most games the siblings make an evil extortion/money grab plan that sort of goes badly (I'm looking at you episode 7), and we also know that Eva still seems to feel pretty guilty about the whole incident. So basically I am saying I wonder if the book mentions that Kyrie and Rudolf's money grubbing plan didn't lead to the incident? Maybe the plans did involve Battler and the epitaph, and maybe they all ended up in the gold room. Maybe Battler (often being shown as disgusted by greed in general in a few episodes) walked out with/without Shannon. Why Eva would be the one to go looking for them is the only thing I can't quite swing, so probably she didn't.

Asuka0NK

2012-06-22, 22:28

There is another thing I've been wondering. Has anyone noticed that the 3 Beatrice's names spell out Evangelion. I wonder if this has any meaning or if it is just a coincidence.

AuraTwilight

2012-06-22, 23:13

It's a coincidence. Ryukishi has himself stated he didn't notice it.

Wanderer

2012-06-23, 00:20

AuraTwilight

2012-06-23, 01:32

Clearly Kyrie was practicing self defense and George was upset that she had figured out his murderous scheme.

GuestSpeaker

2012-06-23, 02:06

Well, you remember all the scenes that appeared when Ange reads the Book of Single Truth

Sadly I do not. Not even a little bit. Except for the goats in the school girl outfit that is.

Jan-Poo

2012-06-23, 03:51

I think it was Jan-Poo who posted the original sequence... or maybe it was someone else.

It was me, but good luck finding that slideshow...
each frame can be easily extracted from the graphic files of the game though, you don't even need to look into the script.

Wanderer

2012-06-23, 04:34

Actually, the post was easy to find after putting the right words into google:

I don't know if someone already made this

Anyway I put together the various frames that are shown when Ange reads Eva's diary in EP8. I included also the frames that still appear in the code, and still exist among the graphic files, but that were later removed.

Note that all of these are already bmp you can find in the game, they aren't screenshots I made.

http://boonce.org/up/ichinarishinjitsu.jpg

Drifloon

2012-06-23, 05:15

Hm...is it just me or are all the removed ones actual screenshots from EP7 tea party?

Edit: Actually, the first one is from the main EP7...and it's from before the portrait was put up. How strange.

haguruma

2012-06-23, 05:43

So, about the day'
1. Battler returns in 1985, she isn't too serious with George yet. No drama.
2. Battler returns in 1986, lolexplosion.
3. Battler returns in 1987, she's already married to George. No drama.
[...]
Well, putting aside that 1986 isn't really a "deadline" for exposing Kinzo's death, it's as you say
I think it's not that hard to actually call it at least a symbolical deadline. The siblings practically said during their meetings that they wouldn't let this conference go by without knowing the true condition of Kinzô. This pretty much makes October 6th the final due-date for the revelation of Kinzô's death.

All in all you could probably add these things to the list.

1. Battler returns in 1985: Shannon hasn't bonded with George enough. She would probably have given up "Shannon" and "Kanon" for Battler, leading to probably a negative reaction from at least George, as Jessica had not really decided on "being interested in Kanon" yet.
She is already in possession of the gold and has knowledge of the bomb but has not tested the explosives yet (this is given as December 1985 in the anime), which might indicate that she had no intention of using the bomb then.
The siblings find Krauss' and Natsuhi's behaviour suspicious and if Battler (maybe with Yasu's help) solved the epitaph, the scheme sorrounding the cover-up would be blown.
"Beatrice" plays her little mystery game which might get out of control as it apparently did in 1986, though the pressure because of the doubt about Kinzô isn't that big yet, there is not that much pressure from George and Jessica and many of the financial situations of the siblings have not yet reached the point of total collapse.

2. Battler returns in 1986: The situation as presented.

3. Battler returns in 1987: Feelings for Battler in the form of "Beatrice" might resurface if he actually returned to the island, which would lead to her wanting to play her mystery game despite being already with George.
Though this doesn't seem to make much sense because wasn't it elaborated that she would actually kill off her feelings for anybody else once she had that little trial of lovers thingy in her heart?!

What's bothering me right now is, what was actually meant with "Battler returning 1 year later"? Because it was made pretty clear that 1986 would be the last family conference for many reasons, even without Battler's immediate presence.
Okay, this means that there would be no explosion without Battler. But does that also mean that nobody solved the epitaph without Battlers presence? This would pretty much imply that it was him who solved it, wouldn't it?! Okay...there was n Beatrice mystery game if Battler didn't return so nobody felt pressured to solve it...but still Kinzô's death would have been known and there would be no further need for any family conferences.

It's also my opinion that when Krauss is described as broke, he's being called broke relative to how wealthy the family USUALLY is. I mean, he still has enough money to pay 7-ish servants, maintain the house, and put on some superficial airs, presumably.
I think Ryûkishi actually meant to imply that the whole family was in the exact sense of the word not only broke, but in terrible debts.
Look at real world rich people. Many can go by for some years without even themselves noticing that they are actually not only out of money but already in debts. Krauss put all of Kinzô's money into those highly risky projects, none of which payed off (if they were even real in the first place) and isn't it even implied that he sold shares of the island due to his resort project? And the other siblings aren't off that much better, with Rosa's company probably being in the red numbers from the very beginning, Hideyoshi's company being pretty much out of his control (and Eva being without working experience) and Rudolph also pretty much implied to have debts in the wrong places.

It's also told that in the aftermath of the Rokkenjima incident Eva was first pretty much broke and had to sell most of Kinzô's possession's before she got into money again (probably life and property insurances being paid only after it was "proven" to be an "accident").

I really think their situation was a lot more dire than what we could assume by their "everyday behaviour".

GuestSpeaker

2012-06-23, 06:41

Does anyone know where George is in the removed shot?

It would be truly interesting to know what story Ryu meant to tell with those images

Jan-Poo

2012-06-23, 06:54

Does anyone know where George is in the removed shot?

It would be truly interesting to know what story Ryu meant to tell with those images

The background is at least as old as EP2, it is used for when characters are in the path between the Mansion and the chapel.
It makes sense in that context, but it isn't clear why George is there.

Also what's with the master key image? In theory this slideshow depicts the adults going for the secret room with the gold, there's no need for keys unless...

unless they used the service door to the underground which was hinted to exist somewhere. And that would mean they didn't actually solve the epitaph?
I wonder...

Golden Bug-Hunter

2012-06-23, 08:19

What's bothering me right now is, what was actually meant with "Battler returning 1 year later"? Because it was made pretty clear that 1986 would be the last family conference for many reasons, even without Battler's immediate presence.
Okay, this means that there would be no explosion without Battler. But does that also mean that nobody solved the epitaph without Battlers presence? This would pretty much imply that it was him who solved it, wouldn't it?! Okay...there was n Beatrice mystery game if Battler didn't return so nobody felt pressured to solve it...but still Kinzô's death would have been known and there would be no further need for any family conferences.

Well, here's my interpretation.

No one was that upset about actually concealing Kinzo's death. As long as they get the money to save them from their own misfortunes, the other siblings aren't really that mad about the embezzling either. It is possible that without Battler around to inspire a mystery, Beatrice would be less interested in performing the full Epitaph ceremony and just go for a few magical disappearances and the challenge of fulfilling the riddle. A scenario where Beatrice Onikakushis Kinzo and either Shannon or more likely Kanon and leaves a note 'Since I'm a free agent now, if you can solve the riddle I'll make a new contract with you and give you ten tons of gold.' In that scenario, even if the siblings find the gold there's no pile of guns nearby so they can argue and yell and fight it out until someone finally smarts up and suggests some good ideas.

Afterwards, well, they're still a family and there's still a lot of gold sitting on the island that will take time to convert and distribute, so they will probably still have family meetings and in a much more cheerful mood, but maybe not conferences in early October since going in typhoon season is a pain and in a more modern world that messed up seating chart and hierarchy has simply got to go.

GuestSpeaker

2012-06-23, 08:33

It makes sense in that context, but it isn't clear why George is there.

He certainly doesn't seem happy to be there does he? I wonder if that is his "my fiancee is a liar" face.

the service door to the underground

It might explain the almost resigned looking Shannon (giving an explanation?) in the weird place.

GuestSpeaker

2012-06-23, 08:39

Also now I really can't wait to see what maga ep 8 does with all this.

Wanderer

2012-06-23, 11:36

Did I sound snippy earlier? If so it wasn't intended.

(I had meant to reply to this earlier...)
No, of course not. You're overthinking things.

Also what's with the master key image?

Yes, I find this perplexing as well.

He certainly doesn't seem happy to be there does he? I wonder if that is his "my fiancee is a liar" face.

I'm inclined to think it's his "mother, I'll marry who I want" face. It's supposed to be Eva's diary, after all.

Drifloon

2012-06-23, 12:43

Seriously, that screenshot is straight from the EP7 tea party. It's right before George is shot by Rudolf. You can see it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQ97g2SMY7c&feature=relmfu

Jan-Poo

2012-06-23, 13:58

that's not the only one, several "screenshots" are taken directly from the folder meant for the music box. Starting with the sky after Beatrice's portraits till the screenshot of George, they all come from there.

GuestSpeaker

2012-06-23, 23:53

I was reading the umineko wiki (I know, a dubious source) and it had this to say about Natsuhi in game 7:

The arguement became very heated and Eva tries to convince everyone that they already have enough money on the cash card. Natsuhi becomes frantic and runs at Eva who accidentally shoots her in the head, hitting her eye, starting the massacre shown in the Tea Party stated to the be result of the 3rd game with red truth by Bernkastel.

Does anyone remember it saying that was the result of the third game? When would that have even occurred?

Not that any of us seem to quite get that game....

Asuka0NK

2012-06-24, 02:00

I was reading the umineko wiki (I know, a dubious source) and it had this to say about Natsuhi in game 7:

Does anyone remember it saying that was the result of the third game? When would that have even occurred?

Not that any of us seem to quite get that game....

Sorry about that I fixed it. People tend to add interpretations as facts on the wiki. If you find anymore errors please inform me. I really want to make the wiki as accurate as possible.

Also has anyone heard of the Rosorgejo theory or whatever you call it?

Finally did anyone ever figure out what the magic circles mean't because I think I have a theory but I don't know if it's true.

GuestSpeaker

2012-06-24, 02:58

Oh, they probably meant as it had her as the survivor, I guess in that way it could be an answer, despite not matching up to it otherwise.

The Eva page on the wiki also lists under her death status in requiem that it showed an interpretation of how she may have survived the 3rd game.

Asuka0NK

2012-06-24, 10:03

Hmmmm I guess my fellow Admin is also a user on this site since he seems to have already edited that detail. Well anyway it is fixed now.

Wanderer

2012-06-24, 16:59

Also has anyone heard of the Rosorgejo theory or whatever you call it?

Yes, heard of it. Never heard it called that, though.

It's the best theory out there if you make a few basic assumptions (namely, that red is absolute and supreme) and work almost entirely deductively from there.

But... as Renall pointed out a few posts ago, any plan to murder everyone on the island leads to a really unsatisfying motive. "Rosorgejo" theory is particularly bad in this regard because it invokes not 1, but 2 psychotic mass murderers each with independent motives. And adding an accomplice, whose motives are also undeveloped, makes it even worse.

The end of EP5 (and most of EP7) should have been enough to tell us that assigning a motive after "deducing" the culprit is the wrong approach, anyway. It makes for a "third rate motive" which in turn makes for a "third rate Mystery".

Jan-Poo

2012-06-24, 17:09

Is that the nine hours video? Is there a tl;dr version?

RandomAvatarFan

2012-06-24, 19:23

Is that the nine hours video? Is there a tl;dr version?

I do want. I can't stand the guy because he gives us a ten minute introduction on why his theory must be correct before he even tells us what his theory is.

I have a question regarding Sakutarou. I think I know the answer, but I might be remebering it wrong, so I'll ask on here.

When did Maria get Sakutarou and when did the Rosa incident occur?

I seem to remember that is happened when Maria was six or so... three years before 1986. The thing is, is that BATTLER has him in Dawn.

Why is this important?

Because it messes up what we think is Prime and/or what is in the forgeries. Or it confirms Ikuko = Yasu.

Basically, we know Ange "gives Maria Sakutarou back" in 1998. However he appears in 1986 on Dawn's gameboard. Usually we chalk this up to the fact that it is a forgery, and character development has been occurring, similar to how Shannon and Kanon are developed even in Tohya's forgeries.

But Battler shouldn't have known about Sakutarou. If Maria was older than three when Rosa gave it to her, Battler had already left the Ushiromiya. It's possible then that Battler may have recognized that his aunt's company made these lion toys, but then he still wouldn't have known what a single doll really meant for her.

One possibility is that Ikuko = Yasu, and that it may have been something that she was able to talk about. It was Beatrice that helped give Sakutarou life for Maria. But how would she bring this up to Tohya/Battler?

Another possibility is that everything to do with Sakutarou and Maria is completely fictionalized. This includes Alliance's 1998 scenes, the "Greatest Mom ever!" scenes. This destroys a lot of characterization.

Asuka0NK

2012-06-24, 20:23

Yes, heard of it. Never heard it called that, though.

It's the best theory out there if you make a few basic assumptions (namely, that red is absolute and supreme) and work almost entirely deductively from there.

But... as Renall pointed out a few posts ago, any plan to murder everyone on the island leads to a really unsatisfying motive. "Rosorgejo" theory is particularly bad in this regard because it invokes not 1, but 2 psychotic mass murderers each with independent motives. And adding an accomplice, whose motives are also undeveloped, makes it even worse.

The end of EP5 (and most of EP7) should have been enough to tell us that assigning a motive after "deducing" the culprit is the wrong approach, anyway. It makes for a "third rate motive" which in turn makes for a "third rate Mystery".

Yeah I didn't want to spell it all out and yes Jan-poo it is that 9-hour long video. I just find it a very well thought out theory but I really dislike the motives and besides the 2nd game 4-6th Twilight doesn't work because George would never kill Shannon. I personally believe in ShKanon and not just because Ryukishi07 said it I believe it because I thought it through myself.

Battler easily could've known about Sakutaro because Ange probably told him about Sakutaro and how much Maria loved the doll.

Wanderer

2012-06-25, 01:17

Is that the nine hours video? Is there a tl;dr version?

ShKanon is impossible, because it contradicts red. ShKanon is a deception by RK07, to fool everyone except those who can see through it. Shannon and Kanon really are two different people. Rosa is Beatrice. Yasu doesn't actually exist. She's fiction. Yasu is the personification of Rosa's guilt for killing Kuwadorian Beatrice. Rosa's Yasu/Beatrice persona took on Shannon's love for Battler in Rosa's own mind. Shannon does not even know this. Rosa carries out the ritualistic murders in order to resurrect the Kuwadorian Beatrice (KnownNoMore is not entirely sure to what extent Rosa literally believes this) and to get Battler's acknowledgement. She'll kill herself, too, when the time comes, or halt the murders if the epitaph is solved. Basically the motive is exactly the same as it is in the most basic of Yasu-culprit-theories. George is creepily obsessed with Shannon. George plans on killing everyone else and taking all the gold to build a life with Shannon. George and Rosa work together, but inevitably end up betraying each other. Nanjo is also an accomplice, but he doesn't ever kill anyone himself. He's in it for the money to save his sick grandchild. He is also inevitably betrayed.

That's it in a nutshell. I've seen everything he's released, so if there are any questions I can summarize his solutions and explanations for the various twilights, the logic error, the love duel, Will's answers, etc.

Drifloon

2012-06-25, 01:38

Battler knows about Sakutaro because he obtained Ange's memories when she died in EP4:

From Ange's arms that held him, ............the very painful, sad, and lonely days, ......that his little sister, who had been left all alone, had gone through...flowed into Battler......
......Because he had been playing around in a place like this, .........his little sister who had been left all alone, .........had lived through such, ............painful days............!!

Jan-Poo

2012-06-25, 01:47

[list] George plans on killing everyone else and taking all the gold to build a life with Shannon.

the 2nd game 4-6th Twilight doesn't work because George would never kill Shannon.

I suppose this means that according to the theory George killed Gohda and Shannon in EP2 and then killed himself?

That seems to contradict his very motive, unless he did so on the spur of the moment after a quarrel or it was an accident. Besides why would he care to make it look like a closed room at that point? It's not like that could have happened while Shannon was sitting in front of a dresser. Why George would place her there? And why would he choose to die in that slow and horrible way? Didn't he know that nobody is stupid enough to commit seppuku without a "helper" ready with a katana behind you?

And of course this just assumes that the explanation that Ryuukishi provided directly isn't relevant. In other words this is a prime example of "death of the author" interpretation.

bigemperor

2012-06-25, 02:20

here are the 9 hours video, it start here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHMta4YbjSM

Is amazing how deep he goes to defend his theory even quoting interviews in which r7 practically confirms shkannon and disapproves all that he says but even that he explained absolutely everything, twilight by twilligt how why who ALL, although i don't agree with him is was very entertaining to see some of his videos, i haven't see ANY fan to give away so much time to explain everything.

In other words this is a prime example of "death of the author" interpretation.

Thats the main reason why i don't like it, he even believe that everything r7 said in the interviews are tramps to misguide the readers and i believe everything r7 said in the interviews.

GuestSpeaker

2012-06-25, 03:51

Ryu would probably appreciate the irony of that.

Captain Bluebeard

2012-06-25, 04:45

Rosa is Beatrice.
Rosa's Yasu/Beatrice persona took on Shannon's love for Battler in Rosa's own mind. Shannon does not even know this.
Rosa carries out the ritualistic murders in order to resurrect the Kuwadorian Beatrice (KnownNoMore is not entirely sure to what extent Rosa literally believes this) and to get Battler's acknowledgement. She'll kill herself, too, when the time comes, or halt the murders if the epitaph is solved. Basically the motive is exactly the same as it is in the most basic of Yasu-culprit-theories.

The whole premise of this is so ridiculous that I don't know where to begin from...
If Yasu seemed far-fetched to most readers, then what would this.....In the first place, why the hell would Rosa want Battler's acknowldegment? I had watched the video in question some time ago, so pardon me if I'm wrong, but I think he argued that Rosa doesn't have romantic interest in Battler, but wants him to acknowledge her as a human being. I mean WTF man? Why would Rosa even.......care?

And of course this just assumes that the explanation that Ryuukishi provided directly isn't relevant.

And it also assumes Ryukishi07 is a dick who would happily spend four years of his life writing complete bullcrap to mislead and trick a fandom which didn't even exist before Umineko was released.

Is amazing how deep he goes to defend his theory even quoting interviews in which r7 practically confirms shkannon and disapproves all that he says but even that he explained absolutely everything, twilight by twilligt how why who ALL, although i don't agree with him is was very entertaining to see some of his videos, i haven't see ANY fan to give away so much time to explain everything.

I wouldn't say it's entertaining, it is rather a huge waste of time. Not that I have some kind of deep grudge against the guy, but making a nine hours video to explain a theory that's not even so complicated and fill in the spare time by saying the same thing a hundred times over and over again just makes one's mind foggy. Plus, he comes off as very bossy 'this might sound like blasphemy to fans of Umineko, but it's true, so if you disagree, fuck off and go play in your corner being wrong'.

There are many people, in this forum specifically, who have managed to put forward many theories, no less realistic than KnownNoMore's, in less than one page and without being 100% sure about something that's never going to get confirmed. Let's take Jan-Poo's missing candy theory for example. Of course, this was a joke theory and all, but it was fully supported as well as an actual theory would need to be, making much better use of our precious time. Why couldn't that guy do the same? Obviously because the nine hours have more prestige and plausibility.

Bottom line is, making a nine hour video analysis about a visual novel (even if it is DA UMINEKO) somehow seems to me like what a sore loser would do.

Thats the main reason why i don't like it, he even believe that everything r7 said in the interviews are tramps to misguide the readers and i believe everything r7 said in the interviews.

I agree with you there. There are tons of red herrings and false hints in the entire Umineko, but Ryukishi07 never supported them in his interviews, rather, he just limited himself to nasty implies and dirty trollings, which is a different thing, provided that all of those were dispproven later on in the series.

haguruma

2012-06-25, 04:52

What bothers me about the Rosa/George theory is that it basically stumbles at two places.
[list] Rosa's Yasu/Beatrice persona took on Shannon's love for Battler in Rosa's own mind. Shannon does not even know this.
If Shannon is not Yasu and therefore has no connection to the Beatrice's then why should Rosa take over her love for Battler? There is no indication for Rosa being motivated to do this at all, is there?!
Rosa carries out the ritualistic murders in order to resurrect the Kuwadorian Beatrice (KnownNoMore is not entirely sure to what extent Rosa literally believes this) and to get Battler's acknowledgement. She'll kill herself, too, when the time comes, or halt the murders if the epitaph is solved. Basically the motive is exactly the same as it is in the most basic of Yasu-culprit-theories.
Then what exactly was the whole finale of EP2 about in his theory?!
Rosa basically tells us that there is someone named Beatrice on the island with whom she had at least some contact during those two days and who she is angry at for apparently not showing up at an appointed time or place. And what about the escape with Maria? Is this all just due to "the crazies"?

Another possibility is that everything to do with Sakutarou and Maria is completely fictionalized. This includes Alliance's 1998 scenes, the "Greatest Mom ever!" scenes. This destroys a lot of characterization.
I think that is something that hinders many of the readers when talking about Umineko. Dividing it into fiction and reality isn't that easy I'd say...I would go as far as saying that nothing is so fictional that it is actually impossible, it's rather to be understood in terms of PROBABILITY. Everything that we are told is equally "true" in a way, it is simply just not always reality.
The scenes in 1998 are not necessarily fictional depictions given to the people of 1998 by an author, but given to us by an author. There are so many narrative layers in Umineko that saying "it's fictional therefore it does not count towards the character" is the wrong approach I'd say.
Rosa is actually the best character to show this. We have two completely conflicting ways of depictions depending on who is telling and when we are told about it. This does not make one depiction a lie, we simply have to count together the different instances and create a bigger picture from it. Rosa is the woman who went crazy over finding the gold, the woman who wanted to sacrifice herself for her daughter, the woman who hated her daughter, the woman who loved her daughter...everything.

Ryu would probably appreciate the irony of that.
It's basically a little bit of EP3-4 Battler combined with Erika :heh:

Asuka0NK

2012-06-25, 05:39

You guys have no idea how happy I am to hear people who disagree with the Rosa/George Theory. I have gone against so many people who defended this theory while I defended mine and finally people who I can agree with. I love this forum so much. I've hated the theory since I first found out about it because he didn't seem to understand the Red. It is not mean't to be taken at face value. It is mean't to be bent and try to make sense of what it means. I do however believe in ShKanon and I don't really know how people feel about it but I will defend it till the day I die.

To Driftloon. We were talking about the Prime world not the fictional world.

Jan-Poo

2012-06-25, 06:35

Bottom line is, making a nine hour video analysis about a visual novel (even if it is DA UMINEKO) somehow seems to me like what a sore loser would do.

This is actually what I would expect from a con artist, a conspiracy theorist or a religious sect missionary.
I don't mean to say that Knownomore is a con artist or that he even consciously used the same underhanded technique to make his point (I don't know). But the use of fact bombing and prolongued rhetoric with redundant repetions, introductions and selective quotations are all things that are abundantly used by the aforementioned people. It's a very well known strategy.

Captain Bluebeard

2012-06-25, 07:02

I don't think he's using any of those techniques (consciously, at least), he's just trying way too hard to sound cool, using diagrams, pictures and stuff. But what you're saying is very interesting, since the way he puts it make him look an awful lot like a conspiracy theorist, but I guess he actually is one since he's exposing the dark conspiracy of Ryukishi07's deception, finally baring him in front of the world for the evil puppet muster he really is, *cacklecackle*.

Oh, but in the beggining of his nine hour analysis he promises (or threatens?) to upload a religion/atheist video very soon, so...stay tunned. The guy has also uploaded a video called 'Denying the desirability of religion'. I mean, okay man, we get it, you're very smart and you've got a great outlook in life, stop trying to shove it down everyone else's ass through YouTube.

GuestSpeaker

2012-06-25, 07:35

dirty trollings

Having only read his interviews post-knowing answers, I can't actually really appreciate or recognise where trolls. Got any good examples?

Rosa is the woman who went crazy over finding the gold

I don't remember that OR the bit with her waiting to meet Beatrice at a specific point and time, I really need to reread ep 2.....

Wanderer

2012-06-25, 10:24

I suppose this means that according to the theory George killed Gohda and Shannon in EP2 and then killed himself?

That seems to contradict his very motive, unless he did so on the spur of the moment after a quarrel or it was an accident. Besides why would he care to make it look like a closed room at that point? It's not like that could have happened while Shannon was sitting in front of a dresser. Why George would place her there? And why would he choose to die in that slow and horrible way? Didn't he know that nobody is stupid enough to commit seppuku without a "helper" ready with a katana behind you?

He has the most trouble with this one, and with Kanon's death in EP1. For this one, he presents 3 possibilities:

1) The first is really awful- Shannon ended up learning about what George was doing and they got into a struggle (which George didn't want, obviously), killing each other simultaneously (with letter openers!).
2) The second is just like the first, except that George won the fight and killed Shannon (again, not what he wanted, and again, with a letter opener to the skull) then tried to fake his own death by faking the wound and using a "fake death drug", except that Rosa had already arranged for that drug to be poisoned so he actually died.
3) The third possibility is that Rosa actually committed the murders herself. When Genji knocked, it woke Battler from a nap, so it's possible Rosa, who had all the master keys, was off murdering while Battler was asleep. Best of the three, but it still doesn't jive well with what Will said.

The whole premise of this is so ridiculous that I don't know where to begin from...
If Yasu seemed far-fetched to most readers, then what would this.....In the first place, why the hell would Rosa want Battler's acknowldegment? I had watched the video in question some time ago, so pardon me if I'm wrong, but I think he argued that Rosa doesn't have romantic interest in Battler, but wants him to acknowledge her as a human being. I mean WTF man? Why would Rosa even.......care?

Indeed. His version of Rosa is even more batshit crazy than Yasu is in "the official explanation". Although you have to admit that Rosa shows more signs of mental instability than any other possible culprit. Certainly she shows a lot more signs of mental problems than Kanon and Shannon do.

Obviously because the nine hours have more prestige and plausibility.

I honestly think he just likes to be clear and thorough. But yeah he takes things to a level far beyond what is needed.

If Shannon is not Yasu and therefore has no connection to the Beatrice's then why should Rosa take over her love for Battler? There is no indication for Rosa being motivated to do this at all, is there?!

Not much, no. It's really all about psychological issues she got from getting Beatrice II killed. IIRC she used the idea of Yasu to try to "resurrect" Beatrice (II) and used Shannon as a kind of real life focal point for this.

Then what exactly was the whole finale of EP2 about in his theory?!
Rosa basically tells us that there is someone named Beatrice on the island with whom she had at least some contact during those two days and who she is angry at for apparently not showing up at an appointed time or place. And what about the escape with Maria? Is this all just due to "the crazies"?

It's basically the same kind of thing as when Shannon or Kanon battle Beatrice. It's metaphor, or something, where Rosa's original self is betrayed by her Beatrice self.

I have gone against so many people who defended this theory while I defended mine and finally people who I can agree with.

Really? I never thought he had that many supporters. Where are they?

Asuka0NK

2012-06-25, 12:31

Youtube mainly like whenever I post anything even remotely ShKanon I always get one of his supporters saying to me "SHKANON ISNT RAEL IT IS A LIE BY RYUKUSHI07 DUMBASSSSSSSSSSS!!! JST WATCH KNOWNOMORES VID TO NOW TRUTH!!!" of course I am exaggerating this but you get the point. I just really hate people telling me my theory is wrong when they never even took the time to actually make a theory and just blindly obeyed someone telling them what the answer so they are huge hypocrites.

Drifloon

2012-06-25, 12:37

Oh, but in the beggining of his nine hour analysis he promises (or threatens?) to upload a religion/atheist video very soon, so...stay tunned. The guy has also uploaded a video called 'Denying the desirability of religion'. I mean, okay man, we get it, you're very smart and you've got a great outlook in life, stop trying to shove it down everyone else's ass through YouTube.

It's pretty ironic, he's obviously spent a huge amount of time on Umineko but its central message of not denying other people's beliefs, however irrational, as long as they're doing nothing to harm anyone else seems to have completely escaped him, doesn't it? I guess he just holds Ctrl through those scenes since they're just useless trolling that's irrelevant to the mystery.

Actually, the more I think about it, the more I realise this guy really is like Erika. He can't handle just proposing his own theory and letting the Shkanon believers keep theirs, he has to actually say that Shkanon is a lie and present "evidence" for it (none of which actually disproves it in a convincing way, and all of which is approximately as twisted as Erika's Natsuhi culprit arguments). And from what I understand, his videos on religion are more or less equivalent to Erika crushing Maria's dreams in the name of truth.

Lady_Bernkastel

2012-06-25, 13:09

RandomAvatarFan

2012-06-25, 13:20

Yeah, I'm sorry, but once you start arguing about religion you become nothing but a douche just trying to pick a fight. And yes, I have started seeing the "You are wrong, watch KnownNoMore!" people.

We can all build our own theories. We can all disagree with each other for various reasons. We are also allowed to feel some degree of certainty in our theories. But since that certainty can never be 100%, we can't take a "my way or you're dumb" approach in arguing it.

Also, the post above is something I've struggled with too.

I think Kumasawa and Genji may have been "playing along", but as far as the rest go... maybe they were fooled like Battler was fooled into thinking they were two different people.

Asuka0NK

2012-06-25, 13:22

I'm going over theories, Ryu's answer, EPs, etc... and there's something I don't understand about the shkanon theory.
*I'll treat Yasu as a male for now.. instead of writing he\she everytime (lazy... lol).

one day Yasu 'created' the shannon personality on 1976 (the year he arrived at the mansion and started working). I guess that on some point, when he wanted the Shannon personality to actually 'interact' with other people, he also changed his looks and not just used the name Shannon.
Then the thing I don't get is - what, since then, everyone who lived in 1976 and knew Yasu as Yasu (e.g. Genji and more servants) just forgot about that kid ever existing? like, *poof* he just disappeared and there's a Shannon girl in the mansion?

Something doesn't make sense to me... Maybe there's something I just didn't get right.
anyone?

I think that Shannon is the real Yasu. We never are told Yasu's servant name but because of this we can assume the her name is Shannon. So the Shannon we see before Beatrice is created is that perfect one while Yasu-Shannon or the real Shannon is the one we see in the story that is shy and clumsy. So pretty much Shannon to them has always been a clumsy person. It's hard to put in words but I think you will get the gist of what I'm saying. Let's just say Shannon is the real Yasu with a stuffed bra.

Wanderer

2012-06-25, 13:27

I'm going over theories, Ryu's answer, EPs, etc... and there's something I don't understand about the shkanon theory.
*I'll treat Yasu as a male for now.. instead of writing he\she everytime (lazy... lol).

one day Yasu 'created' the shannon personality on 1976 (the year he arrived at the mansion and started working). I guess that on some point, when he wanted the Shannon personality to actually 'interact' with other people, he also changed his looks and not just used the name Shannon.
Then the thing I don't get is - what, since then, everyone who lived in 1976 and knew Yasu as Yasu (e.g. Genji and more servants) just forgot about that kid ever existing? like, *poof* he just disappeared and there's a Shannon girl in the mansion?

Something doesn't make sense to me... Maybe there's something I just didn't get right.
anyone?

There's pretty much no doubt that Yasu was raised female, regardless of her original sex.

I tend to think that Yasu's real name was "Sayo Yasuda" with the blessed name of "Shannon". We learned that Shannon's (first) name was Sayo, in EP2 I think, and in EP7 we learned that Yasu's name was really a nickname from shortening her last name of "Yasuda" to "Yasu".

Basically, I tend to think that to the rest of the world "Yasu" and "Shannon" really are just two different names for the same person. "Shannon" to the young Yasu, though, was an ideal person she strived to be, and one day decided to let her human self become, while letting her Yasu self become a witch. But, again, to the outside observer it was always the same person (who perhaps just started to suddenly stop being so clumsy).

AuraTwilight

2012-06-25, 13:38

Lady_Bernkastel

2012-06-25, 13:44

There's pretty much no doubt that Yasu was raised female, regardless of her original sex.

I tend to think that Yasu's real name was "Sayo Yasuda" with the blessed name of "Shannon". We learned that Shannon's (first) name was Sayo, in EP2 I think, and in EP7 we learned that Yasu's name was really a nickname from shortening her last name of "Yasuda" to "Yasu".

Basically, I tend to think that to the rest of the world "Yasu" and "Shannon" really are just two different names for the same person. "Shannon" to the young Yasu, though, was an ideal person she strived to be, and one day decided to let her human self become, while letting her Yasu self become a witch. But, again, to the outside observer it was always the same person (who perhaps just started to suddenly stop being so clumsy).

oh! now it makes sense.. then, you mean Yasu always looked like Shannon does?
But how come people just completely stopped calling her Yasu one day? the scenes from 1976 showed that sometimes they called him by the name Yasu (if I remember correctly...), but on 1986 no one refers to her even *once* as Yasu. as if there's no trace for the name (which makes you doubt whether they are really connected).

Asuka0NK

2012-06-25, 13:49

oh! now it makes sense.. then, you mean Yasu always looked like Shannon does?
But how come people just completely stopped calling her Yasu one day? the scenes from 1976 showed that sometimes they called him by the name Yasu (if I remember correctly...), but on 1986 no one refers to her even *once* as Yasu. as if there's no trace for the name (which makes you doubt whether they are really connected).

Well it's not like they just one day stopped calling her Yasu. I thought only Garashi, Sanon, and the other 2 called her Yasu because as I recall after that she is never called Yasu again. But I may be wrong.

Lady_Bernkastel

2012-06-25, 13:53

Well it's not like they just one day stopped calling her Yasu. I thought only Garashi, Sanon, and the other 2 called her Yasu because as I recall after that she is never called Yasu again. But I may be wrong.

yeah I'm not sure either... maybe you're right and it's just those specific characters who used that name...
and then those servants left, new ones arrived, Yasu was presented to them as 'Shannon', and the name 'Yasu' just disappeared. That would make sense...

Asuka0NK

2012-06-25, 14:07

Nevermind because I remember she still went by Yasu when Berune and Asune came so I think she just probably told people not to call her that once she "became" Beatrice because that is when the Yasu name stops being used and the name Shannon starts to be used.

Renall

2012-06-25, 14:41

I'm siding with Wanderer here. It's likely that her name is Sayo Yasuda. Yet another one of those things that the reader really SHOULD know, since it's probably common knowledge to all the characters.Well maybe not all the characters. Jessica acts like she doesn't know Kanon's name and so she probably would have to get him to tell her in order to know.

One would of course assume all the other servants would know Yasu's name, however. Otherwise, you know, how'd they start calling her that?oh! now it makes sense.. then, you mean Yasu always looked like Shannon does?
But how come people just completely stopped calling her Yasu one day? the scenes from 1976 showed that sometimes they called him by the name Yasu (if I remember correctly...), but on 1986 no one refers to her even *once* as Yasu. as if there's no trace for the name (which makes you doubt whether they are really connected).Taking your questions in turn:

1) No, Yasu probably doesn't look like Shannon. I'd be not the least bit surprised if she actually more closely looks like Kanon physically, particularly if she was born androgynous, hermaphroditic, or just flat-out biologically male. Shannon is a physical and behavioral ideal, and if Yasu strove to become Shannon it was most likely only in the behavioral sense. I find it highly unlikely she was stuffing her bra, unless that's just a body image issue we never got enough information on.

In the stories, that does appear to have been the case (at least if we go by Ryukishi's jokes as truth about things), but I would somewhat doubt Yasu-Prime was doing that. She was just a servant who looked different from the way she'd idealize herself to look. Either that or she was even more insecure than she already portrays herself to be, which is possible at least.

2) No one in 1986 refers to her as Yasu because none of the other Fukuin servants are on the island in 1986. Even if they do still call her that (and they may not), none of them are there to do it. One would assume she is not known by the Yasu nickname among the family, so they'd call her Shannon. Genji is a professional and would not call her Yasu anywhere anyone could see her, if he ever even calls her that at all. Gohda probably doesn't know the Fukuin servants very well and might not even know her name/nickname, so he would also call her Shannon. Nanjo and Kumasawa may know, but they have to act like they don't know because they're not "supposed" to know.

But also, all the representations of 1986 are fictional stories. The first of these written - allegedly - by Yasu herself. She's intentionally erasing herself from her own stories for a particular purpose. Thus, she doesn't want anyone calling Shannon Yasu, because in this fictional world there are two servants who represent two aspects of herself and she clearly wants them both to be happy even though she knows it isn't "really" possible. One could even argue it's authorial escapism, allowing Shannon and Kanon to both exist in some form in the story as independent personalities, even if they're the same "person" in terms of the mystery solution.

Also she's really insecure and probably doesn't mind no one noticing she's not in her own story. And part of finding the "heart" is to recognize the person who isn't there.

...But this sort of makes me wonder how stupid everyone can possibly be. I mean, surely Kanon wasn't a thing that was actually going on in real life that anybody credible among the servants believed. If you asked one of the many Fukuin servants who were still employed but not on Rokkenjima on Oct. 4-6, 1986, they would presumably tell you that in addition to Genji, there was one Fukuin servant on the island. They would know this. Or, at the very least, the way Shannon and Kanon behave would not seem "right" to them, as Shannon and Kanon are highly idealized. While Battler might not necessarily know this himself, and would have to figure it out, anybody willing to do even a tiny bit of research into the whole Rokkenjima Incident thing would have been able to talk to one of the many servants who had worked there in the early 80s.

That and, um, confirm that no such person as Kanon ever actually existed at Fukuin (which ep8 at least suggests someone may have actually done), unless Genji doctored the records. And I don't see why he would bother, since he was in control of that and probably wasn't expecting anyone to start looking into Kanon after everyone mysteriously exploded.

rogerpepitone

2012-06-25, 14:57

I'm going over theories, Ryu's answer, EPs, etc... and there's something I don't understand about the shkanon theory.
*I'll treat Yasu as a male for now.. instead of writing he\she everytime (lazy... lol).

one day Yasu 'created' the shannon personality on 1976 (the year he arrived at the mansion and started working). I guess that on some point, when he wanted the Shannon personality to actually 'interact' with other people, he also changed his looks and not just used the name Shannon.
Then the thing I don't get is - what, since then, everyone who lived in 1976 and knew Yasu as Yasu (e.g. Genji and more servants) just forgot about that kid ever existing? like, *poof* he just disappeared and there's a Shannon girl in the mansion?

Something doesn't make sense to me... Maybe there's something I just didn't get right.
anyone?

I think that it was only the other Fukuins who called her Yasu (it is portrayed as an insulting nickname), and they all decided to leave on the same day. (That's mentioned at one point in Episode 7.) After that, there wasn't anybody to tell the new servants about it.

The adult servants (Genji, Kumasawa) are shown as not being as petty; they probably never used that name. Family members probably only used her professional name and may never have been aware of the nickname at all.

RandomAvatarFan

2012-06-25, 14:59

It may just be me misinterpretting the EP7 scenes, but maybe Shannon also was someone separate from Yasu who Yasu wanted to be like. If Shannon graduated with Renon's group and Yasu turned out to be a *very* great master of disguise, then it would have went something like "I thought you left Shannon." "Oh no." As far as "Yasu" goes, she never really was thought of much. She might not have even been missed.

On the other hand, we also know that "Yoshiya" was made up. I don't quite know what the name means, but is it possible that "Sayo" is just as made up?

bigemperor

2012-06-25, 15:11

I suppose this means that according to the theory George killed Gohda and Shannon in EP2 and then killed himself?

Actually R7 answer that twilight in ther interviews.

K Still, the locked room in Natsuhi’s chamber is a special case. If Shannon actually committed suicide, there is nobody who can get rid of the weapon. If you think of Genji finalizing that, then it just happens smoothly, but…hmm *laugh*.

R7 Because we have come so far, I think I can give you an answer, though it is basically the same trick as with the well. Shannon died face down, slumped over the makeup cabinet. It’s a really simple trick. You tie the weapon to a heavy object with a string, then you throw the heavy object behind the cabinet. And then it’s the classic trick, when you commit suicide, the gun is pulled behind the cabinet towards the heavy object.

K So that’s how it went?!

R7 I thought, because you solved the riddle of the well as well, that you would get this trick without any problem. I especially wrote that she was „slumped over, face down, over the makeup cabinet“. And while the other two in the room were actually pierced by the stakes, Shannon was not. That is why you can imagine her being the last to die in that room, because there was nobody left to insert the stake into the gunwound. There was never a full inspection of that special room, so that means that the weapon was left within it.

Also another part i found very interisting about shannon

K Love is really a sufficient motive even for murder, isn’t it?!

R7 And I think people who do not know that, will sadly never understand Umineko. Because Umineko is „the story of a single girl who arrived at that point because she imagined an incident because of the love and madness in herself“, no matter how much I express that, people who don’t share that feeling will never do so. If I had to compare it, it’s similar to a kick in the crotch or menstrual pain. No matter how much more I pile up on my writing by explaining it, it won’t reach the people who don’t know the feeling. How scary must it be, to be told that your partner „wants children“, when you have a body that cannot make love. That’s why Shannon couldn’t speak honestly. Because she thought she would be hated if she were honest. But to be honest, I think if she really told him that, George would be more than happy to modify his plans for the future. But Shannon was far to scared to hear that. And if you turn this around, it means that George really wasn’t just a replacement for Battler. Maybe he was a replacement at the beginning, but at some point she began completely seeing George for the man he was. If you think about that, his comment about children, must have kept haunting her in silence.

K Then I think it is also a clue that nothing happened between them, while they were staying at the same place in Okinawa.

R7 It is a clue. To just blurt it out spontaneously was more than Shannon was ready for. „I will reveal it sometime“. Because she was so scared of herself, she couldn’t confess. If it had been because of one action that George took, she wouldn’t have had any choice, that was the balance of passivity she upheld. While she did not hide it actively, she also wouldn’t talk about it openly. Because of that thinking, going on that trip to Okinawa was an experience to her like being a carp on a high slope, „He prepared separate rooms for us *twitch*?“ *laugh*. That knightly George came all the way to Okinawa only to dare and prepare separate rooms? Shannon must have been like „What?!“. But there are many scenes like that which show how Shannon left the decision to fate. For example at the first twilight in EP1, when George was told by Hideyoshi „You should not look at this corpse!“. If he had gone in, not minding that there would be no face, he would have seen that there was no corpse. It would have meant the end of the incident. Or even if Battler had actually squeezed Shannon’s breasts, he might have noticed that they are fake. Shannon was in a state of mind that said „if it comes to light, let it“.

Asuka0NK

2012-06-25, 15:58

Yeah the guy Knownomore pretty much thinks everything Ryukishi07 says is a lie so of course he thinks that is a lie.

GoldenLand

2012-06-25, 16:22

Yeah the guy Knownomore pretty much thinks everything Ryukishi07 says is a lie so of course he thinks that is a lie.

/puts on a Beato voice.

He doesn't have enough love!

Without love, the truth cannot be seen. One has to trust in the creator of a mystery game in order to solve it. There's no need to believe in any of the reds at all if everything that Ryukishi says is a lie, let alone believe that the black text fantasy scenes or interviews are conveying important information to us. If he thinks everything Ryukishi says is a lie, every bit of information that guy Knownomore's theories rely on might as well be based on nothing.

It's useless, it's all useless, isn't it?! *cackle cackle cackle*/Ahaha.wav

(I know, some of the reds are dubious, but I do think that Ryukishi likely believes them to be legit. He may be failing to give all the right info, but isn't it true what I think Virgilia said, that although a game may be made to be solved, the person setting it may have a different idea of what is and isn't possible to be guessed?)

Renall

2012-06-25, 16:29

Hell, I have no trust in Ryukishi at all and I still believe he's sincere about what he thinks he intended to do with his own damn story. I just think his decisions are bad.

Besides, it's easier to believe he's shifty or incompetent with respect to contradicting the red than to believe the red is true and he's meta-trolling to an extent that defies all common sense.

GoldenLand

2012-06-25, 16:35

Well, yes. There are levels of trust. By this point, if the Shkanontrice theory isn't true to some degree at least on the gameboards, then Ryukishi is lying to the point where there's very little point in paying attention to anything he says. I'm not sure I trust Ryukishi to deliver a good solution (or even to deliver a solution at all...) but I would agree that he's sincere in his intentions and isn't trying to have everything he says be a lie.

Thunder Book

2012-06-25, 17:24

If Rosa/George theory is true, then what the hell was the point of Episode 7?

Asuka0NK

2012-06-25, 17:28

exactly that is another thing that makes no sense. Who would spend their precious time writing a whole entire story that is nothing but a lie. Considering also how hard making Visual Novels is why would Ryukishi waste his time writing a lie. It doesn't make any sense.

Renall

2012-06-25, 17:39

If Rose/George theory is true, then what the hell was the point of Episode 7?Well you see because EP7 almost didn't talk about Rosa or George at all that's meant to be taken as a hint that the development for everyone else is itself evidence that we must look more closely at them!

...Yeah I got nothin'.

Jan-Poo

2012-06-25, 17:51

EP7? What the hell was the point of the whole umineko.
With the Rose\George interpretation you get a story about stories just because. There is no real purpose nor a logical explanation as to why these many different fictional stories all portraying the same culprits exist.

With the standard interpretation, however, there is a precise a purpose. Each story is meant to communicate something to a precise person. In EP8 it was even stated that for Beatrice and Battler the murder mystery challenge is a way of communicating something.

Now if the purpose of the fictions was to communicate the truth of a murder, they wouldn't make much sense, because you can hardly understand the truth of a murder when the situations drastically change each different game.
But if the purpose is to communicate something that is only secondarily related to a murder mystery, then it makes sense that they are all differents. The fact that they keep changing proves that the mystery itself is not what matters, what really matters is what never changes, and that's the culprit and its reasons (plus some other details like shkanon).
And this is important because you actually a have a person (Yasu) who by mean of these fictions wants to communicate something (her love) to a precise person (Battler).
And this isn't just something that happens in the metaworld, the metaworld is like a metaphor, it needs to be based on something real before existing.

Yasu actually wanted to communicate her message through her mystery and she actually wrote those stories (the first 2 arcs plus a missing third) which had the same purpose.
And this is what Umineko is about.
Umineko is not about a culprit or two killing their family members.
Umineko is about a girl who wanted to communicate her love to a boy that she couldn't see for the last six years due to certain tragicomic circumstances. And she chose the most ineffective way to do it, because she didn't even know what she really wanted herself.

Thunder Book

2012-06-25, 17:55

...Well said, Jan-Poo.

Captain Bluebeard

2012-06-25, 18:04

Having only read his interviews post-knowing answers, I can't actually really appreciate or recognise where trolls. Got any good examples?

Um...of the top of my head, there was this thing in the EP6 interview where he said 'I think we're going to give out a pretty merciless answer in EP7', obviously indicating at the red herring in the Tea Party, wanting to make the deception more plausible (although that herring was almost screaming 'FAKE').

He has the most trouble with this one, and with Kanon's death in EP1. For this one, he presents 3 possibilities.

All three (except maybe for the third one) are terribly ridiculous. Letter openers? What is that, like, the small bombs' cousin? If so, where was the envelope, or a ton other stuff, including the fact that it's ridiculous?

Indeed. His version of Rosa is even more batshit crazy than Yasu is in "the official explanation". Although you have to admit that Rosa shows more signs of mental instability than any other possible culprit. Certainly she shows a lot more signs of mental problems than Kanon and Shannon do.

Rosa doesn't have mental problems, her behavior can be explained very easily. She does love Maria, but she just can't help being reminded by her growth that she's been abandoned by the man she loved, and being pretty young it is painful to know her love life has to end for the sake of her daughter, plus her company having all sorts of trouble, and her financial difficulties, and all of that makes her go wild on Maria. Well, she's done many inexcusable things, but I think she's sane enough, she's just way too stressed.

The Yasu theory isn't as ridiculous, because it is based on a human being who had an abnormal life and difficulties understanding itself, not even having a gender as an identity, and well, in the context of Umineko and a fictional story, if you're willing to accept some far-fetching, it's acceptable.

I honestly think he just likes to be clear and thorough. But yeah he takes things to a level far beyond what is needed.

Exactly. He's trying to impress. Being clear and thorough doesn't mean taking nine hours explaining something that could be explained just as well (if not better) in, let's say, twenty minutes at best.

Youtube mainly like whenever I post anything even remotely ShKanon I always get one of his supporters saying to me "SHKANON ISNT RAEL IT IS A LIE BY RYUKUSHI07 DUMBASSSSSSSSSSS!!! JST WATCH KNOWNOMORES VID TO NOW TRUTH!!!" of course I am exaggerating this but you get the point. I just really hate people telling me my theory is wrong when they never even took the time to actually make a theory and just blindly obeyed someone telling them what the answer so they are huge hypocrites.

Yeah, I've seen some of that happening in YouTube, god forbid if someone dares oppose that theory. It's really sad to see how people go on and accept what seems to be the 'general concesus' or an impressive theory which seems plausible just because of the nine hours duration when the series' whole point was everyone having their own truth. Of course, disagreeing with that is perfectly understandable even for those who like Umineko, and by no means does it imply one would have to enforce it in their everyday life, but saying 'I've totally nailed Umineko' by denying it's very essence, and what is more, parroting someone else's lame theory is really pretentious to say the least.

...But this sort of makes me wonder how stupid everyone can possibly be. I mean, surely Kanon wasn't a thing that was actually going on in real life that anybody credible among the servants believed. If you asked one of the many Fukuin servants who were still employed but not on Rokkenjima on Oct. 4-6, 1986, they would presumably tell you that in addition to Genji, there was one Fukuin servant on the island. They would know this. Or, at the very least, the way Shannon and Kanon behave would not seem "right" to them, as Shannon and Kanon are highly idealized. While Battler might not necessarily know this himself, and would have to figure it out, anybody willing to do even a tiny bit of research into the whole Rokkenjima Incident thing would have been able to talk to one of the many servants who had worked there in the early 80s.

That and, um, confirm that no such person as Kanon ever actually existed at Fukuin (which ep8 at least suggests someone may have actually done), unless Genji doctored the records. And I don't see why he would bother, since he was in control of that and probably wasn't expecting anyone to start looking into Kanon after everyone mysteriously exploded.

I think the answer to that would be the fact that Kanon didn't start working in Rokenjima with another batch of servants as it happened with Yasu in the beggining or is implied that usually happened, but went by himself (it's clearly stated when Shannon cooks him up). Well, I guess that might cause some slight misunderstandings with new servants who were just at the Fukuin house, but those could be overcomed somehow (but I really believe it's just a slight carelessness on Ryukishi's part).

Other than that, I don't see why the other Fukuin servants would be aware of what the shift program was at the day of the conference or why the should be able to tell you which servants were there or not. After all, since servants come and go and stay just for two years, I don't think there was any servant working at Rokenjima who had any means of supsecting Kanon wasn't really at the Fukuin house. It's a little careless of Ryukishi as I said above, but not a total screwup that can't work no matter what.

Besides, it's easier to believe he's shifty or incompetent with respect to contradicting the red than to believe the red is true and he's meta-trolling to an extent that defies all common sense.

I don't think he did it out of incompetence, he just used it in a really, really dirty way which ended up rendering most of it unreliable, because it was put there just for the purpose to make things more tricky for readers.

Well, but actually, for me, and I'm speaking only for myself now, the red made things clearer when I actually figured out the Shkanon thingy. Like, oh, yeah, that right there is a trap wanting to make you think this and that, and it sort of helped become more positive that my theory was actually right.

And by the way, KnownNoMore's 'favorite' argument about the red disproving the Shkannon theory, because of the 'people' 'bodies' 'personalities' mumbo-jumbo can easily be explained in a more rational fashioned by saying that the red is Beato's chew toy, and she can do whatever she wants with it, which I think can be supported more adequately by the actual story.

But, yeah, Ryukishi is just a doujin creator. Maybe his works can be endlessly fun to read and dangerously addictive, but no, he's nowhere close to an evil genious like that.

P.S: Wow, I really type slow....So many posts were made until I finished this wall of text it makes me feel like I'm totally coming out of the blue...

Asuka0NK

2012-06-25, 18:22

the most ridiculous part of his theory is explaining the Ep 6 Logic Error.
ShKanon explanation: After going into the closet Kanon "killed" himself and became Shannon
His explanation: Erika shot Kanon through the door.

Now I tried to go against him by saying. Erika never had a gun in her possession when she entered the mansion. Never is it mentioned she had a gun of any kind. He then responded saying that the Meta scene explains it because she shot him. So pretty much he violated Knox

Knox's 8th It is forbidden for the case to be resolved with clues that are not presented.

There is also one thing I am wondering. Isn't Erika a walking contradiction. She is able to say in Red she is the detective and also say she is the killer.

Captain Bluebeard

2012-06-25, 18:44

the most ridiculous part of his theory is explaining the Ep 6 Logic Error.
ShKanon explanation: After going into the closet Kanon "killed" himself and became Shannon
His explanation: Erika shot Kanon through the door.

The way you're phrasing it doesn't make the official solution seem less ridiuclous, but seriously, his explanation of the logic error was the first thing of his theory I had heard, and it had me holding my stomach laughing.

Seriously, how defeated would that guy feel if confronted Renall's masterpiece of a theory explaining the logic error (see:EP6 thread)?

Now I tried to go against him by saying. Erika never had a gun in her possession when she entered the mansion. Never is it mentioned she had a gun of any kind. He then responded saying that the Meta scene explains it because she shot him. So pretty much he violated Knox

Knox's 8th It is forbidden for the case to be resolved with clues that are not presented.

The guy didn't hesitate to render Ryukishi07 outright false in order for him to be right, did you think he'd be afraid of Knox? Come on now.

And by the way, let's say we accept that she shot him. WHY DUNNIT? Why the hell would Erika shoot Kanon in the closet? Or how did she know he was in the closet in the first place? Or where did she acquire the gun? Or how could she be sure that she wouldn't miss him since she couldn't actually see him?

The whole premise of this is ridiculous. But I guess KnownNoMore knows best than Knox and common sense.

There is also one thing I am wondering. Isn't Erika a walking contradiction. She is able to say in Red she is the detective and also say she is the killer.

Erika doesn't make the detective proclamation in EP6, meaning she doesn't have the 'rank' of the detective for that Episode by Knox's standards. Therefore, she can be the murderer.

Now, when she makes her self introduction and says 'I'm the detective' in red, she just states something that is true about herself, Erika is a detetective, but that doesn't really apply on the game boards and doesn't need to be thought trough to much. It's just Erika being blue.

Wanderer

2012-06-25, 19:06

All three (except maybe for the third one) are terribly ridiculous. Letter openers? What is that, like, the small bombs' cousin? If so, where was the envelope, or a ton other stuff, including the fact that it's ridiculous?

I meant that in other words they used a couple of the 7 stakes; they are in fact ornamental letter openers (IIRC...).

Other than that, I don't see why the other Fukuin servants would be aware of what the shift program was at the day of the conference or why the should be able to tell you which servants were there or not. After all, since servants come and go and stay just for two years, I don't think there was any servant working at Rokenjima who had any means of supsecting Kanon wasn't really at the Fukuin house. It's a little careless of Ryukishi as I said above, but not a total screwup that can't work no matter what.

Yes, a lot of hand waving is possible when Mr. Coverup (a.k.a. Genji) is involved.

The guy didn't hesitate to render Ryukishi07 outright false in order for him to be right, did you think he'd be afraid of Knox? Come on now.

He should since it's in red! I know he's aware that Erika in EP6 violates Knox's 1st and doesn't like it.

Asuka0NK

2012-06-25, 19:26

Ok because I was wondering about the Erika thing. Thanks for explaining it and yes it sounds ridiculous but at least it doesn't violate Knox. Now I have to go read Renall's. What page is it?
Another thing with him it is all
"The red don't agree with my theory well screw the red!"
"The Decalogue don't agree with my theory screw the decalouge!"
"Author already gave solution to the twilight......screw the author he's a liar!"

Captain Bluebeard

2012-06-25, 19:32

I meant that in other words they used a couple of the 7 stakes; they are in fact ornamental letter openers (IIRC...).

Whoopsy daisy...I feel really stupid right now, I totally misunderstood what you said. I thought.....just forget it. :heh:

Yes, a lot of hand waving is possible when Mr. Coverup (a.k.a. Genji) is involved.

He should really ask for a pay raise.

He should since it's in red! I know he's aware that Erika in EP6 violates Knox's 1st and doesn't like it.

But regardless, he can go throwing his weight around, claiming he's discovered the real solution of Umineko and stuff..

Now I have to go read Renall's. What page is it.

It's in the last two or three pages I think....Anyway, it's very close to the end of the thread so you won't have a difficulty finding it. It'll blow your mind away.

Renall

2012-06-25, 19:39

I think the answer to that would be the fact that Kanon didn't start working in Rokenjima with another batch of servants as it happened with Yasu in the beggining or is implied that usually happened, but went by himself (it's clearly stated when Shannon cooks him up). Well, I guess that might cause some slight misunderstandings with new servants who were just at the Fukuin house, but those could be overcomed somehow (but I really believe it's just a slight carelessness on Ryukishi's part).

Other than that, I don't see why the other Fukuin servants would be aware of what the shift program was at the day of the conference or why the should be able to tell you which servants were there or not. After all, since servants come and go and stay just for two years, I don't think there was any servant working at Rokenjima who had any means of supsecting Kanon wasn't really at the Fukuin house. It's a little careless of Ryukishi as I said above, but not a total screwup that can't work no matter what.Two things: It doesn't matter if any given servant is not suspicious. If someone researching the matter gets suspicious and starts looking into Shannon and Kanon's backstories, what are they going to see? Remember, even if Yasu = Sayo = Shannon in Prime, Kanon just materializes out of thin air. There is no explanation for where he was in his younger years, no one who knew him, and no evidence of his parents ever existing. Shannon might have a dodgy or nonexistent birth record, but at least people have known her for many many years and would vouch that they've known her in contexts other than working (such as school; we know Yasu went to school, but how could she do that as Kanon too?).
Are there any males at Fukuin? As far as I know, every other Fukuin servant we've ever seen is female. And even if there are males, they apparently work for the Ushiromiyas in a much lesser quantity. Kanon would be under immediate scrutiny as an unusual servant just for being a young male Fukuin orphan who hadn't been working there all that long (relative to Shannon, whose presence might make sense since she's been working there for years and years).Also, my Logic Error "solution" is here, in case you have signatures off. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zlyqr5nbw74)

Asuka0NK

2012-06-25, 20:04

Oh my gosh that was so awesome but it fell apart in the end. It is the video you are talking about right? That was perfect I never thought about that everybody was in the cousin's room besides Kinzo and those in the next room over.
I don't think Shannon/Kanon go to school anymore. I think that was just something that Genji used to get Yasu out to socialize but it didn't really work out since we never hear if Yasu ever had any friends at school.

Renall

2012-06-25, 20:12

Oh my gosh that was so awesome but it fell apart in the end. It is the video you are talking about right? That was perfect I never thought about that everybody was in the cousin's room besides Kinzo and those in the next room over.It's supposed to fall apart at the end. That's the joke.

I don't think it was intentional that Ryukishi actually meant to define "everyone else" to mean "everyone not excluded from the location check," or at least that when Erika said "else" she meant "that isn't me." The rational argument is the one Bernkastel makes immediately, that Erika clearly knows her own location. Battler's counter-argument (it's her responsibility to make sure of that) and the notion that she lacks Detective Authority and thus can't know where she is unless she's told do sort of fly in the face of it, but I prefer to think of it as an unclear statement that was clearly intended not to refer to Erika and not to refer to anyone else in the universe.

Indeed, nothing really stops a canny witch from declaring that no universe exists except Rokkenjima, since this is a fictional story about a closed-off island. Perhaps nothing exists but empty sea infinitely in all directions around the island?

Wanderer

2012-06-25, 20:16

Whoopsy daisy...I feel really stupid right now, I totally misunderstood what you said. I thought.....just forget it. :heh:

Well, they really are nevertheless quite implausible as weapons. A martial artist, especially, wouldn't waste their time trying to fight someone with a letter opener; George would be far more effective fighting bare-handed. And to the forehead? Seriously? That's the single hardest place in a person's body to stab!

Kealym

2012-06-25, 20:18

1. Battler returns in 1985: Shannon hasn't bonded with George enough. She would probably have given up "Shannon" and "Kanon" for Battler, leading to probably a negative reaction from at least George, as Jessica had not really decided on "being interested in Kanon" yet.
She is already in possession of the gold and...
Well, my problem with this part is that Yasu has no plan as of October 1985. If Battler came back THAT year, I can't imagine anything but alot of awkward blushing and shameless rom-com antics.

What's bothering me right now is, what was actually meant with "Battler returning 1 year later"? Because it was made pretty clear that 1986 would be the last family conference for many reasons, even without Battler's immediate presence.
Okay, this means that there would be no explosion without Battler. But does that also mean that nobody solved the epitaph without Battlers presence? This would pretty much imply that it was him who solved it, wouldn't it?! Okay...there was n Beatrice mystery game if Battler didn't return so nobody felt pressured to solve it...but still Kinzô's death would have been known and there would be no further need for any family conferences.
Well, it means exactly what it says - Battler returns to the family in 1987. Battler's presence may be necessary for the epitaph to be solved (Beatrice won't prompt them to do so, otherwise), but we're shown in no uncertain terms that he's the only person who CAN solve it. Even in End he'd had more than one person helping him and Gary Stu implants.
I think Ryûkishi actually meant to imply that the whole family was in the exact sense of the word not only broke, but in terrible debts.
Hmm. Yeah, I guess that does make more sense.

unless they used the service door to the underground which was hinted to exist somewhere. And that would mean they didn't actually solve the epitaph?
I wonder...
There was a service door implied? Where?
All I remember was the implication from End that one MIGHT stumble upon the entrance near the chapel by mistake, though it would be unlikely.

Yeah, I'm sorry, but once you start arguing about religion you become nothing but a douche just trying to pick a fight.
WELL. I wouldn't say that. There are very often discussions ... that should be had. It really depends on what you're trying to say and how you're trying to say it. :uhoh:

It may just be me misinterpretting the EP7 scenes, but maybe Shannon also was someone separate from Yasu who Yasu wanted to be like. If Shannon graduated with Renon's group and Yasu turned out to be a *very* great master of disguise, then it would have went something like "I thought you left Shannon." "Oh no." As far as "Yasu" goes, she never really was thought of much. She might not have even been missed.

On the other hand, we also know that "Yoshiya" was made up. I don't quite know what the name means, but is it possible that "Sayo" is just as made up?
Aura and Wanderer are on the money. Yasu never disappeared, she just accepted "being Shannon" much more fully over time. On top of the fact that 'Shannon' is never acknowledged by other people in the earliest flashbacks, I think the fact that there was another servant by the same name would have been noted by several people, since the "sacred name" is a big thing for the Fukuin kids.

...But this sort of makes me wonder how stupid everyone can possibly be. I mean, surely Kanon wasn't a thing that was actually going on in real life that anybody credible among the servants believed.
It's hard to say, because though it's implied by the goats in EP8, "Kanon is an ILLUSION!" is immediately followed by "Shannon is an ILLUSION". It's such a huge, OBVIOUS problem, that I'm perfectly willing to say that everything we currently have regarding the character of 'Kanon' is the single biggest problem with Umineko. Even over the pacing issues and questionable morals, 'cause I plowed through the first and begrudgingly accepted that the latter won't change.

Kanon, though, just doesn't make sense. You can kinda tell, in EP7, when the plot just goes "Kanon? Oh ... yeah, don't think about him."

Asuka0NK

2012-06-25, 20:34

Renall

2012-06-25, 20:46

I think the reason we don't see anything about Kanon is because it isn't needed to solve the murder. Is it necessary to know about Kanon to solve the mystery no but it does add an extra layer to Yasu's character and obviously Kanon led to Yasu seeing herself as inhuman. So Kanon to me is the physical form of Yasu's self-hatred.Yeah but this is the problem with Kanon narratively. He exists solely as a gimmick at worst and as an explanatory aspect of Yasu's personality at best. He may have been seen all of one time ever by anyone off Rokkenjima. But he's in the stories and he's prominently featured. So one of two things is gonna happen with him: Either he's going to turn out to have existed in Prime somehow but his existence is sketchy and suspicious (meaning it's a sign something's up with him in-story too), or he's going to turn out to have never existed in Prime and be even more suspicious.

He's underdeveloped to the point that there's no way you couldn't immediately find him suspect if you were an outside observer.

LyricalAura

2012-06-25, 21:42

He's underdeveloped to the point that there's no way you couldn't immediately find him suspect if you were an outside observer.

Sure, but if your only source of information about him is a pair of stories that are already discredited, there's not very many places you can take that suspicion, especially if Eva refused to confirm whether he was present or not. With the other suspects, a Witch Hunter could investigate their background and somehow come up with a theory about how and why they would commit a serial murder, so it would be comparatively less productive and fun to push Kanon as the culprit. The Witch Hunters might even think: "This person doesn't exist in reality, so he must have been put in the stories as a distraction. The real culprit is someone else."

Renall

2012-06-25, 21:55

Sure, but if your only source of information about him is a pair of stories that are already discredited, there's not very many places you can take that suspicion, especially if Eva refused to confirm whether he was present or not. With the other suspects, a Witch Hunter could investigate their background and somehow come up with a theory about how and why they would commit a serial murder, so it would be comparatively less productive and fun to push Kanon as the culprit. The Witch Hunters might even think: "This person doesn't exist in reality, so he must have been put in the stories as a distraction. The real culprit is someone else."Sure, I just mean that becomes an obvious standout in the story to anyone who exists in Prime, but not to us. Because we're not in the Prime universe, and we can't easily confirm that Kanon wasn't really a person (or was a very suspicious person with strangely little info about him existing in the world).

This is, I think, kind of an issue with the writing. It's manipulation of information to the audience that the in-universe audience isn't dealing with. They would know this, but we're misled into assuming Kanon was some kind of real person because no suspicion is raised about him in non-1986 segments that reasonably should be. Even if we're supposed to be following along from the perspective of Battler/Toya somehow, and he doesn't know this for whatever reason, he could find it out very easily. So him not doing so is just kind of odd.

It's not some fatal flaw or anything, but it's kind of sloppy.

Kealym

2012-06-26, 00:40

Jan-Poo

2012-06-26, 02:03

There was a service door implied? Where?
All I remember was the implication from End that one MIGHT stumble upon the entrance near the chapel by mistake, though it would be unlikely.

We don't even know how that door is made, hell we don't even know if it's actually a door rather than a trap door, since there was no mention of any building (and a building would be hard to hide). At any rate the door is supposed to be locked and impossible to open unless you solve the complicated mechanism of the chapel.

As for the implied service door:

`......Also, take this key."

`"......What is this?"`\

`"It is a key to the underground VIP room. If you use this, you won't need to use the more complicated device."

Thi is said By Genji after Kinzo dies in front of Beatrice in EP7.

Well you could argue that it's the same door... anyway the important part is that you don't need to move the golden letters everytime to go to the underground.

Yeah but this is the problem with Kanon narratively. He exists solely as a gimmick at worst and as an explanatory aspect of Yasu's personality at best. He may have been seen all of one time ever by anyone off Rokkenjima. But he's in the stories and he's prominently featured. So one of two things is gonna happen with him: Either he's going to turn out to have existed in Prime somehow but his existence is sketchy and suspicious (meaning it's a sign something's up with him in-story too), or he's going to turn out to have never existed in Prime and be even more suspicious.

He's underdeveloped to the point that there's no way you couldn't immediately find him suspect if you were an outside observer.

Frankly at this point I can only assume that "the servant Kanon" doesn't exist in prime, or at least he's never been a regularly hired fukuin servant.

There's an interesting bit in EP8 where the goats claim that Kanon doesn't exist. Jessica "defeats" them by saying that there are people who saw Kanon at the school's culture festival.
This tells us that in prime Jessica actually made Yasu pose as her boyfriend. But this also tells us that if this is the best she could do to prove Kanon's existence, then I guess there really isn't anything else.

There must be an official list of the victims who went missing in the Rokkenjima Incident, and obviously neither "Shannon" nor "Kanon" are in it. But there should be the name of the young maid who attended school for years in Niijima (probably Sayo Yasuda), and that people can testify was named Shannon.
Kawabata for example, there's just no way he doesn't know her. He supposedly ferried her back and forth from Rokkenjima to Niijima and viceversa for years on an almost daily basis.
The complete lack of interest in Shannon, Kanon and Yasu from Ange's part in 1998 is absolutely appaling and can only be explained by narrative manipulation.

At any rate it is almost inevitable to conclude that for everyone from outside the catbox Kanon is someone that isn't supposed to exist in those stories.

This is, I think, kind of an issue with the writing. It's manipulation of information to the audience that the in-universe audience isn't dealing with. They would know this, but we're misled into assuming Kanon was some kind of real person because no suspicion is raised about him in non-1986 segments that reasonably should be. Even if we're supposed to be following along from the perspective of Battler/Toya somehow, and he doesn't know this for whatever reason, he could find it out very easily. So him not doing so is just kind of odd.

It's not some fatal flaw or anything, but it's kind of sloppy.

I don't think this is a flaw per se. Strategic cuts in the exposition, distorted perspective and such are pretty common. Movies like "the sixth sense", "the others", "fight club" and so on made use of selective expositions to what the characters are going through, because it would be pretty easy to spot what's going on if you saw them in those parts of their everyday "life" that couldn't have an ambiguous interpretation

But what really bothers me about this is that it defies the only justification (which is still weak imo) for not telling the readers what's going on: "In the story people will never know what happened, so you won't either, it's a catbox". But there's a lot of stuff, including this important bit, that is actually common knowledge in prime and Ryuukishi still doesn't explain it years after the end of the story. In others words he makes a mystery out of something that in the story itself isn't a mystery at all.

Lady_Bernkastel

2012-06-26, 05:47

Kawabata for example, there's just no way he doesn't know her. He supposedly ferried her back and forth from Rokkenjima to Niijima and viceversa for years on an almost daily basis.

I agree, that could've been so easy... it's frustrating.

------

I'm not sure if someone had already said this during the discussions about Yasu's gender, but - I was wondering, why is it even a mystery? Doesn't she HAVE to be a girl obviously?
After all, Genji hid the fact she's alive from Kinzo because he thought Kinzo might treat Yasu as Beatrice and make his 'incest sin' again... If Yasu was a boy, that fear wouldn't be relevant. (unless Kinzo is bisexual and we didn't know.. lol)
which means she has to be a girl, otherwise Genji would let Kinzo know about his child being alive.
Then why do people think there's still a chance Yasu might be a male?

Renall

2012-06-26, 08:22

Because it's ambiguous. If she were unambiguously female, there's no reason not to just say so. Same is true if she were unambiguously male, of course. We just don't know, and apparently not knowing is somehow important to Yasu's self-image problems.

I think the issue may well be that Yasu doesn't know and hadn't gotten a straight answer from Genji or Nanjo (at least, perhaps, before the scene referenced in the "guts sequence"). And perhaps Battler and Ange don't know either. So the self-image is ambiguous, and we'll never really know. But it's apparently not 100% expected; either Yasu is a maimed male or female, or transgendered, or not the same sex as the gender she was raised, or uncomfortable with whatever body she does have, or is malformed or hermaphroditic or something uncommon. Something along those lines. Something isn't clicking between the way Yasu understands her own body and what she ideally thinks her body should be like. It's possible there's nothing wrong and she's paranoid and lies and misdirection have messed with her head. But more likely she has some legitimate problem with her self-image that she feels renders her body incapable of love. The ambiguity suggests it relates to her gender image, or to her biological sex conflicting with that somehow, or to something being done to her that changed either her gender self-image or her physical sex, without her consent or approval or apparently even knowledge.

Also let's not put past Kinzo anything regardless of the sex of his supposed child (if indeed Yasu even is that child, if that child even existed). Genji thinks he's insane enough to do something, maybe he just thinks he's insane to the point that the appearance and equipment of the child don't matter. Besides, Genji has other legitimate reasons to hide such a child if one exists.

Wanderer

2012-06-26, 08:57

After all, Genji hid the fact she's alive from Kinzo because he thought Kinzo might treat Yasu as Beatrice and make his 'incest sin' again... If Yasu was a boy, that fear wouldn't be relevant.

Assuming Yasu really is the baby from the cliff, remember there's another person that Genji needs to hide Yasu's identity from.

Renall

2012-06-26, 09:13

Assuming Yasu really is the baby from the cliff, remember there's another person that Genji needs to hide Yasu's identity from.That, and the whole affair is just good common sense. If Yasu really is a secret fifth child, he/she is largely defenseless against her older and better-entrenched siblings. If said child really was special to Kinzo, and Genji is trying to do what Kinzo would have wanted if Kinzo were in appropriate position to do it himself (i.e. not crazy, assuming he is), then protecting the child's identity is just a good idea in general until he or she is old enough to stand on even footing with the others in any sort of inheritance matter.

You wouldn't want to announce "By the way, we saved your secret brother/sister's life, and incidentally he/she owns Kinzo's gold" back in the late 60s. Because the first question on the siblings' minds would be "Wait, what brother/sister?" followed immediately by "Wait, what gold?" I can't imagine Yasu/Lion would've had a very good life without some protection of that sort.

We actually see that in ep7, where Lion's been passed off as Krauss and Natsuhi's first child. Krauss goes along with it because he gets all the perks from it: His family becomes the main branch as far as the law and society knows (which is prestigious), his firstborn becomes the head of the family (again, prestigious), and he gets to manage the finances of the group until Lion is of age (which means he has control of the finances and thus control over the family). It's a pretty damn good deal for Krauss in that situation, so it's incentive to go along with the Lion thing even if he knows it's not really his child. Nobody else has to know that, so why not go with it? As far as the rest of the world sees it, he's raised a brilliant child who is competent and likeable; he has every incentive to protect that image to make himself look good and he and Natsuhi look like perfect parents.

Now imagine Lion's existence without that safety net. It would not be entirely pleasant for him/her, as all the parents would be trying to screw him/her over financially and there'd be little to be done about it.

GoldenLand

2012-06-26, 09:52

I think it would have been much better had Genji taken a different tactic. If he had adopted Yasu himself (from Fukuin, after a suitable gap) or claimed she was his daughter, she would probably not have had to work as a servant from such a terribly young age, and would still have been able to spend time on the island or perhaps live there. Genji's the head servant and Kinzo's old friend, and Kinzo would probably allow him to have his child visit/live on the island if he requested it. Even if Yasu did start to work as a servant some of the time while still a little kid, she would have had some better protection from being Genji's child. And she would have had a parent of her own.

Of course, that would only have worked if Genji was willing to take on a role as a parent, which I doubt he was. The man's got some of the skimpiest characterisation in the whole series.

Renall

2012-06-26, 10:20

Of course that's assuming Yasu isn't Genji's child to begin with...

...is what I'd say could be a cool revelation if Genji had any character development whatsoever, let alone any that supports such a notion.

Asuka0NK

2012-06-26, 10:37

The only thing we ever get from Genji is the fact that he seems to be the only character that actually goes insane. If I'm remembering right Ryukishi said that the gold butterflies are more just showing that someone has gone insane such as the cousins do in Ep 1 because as I recall the gold butterflies appeared before 12:00 AM after Natsuhi was killed.

LyricalAura

2012-06-26, 10:59

I'm paraphrasing here, but he didn't say "gold butterflies mean someone is crazy," he said "someone would be crazy if they really saw gold butterflies." A whole group of people wouldn't randomly go crazy at the same time and all hallucinate the same specific thing that just happens to be convenient to the fantasy narrative. The butterflies showing up means that the scene is false.

Asuka0NK

2012-06-26, 11:16

Alright thats what he said. This sorta does confuse me though because don't the butterflies appear before 12:00 AM in Ep 1 or do I just have a terrible memory? What I mean by this is does Battler see the butterflies before 12:00 AM.

Drifloon

2012-06-26, 12:06

Battler doesn't see the butterflies until the very end of EP1.

haguruma

2012-06-26, 12:27

It's not some fatal flaw or anything, but it's kind of sloppy.
I thought about this for a while and I would say it basically comes down to the "stupid public flaw" that many historical mysteries have. It's actually pretty funny that Ryûkishi brought up Shimada Sôji's 占星術殺人事件 (Tokyo Zodiac Murders) in EP5, because it basicallz has a similar flaw if you ask me.
The culprit basically faked her death by very obviously rearranging the chopped up body parts of her siblings to make it appear as if there was one corpse more.
It always ends up begging the question why nobody in all these years except our protagonists and ourselves (the reader) had the rational thought of questioning some very easy things. This is something that plagues Umineko as well, though you could explain it away by "that theory just wasn't popular enough".
Sure, it would have been problematic for the mystery aspect of the story to cover such elements to early and by Ryûkishi's stance of not committing to one definite solution he would never actually do so. But you are right when you say that this costs the story some points because it rips you out of the narrative by asking for a little too much suspension of disbelief.

Alright thats what he said. This sorta does confuse me though because don't the butterflies appear before 12:00 AM in Ep 1 or do I just have a terrible memory? What I mean by this is does Battler see the butterflies before 12:00 AM.
Well, Battler comments during the Tea Party how they met with somebody in front of the portrait at midnight and then everything went blank. I think this just describes the narrative getting hazy and less easy to comprehend.
The butterflies always seemed to imply, to me as well, how a scene is taken over by a fantasy explanation over a rational one. Genji's action of actually destroying one of those in EP2 kinda seemed to me like Ryûkishi wanting to point out that the fantasy has no control over Genji because he actually knows the full extent of the plot, yet he is not the one actually controlling and spreading the deceptions.

Renall

2012-06-26, 13:11

It always ends up begging the question why nobody in all these years except our protagonists and ourselves (the reader) had the rational thought of questioning some very easy things. This is something that plagues Umineko as well, though you could explain it away by "that theory just wasn't popular enough".While you're right that such an excuse could work, the problem is that he goes and creates this notion that there's a niche of people who are obsessed with the whole thing. And basically, if it's "common knowledge" to one of them, it should be common knowledge generally, and it certainly should be known to Ikuko (who is following the niche group) and thus should be known to Toya/Battler unless she has some particular reason not to mention it at any time. While she may have some reason to do that, we don't really get enough to say that for certain, so it ends up a bit muddy.

The point is, as you said, somebody must have taken an interest in the life histories of the victims. Even if it's just one person investigating, that information presumably exists in some form. It might not be complete information; a couple Witch Hunters might've tried to inquire about Kanon's background from the Fukuin records and been mysteriously ignored by whoever is still keeping them, or found nothing conclusive about Kanon, but not enough to definitively know if he existed or not. Still, if they did even that much, someone should know about it.

Ange spoke to an expert on the subject, and he never noted any such character inconsistency. While it's possible he just doesn't know, the point is more that by structuring the story that way, the author causes us to make assumptions about characters that the world as presented appears to back up. After Alliance, we had no reason to think Kanon was a nonexistent person except inasmuch as we may have suspected Shkanon. But if we did suspect that, we assumed that there must be some explanation as to how "Kanon" can have existed and not have it be questioned by readers of the stories in 1998, since it was never brought up in Ange's sequences. That's somewhat misleading; it seems like, having reviewed all the information, it should have, but it didn't.

A similar issue I think was the explosion, but that was somewhat less of a concern. It is still kind of odd though that Alliance dodges the subject entirely in the 1998 parts. Ange never once thinks about how it happened? She and everyone else even remotely aware of the incident knows that an explosion happened, but we have to figure it out by implication until Chiru because no one confronts the occurrence directly. Even Amakusa, supposedly a seasoned soldier, doesn't get to hear about what happened (or see it) and remark "Man, that would take a ton of explosives." Nobody talks about it. Nobody.

Jan-Poo

2012-06-26, 13:34

Of course that's assuming Yasu isn't Genji's child to begin with...

Or Nanjo's granddaughter.

Wait... she could be both!

Asuka0NK

2012-06-26, 15:38

Kinjo is the best thing I have ever seen in my entire life.

RandomAvatarFan

2012-06-26, 18:03

Yeah, The Kinjo theory from Kinjo's Seacats was actually kind of interesting. The motive that was set up was actually plausible. In fact that read less like a parody and more like the actual thing at that point. It could explain how "they all acknowledged Kinzo's existence" and "Nanjo is dead."

More so on topic... but yeah, the epilogue of EP1 says "The Rokkenjima Mass Murder Incident" or "The Murders of the Golden Witch" but in EP6 it's just like "Yeah, Explosion incident." which is something it should have been more commonly referred to.

I believe the true mystery was solved in Prime. Nothing that resembles Prime is in the Episodes. The Episodes are the forgeries.

Asuka0NK

2012-06-26, 19:29

Well Ryukishi probably just called it that so he didn't give away the mystery too early or else Beatrice's final mystery would've been too easy for the readers.

Cao Ni Ma

2012-06-26, 19:45

How is that red about everyone recognizing Kinzo even written in japanese? I always felt Kyrie just coming out and saying that his Goldsmith name would probably be better as Gold House/storage kinda odd.

LaplaceNoMa

2012-06-26, 20:53

Hello everyone,

I didn't check the last ~500 pages of this thread (that's the amount of pages I've missed by not coming here for a while) to see the latest speculations, but I have one question for all of you:

1. Third game: Shannon and Kanon are dead - first twilight
2. Sixth game (and many other occurencies in the game): Even if you join us, there are 17 people.

Now I remember that the most theories were circulating around the 'person!=body' wordplay, but this has been bugging me for a while.

If Shannon=Kanon=Yasu=Beatrice, than one body should account for 4 (or possibly 3 if Yasu=Beatrice from the start) 'people', not two. And if Shannon and Kanon are dead in the first twilight of the 3rd game (as well as some other moments in the story) then Yasu (Beatrice) must be dead too. And if she is, who the hell could tell Eva about the bomb and everything else?

It's not the only thing that bothers me really, I grow very untrustful towards the whole Shkanontrice resolution. There's way too many things that contradict this idea as well as the 'people/personalities/bodies' shennanigans.

LaplaceNoMa

2012-06-26, 21:12

And another thing I wanted to ask: I've seen a hurtful lot of theories back when eps 6-7-8 were actual material and, well, lately too (including THAT youtube theory)

Each of them has its great points and great flaws, but the problem is - I've tried listening to their explanations of every single murder in games 1-6 as well as every single 'questionable' scene (there are things that look fishy and need explanation from various theories' POVs which aren't murders or even related to murders) but each of them has at least 1 murder that can't be explained without jumping to ridiculous tricks which serve to try and 'fit' the murders to their theories.

So I wonder, did any of the great minds here on forums (there certainly are people here who I endlessly respect for their bright minds) come with a plausible step-by-step explanation of every murder in every game? I've tried checking everyone's signatures but didn't find anything except Renall's logic error explanation yet.

Kealym

2012-06-26, 21:26

Regarding the number of persons, Yasu effectively does not exist on the Gameboards. And I believe the consensus is that Beatrice doesn't "count" because 1. Her victory is dependant on her not being a human, anyway 2. She has to leave a human-only solution possible, which her existence would definitely not and 3. how she can still state "No more than 17"

On the other matter, not to my knowledge, no - just about every theory has you make a few assumptions to get from one good talking point to the next. Even with plain ol' regular Shkanon, laying out not just what happened, but WHY it happened is a good way to end up in a mental clusterfuck. (mostly when trying to map out Banquet):heh:

Wanderer

2012-06-26, 23:02

Drifloon

2012-06-27, 01:38

I still maintain that like the cheese puzzle shown earlier in the episode, the question of how many people are on the island has several different answers depending on how you look at it and all these answers are equally valid, and can thus be said in red. I'm not sure why everyone seems to think the red has to be entirely consistent with itself with all the talk of multiple truths existing at the same time and all.

So I wonder, did any of the great minds here on forums (there certainly are people here who I endlessly respect for their bright minds) come with a plausible step-by-step explanation of every murder in every game? I've tried checking everyone's signatures but didn't find anything except Renall's logic error explanation yet.

Didn't people do this not long after EP7 came out? If you don't consider the Shkanontrice explanations plausible, then you probably aren't going to find anything better, if that's what you mean.

LaplaceNoMa

2012-06-27, 02:37

Nono, don't get me wrong - I'm not a KnownNoMore's fan who will blindly deny everything Shkannon-related.

It's just that I never really saw anyone applying the theory to explain everything. When I re-read all 8 eps with the 'Shkannon' mindset, I had a lot of questions remaining. Hell, I still have no complete understanding of ep6's ending and the exact way we should interpret the windows' sels being broken and Kanon disappearing.

While these are not the only questions I have, they are probably the most important ones:

- As I already said, I can't see how Eva could know about the bomb and the hidden passage to Kuwadorian in ep3 when Shkannon ended the first twilight with her suicide.
- To be honest, I can't really understand the point of this suicide at the very beginning of the game. I can see how Shkannon suicide might work in ep2, but not in ep3.
- Logic error. Shannon is confirmed with red to be in the cousin's room, her 'body' is there and the room is perfectly sealed. But even with the windows' seals being broken, I still can't understand the final part with Kanon actually 'disappearing' from the closet.
- Hideyoshi's death in ep5.

These are just some points that bother me the most, but I'd like to see a full explaination of all games anyway. There's a lot of other strangely-done murders in other games (let's say Gohda and Kumasawa in ep4) which need to be explained without jumping to ridiculous attempts to simply 'fit' them to the theory. Most explainations I've seen consider most of the characters to be completely unbelievably retarded. That or simply using metaworld decisions for explaination. Even though ep6 is clearly too meta to begin with, I just can't see Kanon going inside the closet, changing into Shannon clothes and then killing him/herself just so that things would work out in metaworld battle.

Jan-Poo

2012-06-27, 03:20

My interpretation is more or less the same as Wanderer's.

There is a "Joker" body who can alternatively become Shannon, Kanon and Beatrice.
For the sake of this theory you can consider Yasu the same entity as Beatrice they are the same being. So Yasu actually exists in the gameboard but only when she's not Kanon or Shannon.

So in other words at any given moment there are only 16 persons in the island but one of them switches between three different persona.

In EP3 Shannon and Kanon were "killed" by Beatrice, meaning that she made an incontrovertible choice of abandoning those persona ferever. That means Beatrice was still alive and free to move in EP3.
The personality death was explained in EP5 when Beatrice herself was shown as "dying".

in EP6 our Joker was Shannon when she was closed inside the room, and there was no Kanon inside the other.
Shannon then became Kanon (for absolutely no apparent reason), he ran to the room where Battler was supposed to be dead (still for absolutely no apparent reason). He switched place with Battler (still for absoluely no apparent reason, since then Erika would still find someone inside the closet), and then finally stopped being Kanon by becoming Beatrice or Shannon.

in EP3 Shannon and Kanon were killed by other people and their killer was in the same room when they killed them,

When the five other than Kinzo were murdered, the murderer was definitely in the same room!

Well this is yet another stretch but this red doesn't actually say victim and murderer were inside them same room at the same time. It only says that when the victim was murdered, i.e. when the victim ceased to exist, the murderer was in the same room as they were when they were alive.

All right this is ridiculous logic, do I like it? No seriously. But considering the various evidences and through the interpretation of the story I am moderately confident that this is the logic R07 used.
And this is just one of the questionable gimmicks he used, there's also the one about Erika in EP5 being in the same room with Shannon and Kanon and then there's Erika claiming she's the 18th person in red only to be denied in red that including her there are 17 persons.

Yeah you can explain that with some kind of lame logic, but it's not neat.

haguruma

2012-06-27, 03:27

- As I already said, I can't see how Eva could know about the bomb and the hidden passage to Kuwadorian in ep3 when Shkannon ended the first twilight with her suicide.
- To be honest, I can't really understand the point of this suicide at the very beginning of the game. I can see how Shkannon suicide might work in ep2, but not in ep3.
There is nothing actually pointing to Yasu/Shannon's death that early in EP3. It is basically just Shannon waiting in the parlour (she chose this as her place because it is the ONLY place the people who found her could easily enter), then after being examined the in-narrative Shannon got up, went to the chapel und changed into Kanon until people went there.
Beato says it in Our Confession, had somebody checked the parlour after she (in that theory Kanon) had left, she could have just given it a magical explanation of the witch stealing the body or something like that.
During the time Shannon is found and George revives Shannon she acts as the ghost of Beatrice on the gameboard (approaching people like Eva and George). Considering the fact that there is even somebody leading Jessica to safety we have to assume that she was even alive at that point. The only question that this actually begs is, "who was the Eva Beatrice that killed Shannon and George?". The fact that "Beato" witnessed the murder of the lovers implies to me that Yasu actually witnessed somebody (under the guise of Eva-Beato within the narrative) killing George and thus her Shannon persona (which existed solely for George at this point) died with him. The fact that the anime depicts Kyrie's and Rudolph's corpses as having moved during those events raises the question whether it wasn't them who killed George which led to them being killed in turn by Yasu...at least Kyrie's corpse already raised questions in the VN (being mentioned as not having a fatal wound).

EP3 is less difficult regarding the who and how, the when is actually the only thing that makes it a pretty difficult game.

- Logic error. Shannon is confirmed with red to be in the cousin's room, her 'body' is there and the room is perfectly sealed. But even with the windows' seals being broken, I still can't understand the final part with Kanon actually 'disappearing' from the closet.
Shannon never even had to actually leave the room, though of course if we take Battler being locked in the room literally then she would have at least had to reach the door to his locked room.
The answer is pretty simple nobody was in the closet. Erika was fooled into believing that there was a Kanon among the people she locked into the second room. By him not existing in the first place Battler could simply leave the room because a figurative placeholder in form of the "Kanon-slot" had been placed into his room. It's basically the same trick as Kanon vanishing from Jessica's locked room in EP2.
I think Kanon entering the closet and vanishing in it was simply a narrative means to imply that he is nothing more than "clothing put on a different character". Once you return him to the closet he ceases to exist.

- Hideyoshi's death in ep5.
If you don't want to go for the it was a rouse route, it can be simply explained by the "the murderer was in the room" solution also applicable to EP1's locked room in which Eva and Hideyoshi were killed.
We never actually get definitive descriptions of every character's arrival. It is not impossible that "Shkannon" were already in the room when Natsuhi entered and hid in the bathroom until the wire was cut and everybody ran inside. Everybody was drawn to Hideyoshi imediatly and by Erika not entering the room directly when it was opened we have no objective source of information who entered when and how.

These are just some points that bother me the most, but I'd like to see a full explaination of all games anyway.
I always start doing this but get frustrated because I tend to go into to many side-discussions along the way. Maybe I should just force myself to do it...at least I know there would be people who'd read it. I'd like to get some constructive criticism regarding my ideas.

LaplaceNoMa

2012-06-27, 03:42

haguruma

2012-06-27, 03:52

Wasn't the chain set after Battler left the room? If I recall correctly, that was the main problem there.
But wasn't the problem rather that Erika set the chain after she entered the room and the logic error was created by Battler not being (or according to his theory not supposed to be) in the room when she entered it? There was no person in existence who could have removed his body from the room, unless he was alive -or rather actually admitting he was alive - and left the room before Erika entered it.
At least that was how I remember the problem of the logic error.

LaplaceNoMa

2012-06-27, 03:59

I need to replay this scene. If I recall correctly, there was red clearly stating that Battler is inside the room after Erika entered.

Captain Bluebeard

2012-06-27, 04:07

Shannon then became Kanon (for absolutely no apparent reason), he ran to the room where Battler was supposed to be dead (still for absolutely no apparent reason). He switched place with Battler (still for absoluely no apparent reason, since then Erika would still find someone inside the closet), and then finally stopped being Kanon by becoming Beatrice or Shannon.

I'd have to agree that the biggest flaw of EP6 is many things happening in the game board for no apparent reason at all. Well, actually, from the point of the logic error onward, the only reason things are happening is just so that the logic may work, I don't think it was meant to have any actual game board story to go with the fantasy scenes, which is kind of disappointing.

(Then again, I personally didn't mind it at all when reading EP6, since it had me at the edge of my seat in many points, so I had no time to fret over things like that.)

haguruma

2012-06-27, 04:22

I need to replay this scene. If I recall correctly, there was red clearly stating that Battler is inside the room after Erika entered.
The only thing that clearly states that Battler logically HAS to be in the room is:
Because the guest room was sealed at the time of Battler's autopsy it was absolutely impossible to enter or leave the room until I came back again and broke the seal myself. That is why it is definite that Battler had to be hiding in the guestroom when I entered. Battler's chance for escape was only after I broke the seal. To limit it further, except the moment when I was in the bathroom there is no chance for escape.

The problem here is that two argumentative planes interact with each other. The plane of the narrative where these things actually happen and the theoretical plain where these are only concepts. It actually never clearly states that Battler even was in the room when she sealed it, only that she sealed it after his autopsy and that he is destined to be in the room therefore.

I'd have to agree that the biggest flaw of EP6 is many things happening in the game board for no apparent reason at all. Well, actually, from the point of the logic error onward, the only reason things are happening is just so that the logic may work, I don't think it was meant to have any actual game board story to go with the fantasy scenes, which is kind of disappointing.
Well, mostly all of Chiru is just a giant exercise in how the logic of the games is supposed to work...none of them had any actually functioning story to them that lead anywhere specific. EP5 was a giant troll to show how badly the minor characters understood Beatrice's game, EP6 was to show how intricate the system actually is and what it allows (mainly using "empty spaces"), EP7 was a giant mash-up to ensure the best possible chances to collect evidence and EP8...was a final battle for the perfect solution with everything the gameboard allowed (like Virgilia once said...scribbling all over the board even though it's kinda rude).

GuestSpeaker

2012-06-27, 06:17

although that herring was almost screaming 'FAKE'
I had the same problem, it's my biggest issue with the whole Kyrie Rudolf culprit theory. Yes it makes sense with Angie and Eva, and maybe Ange's reaction, but if it was the whole truth (I am not saying they weren't in some way guilty) then why have Bern give it to us as a big troll? Even though I thought something along the lines of their guilt before that scene, it seems too difficult to accept now.

Or maybe that is how Ry7 wants me to think.....

but we're shown in no uncertain terms that he's the only person who CAN solve it.

We are? When?

He's underdeveloped to the point that there's no way you couldn't immediately find him suspect if you were an outside observer.

Well let's try applying some real life. He appears in forgeries, and people remember seeing him off the island once, and a few may have even seen him on the island on a few of their shifts. Then it turns out that none of the servants remember him from school, and they can't find his birth records (though I don't know how impossible that might have been for an orphan meant to be born in 1970's Japan). Even assuming they never found records of him at the orphanage, it doesn't mean people would immediately assume he didn't exist, or even know about it. Who would actually look into his records anyway? The police? Maybe, but why? Witch-hunters? How would they get access when the records would still be in paper form and not on computers. All an official needs to do is bar them (va is the golden witch after all...). The police and Eva seemed pretty keen on being quite about things anyway. Someone may have known the truth, but then again Eva knew the truth. People seem capable of being honorable regarding secrets, I mean, look at Genji. That guy is a vault.

the sixth sense

I always thought the same thing, my reaction to that movie was "but what about all the times she ignored him NOT at dinner" at least in the Others they were living in an isolated bubble and probably didn't contact the outside world.

Shannon then became Kanon (for absolutely no apparent reason...finally stopped being Kanon by becoming Beatrice or Shannon.

I always interpreted that they didn't need a reason for that, because Ry7 presenting the forgeries to us as real events had been given up. By this point it was more like Ep 8's minigame, Battler playing a logic game with Erika.

The fact that the anime depicts Kyrie's and Rudolph's corpses as having moved during those events

It did?

EP5 was a giant troll to show how badly the minor characters understood Beatrice's game, EP6 was to show how intricate the system actually is and what it allows (mainly using "empty spaces"

Could you explain that in more detail?

haguruma

2012-06-27, 07:30

It did?
Anime episode 17 (01:39)
Rudolph is lying face up to the direct left of the portrait and Kyrie face up directly in front of epitaph plate. Hideyoshi is lying face up in front of the sofa, to the right of the stairs.
Anime episode 17 (17:03)
When they push the doors to the mansion open Hideyoshi is still lying in the same spot, but Rudolph is now lying face down a little to the right of the epitaph plate, even further than Kyrie lay a while ago and Kyrie is nowhere to be seen.

In episode 18 they are face up in their old positions again...but it still strikes me as strange...

This is of course considering that Ryûkishi actually paid attention to this point, but seeing how he told only Beato's voice actress what actually happened and only Shannon's to a certain extent, I think we can assume he would have minded such a blatant move from the anime creators. And it's nearly impossible to be a mistake because these are changes that have to be done instead of just reusing the exact same cells twice (which is easier and cheaper).

Could you explain that in more detail?
EP5 recreated a typical Beatrice game but especially Bernkastel tried forcing logic on it through Erika that was basically unfit for the gameboard. The whole thing was more about showing us how a master detective (Erika) waltzed in and tried solving everything through pure logic without regards for the emotional background that the author sees as important. When laying out the gameboard at least Bern apparently failed to see the logic behind certain pieces.

EP6 showed Battler apparently maneuvering himself into an inescapable trap only to be saved by a system that nobody of the antagonists had anticipated. It basically was all about constructing a framework for the loophole of the "empty character space" to be used.

Basically you could say that EP1-4 pretty much concerned themselves with the Who and Why but didn't concern themselves with the How and Chiru in turn technically became only about the How, while repeating the actions of the first Episodes from a different perspective.

Jan-Poo

2012-06-27, 09:34

Shannon never even had to actually leave the room, though of course if we take Battler being locked in the room literally then she would have at least had to reach the door to his locked room.
The answer is pretty simple nobody was in the closet. Erika was fooled into believing that there was a Kanon among the people she locked into the second room. By him not existing in the first place Battler could simply leave the room because a figurative placeholder in form of the "Kanon-slot" had been placed into his room. It's basically the same trick as Kanon vanishing from Jessica's locked room in EP2.
I think Kanon entering the closet and vanishing in it was simply a narrative means to imply that he is nothing more than "clothing put on a different character". Once you return him to the closet he ceases to exist.

Battler must have been inside the guest room when Erika entered it during the logic error sequence.

We have confirmed that the seals to the guest room are UNDAMAGED. Since the time Lady Erika confirmed Battler's existence, this closed room has been PRESERVED.

I proclaim that the chain lock has been repaired by the duct tape seal and has regained its original functionality. And, thanks to that, I locked the room upon entering it and made this guest room a closed room from the inside once more.

and Battler must have somehow left the room at one point

Battler does not exist within the guest room.

Albeit I think R07 forgot about the loophole he created himself that if someone is dead then he doesn't exist, meaning that Battler could have saved himself from the logic error simply by killing himself.
But for the sake of the game let's just pretend that Battler had to leave the room somehow. The you need to find someone that could "save him" and this someone was our chamaleontic Yasu. I doubt it went differently, after all there must be a reason if the seal of the windows of the neighboring room couldn't be confirmed to be intact.

Still, it is entirily possible that whoever took Battler's place, didn't chose the same place to hide. Yasu could have hidden herself under the bed.

I always interpreted that they didn't need a reason for that, because Ry7 presenting the forgeries to us as real events had been given up. By this point it was more like Ep 8's minigame, Battler playing a logic game with Erika.

Yeah that's pretty much that, but still...

Asuka0NK

2012-06-27, 09:54

GoldenLand

2012-06-27, 10:01

I actually have written an entire solution to ShKanon I just haven't posted it anywhere yet. But in it the culprit of Ep 3 4-8 twilights and beyond is Eva and Shannon for George's murder and Nanjo's murder then she got Jessica. Went back to the parlor and killed herself for good. I don't know I'm sure there are red truths to go against it.

I would love to see your entire ShKanon solution when you post it!

About what you mentioned of the theory just now: you're saying that Eva and Shannon kill George? I'm a little curious about what Eva's motive could be for that. There may not be any reds saying she couldn't kill her own son, but it doesn't seem in character for her.

Judoh

2012-06-27, 10:47

Anime episode 17 (01:39)
Rudolph is lying face up to the direct left of the portrait and Kyrie face up directly in front of epitaph plate. Hideyoshi is lying face up in front of the sofa, to the right of the stairs.
Anime episode 17 (17:03)
When they push the doors to the mansion open Hideyoshi is still lying in the same spot, but Rudolph is now lying face down a little to the right of the epitaph plate, even further than Kyrie lay a while ago and Kyrie is nowhere to be seen.

In episode 18 they are face up in their old positions again...but it still strikes me as strange...

This is of course considering that Ryûkishi actually paid attention to this point, but seeing how he told only Beato's voice actress what actually happened and only Shannon's to a certain extent, I think we can assume he would have minded such a blatant move from the anime creators. And it's nearly impossible to be a mistake because these are changes that have to be done instead of just reusing the exact same cells twice (which is easier and cheaper).

Since they go to their original positions later I'd just say it's one of Studio DEEN's silly mistakes. You have a point that it's cheaper not to redraw them. But then again maybe they didn't want it to look cheap?

They've done tons of other errors like this. Forgetting to draw the one winged eagle onto people's clothes sometimes, and giving the stakes of purgatory the wrong hair colors are a couple.

Asuka0NK

2012-06-27, 11:07

I would love to see your entire ShKanon solution when you post it!

About what you mentioned of the theory just now: you're saying that Eva and Shannon kill George? I'm a little curious about what Eva's motive could be for that. There may not be any reds saying she couldn't kill her own son, but it doesn't seem in character for her.

Oh no what I'm saying is that Shannon performed the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 9th Twilights while Eva did the rest of them so Shannon killed Genji, Kumasawa, Gohda, Kinzo, Maria, Rosa, George, and Nanjo.

Also the thing with the corpses is probably just a DEEN mistake. Do you remember the scene where Ange kills the Stakes and she ends up killing Lucifer twice because they drew Satan wrong. Seriously DEEN makes so many mistakes I find the anime is not very reliable with any info

Klarth

2012-06-27, 13:02

Well, my take on it is that the Yasu entity is simply one person. However, who that person is at any given time changes. These personas can "die" without Yasu's body dying, in which case a different persona can fill its place. This way Yasu's body always amounts to one countable living person, even though it can account for multiple "dead" people.

It's not perfect, though. My theory denies the possibility of the simultaneous existence of multiple Yasu-personas, but, as Renall once pointed out, in EP3 Shannon and Kanon were killed by other people and their killer was in the same room when they killed them, which seems to require simultaneous existence of both the victim and murderer. The only way it could work, then, is if Shannon and Kanon were killed by a non-Yasu persona, which doesn't fit the narrative at all.

As for a comprehensive theory of all the murders, we can assume ShKanon for whodunnit and theorizing a plausible howdunnit is actually pretty easy for all of them. It's the whydunnit that's hard.

Hmmmm... I don't know if this works, but I've always thought it happened something like this:

Eva (and possibly the other adults [or just Rosa]) solve the Epitaph on the first night, similar to EP7 Tea Party. They meet Yasu in the underground gold room. Eva chooses to recognize and accept her as The Golden Witch, Beatrice, and in doing so she kills Shannon and Kanon. If this is true, Shannon and Kanon were killed by other people and their killer was in the same room when they killed them.

I might be missing some obvious red somewhere, though.

Renall

2012-06-27, 13:07

The answer is pretty simple nobody was in the closet. Erika was fooled into believing that there was a Kanon among the people she locked into the second room. By him not existing in the first place Battler could simply leave the room because a figurative placeholder in form of the "Kanon-slot" had been placed into his room. It's basically the same trick as Kanon vanishing from Jessica's locked room in EP2.
I think Kanon entering the closet and vanishing in it was simply a narrative means to imply that he is nothing more than "clothing put on a different character". Once you return him to the closet he ceases to exist.Kanon's body physically entered the room, per the Logic Error red:

Of course. Three people--in other words, three bodies--went in or out. Only you and Kanon entered, and only Battler left. It has already been said in red that all people can only use their own names. Therefore, the names Erika, Battler, and Kanon can only be used by those people.

Erika explicitly asks that Battler refer to the number of bodies that enter or exit the room. Therefore, Kanon's body must enter and presumably remain in the Logic Error room even if Kanon himself ceases to exist.
In EP3 Shannon and Kanon were "killed" by Beatrice, meaning that she made an incontrovertible choice of abandoning those persona ferever. That means Beatrice was still alive and free to move in EP3.
The personality death was explained in EP5 when Beatrice herself was shown as "dying".Except it's not incontrovertible. In fact, it's never incontrovertible, and Banquet itself demonstrates that very thing! The whole thing is nonsense, even though I agree with you it's what the author probably intended.

However, it's impossible to "irrevocably kill" something which lacks an external enforcement mechanism to actually make the act irrevocable. Killing a biological entity is irrevocable because the very act of biological death is itself irrevocable, such that when you kill something it ceases biological functionality. You can decide to un-kill it, but you aren't physically able to un-kill it, so it stays dead. That's what irrevocable or incontrovertible means, you can't change it or go back on it.

With "personas," there is absolutely no mechanism which prevents Yasu from "reviving" Shannon or Kanon at will or simply creating an exact copy of Shannon/Kanon from before they were "killed." Philosophically, of course, these two actions are exactly the same thing. In other words, she can't make an irrevocable decision to kill Shannon or Kanon, short of killing her physical body. The nature of "existing" for Shannon and Kanon precludes the possibility that they can ever truly die for as long as their host body and/or creator entity lives.

But Beatrice/Yasu can't exist in the stories because then her master personality would be an additional person. Which creates the phenomenon of Zombie Shkanon I went over a while back and the whole thing just collapses on itself. Ryukishi isn't allowed to have it both ways, but he tries anyway.When the five other than Kinzo were murdered, the murderer was definitely in the same room!

Well this is yet another stretch but this red doesn't actually say victim and murderer were inside them same room at the same time. It only says that when the victim was murdered, i.e. when the victim ceased to exist, the murderer was in the same room as they were when they were alive.Permit me to get a little Gilbert Ryle up in this bitch: How is this actually possible?

We are told that this crime must have a human solution. Therefore, if "multiple personalities" are going to exist and be counted they must be an observable human phenomenon. For the sake of argument, let's assume all the dumb stuff about Shkanontrice and on-demand persona switching is entirely scientifically accurate, observable, and fully human process, such that it doesn't violate any ban on the supernatural.

Okay. So. How do personalities actually switch? There are three options here: Personalities are always active at all times and one simply takes control of the body. This would appear to violate the person restrictions if more personalities than Shannon and Kanon are present, and violates the notion that either can die because no personality ever actually "dies" (goes inactive). It would also somewhat violate the Logic Error, but only sort of.
Some personalities are dormant and others are active. At least two personalities may be active at the same time.
Only one personality is active and existent at a time. This seems consistent with issues like the Logic Error.Of these, we can immediately dismiss the first as if true, it renders all the red tricks that Ryukishi supposedly used to make a non-dead person dead irrelevant, as the person never "died" anyway. So let's focus on the other two, as the philosophical problem with them is basically the same.

And that problem is this: What is the initiating physical action which causes a personality either to surface or to switch? To use a solution like "Beatrice became dominant and replaced Kanon," it must be explained how a personality that doesn't presently exist (and therefore cannot apprehend anything) can emerge in response to any form of stimulus. "Not existing" is a pretty high bar to set. It doesn't mean you're asleep. It means you do not exist. A thing which does not exist cannot choose to appear because it doesn't exist to perform an act of choosing. It cannot "awaken in response to a memory" because it's not sleeping and sensing, it doesn't exist at all and therefore can sense nothing.

Indeed, for a personality to be invented or recalled it must be acted upon by an external force. But if that external force exists, say as "the brain of Yasu," which regulates the "minds" of each personality and creates and destroys them as necessary, this external force must take up a person slot unto itself. The only way around this is to argue that the "body and brain of the host Yasu" is merely a physical apparatus and "personhood" is contained solely in the mind, and that Yasu's brain which operates as a sort of server or switching board for her myriad minds is not a person. And that's bollocks.

In short, you pretty much have to be a Cartesian Dualist to even accept the functioning of Shkanontrice in the first place, and Cartesian Dualism is for nerds and arguably violates the spirit of Battler's "human truth" claim since a dualist believes that minds are non-apprehensible non-physical entities, and therefore equivalent to Witches.

The only other way to resolve this issue is to suggest that all personalities voluntarily shut themselves down in order to transfer control. I would submit that voluntary sublimation of one's consciousness in this manner is "suicide," and therefore impossible under the red in Banquet. The other option would be that stimuli acting on the active personality can cause it to sublimate, but the problem there is that forcing Kanon to stop existing cannot create Shannon, and Kanon cannot simply be transitioned into Shannon because that violates the notion that the personalities are distinct and not merely a single personality voluntarily acting them out. So neither Shannon or Kanon was able to voluntarily sublimate themselves, and no external force exists which can cause them to be sublimated, therefore Banquet of the Golden Witch contains an irresolvable Logic Error.

...Well, alright, you could also technically argue the personalities arise entirely at random due to comprehensible biological processes, but that makes everything Shkanontrice does remarkably convenient, given that sublimation never randomly occurs at an important point in time (such as mid-murder). Therefore it violates even the suspension of disbelief I have granted Shkanontrice as a premise for this thought experiment and means the writing is even dumber than I am quite literally giving it credit for.

GoldenLand

2012-06-27, 14:22

Life (and bandwidth) is too short to watch the nine hour KnownNoMore video for the anti-Shkanon solution, but I was curious enough to go and look through the comments. Which there were a lot of! And which seem to have got pretty heated. Some people really having a go at KnownNoMore for missing the point of the series ("It's sad to see Goats go to this measure...") and other commenters having a go at "dogmatic Shkanon believers" and "Twilight addicts". Even one "There are actually a lot of similarities between Shkanon believers and religious people who believe their holy book is inerrant". And, well, problem with making a nine hour theory video is probably that by the end nearly anyone would be really, really fixated on their theory being correct, because wow, all that time spent on making it.

The main ideas put forward appear to be Yasu = fictional, Rosa = Beatrice, Shannon and Kanon = separate bodies, Rosa took over Shannon's love for Battler, and people = living human bodies and never personalities. Ryukishi made an illusory truth about Shkanon to cover up a Rosa, Nanjo and George culprit solution. Rosa is doing it because she's wracked with guilt over Kuwadorian Beato's death and wants to perform the epitaph ceremony in order to resurrect her. Nanjo's doing it for money. (I don't know why George is doing it according to this theory.) And ep 7 was written in order to deceive the audience.

Somebody actually did a transcript of the first few parts of the videos. It doesn't get far, but if anyone's curious about what the theory is about, it's the only transcript out there that I know of. It mostly just goes through the ideas of why Shkanon theory is false in KnownNoMore's opinion.
https://sites.google.com/site/ralphmerridew/umineko-explained
https://sites.google.com/site/ralphmerridew/umineko-explained-part-1-a

And some quotes from KnownNoMore in the comments on the Youtube video:

"What you should trust is the red and the objective perspective of the detective and judge EVERYTHING based on that foundation. If you do that, you wont be deceived (unfortunately it can still get you to the other extreme that Ryu fucked up his own story, which many people unfortunately believe)"

"I believe that Ryukishi anticipated that people would find rationalisations to make the official explanation work. He actually put in very direct statements for that exact purpose. Like "its forbidden for a servant to be the culprit". He knew that people who fell for his deception would say things like "Shannon is? not truly a servant" or "heck, its her Beatrice persona thats the culprit, not the servant Shannon persona" etc."

"And yes until Ryukishi states the truth in red, the official explanation is ALSO just a theory regardless of what Ryukishi says in interviews. After all, game designer needs to play by his own rules as well. therefore we can judge Ryukishi words on? whether or not its corresponds with the story Basically, his words in interviews should be regarded as purple statements.

No red = no genuine certainty. Its as simple as that. "

"I think an argument could be made? for Rosa making secret trips to Rokkenjima and (at least for the most part) her so called trips with a boyfriend was just an excuse why she wasnt at work. In actuality Rosa went to Rokkenjima in secret (especially after solving the epitaph and becoming the secret head) and would stay in the VIP room unbeknownst to Krauss and Natushi, furthering the legend of Beatrice wandering through the mansion at night.

Cant prove that, but the new Sakutaro could be a hint"

"My theory accounts BETTER for the love aspect in my opinion because the official explanation completely ignores Rosa's heart"

"Rosa feels guilty towards Shannon and tries to do something to make up to her. So Rosa plays matchmaker and tries to get Shannon to persuit someone other than Battler, namely George. If she falls for George, she will no longer have to worry about Battler. So in this sense, Rosa took on the burden of Shannon's love by actively helping her finding new love.

There is also a more esoteric and symbolic side to it. Shannon's burden is depicted as an actual "thing", a bud of love that exists inside her body. So Beatrice uses her magic to transfer that object into her own body, which causes a change in her character. Since Rosa's Beatrice character now own this object, this character now gets burdened with it, making Beatrice obsessed with Battler.

In other words, Rosa's imaginary character changed to being obsessed with Battler.

Think about the cotton drifting festival of Higurashi (and I'm reffering to the religious meaning). The people transfer their sins upon the cotton and then have it drift away. This cleanses you or your sins and there are many many many rituals like this in Japanese culture. Guilt and sin are such are often treated as actual things inside your body that you can remove from your body using some sort of ritual.

Rosa basically did that on Shannon, and before that she transferred her guilt to yasu"

"Shannon is not involved, she is an innocent bystander. The only reason the why-dunnit is centered around her is because Rosa needed someone to "create a universe with" for the imaginary Yasu which eventually led her to take the burden of Battler's sin upon herself and helping Shannon to find new love. Shannon might be aware of what is going on but she lets fate run its course.

I can't say I agree with this theory, but there's the info I could find on it if anyone who also doesn't want to watch the videos is inclined to get their teeth into it a little more.

Wanderer

2012-06-27, 14:41

Hmmmm... I don't know if this works, but I've always thought it happened something like this:

Eva (and possibly the other adults [or just Rosa]) solve the Epitaph on the first night, similar to EP7 Tea Party. They meet Yasu in the underground gold room. Eva chooses to recognize and accept her as The Golden Witch, Beatrice, and in doing so she kills Shannon and Kanon. If this is true, Shannon and Kanon were killed by other people and their killer was in the same room when they killed them.

Problem: Even if Shannon and Kanon can somehow be "killed" while they are "switched off"/"don't exist" Shannon or Kanon would still have to be "switched on" in order to "exist" in the same room as someone else. Or to put it another way, Yasu has to actually be in "Shannon mode" in order for Shannon to be "killed while the killer is in the same room".

There are certainly ways around this, such as the adults acknowledging Yasu as Beatrice while Yasu is in "Shannon mode", but none of them I find very comfortable.

With "personas," there is absolutely no mechanism which prevents Yasu from "reviving" Shannon or Kanon at will or simply creating an exact copy of Shannon/Kanon from before they were "killed." Philosophically, of course, these two actions are exactly the same thing.

Psychologically they are not, though.

Renall

2012-06-27, 15:26

Psychologically they are not, though.Aberrant psychology should not be used as a basis for a statement of truth. The red cannot be permitted to conform to a person's belief that an individual - regardless of substantive makeup - has "died" if there is not some distinct belief in the practical finality of that event. Otherwise, Shannon and Kanon die multiple times every day. At that point, saying they are presently dead is meaningless because it is always possible to point to a "Shannon" who is dead (even if "Shannon" is alive), and the Kanon name exclusivity argument is violated because there are multiple "Kanons." It's the same personality recalled, which therefore means sublimation cannot be viewed as death. To suggest otherwise is cheating, to essentially redefine "dead" as "asleep," and at that point Kinzotrice and the like are all possible events.

And none of that matters anyway, because the rules were never actually established in the first place. So it's still cheating, because the writer hasn't actually bothered telling us enough to determine how a process works. His retreat into ambiguity is no doubt precisely because he has no idea how the process is philosophically justifiable.

Jan-Poo

2012-06-27, 15:31

*snip*

The problem, I think, is the fact that Ryuukishi by using the personalities gimmick defied the basic rule that the mystery must have a human explanation.

Personalites taken as mere entities detatched from their physical bodies are "human" (adjective) but are not human beings. And he even said so himself they are "less than human". But that means our culprit isn't even a human and two of the victims aren't human either.

Personalities might "exist" in our real world, but the way ryuukishi treats them is the same as if they were supernatural entities. In other words it isn't really different than magic. Because "Kanon" in Ep6 actually magically vanished into nothingness, and that is not something that can happen to something physical in the physical world.

In other words this is not a naturalistic approach, which is what is supposed to be used in sleuthing, it's philosophical and metaphisical. You can argue that a personality can die, but that's a philosophical argument, you cannot demonstrate that this is an objective truth rather than a simple interpretation.

Obi Wan Kenobi can say that Darth Vader killed Anakin Skywalker, but that's just his interpretation, it's not a fact. And since it's not a fact it shouldn't be possible to state it in red. For the same reason any red truth stating the death of Shannon and Kanon assumes the objectivity and validity of personality death when it can be certainly disputed.

And that's where the whole concept of the red truths fails miserably:
The "absolute" part of an "absolute truth" is absolutely void of any meaning if the definitions of the terms used are subjective and not absolute.

The problem is that we know for a fact that the red truths of Umineko make use of subjective definitions, and that means the reliability of red truths is just a facade and doesn't really provide any certainty at all.

Captain Bluebeard

2012-06-27, 15:32

Some people really having a go at KnownNoMore for missing the point of the series ("It's sad to see Goats go to this measure...") and other commenters having a go at "dogmatic Shkanon believers" and "Twilight addicts". Even one "There are actually a lot of similarities between Shkanon believers and religious people who believe their holy book is inerrant". And, well, problem with making a nine hour theory video is probably that by the end nearly anyone would be really, really fixated on their theory being correct, because wow, all that time spent on making it.

The main ideas put forward appear to be Yasu = fictional, Rosa = Beatrice, Shannon and Kanon = separate bodies, Rosa took over Shannon's love for Battler, and people = living human bodies and never personalities. Ryukishi made an illusory truth about Shkanon to cover up a Rosa, Nanjo and George culprit solution. Rosa is doing it because she's wracked with guilt over Kuwadorian Beato's death and wants to perform the epitaph ceremony in order to resurrect her. Nanjo's doing it for money. (I don't know why George is doing it according to this theory.) And ep 7 was written in order to deceive the audience.

Somebody actually did a transcript of the first few parts of the videos. It doesn't get far, but if anyone's curious about what the theory is about, it's the only transcript out there that I know of. It mostly just goes through the ideas of why Shkanon theory is false in KnownNoMore's opinion.
https://sites.google.com/site/ralphmerridew/umineko-explained
https://sites.google.com/site/ralphmerridew/umineko-explained-part-1-a

And some quotes from KnownNoMore in the comments on the Youtube video:

"What you should trust is the red and the objective perspective of the detective and judge EVERYTHING based on that foundation. If you do that, you wont be deceived (unfortunately it can still get you to the other extreme that Ryu fucked up his own story, which many people unfortunately believe)"
Quote:
"I believe that Ryukishi anticipated that people would find rationalisations to make the official explanation work. He actually put in very direct statements for that exact purpose. Like "its forbidden for a servant to be the culprit". He knew that people who fell for his deception would say things like "Shannon is? not truly a servant" or "heck, its her Beatrice persona thats the culprit, not the servant Shannon persona" etc."
Quote:
"And yes until Ryukishi states the truth in red, the official explanation is ALSO just a theory regardless of what Ryukishi says in interviews. After all, game designer needs to play by his own rules as well. therefore we can judge Ryukishi words on? whether or not its corresponds with the story Basically, his words in interviews should be regarded as purple statements.

No red = no genuine certainty. Its as simple as that. "

"I think an argument could be made? for Rosa making secret trips to Rokkenjima and (at least for the most part) her so called trips with a boyfriend was just an excuse why she wasnt at work. In actuality Rosa went to Rokkenjima in secret (especially after solving the epitaph and becoming the secret head) and would stay in the VIP room unbeknownst to Krauss and Natushi, furthering the legend of Beatrice wandering through the mansion at night.

Cant prove that, but the new Sakutaro could be a hint"

"My theory accounts BETTER for the love aspect in my opinion because the official explanation completely ignores Rosa's heart"

"Rosa feels guilty towards Shannon and tries to do something to make up to her. So Rosa plays matchmaker and tries to get Shannon to persuit someone other than Battler, namely George. If she falls for George, she will no longer have to worry about Battler. So in this sense, Rosa took on the burden of Shannon's love by actively helping her finding new love.

There is also a more esoteric and symbolic side to it. Shannon's burden is depicted as an actual "thing", a bud of love that exists inside her body. So Beatrice uses her magic to transfer that object into her own body, which causes a change in her character. Since Rosa's Beatrice character now own this object, this character now gets burdened with it, making Beatrice obsessed with Battler.

In other words, Rosa's imaginary character changed to being obsessed with Battler.

Think about the cotton drifting festival of Higurashi (and I'm reffering to the religious meaning). The people transfer their sins upon the cotton and then have it drift away. This cleanses you or your sins and there are many many many rituals like this in Japanese culture. Guilt and sin are such are often treated as actual things inside your body that you can remove from your body using some sort of ritual.

Rosa basically did that on Shannon, and before that she transferred her guilt to yasu"

"Shannon is not involved, she is an innocent bystander. The only reason the why-dunnit is centered around her is because Rosa needed someone to "create a universe with" for the imaginary Yasu which eventually led her to take the burden of Battler's sin upon herself and helping Shannon to find new love. Shannon might be aware of what is going on but she lets fate run its course.

I can't say I agree with this theory, but there's the info I could find on it if anyone who also doesn't want to watch the videos is inclined to get their teeth into it a little more.

What....the....fuck....?
I mean, his whole premise of the Rosa culprit is ridiculous, but this makes no freakin' sense. I mean, honestly, I do have some respect for the guy, he's got a bunch of clever ideas, like the fact that Rosa could be lying about being with her boyfriends (which, however, could be tackled by the existence of the receipt which Maria sees, but it's still imaginative anyway), but he goes and completely ignores the whydunnit.

Rosa's actions as he describes them make absolutely no sense. First of all, why would she feel guilty towrads Shannon in the first place? Or why would she want her to hook up with George so badly? Or why would Ryukishi keep lying in his interviews and expect his readers to see past that for some reason? Or what about the 'no red truth, no certainty'? Did he even read EP8? But okay, let's say the last one is acceptable when trying to solve the mystery (which really isn't because the red truth isn't really of any help if taken as the only basis to start reasoning).

What bugs me the most is that he's so damn confident in his theory which makes absolutely no sense. I...just have no words.

Asuka0NK

2012-06-27, 15:34

So where should I post my theory at because I don't really know if I should just put it here or not.

GreyZone

2012-06-27, 15:35

GoldenLand

2012-06-27, 15:41

I will not even try to watch a 9-hour video... and having to pause all the time... no thx, but there are 2 main issues i got with a Rosa-George-Nanjo culprit theory:

1. The REAL PERFECT closed room in EP2. How did they all die? If I remember correctly, then the only person that was in the right position for the "hide-gun-by-suicide" method was Shannon? Well please explain how all of them are in a perfect closed room then. Magic?[/COLOR]

About this one, Wanderer summarised KnownNoMore's argument on it earlier.

He has the most trouble with this one, and with Kanon's death in EP1. For this one, he presents 3 possibilities:

1) The first is really awful- Shannon ended up learning about what George was doing and they got into a struggle (which George didn't want, obviously), killing each other simultaneously (with letter openers!).
2) The second is just like the first, except that George won the fight and killed Shannon (again, not what he wanted, and again, with a letter opener to the skull) then tried to fake his own death by faking the wound and using a "fake death drug", except that Rosa had already arranged for that drug to be poisoned so he actually died.
3) The third possibility is that Rosa actually committed the murders herself. When Genji knocked, it woke Battler from a nap, so it's possible Rosa, who had all the master keys, was off murdering while Battler was asleep. Best of the three, but it still doesn't jive well with what Will said.

Speaking of which, Wanderer also gave a good summary of the overall theory from the videos too.

ShKanon is impossible, because it contradicts red. ShKanon is a deception by RK07, to fool everyone except those who can see through it. Shannon and Kanon really are two different people. Rosa is Beatrice. Yasu doesn't actually exist. She's fiction. Yasu is the personification of Rosa's guilt for killing Kuwadorian Beatrice. Rosa's Yasu/Beatrice persona took on Shannon's love for Battler in Rosa's own mind. Shannon does not even know this. Rosa carries out the ritualistic murders in order to resurrect the Kuwadorian Beatrice (KnownNoMore is not entirely sure to what extent Rosa literally believes this) and to get Battler's acknowledgement. She'll kill herself, too, when the time comes, or halt the murders if the epitaph is solved. Basically the motive is exactly the same as it is in the most basic of Yasu-culprit-theories. George is creepily obsessed with Shannon. George plans on killing everyone else and taking all the gold to build a life with Shannon. George and Rosa work together, but inevitably end up betraying each other. Nanjo is also an accomplice, but he doesn't ever kill anyone himself. He's in it for the money to save his sick grandchild. He is also inevitably betrayed.

That's it in a nutshell. I've seen everything he's released, so if there are any questions I can summarize his solutions and explanations for the various twilights, the logic error, the love duel, Will's answers, etc.

I'm a bit curious now. What is the Love Duel about under KnownNoMore's theory?

Xenon_gun

2012-06-27, 15:43

Said to Erika in EP6: Sorry, but even if you do join us.... there are 17 people!

Erika-ball theory. Erika is a personality (or an aspect of one), a ghost, or a witch. Choose your poison.

That, or the timing of the red declaration is such that some people are dead.

Asuka0NK

2012-06-27, 15:45

ShKanon is a deception by RK07, to fool everyone except those who can see through it.

This is one of the things that just makes him sound so coincided

Captain Bluebeard

2012-06-27, 15:45

2. Said to Erika in EP6: Sorry, but even if you do join us.... there are 17 people!

Apparently, his argument for completely disregarding that red, is the fact that the meaning of the word 'people' is ambiguous. Does it reffer to bodies? Does it reffer to personalities? He completely misses the fact that the meaning behind the terms used in red are subjective, just as happens with the white text, which enables the use of many semantics and word-play, which Umineko is full of ever since the red first shows up.

Another thing I came across while skimming his theory is, he uses the following reds to actually disprove Shkannon:
The only one who can claim Kanon's name is the person himself! A different person cannot claim his name.

Not that Yasu IS Kanon so she can claim his name, no, of course not, it means Shkannon isn't real.

They definitely would not mistake any different person for Kanon!

Not that Yasu IS Kanon, again, no, of course not.

Kanon is dead. Among the five people in Kyrie's group, he was the first to die. In short, he was the 9th victim.

Not that the meaning of red text is ambiguous and subjective and Beato is a dirty bitch who can mess around with the meaning of words as she pleases, no, of course not, that's what only us simpletons would think.

GoldenLand

2012-06-27, 15:45

So where should I post my theory at because I don't really know if I should just put it here or not.

I think this thread is probably a good place to post your theory.

Renall

2012-06-27, 16:12

The problem, I think, is the fact that Ryuukishi by using the personalities gimmick defied the basic rule that the mystery must have a human explanation.

Personalites taken as mere entities detatched from their physical bodies are "human" (adjective) but are not human beings. And he even said so himself they are "less than human". But that means our culprit isn't even a human and two of the victims aren't human either.

Personalities might "exist" in our real world, but the way ryuukishi treats them is the same as if they were supernatural entities. In other words it isn't really different than magic. Because "Kanon" in Ep6 actually magically vanished into nothingness, and that is not something that can happen to something physical in the physical world.Actually, my point is kind of even worse than I went into before, but since you pointed it out...

Because Ryukishi is positing the existence of a person who has multiple minds, his entire argument is that the mind is non-physical but is capable of interacting with physical objects. Yet said mind is also capable of retreating into a state of non-existence somehow, which is only a property of physical objects. He's committing a massive category error here by proposing that the dualist mind (the "software" argument he makes for Shkanon) is equivalent to the physical brain, when in fact in order for his entire gimmick to work, minds and brains must be entirely separate, such that the definition of a "person" can be categorized as "a body with an active mind."

But under dualist philosophy, a mind is a non-physical object. It has no existence on the physical plane, and only interacts with physical matter in an undefined and quasi-mystical fashion. A mind, then, could be defined in Ryukishi's terms as "a conditionally existent intellect (mind) which can affect the physical world." That is to say, the Shannon personality is a distinct mind which cannot be said to "exist" anywhere save perhaps when in direct interaction with its body, and as this setup is dualist in nature, the mind itself is somehow capable of causing physical interaction (by directing the Shkanonform body) without itself being a physical object.

Thus, an entirely non-physical, unverifiable, impossible-to-sense-or-apprehend intellect is capable of causing the murders. Hey, that's funny... Beatrice is a non-physical, unverifiable, impossible-to-sense-or-apprehend intellect claiming to be capable of causing the murders.

Therefore we conclude as follows: DEFINITION: "Minds" are non-physical intellects which can interact with physical reality.
PREMISE: Personalities are minds per Dualism which may or may not have physical bodies at any given time.
PREMISE: All characters in Umineko have personalities; thus, all characters in Umineko have (and are) minds.
PREMISE: Some character in Umineko committed the murders.
DEFINITION: "Witches" are defined as non-physical intellects which can interact with physical reality.
THEREFORE: All characters in Umineko are witches.
THEREFORE: The murders were committed by a witch.
CONCLUSION: Checkmate, Ushiromiya Battlerrrrrrrrrrr! ahaha.wav

GreyZone

2012-06-27, 16:16

Erika-ball theory. Erika is a personality (or an aspect of one), a ghost, or a witch. Choose your poison.

That, or the timing of the red declaration is such that some people are dead.

But her BODY entered the room of the logic error. His theory itself is based on the fact that "the red is absolute and has to be accepted at face-value". If ErikaBall works, then ShKanonTrice does too.

About the closed room of EP2: Before accepting his 1st solution, I would rather accept small bombs. Solution 2 is destroyed because of KNOX. And about 3 I think Battler being woken up by Genji was only after he seperated from Rosa and Maria and got drunk, so he probably got the time mixed up... I could be wrong though... also word of god...

Asuka0NK

2012-06-27, 16:21

Well GreyZone Word of God is a lie apparently

GreyZone

2012-06-27, 16:22

that's why it is a "Purple declaration" xD Although..... now that I think about it.... WORD OF GOD!

Asuka0NK

2012-06-27, 16:24

Word of god is a lie I guess in his theory because he is an intellectual that can see through all illusions and is the smartest person on the planet.

GreyZone

2012-06-27, 16:27

Einstein, Newt... oh wait... to debunk someone to be the best, 1 example is enough already xD

Asuka0NK

2012-06-27, 16:31

Ok the smartest living person on the planet.

GreyZone

2012-06-27, 16:37

No blue so I don't have to respond :cool:

I will respond anyway:

Bill Gates

If he really was so intelligent then he should have earned a lot of money with it already Ok... he probably did by YouTube... but now burden of proof is not on my end^^

But also: Intelligence is not enough. Wisdom and Knowledge have to be accounted for too!

Asuka0NK

2012-06-27, 17:30

ShKanon Theory
Now in my theory the accomplice changes
Legend Accomplices: Nanjo, Servants (minus Gohda) and Hideyoshi.

First Twilight:
Will's Truth: Illusions to illusions. The corpse that cannot return to earth returns to illusions.
Red Truths:
Regarding the unidentified corpses, all of their identities are guaranteed. Therefore, no body double tricks exist!
-------------------------
Shannon shot everyone in the Dining Room then Genji helped her carry them. She had attempted to sacrifice Natsuhi but the scorpion pendent was on the door so instead she painted on her door. So Shannon faked her death and Hideyoshi was recruited by Shannon using the Gold as a deal sealer.

Second Twilight:
Illusions to illusions. A chain of illusions can only hold back illusions.
Red:
Both were killed by another person!
It is not the case that, after the construction of the closed room, one of them committed suicide after committing murder!
Furthermore, the murder was carried out with both the victim and the perpetrator in the same room!
No method exists for the perpetrator to commit murder from outside the room!
-----------------------------
This was never a closed room murder. Kanon and Genji had attempted to open the door but it failed. So Kanon and Kumasawa went to get the wire cutters and paint. Kanon commited the murders and Kumasawa painted on the door. They hid the items under the bed afterwards.

Fourth Twilight:
Illusions to illusions. Let the man of illusions go to where he belongs.
Red:
Kinzo is dead at the starting time of all games.
------------------------------
Natsuhi lit Kinzo's body on fire in the Boiler Room.Ok now this one sorta does have a point since whenever Natsuhi dies on the First Twilight Kinzo doesn't get burned (Ep 2) or isn't burned till the very end (Ep 4)

Fifth Twilight:
Illusions to illusions. The witch and stake of illusions can pierce naught but illusions.
Red:
All of the survivors have alibis! Let us include the dead as well!! In short, no kind of human or dead person on the island could have killed Kanon!
Kanon did not commit suicide
----------------------------
Kanon faked his own death and gave Nanjo the letter and snuck out the back door in the Boiler Room.

Sixth, Seventh, Eighth Twilight:
Illusions to illusions. Illusions are the blind girl’s song. Illusions of a closed room.
Red:
Maria, who was in the same room, did not kill them!
And of course, the three were killed by other people!
------------------------
After everyone was kicked out of Kinzo's room Beatrice was let into the room by Maria. She shot and killed the three and told Maria to lock the door with the master key and put back then call Kinzo's room and sing.

Ninth Twilight:
No Truth
Red:
Natsuhi was killed by another person!
The bullet buried into Natsuhi's forehead was not fired from Natsuhi's gun!
--------------------------
Beatrice hid in the shadows until Natsuhi came out and Natsuhi's gun missed and Beatrice killed Natsuhi.

Turn of the Golden Witch
Accomplices: Servants (Minus Gohda), Nanjo, and Rosa

First Twilight:
Illusions to illusions the gold truth locks the lock of illusions
Red:
Regardless of whether they were living or dead, the six people definitely entered through the door
Only one key to the chapel exists
It is impossible to unlock the lock to the chapel without the chapel's key
When the door to the chapel is locked, it prevents any and all methods of entry or exit
Six people definitely entered through 'this front door'
This morning, Rosa definitely took an envelope out of Maria's handbag, and thereby obtained the genuine key to the chapel
The key to the chapel truly was the object inside the envelope I gave Maria
The letter that I handed over to Maria and the one Rosa opened are the same thing
Starting when Maria's key was received, and until the instant Rosa unsealed it the next day, it passed through no one's hands!!
No door with an auto-lock exists other than Kinzo's study!
The six people were already dead by the time they were discovered!
All were killed by other people!
All six were genuine victims, and did not take part in a mutual murder!
There was no simultaneous murder!!
There was no one hiding in the chapel.
By this, a shut-in murder like you say does not work!
When the six were killed in the chapel, the culprit was inside the chapel!
-------------------------------------------------
The chapel door was never locked in the first place. Yasu bribed Rosa with the gold and she had to be an accomplice in the murders. That night Yasu pretended to murder the 6 and after Rosa left she truly murdered them and stuffed them with candy. The reason Rosa went back to get the key was so that she could re-seal the door after discovering the crimes not to open the door

Second Twilight
Illusions to illusions. Illusions who have fulfilled their role do not leave a corpse.

Red:
there are absolutely no types of hidden doors
This door is the only way in or out
The only way to lock this door is with Jessica's single key or the master keys, only one of which is held by each servant
the window is locked from the inside
Kanon was killed in this room
When locked, entry is not possible by any means
No trick could have the effect of locking the door from the outside without using a key
There is no way to get in or out other than the door and the window
No one exists in this room except all of you. 'All of you' refers to Battler, George, Maria, Rosa, Genji, Gohda, and Shannon
When Jessica's corpse was discovered, only Battler, George, Maria, Rosa, Genji, Gohda, Shannon, Kumasawa, and Nanjo were in Jessica's room
[Whoops, the corpse of] Jessica is also included
Therefore, both in the case of Jessica's room and the case in this servants' room, no humans exist that are you were not aware of
No one is hiding
No method exists by which the door can be locked from the outside without using a key
Regarding the window, no method exists by which it could somehow be locked from the outside
-------------------------------
After commiting the murders Yasu killed off her Kanon character "denied his existance" Shannon then slipped the key to Rosa and in turn she gave the key to Nanjo who pretended to find it in Jessica's pocket.

Fourth, Fifth, Sixth Twilights
Ryukishi's answer is absolute and doesn't need to be disputed.Word of God destroys all illusions.

Seventh, Eighth Twilights
Earth to earth. Illusions to illusions. No illusion can create a corpse.\
From now on I am not listing the red truths I know them so if I miss one please just tell me

Shannon murdered them herself and then threatened Gohda to make up a bogus story about what happened while Genji moved the bodies. Later on when he "discovered" them he staked them.

Banquet of the Golden Witch
Culprit: Yasu (Twilights 1-3)
Eva
Accomplices: None

First Twilight
Illusions to illusions. In a closed room ring, the end and the beginning overlap.
Shannon hid a gun behind the couch where she was for later. After being discovered she hauled ass over to the Chapel and pretended to be Kanon.

Second Twilight
Earth to earth. No falsehoods in their final moments as told.
Shannon was trying to leave the mansion after everyone was gone but then she saw Eva and Rosa fighting. Rosa then attacked Shannon since she should've been dead already. Shannon pushes Rosa and then strangles Maria.

Third Twilight
No one cares about George so he has no truth

After killing Rosa and Maria Shannon returned to the mansion to pretend to be dead. George wanted to see her and jumped out the window/or climbed down whatever. He made sure not to leave any marks on the ground. After finding Shannon she shot him.

Fourth, Fifth, Sixth Twilights
Earth to earth. No falsehoods in their final moments as told.
Eva also went to the mansion after them and in there she murdered Kyrie and Rudolf after they tried to attack and convict her of everything. After this Hideyoshi found her and tried to take the gun away from her. She accidently pulled the trigger and killed Hideyoshi. (I don't believe Eva would ever kill Hideyoshi on purpose)

Seventh, Eighth Twilights
Earth to earth. The obvious culprit wields a mutable blade.
The obvious culprit is Eva who in her anger strangled the two and moved them to the arbor. She then rebuilt the barrier in the main guesthouse room.

Ninth Twilight
No truth
Shannon went to go see Jessica but was unfortunently caught by Nanjo. She then shot him in the head and walked with Jessica till the bomb killed them.

Judoh

2012-06-27, 18:39

But her BODY entered the room of the logic error. His theory itself is based on the fact that "the red is absolute and has to be accepted at face-value". If ErikaBall works, then ShKanonTrice does too.

Dude Xenon you forgot the disclaimer :P

Disclaimer: Erika ball theory does not prove that shkanontrice theory is false. it acknowledges that both theories are valid, and acts as a convenient alternative to shkanontrice. The fact that they're equally valid theories does not disprove erika ball theory.

LyricalAura

2012-06-27, 19:07

Okay. So. How do personalities actually switch? There are three options here: Personalities are always active at all times and one simply takes control of the body. This would appear to violate the person restrictions if more personalities than Shannon and Kanon are present, and violates the notion that either can die because no personality ever actually "dies" (goes inactive). It would also somewhat violate the Logic Error, but only sort of.
Some personalities are dormant and others are active. At least two personalities may be active at the same time.
Only one personality is active and existent at a time. This seems consistent with issues like the Logic Error.
Of these, we can immediately dismiss the first as if true, it renders all the red tricks that Ryukishi supposedly used to make a non-dead person dead irrelevant, as the person never "died" anyway. So let's focus on the other two, as the philosophical problem with them is basically the same.

I think your dismissal of the first option is premature. Your problems with it can be resolved pretty easily:
1) Personalities are active and can interact with each other until they are killed off, which erases them.
2) The person limit counts bodies, not personalities.

#2 is arguably implied by the argument about Jessica having split personalities in EP3, since Battler didn't get shot down by the person limit. We can even take it a bit further, regardless of how switching happens:

Whenever Beatrice says that someone exists in a location, such as a room, or the island, she is referring to the physical location of their body. So, the statement in EP3 that "when the five victims were killed, the culprit was in the same room" means that for each victim, the body owned by the culprit and the body owned by the victim were in the same room. All bodies are trivially co-located with themselves! Therefore, since Shannon and Beatrice owned the same body at the time Beatrice murdered Shannon, they were in the same room, regardless of who was active or not!

Since Beatrice stated in EP6 that Kanon does not exist in the guest room, you might claim my theory implies that his body somehow escaped, which is impossible. But to "exist in the guest room" means for Kanon's body to be physically present. After entering the closet, Kanon lost the right to call that body his own, and so it could no longer be said to be his! Therefore, once he disappeared, "Kanon's body" wasn't physically present because he didn't have one!

How's that? Is it still in conflict with any red?

Renall

2012-06-27, 19:21

Whenever Beatrice says that someone exists in a location, such as a room, or the island, she is referring to the physical location of their body. So, the statement in EP3 that "when the five victims were killed, the culprit was in the same room" means that for each victim, the body owned by the culprit and the body owned by the victim were in the same room. All bodies are trivially co-located with themselves! Therefore, since Shannon and Beatrice owned the same body at the time Beatrice murdered Shannon, they were in the same room, regardless of who was active or not!But under #1, Beatrice cannot murder Shannon. It isn't actually possible. Shannon can't even die. She just isn't actively controlling the body. Being out of power is not the same as being dead and it is impossible to make irrevocable. Even if Shannon never appears again for the rest of the body's life, it technically doesn't mean she was irrevocably destroyed, merely that she was never reasserted. That's not the same thing as dying.

Asuka0NK

2012-06-27, 19:24

Well a body not existing can refer to someone being dead since Beato says that Kinzo doesn't exist since he is dead.

LyricalAura

2012-06-27, 19:33

But under #1, Beatrice cannot murder Shannon. It isn't actually possible. Shannon can't even die. She just isn't actively controlling the body.

I don't really understand. It seems to me like you've just added an arbitrary restriction that personalities can't be destroyed for some reason. If we're entertaining different models, why can't we have one where they can?

Renall

2012-06-27, 19:41

I don't really understand. It seems to me like you've just added an arbitrary restriction that personalities can't be destroyed for some reason. If we're entertaining different models, why can't we have one where they can?Because if a personality is destroyed but can be reconstituted, it isn't actually being destroyed. It's not arbitrary, it's common sense.

Everyone just immediately claims Shkanon can choose to permanently destroy one of its personalities, but there's no reason to believe it couldn't choose to do exactly the opposite. What stops it? Nothing. And Banquet suggests it's possible, as does Dawn.

If you can create something exactly as it was before at any time, you haven't permanently destroyed it.

Asuka0NK

2012-06-27, 19:47

Why is this making me think of Beato's one spell of Remember your true form. I don't knwo why it is just making me think about that.

AuraTwilight

2012-06-27, 20:06

I don't really understand. It seems to me like you've just added an arbitrary restriction that personalities can't be destroyed for some reason. If we're entertaining different models, why can't we have one where they can?

What's the difference between a 'destroyed' personality and a personality that is never used again?

You can't KILL ideas. You can't DESTROY concepts. A thought cannot cease to exist.

Even if Shannon or Kanon ever take control of the body until Yasu dies, the possibility still exists that they COULD, Yasu only has to choose to let them. So long as Yasu lives, they are all technically alive. It's more like going to sleep, and it's indeed what it's usually compared to in REAL Multiple Personality Syndrome.

Asuka0NK

2012-06-27, 20:11

See this is what I don't like about Yasu. The fact that people think she has MPD or DID whatever you want to call it but I personally do not believe that at all. I actually think that Yasu is just a very good actress. I think that she just gets into character very well. Like a dumb example of what I'm talking about is let's say Roger from American Dad. Roger has several characters and gives them there own stories and actually plays the roll of the characters. So this is what I believe Yasu does. If this is a mental disorder I have no idea what it's called.

Judoh

2012-06-27, 20:32

Kealym

2012-06-27, 20:49

Asuka0NK

2012-06-27, 21:09

welcome to animesuki forums. a lot of us share your opinion here. :heh:

And this is what I love about this place I don't have a bunch of annoying people shoving there ideas down my throat and telling me everything I think is wrong.

Wanderer

2012-06-27, 21:14

Aberrant psychology should not be used as a basis for a statement of truth.

Objective truth, maybe, but I'd say red is supposed to conform to Beatrice's subjective reality, which is likely pretty... warped.

I'm a bit curious now. What is the Love Duel about under KnownNoMore's theory?

Instead of it being an irreconcilable issue between the different aspects of ShKanonTrice, it's an irreconcilable issue between the viability of Beatrice-Battler, George-Shannon, and Jessica-Kanon. Beatrice-Battler requires everyone dying, since that's Rosa's goal. George-Shannon requires everyone BUT the two of them dying, since that's George's goal. Jessica-Kanon requires the two of them not dying, which is incompatible with either of the others' goals.

It's pretty bad IMO. It pretty much ignores Battler's and Shannon's say in what their partner does to fulfill their love. Also, although KNM accounts for Beatrice not having a real chance at winning being because her victory includes her own suicide, he doesn't really account for why the duel is between Shannon and Kanon- why would they be the belligerents?- like, why would Kanon have a need to metaphorically or actually destroy Shannon? The instigators of the whole problem are Rosa and George!

ShKanonTrice is by far the better interpretation for the love duel. Even KNM would probably admit so.

ShKanon is a deception by RK07, to fool everyone except those who can see through it.

This is one of the things that just makes him sound so coincided

It's true, though. Then again, if he weren't so bold he wouldn't get as much attention.

What's the difference between a 'destroyed' personality and a personality that is never used again?

You can't KILL ideas. You can't DESTROY concepts.

You can according to various philosophical discussions by characters throughout Umineko.

See this is what I don't like about Yasu. The fact that people think she has MPD or DID whatever you want to call it but I personally do not believe that at all. I actually think that Yasu is just a very good actress. I think that she just gets into character very well. Like a dumb example of what I'm talking about is let's say Roger from American Dad. Roger has several characters and gives them there own stories and actually plays the roll of the characters. So this is what I believe Yasu does. If this is a mental disorder I have no idea what it's called.

Sure, no one here thinks of Yasu having DID, but that's not really the issue, anyway. Whatever you call it, we still have a single body constituting multiple people; and the way these "people" necessarily must interact with each other in order to be consistent with various reds is, at least according to some people here, impossible by any stretch of the imagination.

The only kerfuffle present is the "zombie Shkanon" that occurs in Banquet. (Am I using that right? When the body is doing things with no readily identified personality available to do them?) And I'd more readily put that down to a fault in Ryu's writing than a fault in the idea behind it.

I never considered the resurrections to be complete in the first place. The Shannon and Kanon we saw at the end of EP3 were like... shadows? echoes? It's "finite magic", like how Virgilias could repair the broken vase, but only temporarily: They might appear to be alive, but they're really already dead.

Kealym

2012-06-27, 21:32

I never considered the resurrections to be complete in the first place. The Shannon and Kanon we saw at the end of EP3 were like... shadows? echoes? It's "finite magic", like how Virgilias could repair the broken vase, but only temporarily: They might appear to be alive, but they're really already dead.
Yes, I totally agree. I was moreso referring to the presence of the stakes on Kyrolf, Hideyoshi, and Kratsuhi, which basically throw the "what was REALLY going on" of Banquet into, at best ... a murky, murky place.

LyricalAura

2012-06-27, 21:36

Hm. I agree with LyricalAura. I think, in Umineko's conceit about how these things "work", when Shannon or Kanon is claimed to be dead, we can pretty much consider them destroyed forever, and unable to use the body again.

The only kerfuffle present is the "zombie Shkanon" that occurs in Banquet. (Am I using that right? When the body is doing things with no readily identified personality available to do them?) And I'd more readily put that down to a fault in Ryu's writing than a fault in the idea behind it.

It isn't even really a problem. Beatrice can dress up like Shannon or mimic Kanon's voice without actually becoming them. Renall wouldn't even be batting an eye if it were, say, twin sisters mimicking each other. I don't see any reason to believe in some cheating resurrection when there's a perfectly acceptable alternate solution that's consistent with the story themes.

I also thought we were all in mass agreement that Yasu totally does not at all have some kind of MPD.

Yes. It's really a nuisance that we can't talk about Shannon and Kanon without ending up using terms like "personality" when they're totally inaccurate. As far as I'm concerned, the author just decided to reify her personal problems as three people who share a body on her game board and fight each other. It's a literary condition, like Gregor Samson turning into a cockroach.

LyricalAura

2012-06-27, 22:27

Yes, I totally agree. I was moreso referring to the presence of the stakes on Kyrolf, Hideyoshi, and Kratsuhi, which basically throw the "what was REALLY going on" of Banquet into, at best ... a murky, murky place.

One red that a lot of people forget about is that Kyrie never did anything to suggest that she wasn't going to the mansion for food right up until the moment she died. It basically proves that she never got to the point of revealing her suspicions, so there was never any way for a firefight to start for the 4th-6th twilights unless Beatrice was the one who started it. So I got to thinking, what if Eva actually didn't kill anyone besides Battler? You can explain all of the stakes easily if Beatrice was the one committing the murders.

If Eva was chosen as the bribed/threatened sibling this game, then she could have been deliberately lured into having no alibi for Rosa's murder despite never actually leaving her room. Then for 7-8, Beatrice could have spiked the coffee with Rosa's missing sedatives so that the already-exhausted survivors would fall asleep, and she could strangle Krauss and Natsuhi and drag them away at leisure.

Wanderer

2012-06-27, 23:16

One red that a lot of people forget about is that Kyrie never did anything to suggest that she wasn't going to the mansion for food right up until the moment she died.

It was translated as Until the last instant before she died, Kyrie preserved her pattern of behavior which states 'not going to get food=not going to the mansion', which is fairly confusing.

Renall

2012-06-27, 23:55

Yes. It's really a nuisance that we can't talk about Shannon and Kanon without ending up using terms like "personality" when they're totally inaccurate. As far as I'm concerned, the author just decided to reify her personal problems as three people who share a body on her game board and fight each other. It's a literary condition, like Gregor Samson turning into a cockroach.It's Ryukishi's fault for suggesting a solution which requires him to stoop to absurdities. If that isn't what he meant to do, he screwed up in communicating the matter properly. I would agree that literary conceits and/or a single actor are the most sensible explanations, it's just the stumbling block of one silly set of reds (and some odd interview answers) that create the appearance that Ryukishi meant something with more a more awkward technical explanation. A technical explanation which does not, and cannot, actually work.

haguruma

2012-06-27, 23:58

You can according to various philosophical discussions by characters throughout Umineko.
I would add to this that Shannon, Kanon and Beatrice, to me, are less ideas - and of course not personalities - but rather "an emotional state of being fashioned in different appearances". What "killing" them basically means is that this emotion or emotional goal has no longer any bearing on the game. Be it by Yasu's own decision or an outside force.
When she decides that her love for Battler (and thus a more overarching spiritual connection) is more important than her relationship with George (and fulfilling the concept of a classical girl) or her feelings towards Jessica (and being a rather typical example of a boy) she tosses those longings aside and any action towards those becomes meaningless. This doesn't mean that she can't act in a fashion that would indicate her return to such a state of mind and thus be interpreted by an outside observer as her being "that person again", but that does not mean that she is any longer actively pursuing this idea...which is why Kanon is the witches furniture in EP2 and nothing more than a ghost summoned by the witch in EP3.

It's basically likening the act of abandoning a goal to killing a part of yourself.
And this is possible to portray in Umineko as killing somebody because it has been established long and excessively that everybody carries different personas within that are used depending on the circumstance. Like Nice-Mama and Possessed-Mama or Kinzô and Goldsmith or Nice Daughter Jessica and School Jessica. Had they not the same appearance they would appear as completely different people to an outside observer and one suddenly disappearing would be
as if that one person suddenly died.

I still think, and I will stay by that position, that people are still trying too hard to actually push the idea of Shannon, Kanon and Beatrice appearing as different people on the island forward.
The only people still alive who were on the island that day are a wheelchair-bound insomniac who talks in riddles and a crazy old lady who refuses to talk. Ange would probably not even remember two servants that she met 1, 2 times a year for 2 days between 1 and 5 years old.

Drifloon

2012-06-28, 01:55

Yeah, I think Ryukishi screwed up with that ONE red, the "6 people: Shannon, Kanon, Genji, Kumasawa, Gohda, and Kinzo are dead!" one. Every other red in the game can be interpreted without resorting to multiple personalities - you can say that "Shannon is dead" means that Yasu's feelings for George are dead, and so on. But that one red actually defines Shannon and Kanon as "people", which really bugs me. It seems like Ryukishi wanted to let people decide their own interpretation of Yasu, but this one red really restricts it, and it's not even NECESSARY to define them as six people to make that red actually work in the context. I have no idea why he did it, and I think a lot of people would be happier with the resolution if this one red was just worded differently.

LyricalAura

2012-06-28, 02:29

Asuka0NK

2012-06-28, 03:12

You know what I actually wonder if the whole reason we even question the true theory is because of translation. Maybe in Japan the actual story is written without all these confusing things. But I don't know if anyone can read japanese and actually say this is wrong which it most likely is.

Jan-Poo

2012-06-28, 04:01

I have to wonder whether Japanese readers really had the same gripe about it, because it looks like a translation issue to me. The word that was translated as "people" is a somewhat broader category in Japanese that includes a variety of things that are sufficiently person-ish.

Something similar happens in English with the word "men" in English. I can say "There were six men in the room" and "The army was a million men strong", but the first one refers to males and the second one doesn't specify.

Still I really wonder if everyone in Japan would recognize that the "人" counter can be validly used for "an emotional state of being fashioned in different appearances" as Haguruma suggested.

I think that in the end you still end up in a matter of philosophical interpretation that defies common sense.

Anyway I'm one of those who doesn't flat out dismiss the possibility that Yasu actually has a multiple personality disorder in R07's view.
Of course you can say: that's not how DID is supposed to work.
Yeah, no doubt about that but two things:

1) MPD or DID is a disorder that has always been contested and it still is. In other words it might not even exist as it is intended and in the ages its definition has been changed and manipulated dozen of times until it completely changed name. So in the end you might be arguig about the lack of realism in something that doesn't even exist in the first place. I mean... 30 years ago you would claim that MPD works in a way that it is now denied.

2) The fact that it's not how DID is supposed to work doesn't mean that it's not DID. You'd have a hard time convincing me that R07 wouldn't "do it wrong" or that he would bother with being absoluely realist or that he wouldn't make use of overused narrative gimmicks. After all in there is a wide narrative where MPD was used wrongly, why do you think R07 would be different?

GuestSpeaker

2012-06-28, 04:28

I would say if Shannon is never reactivated then she is dead. Ignoring that Ry7 once defined dead as unable to act even if they have not physically passed yet, even the death you describe is not permanent. Not only can we not say that people can't be revived in the future, but you can still meet the medical criteria for dead and be revived by resuscitation. Does this mean the person was never dead? Death by common definition is actually not always all that permanent.

But yes, I believe it more likely Ry7 sort of half made up a condition which does not exist, but can be inferred from his clues. I agree with the body definition of existing, and doesn't it just seem like a trick Beato would love? This isn't just fanboyism, this is because if I were Ry7 creating the reds, I would know that EXACTLY what they said would become a matter of vital importance to any reader who cared, and therefore the wording would be more important than a mistake in the white. I really just hope he gave it the thought it deserved.

I also agree that it isn't cheating for Beato to perfectly imitate kanon's voice (if this even happened at all let's not forget). If you were able to perfectly emulate someone's voice, it doesn't mean that you are them, even if you pretend to be.

LaplaceNoMa

2012-06-28, 07:33

I wonder if there's any possible way of going with Yasu=Shannon=Beatrice != Kanon approach. It would really cause problems with the love duel, but at least that ep3 red won't be contradicted that way.

Renall

2012-06-28, 08:25

I would add to this that Shannon, Kanon and Beatrice, to me, are less ideas - and of course not personalities - but rather "an emotional state of being fashioned in different appearances". What "killing" them basically means is that this emotion or emotional goal has no longer any bearing on the game. Be it by Yasu's own decision or an outside force.
When she decides that her love for Battler (and thus a more overarching spiritual connection) is more important than her relationship with George (and fulfilling the concept of a classical girl) or her feelings towards Jessica (and being a rather typical example of a boy) she tosses those longings aside and any action towards those becomes meaningless. This doesn't mean that she can't act in a fashion that would indicate her return to such a state of mind and thus be interpreted by an outside observer as her being "that person again", but that does not mean that she is any longer actively pursuing this idea...which is why Kanon is the witches furniture in EP2 and nothing more than a ghost summoned by the witch in EP3.You understand how utterly ridiculous that is. "Oh, he's dead... but he can still appear, interact, and be blamed for things. He's just dead because I say so. You know, until I change my mind." Because apparently it is possible to change your mind and bring a character back for the shits of it, or to pose as them and act, behave, and think as them. But somehow still be "dead." And if you're going to tell me with a straight face that this is perfectly acceptable, I'm going to have to say you're behaving unreasonably.

...by the way, what the hell is up with that ep4 red about Kanon being the ninth victim? Victim of what? Who was in "Kyrie's group?" What was the point of that red at all? It seems designed to anchor the fantasy story around some real sequence of events, but it's entirely pointless to use Kanon's "death" as an anchor for anything because it can happen at an arbitrary time and place and be reversed at will.I have to wonder whether Japanese readers really had the same gripe about it, because it looks like a translation issue to me. The word that was translated as "people" is a somewhat broader category in Japanese that includes a variety of things that are sufficiently person-ish.

Something similar happens in English with the word "men" in English. I can say "There were six men in the room" and "The army was a million men strong", but the first one refers to males and the second one doesn't specify.The ideal translation in this circumstance would be to say "characters." "Character" is sufficiently vague as to potentially refer to the fact that they are physically dead people who happen to be characters in the story (which is true), but it could also suggest something like a fake murder game or even just a faked death in which the characters have been "killed."

This does open the door to the other First Twilight victims being alive, but it doesn't mean they have to be. You could put on a production of Julius Caesar where Caesar's actor is literally stabbed to death, but Brutus's actor dies a stage death. It would then be borderline acceptable to say Caesar and Brutus are dead. But you can't ever actually know which of the two is the case, so it would swing some doors wide open. That's just a consequence of the (supposedly intentional) imperfect definition.

It's still stupid, and Banquet would've been greatly improved without the red in it at all.I would say if Shannon is never reactivated then she is dead. Ignoring that Ry7 once defined dead as unable to act even if they have not physically passed yet, even the death you describe is not permanent. Not only can we not say that people can't be revived in the future, but you can still meet the medical criteria for dead and be revived by resuscitation. Does this mean the person was never dead? Death by common definition is actually not always all that permanent.The main thing is that if you accept this, you accept that nobody died. You can no longer definitively call any death mentioned in red permanent, as it has no foundation and indeed the only conception of "death" we have in Umineko is fundamentally non-permanent. If you're okay with that, then by all means.

But if Shannon is never reactivated, she isn't actually dead until the point where she cannot be reactivated (i.e. the death of the host). "That is not dead which can eternal lie."But yes, I believe it more likely Ry7 sort of half made up a condition which does not exist, but can be inferred from his clues. I agree with the body definition of existing, and doesn't it just seem like a trick Beato would love?No, it doesn't. Because it would run entirely counter to her purposes to lie in red, and the only reason she'd even have to lie in red is so Ryukishi can deceive his audience, as it doesn't actually help her deceive Battler (who would've assumed the First Twilight victims were dead even if she didn't actually confirm it). It retroactively messes up her character if true.

GreyZone

2012-06-28, 09:07

Well the issue may be resolved, if we look at Nanjo's death in Banquet... If ShKanonTrice is really dead since the 1st twilight, then Battler's blue truth in EP4 would be right... Until today it was never disproved, that someone killed Nanjo and died afterwards for some reason and was then deemed "dead" by Eva-Beatrice's red truth. If Battler's blue is wrong, then it means ShKanonTrice must be alive.

Renall

2012-06-28, 09:58

haguruma

2012-06-28, 10:21

You understand how utterly ridiculous that is. "Oh, he's dead... but he can still appear, interact, and be blamed for things. He's just dead because I say so. You know, until I change my mind." Because apparently it is possible to change your mind and bring a character back for the shits of it, or to pose as them and act, behave, and think as them. But somehow still be "dead." And if you're going to tell me with a straight face that this is perfectly acceptable, I'm going to have to say you're behaving unreasonably.
The way you understood it, it is quite unreasonable, though I wouldn't call it unacceptable. But I meant it in a slightly different way.
What actually makes up Umineko's point concerning this is the fact that "an unobserved event stays in eternal process". What does this tell us about Shkannontrice? Because we can't be sure who that person wearing these personae actually is, a different persona is used for actions that would make it appear as if it is another person. You could basically have given a different sprite to Rosa once she goes mental on Maria and called that sprite "the evil witch Carmen".
Umineko is told to us from a perspective after the events but without certain knowledge of how the space between beginning and end was filled. The same goes for the characters which compose the entirety of "Yasu" and were divided into roles on the gameboard.

Actually they are not the only people who's life and death status is arbitrarily used depending on the narrative. Think of Kinzô in EP5. We know he is dead, basically everyone knows he's dead and yet we are entertaining the notion of "what if he wasn't dead".

I just think you are trying too hard to actually apply the notion of realism to the gameboards when they are more or less metaphorical representation that are maybe useful to reason towards reality but don't depict reality.
Of course you can solve them as a story, but I think it's too much too assume that any of the stories actually displayed what happened on Rokkenjima during those 2 days.

I'm actually entertaining the theory that there was no Shkannon on the island at all and trying to write a forgery around it myself. And I think it's important to distance oneself from the idea of trying to piece together reality from what the stories show us...reality should rather be deduced from what the stories tell us.

Wanderer

2012-06-28, 10:26

The ideal translation in this circumstance would be to say "characters." "Character" is sufficiently vague as to potentially refer to the fact that they are physically dead people who happen to be characters in the story (which is true), but it could also suggest something like a fake murder game or even just a faked death in which the characters have been "killed."

This does open the door to the other First Twilight victims being alive, but it doesn't mean they have to be. You could put on a production of Julius Caesar where Caesar's actor is literally stabbed to death, but Brutus's actor dies a stage death. It would then be borderline acceptable to say Caesar and Brutus are dead. But you can't ever actually know which of the two is the case, so it would swing some doors wide open. That's just a consequence of the (supposedly intentional) imperfect definition.

It's all here, in the conversation between Lion and Will.

"So when Bernkastel asks us who killed Beatrice, she means who killed the kind person who pretended to be Beatrice?"

"That's close, but not quite. It's not the one who pretended. We're talking about two different people. ......In Maria's eyes, just like how her mother and the black witch are different people, Beatrice and the person who played that part are also different people.

It's just like Mariage Sorciere.

That was where one person would be the creator, and the other person would acknowledge those creations, thereby nurturing the illusion.

The Golden Witch Beatrice was also created by one person, and then nurtured when Maria acknowledged her."

"You mean, even if you killed the acted character, that doesn't mean you've killed the kind person who was playing her part?"

"Even if Beatrice's vessel is lost, that isn't the same as Beatrice being killed. ......It's easier to understand if we use a telephone as an example. Let's say I call you on the phone. From my perspective during the call, the phone is you, in the sense that it is what I talk to.

But what if I break the phone?"

"......I see. If you kill the phone, you won't be able to talk to me, but that doesn't mean you've killed me."

"We know Maria once offered to let Beatrice possess her, early on in their relationship. That clearly shows that Beatrice did not look like the portrait at that time."

"So, if the person acting the part and the witch character they play are different people, ......we're talking about killing just the witch character itself. ......Is that even possible?"

"Only the actor can kill the character. In other words, the person who killed Beatrice is the person who played the part of Beatrice."

"You mean that the person who played witches with Maria-chan is the culprit Bernkastel's talking about?"

"That's it. .........But, as if this wasn't confusing enough, this chapel is now a world inside a cat box. The culprit is the cat. There are now two cats existing at the same time...one alive, and one dead."

(and Will goes on to explain that Lion is the dead cat)

Or anyone else "died" in a non-physical manner.

Just because the interpretation makes it logically possible for anyone to die a non-physical "death" doesn't mean that they necessarily do. We don't have any reason to believe that anyone besides ShKanon work that way.

GreyZone

2012-06-28, 11:11

Nice find Wanderer. Yes it shows very well the "system" of ShKanonTrice.
(But this also enforces my belief on Ikuko=Yasu again.)

Now that i think about it: Banquet of the golden witch proves that there is more than just Shanon, Kanon and Beatrice.

After the 1st twilight Shanon and Kanon are dead, but at the same time by the epitaph the witch Beatrice was not revived yet.
In other words: The culprit is and empty vessel until "the witch is revived again". It is later called "Yasu".

Renall

2012-06-28, 11:33

I just think you are trying too hard to actually apply the notion of realism to the gameboards when they are more or less metaphorical representation that are maybe useful to reason towards reality but don't depict reality.If they don't reflect reality, then Beatrice was right all along and the murders are sorcery. Beatrice's stories are fantastical and the message she is conveying does not need to be inherently realistic, but her culprit methodology does.Just because the interpretation makes it logically possible for anyone to die a non-physical "death" doesn't mean that they necessarily do. We don't have any reason to believe that anyone besides ShKanon work that way.Actually, we have no reason to believe that anyone dies physically, because the only clear model the story advances for "death" relates to Shkanon, and "dead" equivocates Shannon and Kanon's deaths to that model. So it's actually the opposite of that.

The consequence of personality death, or character death, or actor death, or role death, or however you want to ascribe it is that we do not, in fact, know for certain that every single death wasn't just faked, at least to start with. There's a number of things which support this, even Our Confession suggests Beatrice manipulated individuals into faking death before really killing them. At what point in the storyline could Meta-Beatrice have declared those people dead? At the time they pretended to be dead, they were essentially entirely inactive right up to the point where they really died. Is there a difference between the actual biological death and the actor death if they're faking death right up to the point of the explosion? What if they get up, but only when no one is watching? Does it really make any difference?

It'd be easier to just say "dead" means "the person is now putting on the appearance of being dead" and leave it at that for all characters. This universality removes any issues of concern with Shkanon because it can simply be stated that at any time they are declared dead, it's because they've affected the appearance of death either physically or through established group knowledge. And the same is true of everyone else. That doesn't mean that they do get up and do something (although in Banquet it's at least a possibility and in End it's a near certainty), but they could.

Problem is, this would run afoul of End when it says that the corpses never moved "after death." This strongly suggests that two separate definitions of death are being used here. And that will never be acceptable under any circumstances. Nothing anybody can say is going to suddenly make that work.

Drifloon

2012-06-28, 12:06

Wanderer

2012-06-28, 12:44

Actually, we have no reason to believe that anyone dies physically, because the only clear model the story advances for "death" relates to Shkanon, and "dead" equivocates Shannon and Kanon's deaths to that model. So it's actually the opposite of that.

Yeah, actually I think this is true... and actually I think it's a pretty darned important hint for Murder Game Theory: Red has no literal bearing on reality, and even no literal bearing on the fictional reality being depicted in the various stories/forgeries (the "reality" of the "game" being a separate concept grafted over the "reality" of the stories/forgeries).

This is also what I mean when I've argued (poorly, I suppose) that Bern and Erika just made up their reds in EP5 and EP6 as they went along. All reds are simply "what-ifs" added to the original story that when taken as "truth" can form the rules of a kind of game. They don't tell you the actual story (which could just as well be a Fantasy).

Problem is, this would run afoul of End when it says that the corpses never moved "after death." This strongly suggests that two separate definitions of death are being used here. And that will never be acceptable under any circumstances. Nothing anybody can say is going to suddenly make that work.

Passive form. The corpses were never moved after death.

Renall

2012-06-28, 13:14

Sure it's okay to have multiple definitions of the word 'dead' in play.

Eva is dead. Shannon is dead. The phone line is dead.

You can infer what kind of 'death' is being referred to by looking at what is said to have 'died'.
A person dies a physical death.
A 'personality' dies a metaphorical/symbolic death.
A phone system 'dies' if it is no longer functional. And so on.I was hoping someone would bring this argument up because it's really, really stupid. The reason a telephone line being "dead" works is because inanimate mechanical or electronic objects being "dead" when they are non-functional is a collectively-understood definition, in the same sense that you'd call a roadkilled squirrel or your great-great-grandma "dead" because it's collectively understood to mean a termination of biological life. If nobody ever used one of those particular definitions, you'd get quizzical looks when you used expressions like "I heard a gasp and thump on the other end of the line. Then the phone and my grandma were dead." The wordplay works only because we recognize as a body of language users that a particular word has two distinct meanings. That by itself is not carte blanche for someone to make up their own definition of the word and then claim it's okay because the word has more than one meaning.

The entire lynchpin of the supposed Beatrice-really-believed-it red concept is that the definition makes sense... to her. It doesn't have to make sense to anyone else. But that's a violation of the general understanding that we have for how language operates. I don't get to define turds as "ice cream sandwiches" unless I specifically tell everyone else, who are accustomed to not getting a big bite of shit for dessert, what I mean when I say "ice cream sandwich." Beatrice was obliged to present a universal definition of "dead," even if that definition required some clever thinking to understand how it might apply to a person faking death. Hence my suggestion that "dead" be treated to exclusively refer to the appearance of death as either an actual event or participation in deception, as at least it is then equally consistent for a person actually murdered and a person faking death and avoids any "personality" shenanigans at all.

Even if you say the concept is meant to apply to Beatrice and to her inner circle, the audience is Battler. No evidence is ever presented to show that Battler shares such a commonality of language, nor is any apparent effort made to actually permit him to come to that understanding. And it rather goes without saying that it's manipulative to an extreme with respect to a reading audience.

Drifloon

2012-06-28, 13:25

Sure, "the phone and my grandma were dead" is an odd expression, but you wouldn't object to that being said in red, right? It IS a true statement, however strangely worded.

And if you know that the names Shannon and Kanon do not refer to people, but personalities, then you can infer from that red that they in fact fall under the 'personality death' category.

Naturally, Battler does not know this, but there are clues presented so he can figure it out.

Captain Bluebeard

2012-06-28, 13:46

Even if you say the concept is meant to apply to Beatrice and to her inner circle, the audience is Battler. No evidence is ever presented to show that Battler shares such a commonality of language, nor is any apparent effort made to actually permit him to come to that understanding. And it rather goes without saying that it's manipulative to an extreme with respect to a reading audience.

Except the effort is made through all the mumbo-jumbo the characters mumble all the time about the concept of 'life' and 'death' and 'ressurection' (and we know Beatrice excepts Battler to get tons of stuff by what she's showing him). Regardless of that concept being valid or not, we certainly did have means to pick up on it and see how they mean it.

And it's obviously manipulative and misleading. If it weren't, it wouldn't be a mystery. I'm not going to argue whether it was fair or not, because it really depends on how different people interpret the same thing. A hint that's obvious for some may appear as incomprehensible to others and so on.

Though I will agree that the red is plainly dirty-cheating from the start. Well, actually, it's neccessary in order to trick Battler that it's magic from one point of view, since in a game with unreliable witnesses and fucked up 'reading' or whatever else you want to call it, where every information shown may or may not be filtered with fantasy, nobody would accept any closed room, since it'd be simpler to argue that the witnesses are lying, the corpse is playing dead, or the door was never locked to begin with. It is needed only to make us accept certain bits of information which we could very easily doubt otherwise. However, the ways in which it is used are far from reader-friendly.

Wanderer

2012-06-28, 14:10

Except the effort is made through all the mumbo-jumbo the characters mumble all the time about the concept of 'life' and 'death' and 'ressurection' (and we know Beatrice excepts Battler to get tons of stuff by what she's showing him). Regardless of that concept being valid or not, we certainly did have means to pick up on it and see how they mean it.

And it's obviously manipulative and misleading. If it weren't, it wouldn't be a mystery. I'm not going to argue whether it was fair or not, because it really depends on how different people interpret the same thing. A hint that's obvious for some may appear as incomprehensible to others and so on.

I pretty much agree with this stuff. There was actually quite a lot on the concept of metaphorical death throughout Umineko, but whether that makes the "dead" tricks fair or not is really just a matter of opinion.

Renall

2012-06-28, 14:15

You guys continue to ignore the point, which is that it's inconsistent.

AuraTwilight

2012-06-28, 15:17

Though I will agree that the red is plainly dirty-cheating from the start. Well, actually, it's neccessary in order to trick Battler that it's magic from one point of view

Pity that's not what Beatrice wants at all.

Wanderer

2012-06-28, 15:24

You guys continue to ignore the point, which is that it's inconsistent.

I thought you had reached a consistent explanation with "dead"~"appear to be dead".

Renall

2012-06-28, 15:38

I thought you had reached a consistent explanation with "dead"~"appear to be dead".Well sure, I did, but I'm not Ryukishi and my conception of it doesn't seem to work too well.

Captain Bluebeard

2012-06-28, 16:59

You guys continue to ignore the point, which is that it's inconsistent.

I didn't try to defend the consistency of the logic behind personality death, I just said it was hinted so you could easily pick up on it regardless of its validity.

Pity that's not what Beatrice wants at all.

Um...Isn't it? Even though Beatrice secretly wishes for Battler to solve her mysteries, she also wants him to acknowledge her as a witch, which he does once he gets a good understanding of her, thus granting her wish.

Plus, making Battler accept witches is her winning clause in the game, which we know she wished to play with him.

I agree, it is roundabout, it is counter-productive to her motive, but Beatrice is a fickle and selfish person after all.

Kealym

2012-06-28, 17:31

Alt form for Banquet's problematic red, maybe:

"Kinzo, and all of the servants are dead! The 5 existing master keys were found on their bodies, of course. All deaths were instant, and noone is hiding in the rooms they were discovered in : *list of rooms* I have more : when I say noone was hiding, I mean that there was nobody present that your parents could not detect, and your parents faithfully reported all they had found! None were killed by traps or commited suicide, either."

This is the same bundle of information, but only implies a body count of 6 by stating that 6 rooms were found with bodies in them.

The part about no suicides, or rather, no suicides AND instant death is a still a problem. Not sure how one would work around that

GreyZone

2012-06-28, 17:52

GabrieliosP

2012-06-28, 18:16

If you look at EP7, his death really was instantaneous.

Kealym

2012-06-28, 18:51

Yeah, the regular reds also list Kinzo's death as instant.
"The six people died instantly!"

I mean, it's rather forced, semantically - there's often a time between when an injury is inflicted and when the body finally goes "kaput", and Kinzo had been in the process of being old and nearly-dead since forever ago. The sentiment is probably just "Nobody was limping around the mansion for a half hour as they slowly bled out" or anything like that.

AuraTwilight

2012-06-28, 19:05

Kealym

2012-06-28, 19:18

"No, no, not lied, at all
No I never lied. Said she took a poison, she DID, never said that she died!
...w-...wait. Shit. Wait."

Wanderer

2012-06-28, 19:36

Well sure, I did, but I'm not Ryukishi and my conception of it doesn't seem to work too well.

Well, yeah, thinking about it it's pretty silly. Why have red to describe appearances? We and Battler already have that kind of information. The whole point of red is to provide information beyond appearances.

So. It probably requires work, but here's what I'm thinking:

"Death" refers to the death of characters (that's the word I think suits the concept best, but it's basically interchangeable with "personalities", "roles", w/e). It always refers to characters.

Characters may or may not be human (I will postulate that "being human" and "being a person" are functionally interchangeable terms, at least in every case we have encountered them). What distinguishes a non-human character from a human character is that a human character has a physical manifestation through which it can express its will directly in the real world- in other words, a living body. Conversely, this means that non-human characters exist only as an idea (or to put it another way, as a Fantasy character), and as such have no physical location. But, they do exist and can interact with human characters. This is quite important, actually, because it injects an element of the supernatural into what otherwise seems to be a naturalistic world. This is how a human character, say Shannon, can allow their body to be taken over by a Fantasy character, say Kanon. In such a situation their positions reverse, and Shannon becomes Fantasy in exchange for Kanon's humanity.

Now the question of the meaning of bodily death. I will suggest that everything is relative to Yasu's/Beatrice's subjective perspective. To Yasu/Beatrice, the bodily death of another human being is functionally equivalent to the death of the character that uses that body, because as far as she is concerned, the character is gone forever.

Of course the bodily death of Yasu/Beatrice in this subjectified Universe is arguably inconceivable, which I think also suggests that she's still alive.

I wanted to edit this more, and maybe add to it, but ran out of time. There may be amendments to follow.

Prototype909

2012-06-28, 20:58

Um...Isn't it? Even though Beatrice secretly wishes for Battler to solve her mysteries, she also wants him to acknowledge her as a witch, which he does once he gets a good understanding of her, thus granting her wish.

Plus, making Battler accept witches is her winning clause in the game, which we know she wished to play with him.

I agree, it is roundabout, it is counter-productive to her motive, but Beatrice is a fickle and selfish person after all.

Beatrice blatantly states throughout Episode 4 (And probably even before and after that), that Battler accepting witches and magic is a false win condition (In reference to why she didn't just keep Battler fooled for eternity at the end of Episode 3), and not 'true victory' no matter how convenient it might be for her.

The whole point is that Battler remember the person BEHIND the witch, that's why everything can be solved with mysteries and humans instead of magic - going back to young Battler's whole rant about understanding the heart being so important to mysteries in Episode 7.

Beato wanted me to solve it, so she made the riddles of this game solvable

Which is so ironic since if the first four game-boards really do reflect any semblance of prime, the Battler who showed up on Rokkenjima in 1986 didn't really give a flying shit about mysteries, or the heart, or 'why dunnit' at that point. But at least as far as the first two gamebaords are concerned they were written beforehand by Yasu to reflect 'the Battler she imagined would come back after all those years' - when she had the time to write this is anyones guess but still. We have no way of knowing whether or not the Battler who showed up in 1986 was like he was on the gameboards, if he liked mysteries, remembered his promise, or just decided to brutally murder everyone. We just don't know!

Drifloon

2012-06-29, 01:48

Sure Beatrice wanted Battler to solve everything. If it had been up to her, she'd probably have made things a lot easier and not used so many questionable tricks with the red, showed scenes that didn't actually happen, and so on. But it wasn't up to her. The only reason she gets to run the game at all is because of Lambda, and she's not going to accept anything she thinks Bern is going to be able to win without a lot of trouble. So naturally Beatrice had to make the difficulty higher than she wanted to. Even the level of hints she gave out in EP3 made Lambda pretty unhappy, as we saw in the tea party. She had to constantly balance between her hope that Battler would solve it and the need to satisfy Lambda, who wanted it to never be solved.

Bern told you at the end of EP1 ???? that Beatrice's board had a lot of unfair devices in play, even more than Lambda's board of Higurashi, so you really can't say you weren't warned.

LaplaceNoMa

2012-06-29, 02:36

I will attempt to bring my point again: if that red is so problematic, why don't we try going with the old good 'Shannontrice' again? Is it impossible to explain some things without going with ShKannontrice?

Drifloon

2012-06-29, 02:45

Even if you go with Shannontrice, Shannon still has to be declared dead when she isn't dead, so it's not really any better, is it?

Kealym

2012-06-29, 03:18

The big problem with Shannontrice (a much more elegant solution, and what I'd assumed was the truth after Alliance) is that Dawn pretty much spends 5 hours assaulting it with the Shkanon hammer.

As Drifloon says, it still has a "zombie Shannon" problem, but it's better to only have ONE should-be-dead person than TWO should-be-dead people.

LaplaceNoMa

2012-06-29, 03:47

I don't really think the 'zombie' thing is a real problem in ep3. The discussion about personalities, death and suicides isn't really productive, because it fits ep6 logic error and doesn't contradict itself anywhere in the story.

The main contradiction of ep3 is the '6 people' including both Shannon and Kanon. No matter how you look at it, the only possibly plausible explaination would be Shannon and Kanon being separate beings. If they're not, this red causes lots of problems and inconsistency with other parts of Umineko.

Captain Bluebeard

2012-06-29, 03:54

Beatrice blatantly lied about her motive and winning conditions.

Also, someone understanding you and calling you a 'witch' as a code-word for realizing you're the girl he liked as a child is magnitudes different from "Well damn you can blatantly deny the laws of reality with supernatural feats."

The "death" trick only works for the LATTER, not the FORMER.

Making Battler 'surrender' was the winning clause in the context of the game, regardless of Beatrice's real motives. The 'evil witch' personality of hers is just a facade which she keeps up for the games' sake. The reason she puts him through all that shit is to get back at him a little for forgetting the promise.

Battler does accept witches in the end, which isn't just a code-word for the girl he liked as a child, he really does figure out how Beatrice's magic works, and accept its existence, that's what it means he understood her.

I agree that the 'death' trick isn't really productive in regard to Beatrice's goals, even if we take into account her childish and selfish personality, thus her wanting Battler to understand but refusing to just give it to him. It's terribly roundabout.

LaplaceNoMa

2012-06-29, 03:55

AuraTwilight

2012-06-29, 04:18

Making Battler 'surrender' was the winning clause in the context of the game, regardless of Beatrice's real motives. The 'evil witch' personality of hers is just a facade which she keeps up for the games' sake. The reason she puts him through all that shit is to get back at him a little for forgetting the promise.

I would wager that since Beatrice never stated her win-condition in Red, it's entirely valid to say that she lied and her real win condition is "to be remembered by him."

Battler does accept witches in the end, which isn't just a code-word for the girl he liked as a child, he really does figure out how Beatrice's magic works, and accept its existence, that's what it means he understood her.

I agree that the 'death' trick isn't really productive in regard to Beatrice's goals, even if we take into account her childish and selfish personality, thus her wanting Battler to understand but refusing to just give it to him. It's terribly roundabout.

It's more than roundabout! It's directly harmful to what she wants! It's the same as wanting someone to figure out you're cooking a hamburger and telling them this is a ham.

To elaborate further, we know for sure that Battler's there are 17 people includes Erika is a real person with a real body.

No we don't. We really, really don't.

LaplaceNoMa

2012-06-29, 05:04

Okay, 'for sure' wasn't a nice way of saying that.

It's just that if we account for red during the logic error, we have to do that at least for that game. Those reds imply that Erika has a body and she, in fact, commited the action of entering a room on the island.

Xenon_gun

2012-06-29, 05:05

To elaborate further, we know for sure that Battler's there are 17 people includes Erika is a real person with a real body. In other words, this red considers Kanon and Shannon to be one "people".

However, that ep3 red uses the same kanji to describe them as two "people". If we don't like it, we have to assume that Erika isn't included in "17 people" which makes things even more grim.

No we don't. We really, really don't.

To once again state why that red doesn't prove this: personality death. If one takes Shannontrice or Shkanontrice as a possibility, then Erika becomes subject to the same rules.

In other words, it's the Erika-ball theory. Erika is another personality or an aspect thereof that is always present in one of the humans on Rokkenjima. For an extremely radical example, Erika could just as well be another of Yasu's personalities, with Dlanor, Cornelia and Gertrude being a personification (witchification?) of the rules Yasu learned about in all those mystery novels she read throughout the years.

Shkanrikatrice theory, anyone? :)

AuraTwilight

2012-06-29, 05:15

LaplaceNoMa

2012-06-29, 05:23

Erika could just as well be another of Yasu's personalities

No, she can't. According to ep6 red text, Erika, Kanon and Battler are 3 different bodies..

GuestSpeaker

2012-06-29, 06:59

The main thing is that if you accept this, you accept that nobody died. You can no longer definitively call any death mentioned in red permanent, as it has no foundation and indeed the only conception of "death" we have in Umineko is fundamentally non-permanent. If you're okay with that, then by all means.

If they were never able to act again after this point, I'd accept them as dead. After all, not only is it more dead than some heart attack victims, but it is because I would also call someone in a vegetative state never again able to act dead too. Besides, even if he did make a red mistake (which I sincerely hope he didn't), you could still solve the story.

Though to counter my own theory, you could almost argue Rosa was depicted as having two personalities (though never hinted one could act independently, unlike Eva..) so technically they could also pull a Yasu, though there is less evidence for it. But in any case, Shkannontrice is partially crushed by Maria's little ep 2 "the mean mama and the nice one are the same person, there is only one mama" speech. I know it is in white, but it sort of flies in the face of Kanon and Shannon being different people. At best, it points to them being facets of the same person.....

In other words, it's the Erika-ball theory. Erika is another personality or an aspect thereof that is always present in one of the humans on Rokkenjima. For an extremely radical example, Erika could just as well be another of Yasu's personalities, with Dlanor, Cornelia and Gertrude being a personification (witchification?) of the rules Yasu learned about in all those mystery novels she read throughout the years.

Let's not forget that while objectively true, reds are true in two contexts. They are objectively true for each game described (ie Rosa died in the parlour, and Rosa died in the guestroom both possibly being red in different games), but these can be crushed by an over-arching prime red. I always thought the reds about Erika were true for the game they were referring, but the 17 people red was basically saying "sure you existed in that little story, but in reality you never came here"

theacefrehley

2012-06-29, 07:38

I wasn't even going to get that far. I was just going to point out that it's entirely appropriate to say that Shannon and Kanon count as two people and that Erika doesn't count as one at all since she never existed, Erika-Ball or not.

And how we would fit that red in EP5:
古戸ヱリカが１人増えただけ

That says Erika adds 1 person more to the count?
Unless we say it's true for ep5 and not ep6? :confused:

Captain Bluebeard

2012-06-29, 07:54

I would wager that since Beatrice never stated her win-condition in Red, it's entirely valid to say that she lied and her real win condition is "to be remembered by him."

Um...That's not any different from what I said, actually. Beatrice challenges Battler in a game where she tries to prove witches and he tries to prove the opposite. Beatrice's goal isn't to achieve victory in that game, however that's her winning condition as far as Battler is concerned, regardless of what Beatrice actually has in mind, and that's the facade she puts up on purpose. I don't see what you disagree with.

It's more than roundabout! It's directly harmful to what she wants! It's the same as wanting someone to figure out you're cooking a hamburger and telling them this is a ham.

I didn't disagree with that. That's just Ryukishi's fault for using the red to troll his readers. Even taking into account Beatrice's fickle nature, it still doesn't make much sense.

To elaborate further, we know for sure that Battler's there are 17 people includes Erika is a real person with a real body. In other words, this red considers Kanon and Shannon to be one "people".

However, that ep3 red uses the same kanji to describe them as two "people". If we don't like it, we have to assume that Erika isn't included in "17 people" which makes things even more grim.

The meaning of words can change according to what people have in mind when using them (in the context of Umineko, at least).
Beatrice reffers to them as 'personalties' to make it seem that Kanon-Shannon = 2 people.
In EP6, they're actually reffering to the number of bodies, thus blatantly telling you that there are actually 16 humans on Rokenjima.

Renall

2012-06-29, 09:03

Though to counter my own theory, you could almost argue Rosa was depicted as having two personalities (though never hinted one could act independently, unlike Eva..) so technically they could also pull a Yasu, though there is less evidence for it. But in any case, Shkannontrice is partially crushed by Maria's little ep 2 "the mean mama and the nice one are the same person, there is only one mama" speech. I know it is in white, but it sort of flies in the face of Kanon and Shannon being different people. At best, it points to them being facets of the same person.....People in Umineko depicted or at least mentioned as having multiple "characters" or "personalities" include: Yasu, obviously.
Jessica (sort of).
Rosa.
Maria.
Natsuhi.
Hideyoshi (sort of).
Genji (maybe).
Eva.
Kinzo.If you squint hard enough you can probably find more. If the bar is lowered to "acting or behaving differently," then any one of these people could potentially be dead while still alive. Some more plausibly than others, of course.

But yes, it's more plausible to say Fictional Shkanon is an overlay for the actions of a single, deliberate, sane person who is merely acting (with all the Shannon/Kanon stuff being nothing more than metaphor), and that Yasu, or Beatrice, or however you want to think of the author is herself entirely in control of her faculties. In fact, this is really the only setup that makes any sense, because I don't see a batshit insane person committing murders competently even in a fictional story, and I certainly don't see such a person writing a story.

Jan-Poo

2012-06-29, 09:28

GabrieliosP

2012-06-29, 09:29

Asuka0NK

2012-06-29, 09:37

Actually you got the corpse thing wrong
Corpse = Zero human and one person
Kinzo is already dead at the starting time for all games!
Before now, I have proclaimed that no more than 18 humans exist on this island.
I will lower that by one for Kinzo!!
No more than 17 humans exist on this island!!

How I solved it was that
Humans are any living like humanoid creature
People are alive or dead humanoids.

So we have the original 18 humans on Rokkenjima
Let's lower that by 2 for Kanon and Kinzo
Beatrice is a witch and witches seem to count towards the human total and not the people total so +1 = 17
Also Erika was the Witch of Truth when she arrived +1 again = 18 Humans
Also I got that a Witch = Human but not Witch = Person from Evatrice's Red Truth in Ep 3
The one who killed Nanjo was definitely a human
A human, with their feet on the ground, held up a weapon and killed with it!
Now if this mean't Witch =/= Human then she would've out right denied her own existence.

Now with people we originally have 18 people. Let's minus that by 1 for Kanon
There this makes 18 = 17

This however only works if you consider Yasu = Shannon.
------------
On another thing do you guys remember in Ep 8 where Kanon and Shannon were going to do the love duel again. I actually got excited to see how this would play out but Ryukishi seemed to forget about it right after it happened and we never got to see what happened. I'm assuming the attack on Rokkenjima interrupted them from doing it but still we never got to see it. Also I have a new theory about Rokkenjima Prime. No one was a culprit on October 4th Rokkenjima was raided by pirates in goat masks. The captain of the goat-headed pirates was a young girl with blue hair that wielded a scythe. They broke into the mansion and killed everyone. Shannon was forced to give them the gold. They then activated the bomb because they didn't know what it was and then they sailed away. Later the night the island exploded. People heard rumors about a pirate group like this and noticed the resemblances of them to Erika from the Forgeries and thus Twilight of the Golden Witch was written.

Jan-Poo

2012-06-29, 09:42

Regarding the whole people/human thing at the end of Dawn:

Human = Has a body, be it alive or dead
Person = Has self-awareness and can act by itself

Thus:

Alternate personality = Person
One body one personality = One human and one person
One body two personalities = One human and two people
Corpse: One human and zero people

So:

Siblings and their spouses: Seven humans and seven people
Cousins: Four humans and four people
Kinzo's dead body: One human and zero people
Genji, Gohda, Kumawasa and Nanjo: Four humans and four people
Kanon/Shannon: One human and two people
Erika's dead body at the beach: One human and zero people

Final count:

18 humans and only 17 people

Problem: There are several red truths with Erika as the subject in various actions. if she was a dead human there's simply no way she could perform all that.
And if you use the erika ball theory postulating an Erika personality using someone else's body then you end up with 18 people. Also, I believe that Yasu should count as yet another "people" according to you analysis.

ndqanh_vn

2012-06-29, 09:48

But yes, it's more plausible to say Fictional Shkanon is an overlay for the actions of a single, deliberate, sane person who is merely acting (with all the Shannon/Kanon stuff being nothing more than metaphor), and that Yasu, or Beatrice, or however you want to think of the author is herself entirely in control of her faculties. In fact, this is really the only setup that makes any sense, because I don't see a batshit insane person committing murders competently even in a fictional story, and I certainly don't see such a person writing a story.

About the Shkanon's sanity, I have thought of two theory:

1. They're just roles in a story. I don't think Yasu really dressed up with fake boobs and all in REALITY, because that would mean Jessica and Geogre are huge idiots, or in the cathood too (Especially Jes. You went to the same school with this child and cannot tell that he and his "sister" are the same?). They're just roles Yasu put in her stories as a metaphors for her gender problem and conflicting feeling. In reality, there should be only one Shanon in the island. Of course, there would be the problem then about nobody realize Kanon did not exist. Or why we are not informed about something weird with the guys.

But maybe, just maybe, the only bits we know about Prime is from EP4 and EP6. If I assume the forgeries are exactly what we read, then Battle/Ikkuko got some damn good reason for never mentioning about Kanon being fake.

2. Well, it is not a very nice move on my own, but I sometimes have to doubt about Ryukishi's knowledge of how MPD really suppose to work. Shkanon is very typical if you compare with how multiple personalities are sometimes portrayed in media. So I guess Ryukishi just simply wrote his characters according to popular belief (personalities emerging from childhood pain, trauma, etc...each of them got slightly different motives and memories...wish fulliment through dellusion...identiy crisis....the death of personalities...a bit psycho intent...totally cracked down at the end...) My example would be that Marik from Yugioh manga. Well it is pretty much a cracked theory, I guess, but maybe we should not think too hard about it like how Maria could know about Card Captor Sakura :heh: The point is, personality death is treated with as much drama as real death in Japanese media, so I wonder if that is just some genre cliche, and therefore we could leave the technical issue of the "death".

And well, I guess I cannot say Yasu is very sane, or at least very normal, mentally healthy. She's at least quite delusioned, and her obsession with Battler is not so healthy, too. At the end I guess she might have been willing "leave it up to fate" by some Russian roulette. So the girl got issues. But still I don;t want to view her as totally nut, because her action still suggest some logical thinking behind.

LaplaceNoMa

2012-06-29, 10:12

*snip*

*snip

So what can we say about ep3 read about '6 people' then? Is the kanji for 'people' the same as 'human' or 'person' in that case?

GabrieliosP

2012-06-29, 10:25

About the Shkanon's sanity, I have thought of two theory:

1. They're just roles in a story. I don't think Yasu really dressed up with fake boobs and all in REALITY, because that would mean Jessica and Geogre are huge idiots, or in the cathood too (Especially Jes. You went to the same school with this child and cannot tell that he and his "sister" are the same?). They're just roles Yasu put in her stories as a metaphors for her gender problem and conflicting feeling. In reality, there should be only one Shanon in the island. Of course, there would be the problem then about nobody realize Kanon did not exist. Or why we are not informed about something weird with the guys.

Just to clarify: when was it said that Yasu and Jessica went to the same school? I sort-of remember the other servants wondering if Yasu was there so Jessica wouldn't be alone with no one her age around but nothing about them going to the same school.

Renall

2012-06-29, 10:43

Just to clarify: when was it said that Yasu and Jessica went to the same school? I sort-of remember the other servants wondering if Yasu was there so Jessica wouldn't be alone with no one her age around but nothing about them going to the same school.Jessica attends a public school on Nijima, as I recall. She could have attended a private school but somebody (I think it's Battler narrating in one of the early episodes) says she doesn't for various reasons.

One would assume that Yasu would be enrolled to go to the public school in Nijima as well. So it would make some degree of sense that they'd both be going to the same place, as last I checked Nijima only has one high school.

ndqanh_vn

2012-06-29, 10:47

Just to clarify: when was it said that Yasu and Jessica went to the same school? I sort-of remember the other servants wondering if Yasu was there so Jessica wouldn't be alone with no one her age around but nothing about them going to the same school.

I donơt remember they mentioned any other school around. And I always understand that it's implied they went to the same school. Yasu at least was told he/she was not supposed to treat Jessica as her friend, so I think they have close contact/proximity with each other outside Natsuhi's looks - Outside Rockenjima.

I gave Geogre an excuse because he was not a very frequent visitor to the island, so maybe he's not very well-informed. He might not even care about other things outside his waifu.:heh:But Jessica lived in the same house with the kid, is Shanon's best friend and at least noticed Kanon very much, so it's a bit strange for her to not notice anything.

Of course, I was working under the assumption that there is some truth in the bottle stories. Therefore, it's more logical if the Shkanon stuff is a narrative-only device. Yasu might have stuffed her bra for being insecure, but I doubted she would really display multiple personalties disorder sympton (dressing up and addressing herself as another person) and the whole Skhanon is only a metaphor.

But in an interview, Rykishi exciplit says things may have changed if Battle touched her boobs in EP 1. What can it change, I wonder? If you know a girl is stuffing her bra, which is not so abnormal, the next best thing is to shut up about it, unless you're a huge jerk.

ndqanh_vn

2012-06-29, 10:49

double post, sorry, the internet is working up

Asuka0NK

2012-06-29, 10:56

ndqanh_vn

2012-06-29, 11:07

Well I know that girl's who stuff their bras usually have breasts even if they are small but Yasu has no breasts from what we know based on Kanon. So I think it would have been very obvious that she was stuffing her breasts and Battler probably would have said something since that is who Battler is. It probably would've been what would happen if someone solved the epitaph. Shannon probably wouldn't have committed the murders since Battler may have actually noticed her and she would probably explain herself. So yes the murders can be stopped by groping Shannon instead of solving the epitaph.

It is actually not that strange to find 16-19 girls who has next-to-none breast. I know some of them myself. So if Yasu stuffed her breast, it might just have been she's very insecure about herself, like many girls in their teens would, it might not suggest she's Kanon or a person with ambigous gender since birth or got his genitals forever damaged in some accident. So I don't think Yasu would be in danger of being exposed here. Nobody doubts her to be the master mind of a mass murder. Yet.

Even if she really disguisses herself as Kanon in daily life, which I don't think it is very likely, well...is there any reason of being exposed there? Those people are... dumb if they had never discoverd it before. They would discover Shanon is Kanon with fake breast, and they had never doubted it before Shanon is Kanon with breasts?

So I don't really know why Yasu would give up her plan if Battler comment something "Well....it's not...that big as I think". Why should her give up her trial of love? The whole point is for Battler to remember their connection right? Then why should she give up? If the point is just to "leave it to the roulette of fate", I still don't see any reason for not continuing the murder game/challenge just as plan.

It's still a bit ironic to prevent the tragedy by acting as a total pervert. But I think I get Ryukishi's point that Yasu "leaves eveything to fate" now. Still cannot understand the working of her mind. By arranging the murder game, blackmailing people to help her with her plan, revealing her true identity as the heir of the family to her accomplices, what kind of risks she could not take?

Jan-Poo

2012-06-29, 11:21

Asuka0NK

2012-06-29, 11:24

Well the whole point of the murder game was to make Battler remember her and in that position she would probably have to spill the beans. Since George and Shannon would be very confused by this. Again she left everything up to fate. If Battler and everyone did find out about her breasts she won't even have to mention the murder game and it can just be a thing she would keep to herself. Also is it possible that the cliff fall really damage Yasu in anyway besides some almost fatal damage. Because if you look at another way her small physique and unlovable body as she calls it could have also been caused by the fact that she is an inbred child.

ndqanh_vn

2012-06-29, 11:32

Well yeah... Battler was depicted as such a doofus in the first four gameboards that even if he witnesses Shannon completely bloodied with an equally bloodied knife in ther hand while standing in front of three recently slaughtered bodies, he'd still think she probably fought the culprit and managed to steal the knife before being killed like the other three.

I do not know whether you are being sacratic Jan Poo. But I honestly do not really see the significant of the fake breasts. Even if Jes and Geogre were confused, they might just think that Shanon is insecure and advoid the topic out of courtesy. Yasu did not want to tell BAtler. She wanted him to remember on his own. So if she already went that far, why gave up now?

Asuka0NK

2012-06-29, 11:49

Well I know Jessica would probably just say whatevs but George will probably have a very different reaction to it. I mean Shannon is a person they've known and trusted for a very long time. They will probably consul her and help her with what she's done.

AuraTwilight

2012-06-29, 13:50

That says Erika adds 1 person more to the count?
Unless we say it's true for ep5 and not ep6?

It's completely irrelevant. I could add a billion people to a Gameboard, but none of those people were ACTUALLY there. It overrides all other other Reds because it can be interpreted as Prime-tier, or something.

Um...That's not any different from what I said, actually. Beatrice challenges Battler in a game where she tries to prove witches and he tries to prove the opposite. Beatrice's goal isn't to achieve victory in that game, however that's her winning condition as far as Battler is concerned, regardless of what Beatrice actually has in mind, and that's the facade she puts up on purpose. I don't see what you disagree with.

I'm just pointing out that your wording sends the wrong intention, and that Shkanon death trickery doesn't help her with her goals.

I'll try again to challenge the common belief that Yasu has to be perfectly sane.

Let's even say that she's acting as having different personalities, but what if she's delusional enough to believe these facets of hers are actual individual separate beings?
Are you familiar with the concept of tulpa?

Don't even gotta go that far. The Empowered Multiples community has a term for people called "Medians", which is basically exactly like Yasu.

Wanderer

2012-06-29, 15:47

So what can we say about ep3 read about '6 people' then? Is the kanji for 'people' the same as 'human' or 'person' in that case?

word for "person" is: 人 (pronounced "hito")
word for "human" is: 人間 (pronounced "ningen")
also, counter for people is: 人 (pronounced "nin")

Whenever there is a number of people, say 17, the Japanese would say "17人". It's kinda like a word in of itself (like "seventeenpeople" being one word). So, you could make a case that the counter version of 人 and the normal word version of it are different. But, it'd be pretty wobbly.

Kealym

2012-06-29, 18:24

Now if this mean't Witch =/= Human then she would've out right denied her own existence.
Well, she kind of DOES deny her own existence. Witch =/=human is one of the basic conceits of Beatrice's game, anyways. Anyways, I'd say Evatrice's existence was protected because witches exist in the darkness of "unexplained incidents", so as long as Battler couldn't provide a satifactory blue truth, it may as well have been magic. The problem in that case is that that incredibly restrictive red truth went contrary to every notion of common sense about the humans even available to blame.

On another thing do you guys remember in Ep 8 where Kanon and Shannon were going to do the love duel again. I actually got excited to see how this would play out but Ryukishi seemed to forget about it right after it happened and we never got to see what happened. I'm assuming the attack on Rokkenjima interrupted them from doing it but still we never got to see it.
Yeah, they probably were interrupted by the attack. However, I think Ryu included that scene to show that having a "duel" of sorts is just ... like ... the DESTINY of the Shannon and Kanon pieces, and despite how melodramatic it was in Dawn, it's just "something they do".

But maybe, just maybe, the only bits we know about Prime is from EP4 and EP6. If I assume the forgeries are exactly what we read, then Battle/Ikkuko got some damn good reason for never mentioning about Kanon being fake.
I forgot who, but I recall some time ago someone posted a very solid explanation of why the forgeries CAN'T be the exact same text we ourselves are reading.

GuestSpeaker

2012-06-29, 19:22

There are several red truths with Erika as the subject in various actions.

Once again, I'm not sure red truth have to be consistent both within and across all games. She can act in red on the gameboard and still not really have existed.

and at least noticed Kanon very much

It is possible that living alone on the island she pulled a yasu and fell for someone she never really spoke to and never really saw. It does sound shaky though.

As for the Ryu interview comment re: the breasts, that might have been more offhand than anything else, not everything he says can be a deeply thought out clue. He was probably amused at the idea of her plan falling apart because she had no breasts or her wig fell off or something, an event like that wouldn't necessarily stop all her plans, but it would certainly make it harder for her to continue as normal. And not be the center of attention. And since we know she is a blusher, not implode with embarrassment.

Judoh

2012-06-30, 21:51

As for the Ryu interview comment re: the breasts, that might have been more offhand than anything else, not everything he says can be a deeply thought out clue.

Except he says it's a clue in the interview. in the same sentence he talks about Battler he says that Shannon was in a state of mind that if she were going to get caught she'd let it happen.

It would have meant the end of the incident. Or even if Battler had actually squeezed Shannon’s breasts, he might have noticed that they are fake. Shannon was in a state of mind that said „if it comes to light, let it“

the whole paragraph is pretty interesting actually.

K Then I think it is also a clue that nothing happened between them, while they were staying at the same place in Okinawa.

R It is a clue. To just blurt it out spontaneously was more than Shannon was ready for. „I will reveal it sometime“. Because she was so scared of herself, she couldn’t confess. If it had been because of one action that George took, she wouldn’t have had any choice, that was the balance of passivity she upheld. While she did not hide it actively, she also wouldn’t talk about it openly. Because of that thinking, going on that trip to Okinawa was an experience to her like being a carp on a high slope, „He prepared separate rooms for us *twitch*?“ *laugh*. That knightly George came all the way to Okinawa only to dare and prepare separate rooms? Shannon must have been like „What?!“. But there are many scenes like that which show how Shannon left the decision to fate. For example at the first twilight in EP1, when George was told by Hideyoshi „You should not look at this corpse!“. If he had gone in, not minding that there would be no face, he would have seen that there was no corpse. It would have meant the end of the incident. Or even if Battler had actually squeezed Shannon’s breasts, he might have noticed that they are fake. Shannon was in a state of mind that said „if it comes to light, let it“.

K Will called that walking on a tightrope.

http://seizonsha.wordpress.com/2011/06/13/最終考察　うみねこのなく頃に-answer-to-the-golden-witch-special-discussion/

Thunder Book

2012-07-01, 18:50

I often hear that Yasu wrote Episodes 1-2, Tohya did 3-6, and Episode 8 was in Ange's mind for the most part.

What's the general consensus on Episode 7's existence?

Also, are there any ideas about who the writer of Forgery no.XXX is? It really sticks out to me that Black Battler calls out Tohya randomly toward the end of that little story.

GabrieliosP

2012-07-01, 19:00

Probably Ikuko since she knows who Tohya really is. Or since it was a meta scene, B.Battler maybe was aware of who Tohya was. There's also the possibility that it was a random author since "Hachijo Tohya" is very famous as a forgery writer.

Episode 7... I seriously have not idea.

Kealym

2012-07-01, 19:22

I dunno if there's a general consensus on Requiem. Very generally speaking, it doesn't even depict a gameboard, and probably doesn't reflect any written piece of work/forgery or whatever.

As far as Prime is concerned, there probably is no such thing as 'Requiem', and it's a purely Meta episode from Ryukishi to his readers with a bunch of information to fill in gaps. Also "lolKyrie for lolgold" is apparently a popular theory in Prime.

Thunder Book

2012-07-01, 19:25

But doesn't Requiem have to exist in some form for Ange to "imagine" Will and Lion in Twilight?

Kealym

2012-07-01, 19:37

It DOES exist ... in the Meta narrative. Lion is the concept of "maybe Yasu's life didn't have to suck so hard" and Will is both (a.) a reader who cares about things like that and (b.) a meta-being rules lawyer like Dlanor.

Ange is diving in and out of the Meta world willy-nilly anyways, so those two don't need to have been written into a story in order to be part of her considerations, I'd say. Also, Ange wasn't even present for most of Requiem, so who knows how much of that information actually got to her.

AuraTwilight

2012-07-02, 00:06

Drifloon

2012-07-02, 01:48

There's also the possibility that it was a random author since "Hachijo Tohya" is very famous as a forgery writer.

Uh, no. Nobody except Ange knows that Hachijo Tohya is the same person as Itouikukuro, as far as we're told.

haguruma

2012-07-02, 05:02

But doesn't Requiem have to exist in some form for Ange to "imagine" Will and Lion in Twilight?

Also, Ange wasn't even present for most of Requiem, so who knows how much of that information actually got to her.
I always imagined that it happens - similar to what was insinuated by Ronove's line about when he last met Battler in Forgery No.XXX - largely outside of a usual matter of time and space. The events are basically happening in the order you read them, but because nobody would read them in a given order they could happen in any possible combination. Like Ronove said, Bernastel's game is widely considered to be the last one...basically saying it all went pretty silent after the Kyrie and Rudolph culprit theory.
This also helps me with my theory that the meta-events are not included in the forgeries we find in Prime. If they actually were there would be no confusion about which game happened in which order because the meta-plane clearly structures them on a linear temporal line.

Also, considering what Ange might have witnessed through a forgery, we have to sort out our terminology. A FORGERY's content, at least for me, equals the GAME's events the gameboard, as the "preparing of the pieces and strategies, etc." is largely likened to how an author collects data and structures his plot. What Bern made Will do was basically shut him in a room where every possible information that she could retrieve from within the catbox that is the Rokkenjima incident exists simultaneously and let him prepare a neat set of information and explanations for her to toy with. So it is not unlikely to assume that the actual story "Requiem of the Golden Witch" was simply the play that Bern conducted for Ange.

Even further I'd say that the term FORGERY in itself is rather misleading, as Ryûkishi doesn't seem to limit this to one actual kind of narrative structure. There does not appear to be a series of novels called The Rokkenjima Murder Case (okay, there is Ikuko/Tôya's series) in what is supposed to be a Rokkenjima Prime, but rather everything that is said, written and discussed over Rokkenjima is basically a "forgery".
This is both underlined by the scene-shift to a young Ange at the end of EP7, through which it is implied that she had to endure those "forgeries" about Kyrie/Ruolph culprit since she was pretty young, and by the added lines in Hane's Forgery No.XXX where basically Beato and Black-Battler title themselves the incarnation of forgeries about themselves and Black-Battler admitting that it doesn't matter where the forgery originated as long as it empowers him.

This leads to what AT said:
I'd like to say that the Meta-World is a plane of existence that actually exists, effected by and effective on the reality of Rokkenjima Prime.
Yeah, I'd also say it does exist on a certain plane. It would be a pretty dull move to basically pluck out about 60% of your narrative.

I know this is a highly sensitive topic here, but it's made pretty clear throughout EP8 and Forgery No.XXX that the reality construct at least within Umineko is following what has been said throughout the narrative plenty of times "an unobserved event stays in eternal process" and the meta-world exists in exactly that unobserved area.
This is actually what we have been told throughout all the series: Due to magic being explained away by science and reason, the possibility of witches and demons to take form in our dimension has been taken away. This does not actually say that magic exists and that therefore the question if the crime has been committed by a human culprit is useless, it rather says something about the reality-construct of Umineko as said above.
Truth is created by a decision upon a past event. Everything can be explained with reason or with magic, but as long as only a grain of doubt remains it stays in process and can't commit to either form. That is what the meta-beings fight for, for power over existence itself...because only that which is deemed truthful can exist in the catbox which is Rokkenjima in 1986. Or in this case, the more accepted theories are the more powerful ones.

There is no problem with both existing at the same time unless you follow the theory of a fixed reality that we can have a grasp of. Of course there is this reality of Rokkenjima Prime, but we are basically told from EP6's dilemma of Erika onward, that we humans can never have access to this reality by ways of the red (objective) truth, we can merely construct a blue (theoretical) truth or a golden truth (based on belief).

Also, are there any ideas about who the writer of Forgery no.XXX is? It really sticks out to me that Black Battler calls out Tohya randomly toward the end of that little story.
Following what I said above, I'd agree with AT on the point that this Black Battler is "real" in his own meta-world and they possess knowledge of who created them and who lends them power.
As already said, he says it doesn't matter who wrote this forgery because it fulfills it's purpose of empowering him. That is why he chose to abandon it if he had found out that it is not a story that gives the character of Battler the freedom to be interpreted as the culprit.

Thunder Book

2012-07-02, 06:43

Asuka0NK

2012-07-02, 09:35

Ok how I always see the meta-world and stuff is that their are two completely different worlds. The meta-world and the human world. Then the magic world but that doesn't have to do with Umineko. Anyway The meta-world is a world with beings above humans who toy with their lives for fun. The meta-world governs everything and so far the only two ressidents of the meta-world that are actually real are Lambda and Bern. Bern comes from the magic world or the world where the meta and human co-exist. This is the world that Higurashi takes place in. Lambda is most likely from the human world but I'm just guessing. Also Bern's age is becasuse Higurashi is long over and everyone from it is dead but then Umineko is another kakera that still exists in the past when compared to the other one. So Umineko doesn't take place 3 years later it takes place 1000 years later. So pretty much the meta-world is the afterlife.

Requiem I think was written by Yasu but was never put in a message bottle. I think it was Yasu's own thoughts and the like. This was pretty much what she was thinking about when she was dying. Hey what if I didn't fall off that cliff. What if Battler didn't come back. What if someone came and helped me. So i just think it is a bunch of Yasu's what if's put together in a huge cluster.

Also I thought Twilight was written by Ikuko?

Forgery No. XXX may have just been written by a random forger.

Kealym

2012-07-02, 14:00

I'd like to say that the Meta-World is a plane of existence that actually exists, effected by and effective on the reality of Rokkenjima Prime.

The story's way cooler that way, and easier to reconcile morally.
Yeah, I agree with this sentiment. It's like, how, when Beato dies at the end of Alliance, it's something like both the death of a person and the death of the abstraction she represents, i.e "the death of her fantasy narrative", and her catatonic state lines up with how End was presented to us.

The meta-world governs everything and so far the only two ressidents of the meta-world that are actually real are Lambda and Bern. Bern comes from the magic world or the world where the meta and human co-exist. This is the world that Higurashi takes place in. Lambda is most likely from the human world but I'm just guessing. Also Bern's age is becasuse Higurashi is long over and everyone from it is dead but then Umineko is another kakera that still exists in the past when compared to the other one. So Umineko doesn't take place 3 years later it takes place 1000 years later. So pretty much the meta-world is the afterlife.
I'd argue some of these. Keeping in mind that Higurashi and Umineko are related but not ... very directly so, I'd argue:
1. Bern's age comes from her repeating Higurashi. For regular humans, only 3 years have passed.
2. Everyone in the Meta-World is real! Bern and Lambda are just the only Voyagers we meet. Let's not forget that we ourselves are Observer Witches, apparently.
3. I dunno about the afterlife angle - I guess dead people would certainly be more at home than live people, but Ange and Hachijou seem able to Meta it up on a moments notice.

Also I thought Twilight was written by Ikuko?

Hm, well, it was said that Tohya would plot a forgery, and Ikuko would do most of the actual writing. I'm almost sure, though, that Twilight would've come right from Tohya, though, with the "tale that's happiest for Beato" and "see Ange, everyone was really cool" angle.

Wanderer

2012-07-02, 15:34

When trying to understand Prime I tend to see the meta-world as a metaphorical representation of it, but I can also appreciate the concept of Prime being controlled by the beings of the meta-world. I think it's relative to which you choose as your foundational world, and in that sense both interpretations are valid. Personally, I switch between perspectives, but tend to focus more on Prime as the foundation for the meta-world rather than the other way around.

As for Requiem... I think it was pretty obviously written by Touya but not released. From the first scenes of Requiem:

BATTLER: "......This is... the unique tale I made for you."
This tale will be shut up with you in your coffin, for all eternity
So, no one will be able to read it except for you, there in your coffin.
[...]
"......Between just me and her, ...just the two of us, this is the one and only certain truth."

Renall

2012-07-02, 16:39

Interesting thoughts and clarifications. Thanks for sharing everyone. I've got to admit I've never really thought about the Meta World coexisting with Prime before, or at least not since early Chiru.

I always interpreted it as an either/or sort of thing, as in "Either the Meta World exists as presented" or "They're fictions/delusions people have made". The idea that the Meta World exists, but is shaped and effected by Prime and the people there is certainly interesting.Tch. Look at these fools. Believing Prime exists. Perhaps the Meta-World is the reality of things.

There never was a Rokkenjima. Can you find it on a map? Who are the Ushiromiyas, where is the evidence they ever existed? Can you attain it? Hah! You claim it is locked away in a box, filed on dusty police shelves in a universe you cannot see, cannot touch, cannot research.

There is a simple enough reason: It does not exist. It is not there. No one exists in it to provide you with that information. The information is a null value unto itself, unable to provide anything approaching useful data. The only "information" is information you generate to satisfy your own belief in a nonexistent truth.

This world of ideas, this world of speculation and arbitrary assignment of truth, is the only world that exists.

For the crime to have a human culprit, it is not necessary that a "human world" actually exist outside the theater of Rokkenjima. Rokkenjima exists suspended in an endless and featureless ocean; there is nowhere to escape to and nothing that can be done to change the parameters of this existence. Humans exist upon it but they did not arrive there and they did not leave there. There is no "there" but where they already exist.

If you were born with motive to kill, what difference would it make than if you had developed that motive through experience? If a man were born believing he was once a man named Ushiromiya Battler, and apprehending and creating the supposedly "lost" memories of the same, in the absence of any further proof it is indistinguishable whether any such man has ever truly existed in the first place. Perhaps every instance of experience is nothing more than the memories which dress your piece on the witch's board. Or perhaps you merely deign to play at times, when in truth you exist above and within it simultaneously.

Who are the goats? Who are the witches? What identities make up the Grand Senate of creators and observers? In the absence of any other evidence, what else can you conclude? It is you. And possibly me. Or perhaps I am just a manifestation of existential self-doubt you formulated to keep your life from becoming boring. One way or another, it makes no difference.

(So gotta write this forgery... after the other two I'm working on...)

UsagiTenpura

2012-07-02, 16:56

Tch. Look at these fools. Believing Prime exists. Perhaps the Meta-World is the reality of things.

There never was a Rokkenjima. Can you find it on a map? Who are the Ushiromiyas, where is the evidence they ever existed? Can you attain it? Hah! You claim it is locked away in a box, filed on dusty police shelves in a universe you cannot see, cannot touch, cannot research.

There is a simple enough reason: It does not exist. It is not there. No one exists in it to provide you with that information. The information is a null value unto itself, unable to provide anything approaching useful data. The only "information" is information you generate to satisfy your own belief in a nonexistent truth.

This world of ideas, this world of speculation and arbitrary assignment of truth, is the only world that exists.

For the crime to have a human culprit, it is not necessary that a "human world" actually exist outside the theater of Rokkenjima. Rokkenjima exists suspended in an endless and featureless ocean; there is nowhere to escape to and nothing that can be done to change the parameters of this existence. Humans exist upon it but they did not arrive there and they did not leave there. There is no "there" but where they already exist.

If you were born with motive to kill, what difference would it make than if you had developed that motive through experience? If a man were born believing he was once a man named Ushiromiya Battler, and apprehending and creating the supposedly "lost" memories of the same, in the absence of any further proof it is indistinguishable whether any such man has ever truly existed in the first place. Perhaps every instance of experience is nothing more than the memories which dress your piece on the witch's board. Or perhaps you merely deign to play at times, when in truth you exist above and within it simultaneously.

Who are the goats? Who are the witches? What identities make up the Grand Senate of creators and observers? In the absence of any other evidence, what else can you conclude? It is you. And possibly me. Or perhaps I am just a manifestation of existential self-doubt you formulated to keep your life from becoming boring. One way or another, it makes no difference.

(So gotta write this forgery... after the other two I'm working on...)

That might not be very off from what R07 really wanted us to think about you know.
Magic is only as real as you accept it to be.
Prime is only as real as you accept it to be.
What difference is there between them?

It's like believing Yasu or Toyah or whoever else wrote any given arc. We all know it's R07 who did it. We still have debates based mostly on faith and belief vs disbelief about who wrote which given arc, even tho there isn't a clear conclusion about them.

Asuka0NK

2012-07-02, 17:12

Ok.......well I don't think that deeply into it. Hinimizawa isn't a real place but no one questioned it because it is just a made up place. I'm sure there is an island off the coast of Niijima but it isn't Rokkenjima. So I think you are just looking waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much into it.

Also Usagi I love your Plenair avatar.

Renall

2012-07-02, 17:19

AuraTwilight

2012-07-02, 18:42

Interesting thoughts and clarifications. Thanks for sharing everyone. I've got to admit I've never really thought about the Meta World coexisting with Prime before, or at least not since early Chiru.

I always interpreted it as an either/or sort of thing, as in "Either the Meta World exists as presented" or "They're fictions/delusions people have made". The idea that the Meta World exists, but is shaped and effected by Prime and the people there is certainly interesting.

I always really liked the idea of the Meta World being a Phenomenological interpretation of Empyrean reality and vice versa.

...I'm slipping into Philosophy mode, so before I start becoming incoherent with my vocabulary, lemme bring up a comparison I used during Umineko's run to think of things.

There's a tabletop RPG called Mage: The Awakening. The basic premise is that there's the world we live in, and the "Supernal Realm", which is a multiverse made out of Truths, Concepts, and Absolutes. The two worlds were once one and are now separated, and Mages (who can use magic by looking at the Supernal) call our world the "Fallen" world, imagining that some original sin broke the worlds apart.

The truth of the matter is that the Supernal needs the "Phenomenological" world that we live in, because those Truths need to be expressed in process in order to exist.

It's an eternal feedback loop, and more than a little paradoxical. The Truths define the world, but the world allows those Truths to exist. Hypothetically, if you go up to the Supernal world and destroy the truth-symbol of, say....Christianity, then you'll go back to the lower world and find that Christianity never existed, and now the whole world is basically exactly the same except now most of the world is Roman. You watch Neon Genesis Evangelion and the plot is exactly the same, but the show is full of Roman Mythology symbolism now.

The two worlds need each other. Without the Supernal, the Phenomenal world becomes random chaos. 2 + 2 = bleepbloop bluh. Without the Phenomenal, the truth-symbols have no meaning. "Red" is a sound. "Germany" is a flavor. Letters don't exist.

At best, you have these pretty 'legends' that SOUND like things, but AREN'T things. Symbolism with no meaning, and it's just some random bullshit.

Apply this to Umineko. Take away the lower worlds, and the Meta-World has no context of any kind. Take away the Meta-World, and the Gameboards and Prime make NO sense, as Renall has pointed out countless times.

It's not that "The Meta-World is real and it controls the lower worlds with magic" or "Prime exists and everything else is the imaginings or writings of some amnesiac."

BOTH are true. In a literal sense. The canyon causes the river to take the shape it does, but there would be no canyon if the water hadn't eroded the rock. The Meta-World creates Prime/The Gameboards, and they create the Truth-symbols of the Meta-World.

There is Mystery, and there is Fantasy, but there is a third story. And it is only in finding that third story does the Truth emerge. Without love, it cannot be seen, and to love something in Ryukishi's terms is to accept its existence. You must acknowledge and love the Meta-World and Prime both, or the Truth cannot exist, nor can it be contained.

This reasoning is why, way back when EP8 came out, I entertained the idea that Battler and company tried to hide the truth from Ange. It wasn't because, morally, the truth is bad or anything. It's that if Ange, in the Meta-World, defines the Truth as "You're all dead", then they're Truth-Symbols, the meta-beings representing them, which can think and feel and act and BE, will cease to be.