View Full Version : [Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations
How are you able to confirm that Shannon is not older than 17 years old? Who do you think is 19 years old?
Statements about 'I was a middle schooler' and dating the meeting with George they correspond to are the basis.
Shannon's age, actually, can be inferred from multiple quotes with different margin of error and you always get 16. If anyone's 19 years old at all, a girl named Kanon would be my choice, as Kanon gets much less age references and is too flimsy for a boy of that age - but good enough for a 19-year old girl.
I guess there is little reason to lie about the age of Sayo when she got into the family.
Why did she have to be 3 years less old?
I guess there is little reason to lie about the age of Sayo when she got into the family.
Why did she have to be 3 years less old?
I don't subscribe to that -- or, for that matter, Shkanon. My current guess is that their inferred ages are true, and that if Kanon does not have a body, a satisfactory way for him not to is not yet determined.
I have so far only imagined one scenario that would produce a Shkanon I find believable. The problem with it is that it is believable because of personal experiences (which would be rather unbelievable themselves if retold) and hinges on a social antipattern that I have, so far, only observed occurring four times, (two times personally, two more through trusted sources) and have never seen described in full in literature, either fiction or specialized. I find it doubtful Ryukishi could know about it. In Umineko, this would only happen if Shkanon+Jessitrice and if Jessitrice is created deliberately by Kinzo with full cooperation of the staff with anything Jessica pulls as part of it. In short it doesn't fit very well either.
There is an interesting trace thought floating in the back of my head based on their sprites -- Shannon is slightly taller, looks wider in shoulders... so they could both be crossdressing for a yet unknown reason. But basing anything on sprites in Umineko would be a big stretch. :)
Ryukishi said that we should use the "key" we have found and apply it to episode 1-4. So I want to try to see what happens if I try to match the most popular theories with a scene of EP1 that I consider most relevant in order to understand what's going on.
It's when we see the servants talking about Shannon's death while not aware of Battler listening to the conversation.
The fact that Battler is listening, should prove that this event is 100% true. There might still be a chance that they noticed him and were playacting, but I find this improbable. Anyway I'll start:
After the silence had continued for some time, .........Kanon opened his mouth and muttered.
Kanon: ...............Shannon... ............Why..., did she have to die in such a horrible way...?
If shkanon is true, this might sound like a preposterous question. Kanon should know Shannon didn't die. However this could be interpreted in another way. The Sayo personality might be attached to her other personalities and here she might be grieving for the fact that she won't be able to be "Shannon" ever again and on top of that they recreated a very sad way to kill her.
However with Shkanontrice in mind, this still looks strange. Kanon here is talking as if it wasn't his idea. Even if he's part of the plot, it looks like he didn't want to do that.
With Kanon-Kinzo in mind, you'd wonder who or what could have more power than him to go against his desires.
Genji: ......Forget about how she died. .........It was nothing more than...bad luck.
Kanon: .........You're right. ...It was nothing more than bad luck.
They both fell silent once again. ...Kanon's expression was filled with grief.
Bad luck. Why is it bad luck? Do they actually use a roulette to choose the victims? However they both agree on that.
With the fake murder plot in mind, you might wonder why they are so sad. Also it seems impossible that they aren't part of it. If thee is a fake murder plot the chances that those 3 aren't part of the conspiracy are almost none. Then maybe they are forced to follow some rules?
With Kanon-Kinzo in mind, you'd notice that from the way they talk Genji is clearly the boss. If Kanon had a higher status than Genji you'd think that it's very unlikely for Genji to talk like that. Unless there is an odd agreement about them to keep talking like that even in private.
Kumasawa: To think that Shannon-chan's actually dead... I still can't believe it. ......Poor, poor Shannon-chan... ......Not being able to meet her again feels like a lie... I just wanted to see that girl's smiling face one more time...
Kumasawa spoke with her back facing them. ...After all, Kumasawa hadn't seen Shannon's corpse, so she had no trouble mentioning Shannon's face. ...When Kanon heard those words, it reminded him again of how only half of Shannon's face had been left, and his grieving expression twisted even further...
Now I don't really trust the narrator. The narrator is Battler as it becomes clear later. So what the narrator say are just Battler's interpretations of what happen, so I'll just stick with what the people say.
With Shkanon in mind you could think that Kumasawa is just talking about the fact that Sayo won't be Shannon ever again.
Kanon: .........Why did Beatrice do that to Shannon...? ......If she wanted a sacrifice, there were plenty of others to choose from... ......Why..., ......why...?
okay this is the part that is totally at odd with shkanontrice and kanontrice.
If Kanon was Beatrice why would he be so upset about Beatrice's decisions?
This one is very hard to justify unless you claim it's DID.
with the fake murder plot in mind, this still causes a problem. Unless they are totally unaware of Beatrice's plans (which seem unlikely), Kanon would just need to ask to beatrice why. Also if Shannontrice is true and shkanon is not, why Kanon is so upset? This would become: "Beatrice faked her own death", get over with it man, it's not the end of the world!
Genji: .........It was nothing more than bad luck. ...If we were less lucky, one of us could have been lying out there. And it could have been anyone else. ......Everything is left to fate.
Again, fate, bad luck. Why is it fate?
Kanon: Genji-sama. .........You said that the door to Madam's room was stained with traces of something like blood, right...? The same substance that was painted on the shutter?
Genji: ......Hmmm. ...It was the trace of something unpleasant. Almost as though someone with blood-stained fingers had been trying to pull out the doorknob, ...no, scratch through the door... ...That sort of unpleasant mark.
Kanon: So does this mean that... Beatrice-sama came to visit Madam's room, ......and tried to open the door, but couldn't...?
Okay this is even more at odd with Kanontrice and Shkanontrice. If Kanon is Beatrice why does she need to ask Genji what happened there?
Again you need to imagine someone of the three is clueless.
With Kanon clueless you need to think he has DID.
With Genji clueless, then it's Kanon playacting to shed any suspicion on himself. But Genji seems to know very well what's going on
With Kumasawa clueless then Genji and Kanon are playacting to fool her, but Kumasawa also is very unlikely to not know the truth about "Beatrice"
and again from the "fake murder scenario" theory, you still have a problem explaining why Kanon doesn't know the details of what happened. Even if for some reasons he didn't know, Genji shouldn't have problems tell him, why being so evasive?
I would like to point out, that no one here talks about the scorpion charm.
Genji should have said: "well we planned to "kill" Natsuhi but there was that scorpion charm that forced us to change our plans".
They seriously do not seem to be aware of that.
Genji thought back to the time he had seen those traces of blood on the door to Natsuhi's room... With the substance sticking to the door around the doorknob, and the marks of something scratching against the door... it had definitely appeared as though someone had tried to open the door, but couldn't...
Kanon: ...Why, .........was Madam not chosen as a sacrifice...? If only she had been chosen, ......Shannon wouldn't, ......Shannon wouldn't have had to die...
Just then, a loud, sharp noise came in from the hall. Both of them turned around, surprised.
Battler: ..................It sounds like you're having a pretty interesting discussion. Let me join in too.
Again here Kanon asks "why" Natsuhi wasn't chosen, as if he's really totally clueless about the reason, which is at odd with any kanontrice, shkanontrice and fake-murder conspiracy.
Also if Kanon was Kinzo you'd think he'd be a lot less helpless than this. A Kanon-Kinzo should have the means to find Beatrice and question her. After all Beatrice uses Kinzo's envelopes and has the ring, it's impossible that "Kinzo" and "Beatrice" do not know each other.
So what do you think?
So what do you think?
While I agree with most of your points, I must say that if the murders were planned to be fake, but they abruptly and unexpectedly for the perpetrators of those turned real, "bad luck" and "fate" statements still make sense if the 'victims' were chosen randomly based on their location at the time -- the plan was prepared beforehand but some actual details were left to the implementation in place.
This way, even though they themselves picked the 'victims', them dying is 'fate' due to 'bad luck'.
Abrupt. Here are a few points for Gaap being a representation of Rosa of all people:
While there has been an argument proposing that all the magical representations of characters have the One Wing if their vessels have the one wing, this is not true in case of Virgilia, because Kumasawa is not wearing the One Wing, while Virgilia wears one on her sash. Therefore, One Wing is not a strict requirement.
Gaap is the only character who makes a point to discuss her clothes and clothing brands. Rosa is in the clothing design business.
Possibly the most interesting argument. Gaap's special ability is making things lost and hidden by swiping them to nowhere as Gaap's TIPS and speech attests. In episode 4, it is mentioned that Maria's room is in a state of perpetual chaos, and were things to be rearranged in a proper order of any kind, Maria would not be able to find anything. That would make them inexplicably lost. Maria refers to Gaap all the way back in Ep1 and she is clearly aware of the ability. The only one beside Maria who can rearrange anything in Maria's room is Rosa. Therefore Maria ascribes Rosa's actions to Gaap.
Gaap says she is a guest on the island. Rosa is hardly native to it either.
Gaap is friends with Beatrice. Rosa is clearly more friendly with the servants, at least outwardly, than any of the sibling generation and actually offers to drink coffee with Shannon at one point while in Battler's presence, a familiarity which would be unthinkable for, say, Natsuhi or Eva. Alternatively, if Shannon is not Beatrice, Rosa very well may have had a much longer contact with Beatrice-2 than she claims to, which would also fit quite well.
Gaap openly expresses admiration for George. There is nothing unthinkable about Rosa wishing George to have been her own son instead of Maria, and even if we assume Gaap's lines in this scene mean something more romantic, they're in distant, but not too distant age brackets, with the difference being just over ten years at most.
Generally, Jessica and Shannon are seen as the major Gaap vessel candidates, followed by the paradoxical Nanjo, but few people seem to consider Rosa seriously. :)
LyricalAura
2010-04-26, 10:21
Again here Kanon asks "why" Natsuhi wasn't chosen, as if he's really totally clueless about the reason, which is at odd with any kanontrice, shkanontrice and fake-murder conspiracy.
Also if Kanon was Kinzo you'd think he'd be a lot less helpless than this. A Kanon-Kinzo should have the means to find Beatrice and question her. After all Beatrice uses Kinzo's envelopes and has the ring, it's impossible that "Kinzo" and "Beatrice" do not know each other.
So what do you think?
I thought something like this: what would happen if Beatrice was narrating the conversation, and Battler actually only heard one or two lines before he entered the room? Then the conversation from his perspective looks like:
Kanon: ...Why, .........was Madam not chosen as a sacrifice...? If only she had been chosen, ......Shannon wouldn't, ......Shannon wouldn't have had to die...
Read: "Why didn't we have Madam act as one of the sacrifices instead of having Shannon fill in for her? If she'd been the one lying out there, Shannon wouldn't have gotten killed."
Bluemail
2010-04-26, 10:39
This Beatrice, the mastermind probably, told them not to use Natsuhi. She didn't tell the servants why thought, no-one knows about the scorpion charm. Only one who'd know about it would be Jessica or Natsuhi. This is one of the points I base my suspicion on Jessica. But for what reason she would not include Natsuhi as a sacrifice on the first twilight, when she does that in Episodes 2 and 4, well no other episodes have those scorpion charms in use and they met by a chance. But as shown by that scene, she does care for her mother after all. And wanted to be with her a bit longer.
As for Gaap, because she is Beatrice's friend she is also Maria's. If Gaap is Rosa, maybe he just wanted Maria to be happy with that. Rosa might have actually planned the Halloween party in EP2, not part of the murder, when the killer took her chance. I like it, I want Rosa take even more part :D
Also, a random thought of the original Kanon/Yoshiya being the servant falling off the cliff. But because it happened way too early... With that theory of ijriim's, Shannon couldn't be fooling Kinzo with a Kanon younger than the actual dead one :heh:
*Gaap says she is a guest on the island. Rosa is hardly native to it either.
If Rosa isn't a "native" who else is? I think only Jessica could claim that... and Beatrice if she was born there. All the other people started living in Rokkenjima at an older age than Rosa.
Rosa however is still a guest since she isn't living there, but this is true for a lot of other people.
I thought something like this: what would happen if Beatrice was narrating the conversation, and Battler actually only heard one or two lines before he entered the room? Then the conversation from his perspective looks like:
Read: "Why didn't we have Madam act as one of the sacrifices instead of having Shannon fill in for her? If she'd been the one lying out there, Shannon wouldn't have gotten killed."
However Battler later claims he's been listening for a while. So he didn't hear just the last sentence. He might not have heard everything from the beginning, but the most relevant part should have been caught by his ears.
However Battler later claims he's been listening for a while. So he didn't hear just the last sentence. He might not have heard everything from the beginning, but the most relevant part should have been caught by his ears.
Battler may be exaggerating in an effort to wrestle more information from the servants, which would be perfectly sensible. It's not a nice thing to do, but Meta-Battler says at one point that he doesn't take any responsibility for his own conduct. :)
Okay after thinking about the latest stuff I came up with another one of my crazy theories. this theory tries to unify several elements across the game and give a single explanation to both.
The interesting part is that it can match with shkanon theory, ghosterika theory and kanon-kinzo theory, all in a single package.
I'll call it the medium theory.
here are the main points of the theory:
- Among the people in Rokkenjima there is a person (which will be called "person X") who has the ability to act as "medium" for the spirits of the dead. Whether this actually happens or it's just magic mumbo-jumbo that can be explained in another way is not really relevant to the theory.
- Person X, once possessed by other personalities (which for simplicity will be called "ghosts" from now on), becomes unaware of his real self. the ghosts take over the body and act according to their personality and will.
- Ghosts may or may not be aware of the truth, but most of them do know they are merely living in an host body.
- Genji, Kumasawa most certainly know about Person's X ability, however they can't really tell that to everyone because they know they'll face disbelief. Kinzo of course knew that very well.
- Person X does not have total control on her ability, so it could happen that she makes things she isn't aware of. Consequently, Genji and Kumasawa often need to cover up her blunders.
- Ghosts might be able to see other ghosts and converse with them if the situation allows it. Also if they quickly interchange in Person's X body, Genji and Kumasawa or whoever knows and accept this strange story are able to talk with two or more ghosts at the same time.
Kinzo's ghost
If this theory is correct, then Person X can host Kinzo's ghost. Natsuhi might have been very skeptical of this in the beginning, but her strong desire to see Kinzo again, made her "magitoxin" level fade and therefore she was able to recognize Person X as Kinzo. She accepts that Person X truly becomes Kinzo even so she is aware that everyone else cannot understand it. Whenever in the game we see Kinzo, it's actually Person X. Whenever we see person talking about Kinzo even among the people tha know he is dead, they are referring to Kinzo's ghost. In time Krauss accepted this truth as well.
Beatrice's ghost
Beatrice died long ago, and then a second Beatrice died in 1967. Both their ghosts can possess Person X. This explains the "two Beatrice dilemma". This also explains why Beatrice "has no body". The witch's prank can be explained by Person X becoming the witch, and of course Genji does his best to cover it up.
Shannon's and Kanon's ghosts
It is possible that one of them is dead or both of them are. It's difficult to imagine who they were but it's possible that Shannon was the young maid that died in 1967. Kanon has been said to have died in Jessica's room, maybe that was an accident of some sort.
Shannon has been possessing Person X for a long while, making it the main ghost. Kanon has probably died more recently 3 years before, causing his appearance to come much later.
Erika's ghost
Erika died by falling from the pleasure boat. This is can only be explained with the supernatural, in that case it's possible that her "ghost" possessed person X. More of that later.
EP2 chapel scene
Person X, possessed by Beatrice, invited all the adults in the chapel and explained the situation. Of course no one wanted to believe that at first, however Beatrice managed to convince them somehow. She proved it. That's why Rudolf said "what can I say you have proved devils". Everyone, reluctantly, acknowledged it: "You are the witch Beatrice".
Later when Rosa goes talking to Kinzo, she is actually going to talk to Person X possessed by his ghost. Rosa already knows the situation from before, so she accept that Person X can become Kinzo as well.
EP4 Kinzo's appearance
Krauss and Natsuhi already believe that Kinzo's ghost can take control of person X, however they don't think they can just tell this story to the rest of the family.
In EP4, they are left with no choice. They have no choice but to ask Person X to become Kinzo and show himself in front of everyone. And so that's what happens.
Similar to the previous situation, the adults have no other way but to accept the evidence even if it is preposterous. They all acknowledge Kinzo's existence
Kanon, Shannon and Beatrice
This mainly appears in EP2 and EP6. Beatrice is a ghost that emerged only recently. Kanon and Shannon who alternate often and can coexist meet with Beatrice the way it is described in the story. Of course this only happened in their head, not physically. Kanon apparently doesn't like Beatrice, Shannon is more open, in the end Shannon is influenced to accept Beatrice's suggestions to never give up on their love dreams. These kind of interactions only happen at a "spiritual level" not in the real world. The same way is true for Kanon and Kinzo interactions.
For some reasons Beatrice and Kinzo cannot coexist, the irony. Well actually in the end even they can do that since sometimes we see them together.
Kanon and Jessica, George and Shannon, the love duel
Jessica knows, George knows. The persons they love are dead. However their love its too strong to be defeated by that, even if they know the truth they still want to fulfill their dreams, though they know, only one of them can win. George wants person X to be Shannon forever, Jessica wants person X to be Kanon forever. And then of course there's Beatrice that wants to stay with Battler. That's why the love duel is required.
Erika's presence in EP5
When Erika appears in front of Maria it's not like the usual plot really changed. Person X shows in front of Maria as usual, but this time, she's been possessed by Erika's ghost. Maria knows person X situation and being very perceptive she recognizes that person X is being possessed by an unknown person. She then brings person X to Kumasawa and Genji which understand what happened. Someone named Erika Furudo just drowned and now Person X believes that she's that person. In order to cover up the problem, they try disguise Person X as much as possible to make her look like a stranger.
Then Person X is introduced to everyone as Furudo Erika explaining that she just survived after falling off a ship. Erika's ghost herself believes in this story.
She is able to see both Kanon and Shannon, but she's not aware that they aren't actually there.
I stops here, for now, but I think you can guess all the other implications, it would be very long to explains them all. Of course some of these parts might be false. After all if they are ALL correct, then we need an unknown person to make 17 people in total.
I'll call it the medium theory.
here are the main points of the theory:
- Among the people in Rokkenjima there is a person (which will be called "person X") who has the ability to act as "medium" for the spirits of the dead. Whether this actually happens or it's just magic mumbo-jumbo that can be explained in another way is not really relevant to the theory.
- Person X, once possessed by other personalities (which for simplicity will be called "ghosts" from now on), becomes unaware of his real self. the ghosts take over the body and act according to their personality and will.
This is elegant and universal, but it keeps the disguise problem which it inherits from Shkanon. How is Battler, who obviously doesn't believe in magic or the complicated inner workings of someone able to manifest arbitrary identities, is able to readily and instantly tell which of the ghosts he is talking to?
I gotta admit, if not for the paranormal aspects of that, which can be explained away as multiple personality disorder, it does represent a solution for the entire Umineko. If a bit unsatisfying...
I once joked about this theory, which if I may, I'd like to call the Sheverybodytrice theory. 8)
(Actually, my joke about the Sheverybodytrice theory was that there was just one or two people on the island and everyone is fake... although that doesn't work for the given count of people on the island now.)
Actually there is one supporting piece of evidence that if not everyone is possessing people as 'ghosts' then maybe at least Beatrice is. Maria seems to have difficulty identifying Beatrice. I'm sure everyone remembers her pointing to Eva-Beatrice in EP3 and declaring that 'Beatrice is here.' It makes me wonder if Maria thinks Beatrice's form keeps changing so she recognizes any strange occurance as 'Beatrice.'
I once joked about this theory, which if I may, I'd like to call the Sheverybodytrice theory. 8)
(Actually, my joke about the Sheverybodytrice theory was that there was just one or two people on the island and everyone is fake... although that doesn't work for the given count of people on the island now.)
That'd be Ryukishi himself. :) But then we would be denying the two principal assumptions of literary criticism and characters become simple words which aren't even on paper, which makes this whole thread meaningless.
This is elegant and universal, but it keeps the disguise problem which it inherits from Shkanon. How is Battler, who obviously doesn't believe in magic or the complicated inner workings of someone able to manifest arbitrary identities, is able to readily and instantly tell which of the ghosts he is talking to?
I hate to do it this way, but we could say Battler IS dead and is a ghost. And Shannon, Kanon, or Erika are not; whatever it takes to satisfy the body count.
This owing to how Battler is seldom by himself, some people have said, and how he just participates in conversations but doesn't lead or something.
LyricalAura
2010-04-26, 15:12
I'll call it the medium theory.
here are the main points of the theory:
<snip>
I stops here, for now, but I think you can guess all the other implications, it would be very long to explains them all. Of course some of these parts might be false. After all if they are ALL correct, then we need an unknown person to make 17 people in total.
...Oh my. This might be workable, if you can resolve that person count issue.
I suspected for a while after EP3 that there might be a tiny supernatural core at the heart of the mystery. That would be the one way that Lambda could be absolutely certain Bern would never, ever solve it. And it would be totally in keeping with Ryukishi initially claiming that it could be a fantasy or a mystery.
I hate to do it this way, but we could say Battler IS dead and is a ghost. And Shannon, Kanon, or Erika are not; whatever it takes to satisfy the body count.
This owing to how Battler is seldom by himself, some people have said, and how he just participates in conversations but doesn't lead or something.
From EP3: Battler is alive. So I think that doesn't work, unless you bring in some shenanigans involving the other Battler.
I hate to do it this way, but we could say Battler IS dead and is a ghost. And Shannon, Kanon, or Erika are not; whatever it takes to satisfy the body count.
This owing to how Battler is seldom by himself, some people have said, and how he just participates in conversations but doesn't lead or something.
But considering that it makes it impossible to determine if any scene with Battler present in it is a reliable perspective, because he could have been displaced out of it by another ghost at any moment, discussion also becomes meaningless. :) Battler that is dead only works if he's alone in whatever jar that keeps his soul.
LyricalAura
2010-04-26, 15:24
Oh, hey. The age of the true master of this world is 19, so:
1948: Kawabata begins supplying Kuwadorian.
1967~1968: Beatrice-2 dies, Kawabata stops supplying Kuwadorian.
1967 - 1948 = 19.
I suspected for a while after EP3 that there might be a tiny supernatural core at the heart of the mystery. That would be the one way that Lambda could be absolutely certain Bern would never, ever solve it. And it would be totally in keeping with Ryukishi initially claiming that it could be a fantasy or a mystery.
The problem is that we don't really know how big a supernatural element really is allowed in explanations. It's obviously not something as big as 'magic', because that is essentially accepting a witch while pretending you aren't.
It's very easy to assume a tiny supernatural element that looks reasonable, which will eventually purely logically transform into a 2=1 equation, which will allow an arbitrary quantity of supernatural that you can't stop...
P.S. Actually, if we roll with it, Kanon is Natsuhi's furniture, materialized from a memory of the baby 19 years ago. Natsuhi repeatedly has headaches. Ange refers to the strain on her brain imposed by materializing the Stakes as a headache. :) He is not a suitable boyfriend for Jessica in Natsuhi's eyes, which is why he isn't allowed to love her.
LyricalAura
2010-04-26, 15:42
...Oh my. This might be workable, if you can resolve that person count issue.
Alright, let's try this. The true number of people on the island in EP1-4 is sixteen. Shannon is the medium. Having this ability is the reason she was brought to the island so young, and why she remained for such a long time. In EP5-6, Erika was alive when she washed up on the island, increasing the person count to 17, but she died almost immediately, releasing her ghost to possess Shannon.
The problem is that we don't really know how big a supernatural element really is allowed in explanations. It's obviously not something as big as 'magic', because that is essentially accepting a witch while pretending you aren't.
It's very easy to assume a tiny supernatural element that looks reasonable, which will eventually purely logically transform into a 2=1 equation, which will allow an arbitrary quantity of supernatural that you can't stop...
I agree, but we do have Knox 8 to fall back on, which is a pretty powerful weapon. In this case, there are hints for ghosts, and they still require the medium's human body to take any action, so things like teleporting and magically opening locks won't come into it.
I must say that this theory, despite its many weak points, it finally gives me enough reasons to accept ghosterika.
Before there were a lot of things that didn't sound right to me. I can't really accept that a random person becomes Erika Furudo, but if it is the same person that can become Beatrice and Kinzo, then it works.
Plus this way I have found a connection between Erika and Beatrice's game, that previously was missing. If Erika is one of the many ghosts of the "Person X", then understanding this is an important piece to understand Beatrice's games.
Also I found interesting to note how Erika and Beatrice seem to be incompatible existences.
Erika makes her appearance when Beatrice starts to die. Soon after Beatrice dies Erika becomes a full fledged witch.
Then we have EP6 where as soon as Beatrice fully recovers her identity Erika dies. Interesting to note that we have a duel between Erika and Beatrice that is pretty similar to the duel between Shannon and Kanon.
Also I wonder if "ghosts" are limited to dead people, because in case they are not, then we can also explain EP3 with person X becoming Evatrice. It would fit since Evatrice takes Beatrice's place. plus the red web of truth would be solved easily if Kanon and Shannon are dead since a long time.
Lastly the scene where Beatrice resurrects Kanon and Shannon for George's and Jessica's sake could be explained by the fact that Beatrice steps aside to let Kanon's and Shannon's ghosts appear.
Alright, let's try this. The true number of people on the island in EP1-4 is sixteen. Shannon is the medium. Having this ability is the reason she was brought to the island so young, and why she remained for such a long time. In EP5-6, Erika was alive when she washed up on the island, increasing the person count to 17, but she died almost immediately, releasing her ghost to possess Shannon.
uhmm this could explain the erika ghost without supernatural, if Person X just found the body and the shock caused her to want that girl to have survived.
SeagullCrazy
2010-04-26, 15:43
I'll call it the medium theory.
here are the main points of the theory:
Erika's ghost
Erika died by falling from the pleasure boat. This is can only be explained with the supernatural, in that case it's possible that her "ghost" possessed person X. More of that later.
Erika's presence in EP5
When Erika appears in front of Maria it's not like the usual plot really changed. Person X shows in front of Maria as usual, but this time, she's been possessed by Erika's ghost. Maria knows person X situation and being very perceptive she recognizes that person X is being possessed by an unknown person. She then brings person X to Kumasawa and Genji which understand what happened. Someone named Erika Furudo just drowned and now Person X believes that she's that person. In order to cover up the problem, they try disguise Person X as much as possible to make her look like a stranger.
Then Person X is introduced to everyone as Furudo Erika explaining that she just survived after falling off a ship. Erika's ghost herself believes in this story.
She is able to see both Kanon and Shannon, but she's not aware that they aren't actually there.
I found a problem. Erika was the detective in EP5. Knox's 2nd: supernatural agencies cannot be used as a detective technique.
In other words, you can't have a supernatural detective because of Knox's 2nd.
Other than that and the 17th person, I don't see any problems.
Well I've just found a possible solution to that problem in the previous post.
I have to admit I like the medium theory it can explain a lot of things quite gracefully.
I was just thinking before that of a way the final reds work though. So assuming it's not true I'll add in my theory.
I'll start with the reds supporting it first
No more than 17 humans exist on this island!!
That excludes any 18th person.
In short, this 18th person X does not exist!!
This applies to all games!!!
Furudo Erika had no influence on any of Beato's games before now.
She does not exist in the worlds before this one, nor does she influence them.
Furudo Erika only increases it by one person.
The reds in episode 4 created the rule that no more than 17 people exist on Rokkenjima during the disaster. For any new character to be introduced another character must be eliminated to make an 18th person one of the 17 people. Either that character never arrived to the island or he was dead before the game was finished being set up. This allows Erika and other characters to exist while still keeping the number of people no more than seventeen
In other words because of this new rule the game master had to write out or kill off a character to introduce Erika.
For episode 5 and 6 I'd chose Battler. :D
LyricalAura
2010-04-26, 16:40
I found a problem. Erika was the detective in EP5. Knox's 2nd: supernatural agencies cannot be used as a detective technique.
In other words, you can't have a supernatural detective because of Knox's 2nd.
Erika didn't use any supernatural agencies in the course of the investigation. All of the actions she took during the investigation were within the normal capabilities of the medium's perfectly human body. Of course, it would have been a different matter if she'd done something like leave the medium's body in order to spy on Kinzo's study.
A trickier problem to get around is this one:
Three people, that is, three bodies, went in and out of the room. Only you and Kanon entered, and only Battler left.
If there's only one medium, and Kanon and Erika are both ghosts, and ghosts don't count as bodies, then we'd only have two bodies going in and out.
SeagullCrazy
2010-04-26, 16:47
Erika didn't use any supernatural agencies in the course of the investigation. All of the actions she took during the investigation were within the normal capabilities of the medium's perfectly human body. Of course, it would have been a different matter if she'd done something like leave the medium's body in order to spy on Kinzo's study.
I meant if Erika is a ghost, then that itself is supernatural. So if Erika's ghost is the detective, then the medium would be using Erika as a detective technique, which violates Knox's 2nd.
But Jan-Poo did offer a different explanation in a previous post.
uhmm this could explain the erika ghost without supernatural, if Person X just found the body and the shock caused her to want that girl to have survived.
If I understand correctly, the medium saw Erika's corpse and pretended she was her ghost to keep Erika "alive".
A trickier problem to get around is this one:
Three people, that is, three bodies, went in and out of the room. Only you and Kanon entered, and only Battler left.
If there's only one medium, and Kanon and Erika are both ghosts, and ghosts don't count as bodies, then we'd only have two bodies going in and out.
I was thinking the same thing. If it wasn't for this I could solve the riddle by stating that Erika's ghost was shut down momentarily to let Kanon jump in the scene. Kanon then locked the room and disappeared without letting Erika understand what happened.
however the "3 bodies" issue cannot be explained...
however the "3 bodies" issue cannot be explained...
A third body was carried into the room by the medium with an intent to hide it in there.
LyricalAura
2010-04-26, 17:45
A third body was carried into the room by the medium with an intent to hide it in there.
Erika!Medium carried her own corpse into the room. Kanon knew Battler was hiding inside, so he hijacked the medium after Erika sealed the room and warned Battler to escape.
...Wow, this is getting pretty weird. :heh:
Speaking of supernatural, I just stumbled on some weirdness in Ep4.
According to Maria, summoning, creation and resurrection are substantially different, though she never actually elaborates how. Resurrection and creation are supposedly much harder than summoning.
Interacting with a phantom Maria is effortless for Ange while the diary is open. It takes great mental strain for Ange to summon the Stakes. Even maintaining them when they are already summoned is initially a problem.
Maria is very definitely dead, so seeing her would, technically, involve resurrection.
Maria explains that by claiming that she is actually present regardless of the diary, and the diary merely allows her to be seen. She actually glazes over the issue of being dead in the first place.
If you assume a rational explanation that Ange generally subscribes to, i.e. that virtual characters are internally maintained delusions, there should be no difference whatsoever in terms of effort between interacting with Maria and imagining the Stakes. Stakes should in fact be easier as they are inherently simpler characters. The only difference would be in terms of numbers.
So why?
Raiza Sunozaki
2010-04-26, 18:07
Okay after thinking about the latest stuff I came up with another one of my crazy theories. this theory tries to unify several elements across the game and give a single explanation to both.
The interesting part is that it can match with shkanon theory, ghosterika theory and kanon-kinzo theory, all in a single package.
I'll call it the medium theory
*snip*
I like it for the fantasy aspect, but I can't accept it as a theory for solving Umineko. Sorta like how I like chrono's theory on Shkanon for the fucked up psychological aspects, but since I refuse Shkanon, I can't accept it.
I've just been focused so hard on finding a solution which doesn't involve fantasy elements and Shkanon, that it's become impossible for my mind to consider anything that involves them as vaild. Still, I can't find any evidence against it, so I can't deny it.
Unrelated, but I'm thinking about formulating what I think the rules of the gameboard are, in response to a post about five or six pages back (which considering how fast this thread is moving these days, is probably only yesterday). I'll post them when I get them finished.
Raiza Sunozaki
2010-04-26, 18:12
If you assume a rational explanation that Ange generally subscribes to, i.e. that virtual characters are internally maintained delusions, there should be no difference whatsoever in terms of effort between interacting with Maria and imagining the Stakes. Stakes should in fact be easier as they are inherently simpler characters. The only difference would be in terms of numbers.
So why?
If I remember correctly, it's because there's no vessel for the Stakes. Maria's diary acts as a vessel for her, and I actually think that Ange's not ressurecting Ange, but summoning her witch form MARIA as a familiar, like how she does with the Stakes. Of course, Ange's a little strange, and calls MARIA Maria, like how she calls Sakutaro Sakutarou. So the Stakes are harder to summon because she doesn't have anything to act as a vessel for them.
If I remember correctly, it's because there's no vessel for the Stakes. Maria's diary acts as a vessel for her, and I actually think that Ange's not ressurecting Ange, but summoning her witch form MARIA as a familiar, like how she does with the Stakes. Of course, Ange's a little strange, and calls MARIA Maria, like how she calls Sakutaro Sakutarou. So the Stakes are harder to summon because she doesn't have anything to act as a vessel for them.
Here we come to the real puzzler. Notably, it's on one of those screens flashing when Battler has his epiphany in Ep5, and I am still wondering why.
When Maria teaches Ange to summon the stakes, no vessel is mentioned, and apparently one is not available at all while Ange is in school.
The stakes immediately proceed to tease Sakutaro. Ange is still feeling no strain.
After admiring them for a while, Ange agrees to have control and maintenance of the Stakes transferred over to her. It takes her quite some time to do that, full of discussion and observing the Stakes nibbling on the lion.
Then she immediately starts having a headache and suffering other effects.
Basically, if the scene follows materialistic rules, Ange is able to imagine all seven sisters simultaneously immediately, without any practice or training or even indepth study on what they should be. Then she starts training to do what she just had no problem with.
If the scene follows mystic rules, how is Ange able to talk to Maria in the first place is unclear and the witch form MARIA just muddles the issue - but it is solved best if Maria is literally truthful and a witch is somehow capable to transcend death by imagining herself...
If the mystic version is unacceptable and the materialistic version is silly, there has to be a third option somewhere.
Raiza Sunozaki
2010-04-26, 18:47
Here we come to the real puzzler. Notably, it's on one of those screens flashing when Battler has his epiphany in Ep5, and I am still wondering why.
When Maria teaches Ange to summon the stakes, no vessel is mentioned, and apparently one is not available at all while Ange is in school.
The stakes immediately proceed to tease Sakutaro. Ange is still feeling no strain.
After admiring them for a while, Ange agrees to have control and maintenance of the Stakes transferred over to her. It takes her quite some time to do that, full of discussion and observing the Stakes nibbling on the lion.
Then she immediately starts having a headache and suffering other effects.
Basically, if the scene follows materialistic rules, Ange is able to imagine all seven sisters simultaneously immediately, without any practice or training or even indepth study on what they should be. Then she starts training to do what she just had no problem with.
If the scene follows mystic rules, how is Ange able to talk to Maria in the first place is unclear and the witch form MARIA just muddles the issue - but it is solved best if Maria is literally truthful and a witch is somehow capable to transcend death by imagining herself...
If the mystic version is unacceptable and the materialistic version is silly, there has to be a third option somewhere.
While I have no idea why this scene was part of Battler's epiphany in Episode 5 (Chrono seems pretty sure he has an idea though) I can sort of explain the scene from a fantasy point of view. Ange has practice summoning familiars; from her narration, it feels like she's subconciously been summoning Maria/MARIA for a while now. So the only difference between summoning her and the Stakes is the focus overload.
This is where it gets a little complicated to me. Maria originally summons the Stakes, like how she's been the one summoning Sakutaro all this time, and that's why Ange is able to percieve them without feeling the stress. Then, when Maria transfers the Stakes summoning over to Ange, it changes from hosting one familiar to eight, and Ange can't cope.
The thinnest part of this is this. Can a familiar/furniture summon it's own furniture?
The thinnest part of this is this. Can a familiar/furniture summon it's own furniture?
I don't think it can possibly be allowed, it creates an infinite loop even a fantasy interpretation should dread. :)
The only other way out for the fantasy perspective is that someone acknowledged as a witch in life transcends death and can be seen even by untrained (but sensitive) people if a vessel is available. And in that case the vessel does not have to be animate. Which actually implies Maria can be resurrected by a ceremony like Beatrice. :)
While the portrait would be an obvious vessel for Beatrice-2, I suspect something more mobile that we have actually seen and treated as a normal object should be available.
Raiza Sunozaki
2010-04-26, 19:01
I don't think it can possibly be allowed, it creates an infinite loop even a fantasy interpretation should dread. :)
The only other way out for the fantasy perspective is that someone acknowledged as a witch in life transcends death and can be seen even by untrained (but sensitive) people if a vessel is available. And in that case the vessel does not have to be animate. Which actually implies Maria can be resurrected by a ceremony like Beatrice. :)
While the portrait would be an obvious vessel for Beatrice-2, I suspect something more mobile that we have actually seen and treated as a normal object should be available.
The ring perhaps? Solving the Epitaph grants you the title of the head of the family, and with it the head's ring. Solving the Epitaph also revives Beatrice, even if it is just for a short while.
Back to the Ange debate, this is why I don't like discussing anything out of the meta-world as magic. If you simply assume that Ange created these hallucinations out of loneliness, then any amount of contradictions can be blamed on Ange's inexperience with magic.
The ring perhaps? Solving the Epitaph grants you the title of the head of the family, and with it the head's ring. Solving the Epitaph also revives Beatrice, even if it is just for a short while.
Actually, gold itself would be a better vessel than either. It is the only object that is definitely intimately connected to Beatrice herself -- the ring was commissioned by Kinzo, and so was the portrait.
Back to the Ange debate, this is why I don't like discussing anything out of the meta-world as magic. If you simply assume that Ange created these hallucinations out of loneliness, then any amount of contradictions can be blamed on Ange's inexperience with magic.
Blamed - yes. But I'm pretty sure reconstructing the 'magic school' of the story sufficiently completely is required to arrive at reasonable motivations for bizarre actions which we constantly come up with to fit the red.
In this particular case, though, the materialistic explanation is actually rather silly, while the magical one, which we aren't supposed to accept, makes sense. Which is why I'm thinking there might be a third option.
Hmmm at the time Ange was still in school, her magitoxin level was very low. Also I don't think Ange was able to summon the stakes right away back then, it probably took her some time (off screen).
Later in 1998 when Ange tries again her magitoxin level dramatically increased, also she isn't used to that anymore. I think Maria stressed out in a few instances that Ange couldn't summon too many of the stakes "in her current state". Which imho it means that Ange weakened a lot in the magical sense. Her headache is therefore caused by the strain of focusing her mind to keep at bay her magitoxin, something that she had no problem doing before.
as for the difference between resurrection, summoning and creation from what I can understand:
Summoning: the act to call forth a furniture, which basically means to be able to see and interact with an imaginary friend.
Resurrection: the act of bringing back to life people that are dead or things that are broken. It is similar to summoning, but you imagine people that really existed instead. It's supposedly a lot more difficult because the knowledge of their death might cause a block.
Creation: the act of creating a furniture which didn't previously exist. In the case of the seven sisters, for example, the "seven demons" already existed in mythology, Sakutaro however is a character that Maria made up.
If a witch is powerful enough she can make it so even third parties can "see" or believe in the furnitures and the resurrected people.
Hmmm at the time Ange was still in school, her magitoxin level was very low. Also I don't think Ange was able to summon the stakes right away back then, it probably took her some time (off screen).
Please study the scene where Ange gets the Stakes. First, Maria summons them. At that time, Ange sees them tease Sakutaro and interacts with them in detail.
Which means she imagines them already, doesn't she. There's nobody else to do this for her, Maria is dead, and nobody can do this in the mystery perspective. But a few minutes later she is 'handed over maintenance' so to speak, and is suddenly unable to imagine more than one stake, and every minor action by the Stakes psychosomatically hurts her until only Mammon remains.
I found a problem. Erika was the detective in EP5. Knox's 2nd: supernatural agencies cannot be used as a detective technique.
In other words, you can't have a supernatural detective because of Knox's 2nd.Incorrect. The detective is prohibited from using supernatural methods to uncover the details of the crime.
Nothing says other supernatural things cannot exist, or that the detective cannot him or herself be supernatural or supernaturally-inclined. I believe there have been mystery stories written from the POV of ghosts, the victim, a dog, etc.
Imagine, for instance, that Battler is actually the first person murdered, shortly into the first day. Battler's ghost then meanders about investigating the mysteries, though he isn't aware that he died and thus never does anything that would necessitate suspension of disbelief. His perspective remains objective, he's merely mistaken when he thinks people are paying attention to him (this doesn't work with Umineko's narrative, but just pretend for a second). He refuses to accept a supernatural means for the crime and proceeds to attempt to investigate using the clues he has available, ep1 style.
I see no Knox violation here. Yes, the detective himself is supernatural, but so what? So is the reader, in a sense, as the reader is a disembodied entity which no character within the story can recognize who is capable of attaining the thoughts - to whatever extent the author permits - of characters within the story, with the express purpose of solving the story. In other words, even if the storyline's detective obeys Knox, the reader never actually can with anything short of a strict first-person narrative. It shouldn't matter who the detective or narrator is, or even what they are, or that they exist at all. EDIT: Note that, by this theory, stories Knox would have viewed as "pure" are actually grossly in violation of his own rules. However, as Knox probably did not know anything about deconstructionism I am going to give him a pass here. Even if Dlanor didn't.
By the way, I consider this entire medium theory elegant nonsense. But it is elegant, so good show making everything fit. I just think it's far too absurd to be true. It's actually a perfect example of creating a theory which is technically sufficient but materially unbelievable. Then again, Hanyuu...
Raiza Sunozaki
2010-04-26, 19:30
Actually, gold itself would be a better vessel than either. It is the only object that is definitely intimately connected to Beatrice herself -- the ring was commissioned by Kinzo, and so was the portrait.
But the ring is shown in fantasy aspects to be very close to Beato; whoever she is on the island inherits the ring after Kinzo dies, if the fantasy scenes have any truth to them. And Kinzo did commission the ring, but I'd put my money on the chance he used gold from the Beatrice gold. Making it something connected to Beato, but also something that would bind her to the family.
Blamed - yes. But I'm pretty sure reconstructing the 'magic school' of the story sufficiently completely is required to arrive at reasonable motivations for bizarre actions which we constantly come up with to fit the red.
Ugh. Alright, my best attempt at logically explaining the scene using magic. Ange, while at this time is not acknowledged as the Ressurection Witch, still holds the potential for it. She specializes in the recovery of impossible summons, such as dead family members (Maria, and of course, her never attempted target, Battler), "dead" familiars (Sakutaro) and summons without vessels (Stakes). With her potential, she unknowingly revived Maria, but bound her to the diary. Like how Beatrice could survive on the island, but was bound to it. Therefore, MARIA existed as a witch, and could summon furniture on her own, which helped as she taught Ange magic.
Raiza Sunozaki
2010-04-26, 19:35
Please study the scene where Ange gets the Stakes. First, Maria summons them. At that time, Ange sees them tease Sakutaro and interacts with them in detail.
Which means she imagines them already, doesn't she. There's nobody else to do this for her, Maria is dead, and nobody can do this in the mystery perspective. But a few minutes later she is 'handed over maintenance' so to speak, and is suddenly unable to imagine more than one stake, and every minor action by the Stakes psychosomatically hurts her until only Mammon remains.
What you said is somewhat invalid. By saying "Which mean she imagines them already," it means that it wasn't magic at all, but merely a lonely girl hallucinating. In order to explain magic, you have to avoid thinking "she imagined it." You can't explain magic with mystery. There's a reason the two are incompatible.
Wait, crap. I said Battler being dead already doesn't work with Umineko's narrative. Wouldn't I be a jerk if it turned out I was right? I mean he is in Purgatory. Maybe his sin was dying. Erika realized she was a ghost because the detective has to be one.
Okay, probably not, but it's a ghost-themed day.
Raiza Sunozaki
2010-04-26, 19:42
Wait, crap. I said Battler being dead already doesn't work with Umineko's narrative. Wouldn't I be a jerk if it turned out I was right? I mean he is in Purgatory. Maybe his sin was dying. Erika realized she was a ghost because the detective has to be one.
Okay, probably not, but it's a ghost-themed day.
I don't think it would be, but knowing Ryuukishi, I wouldn't put it past him. It would require quite the skill to explain. Basically, it means Ange's narration was completely wrong, as she believe Battler died on that day. Or, we'd have to pull another Shkanon, and say Rudolf or Kyrie were pretending to be Battler for her.
Still, if this came true, I would laugh. A lot.
What you said is somewhat invalid. By saying "Which mean she imagines them already," it means that it wasn't magic at all, but merely a lonely girl hallucinating. In order to explain magic, you have to avoid thinking "she imagined it." You can't explain magic with mystery. There's a reason the two are incompatible.
Sorry, I should mark the perspectives more clearly and I probably shouldn't have reiterated it yet again. :) I just meant to say that from a materialistic perspective using the already accepted for all other cases "purely subjective self-delusion through training in vivid daydreaming" explanation that scene does not make much sense as vivid daydreaming occurs before training required to achieve it.
From the mystic perspective, it only works if Maria is present in rather unusual ways, three of which we have proposed here. And all are rather complicated. But at least no contradictions occur.
So what if there actually is an objective phenomenon of some kind - non-supernatural, but somehow ensuring synchronicity of subjective processes without clearly visible cause?
But the ring is shown in fantasy aspects to be very close to Beato; whoever she is on the island inherits the ring after Kinzo dies, if the fantasy scenes have any truth to them. And Kinzo did commission the ring, but I'd put my money on the chance he used gold from the Beatrice gold. Making it something connected to Beato, but also something that would bind her to the family.
Yes, I guess the ring has to be it then.
You know just to clarify I didn't mean to say the medium is actually a medium and the ghosts are actually ghosts, but just that this is what people believe. Although I must say that without Person X being actually a medium it is very difficult to explain how he managed to convince everyone.
Apart from that clarification I'm not going to defend this theory (nor deny it) because I'm aware of its limits and I doubt I can defend it from attacks. And I agree with Renall that the simple fact that a theory explains everything (or a very big deal of things) doesn't mean that the theory is true. I think that for any given set of problems with enough imagination and skill it is possible to create an unification theory that explains them all perfectly even if it's completely wrong in practice. That's why the superstring theory doesn't impress me.
Anyway it's not like the other theories we have are so solid in comparison.
You know just to clarify I didn't mean to say the medium is actually a medium and the ghosts are actually ghosts, but just that this is what people believe. Although I must say that without Person X being actually a medium it is very difficult to explain how he managed to convince everyone.Well, yes, I accept the possibility that the theory could be interpreted with no supernatural elements, but in that instance I'm not sure I really believe there are enough clues presented to support not merely the notion of a spiritual medium, but also a fake spiritual medium.
The "medium" would also need extensive experience in the mannerisms and natures of every single person likely to be present on the island (except, perhaps, Battler, which might explain his exclusion from supernatural events since the "medium" would not be able to fool him since he/she has a six-year gap in their "read"). They would need to be a good enough liar to convince sixteen people that it's true. That takes enormous suspension of disbelief, to say the least.
EDIT: Though it does support and explain some things, like the beach scene and Shannon and Jessica trying to prompt Battler to recall things. They would by this theory be attempting to "read" him psychologically so that they can tune their behavior accordingly. This is a very common trick in a magic (as in rabbits and card tricks magic) show. Also used by phony psychics. Misdirection through props and theatrics is also pretty common. I would even go so far as to say someone is strongly versed in stage magic, the problem is I have seen no evidence of this anywhere in any episode. I don't think ryukishi has extensive experience with stage magic, though he clearly understands similar concepts.
EDIT EDIT: Okay, the card trick in ep5 is actually the one example I can think of. You could argue closed rooms are also a magic trick, at least inasmuch as escaping them is. And like stage magic, the best tricks are the ones that operate on assumptions rather than cheap things like trapdoors.
Raiza Sunozaki
2010-04-26, 20:04
Sorry, I should mark the perspectives more clearly and I probably shouldn't have reiterated it yet again. :) I just meant to say that from a materialistic perspective using the already accepted for all other cases "purely subjective self-delusion through training in vivid daydreaming" explanation that scene does not make much sense as vivid daydreaming occurs before training required to achieve it.
From the mystic perspective, it only works if Maria is present in rather unusual ways, three of which we have proposed here. And all are rather complicated. But at least no contradictions occur.
So what if there actually is an objective phenomenon of some kind - non-supernatural, but somehow ensuring synchronicity of subjective processes without clearly visible cause?
The "purely subjective self-delusion through training in vivd daydream" (sorry, I just love that title) train of thought still works. If you replace Maria as her familiar with Maria as an equal witch (I am the one who called Maria her familiar, I need to take that back), then the training happens with Maria summoning the Stakes, then giving the load to Ange, like how you'd give the load of a heavy object off to another person. Ange is not on summoning yet. She just (non-fanstasy here) imagines Maria summoning the Stakes, so logically, since Maria is not attached to Ange, there is no strain on her. Or, fantasy instead, she believes that Maria summons the Stakes, so she can see them.
Working out an extensive theory of how each individual type of magic sounds fun now.
The "purely subjective self-delusion through training in vivd daydream" (sorry, I just love that title) train of thought still works. If you replace Maria as her familiar with Maria as an equal witch (I am the one who called Maria her familiar, I need to take that back), then the training happens with Maria summoning the Stakes, then giving the load to Ange, like how you'd give the load of a heavy object off to another person. Ange is not on summoning yet. She just (non-fanstasy here) imagines Maria summoning the Stakes, so logically, since Maria is not attached to Ange, there is no strain on her.
Yes, that works in the non-fantasy perspective if Ange only starts feeling the strain when she believes she should. Which is still within bounds.
But actually seeing them before that moment requires her to believe she actually needs training when she in fact does not, which is the really interesting part.
Working out an extensive theory of how each individual type of magic sounds fun now.
So far, at a glance across the entire text, it's a rather eclectic mess. Very childlike things by Maria ('U-uu!') with little to no system but pure imagination to them coexist with hermetic tradition which is mostly seen as goetia/theurgy (that is, summoning of spirits) and mentions alchemy but astrology is completely forgotten. Much of the underlying philosophy is completely missing and instead replaced by something very different. The concepts Kinzo is described using are suspiciously modern and smell of chaos theory magic... In the middle of all that, number theory pops up out of nowhere and flashes you.
Progressing with a random thought: What if everyone is getting entirely the wrong idea about Kinzo's "black magic?" Maybe he's not interested in real magic at all, but stage magic. Of course, any good magician uses a gimmick, so pretending to be a real Crowley-style sorcerer is an entirely valid way to present your act. Less scrupulous magicians even claim actual powers, though merely pretending to have real magic powers is acceptable as long as you assert it's all part of your act. Some magicians would find this a bit irksome, like James Randi, but as long as the audience is not intentionally misled except during the show, it's acceptable.
So maybe Kinzo's not teaching people magic, but "magic." Let's look at the difference between Ronove and Genji. If we assume the two are similar and that aspects of the personality transfer over, perhaps we're led to believe that Genji and Kumasawa are capable, in the context of a "show," of performing certain feats. Ronove's butler outfit looks a bit like a stage magician's outfit anyway, and Virgilia's got lots of room up her sleeve. In other words, they share a mutual interest in stage magic with Kinzo.
The notion of "furniture" also takes on a different perspective here. Furniture help the magician perform his tricks. This includes props (the Stakes), but it could also include assistants. After all, when sawing a woman in half or levitating a person, it helps to have somebody who is in on the trick and actively participating, but they aren't really the magicians themselves. They're, to use a rough term, human props. But of course, nothing stops them from stepping forward and becoming a larger part of the act, or even taking over the starring role. Perhaps Gohda isn't allowed to wear the one-winged eagle because he just isn't good enough at putting on a show. He is a bit of a stammering sycophant, after all...
So what is Beatrice? She's the "witch." The new magician. Kinzo's taken his last bow, so now we have a new performer. Suit-Beatrice's outfit and her trick with Maria's candy is stage magic 101. Furniture that became a witch; an assistant who became a performer herself. She demonstrates her mastery with an impressive display that is twisted into tragedy. Battler does exactly the same thing in ep6; to demonstrate his mastery of the game, he constructs an elaborate magic trick. Then someone wrecks it.
Looked at this way, a lot of elements that appear sinister (minus the murders anyway) are actually quite a bit more clear. The fake plots are an act. The faked deaths are stage makeup. The closed rooms are fantastic tricks. Someone is using them to really hurt and kill people, but that wasn't the intent behind them. It's very possible that more than one person was instructed in the stage magic and misdirection, but that one has chosen to use it "properly" as entertainment and another is using it to lie to people and kill them.
Kinzo's epitaph appears a sinister ritualistic slaughter. It's actually a childlike word puzzle that ends in a reward of more money than anyone present would know what to do with. It's playful, even though it appears dense and scary. This also somewhat matches Kinzo's personality, if we believe some of the things Kanon said about him.
Inconsistent elements are explicable as different people's acts. Not everyone uses the same tricks the same way. To one person a given prop is an important thing to emphasize, but to another it's just something to jam into the box where the assistant appears to be.
Battler (and later Erika), of course, thinks all of these things are human tricks. They are human tricks, but that's the point; everyone agrees to that and is suspending disbelief. Battler/Erika is the guy sitting in the front row heckling the magician at every turn, claiming everything is fake. Of course it's fake. This is the essence of the ep6 argument between Erika and Maria. Maria is - if not to the extent more mature people are - aware of the trick, but she derives happiness from pretending. This is a perfectly understandable coping mechanism for a child with a rocky home situation, especially one who is intelligent like Maria. Maria can, of course, get the wrong idea, which is why she often absorbs herself in the misdirection of the act rather than the details. Since Battler is more mature, he looks to the tricks themselves (the disappearing object) and not the trappings (the magical cloak covered in runes). Both of them are wrong. The trick is only properly enjoyable when you synthesize the ideas; you know the magician is trying to trick you, but you let yourself get caught up in it. You want to lose. You want to be completely baffled. That's what makes it magical. "Surrendering to the witch" is the right thing to do.
Maria and Ange's distinctions between "white" and "black" magic fall into similar ideas. "Black" magic is the use of human trickery and deception, preying on psychology, to make people believe things that aren't true. It's the faith healer who is a sham, or the phony spoon-bender. People who are just trying to get ahead or hurt others. People who promise things and don't deliver, or deliver something that isn't really what they said it was. "White" magic is the same thing, but to entertain, uplift, engage, and delight. It's making the world fantastic even though everyone involved understands rationally that it's a trick. It's letting people be fooled, knowing they're being fooled, and consciously choosing to let that happen.
Raiza Sunozaki
2010-04-26, 20:44
Yes, that works in the non-fantasy perspective if Ange only starts feeling the strain when she believes she should. Which is still within bounds.
But actually seeing them before that moment requires her to believe she actually needs training when she in fact does not, which is the really interesting part.
Why do you need training to see something? Through her subconscious revival of Maria, she's entered the world of magic, so there's no reason for her to not see the Stakes. There's never any evidence that Ange is the one summoning Sakutaro, yet she can see him fine. The thing about magic is acceptance, or love. Unless you accept it's existence, you can see it.
So far, at a glance across the entire text, it's a rather eclectic mess. Very childlike things by Maria ('U-uu!') with little to no system but pure imagination to them coexist with hermetic tradition which is mostly seen as goetia/theurgy (that is, summoning of spirits) and mentions alchemy but astrology is completely forgotten. Much of the underlying philosophy is completely missing and instead replaced by something very different. The concepts Kinzo is described using are suspiciously modern and smell of chaos theory magic... In the middle of all that, number theory pops up out of nowhere and flashes you.
Isn't that the root of all magic though? The childish desire to achieve the impossible through means supernatural, or at least what is considered supernatural in that time period. Whoever Beatrice was wanted to show Battler something, so she spent six years becoming the Endless Witch, Beatrice the Golden, who has lived for a thousand years. Kinzo wished to revive Beatrice, so he dabbled in magic even though he had no potential as a magician, and achieved success, in the end. Maria wished for her mama to always be happy, so she took the mantle of a witch to accomplish her goal. It seems all witches who become witches by their own means do so with a goal in mind. So you could say a witch is someone who possesses a overwelming resolve.
he he, I think that's the definitely what we have here, Renall. Albeit Ryukishi tries to give us the image of a fool crazy man with Kinzo, I always suspected that this was all a deceipt. Because Kinzo is not mad, he's a genius, that's different. Kinzo is a man that achieved the impossible, I just don't buy his madness. The study of the occult might seem foolish, but I think what Kinzo actually tried to study was the basic principle of "magic" with the clear knowledge that magic doesn't actually exist in this world, but it can be "created".
Tricks and magics, have always been at the center of this story. A magic that is actually a trick what else can be if not stage magic? No doubt that Kinzo is quite knowledgeable about that.
Now think about what Maria says about Beatrice, she keeps saying that Beatrice shows her a lot of magic tricks. Like making appear a candy inside a teacup. But that's just one, Beatrice showed her a lot of magic tricks of that kind. And what's this if not stage magic?
Of course a person like Kinzo cannot be satisfied with the kind of stage magic you see on TV. Kinzo is the man who'd rather use the stage magic tricks to make people truly believe in magic. Kinzo probably believe that a human trick that is indistinguishable from a real magic trick is magic. Some philosophers believe that a reality doesn't exist, rather everyone's experience is their own reality. So if everyone experiences magic wouldn't that be a real magic?
Of course I'm not the kind of person that believes in such a thing but I think Kinzo did.
We know that Kinzo had a lot of occult stuff in his study. But was that really serious stuff?
Now remember the stakes, they weren't serious stuff, they were cheap instruments, garbage.
The kind of thing you'd find in the study of a stage magician not a real occultist (provided that they actually exist).
You know what I think the stakes actually are? trick knives, like these ones (http://www.unitedmask.com/Armor/images/trick_knife.JPG), except a little more elaborate.
Why not? They aren't sharp, you can't physically pierce someone with them, not with a normal human strength. But that's all right if they aren't meant to actually pierce people, rather to give they illusion they did.
The rest is special effect, fake scars, fake blood, the kind of thing you can see in a movie. Kinzo shouldn't have problem acquiring that kind of stuff, and he learned how to do it and Beatrice learned from him.
"Without love, it can't be seen."
If you aren't willing to let yourself be fooled, you'll never be able to enjoy the show.
...but what does that say about people who have love? Is love a compromise? Is love overlooking the trick you know is behind the magic?
Raiza Sunozaki
2010-04-26, 21:05
It's letting people be fooled, knowing they're being fooled, and consciously choosing to let that happen.
This. I love this one line. It ties in with what Umineko's magic truely is. Thank you Renall, for this line. I kept on thinking that magic was just simply an elaboration on the story. And in a sense, that is magic. But it's more Black magic than anything. What you said, I think that's the truth behind real magic. A magic that everyone accepts because it makes life nicer. Going along with the flow of the show so life is a little brighter.
This is what magic is.
Maria knows that. That's why she accepts so easily that her mother died. A magic performer can cut a person in half in front of your eyes, but that's not scary, because then the person will get in one piece again. A magic performer can make people disappear, but that's not scary, because then the people reappear again.
And Beatrice might "kill" people, but that's not scary, because Beatrice can "revive" them.
Raiza Sunozaki
2010-04-26, 21:15
"Without love, it can't be seen."
If you aren't willing to let yourself be fooled, you'll never be able to enjoy the show.
...but what does that say about people who have love? Is love a compromise? Is love overlooking the trick you know is behind the magic?
I think, no matter how romanticly you put it, any amount of love is a compromise. No human is perfect, so falling in love is praising their good qualities while admitting to their faults. So yes, love is a compromise. But that doesn't make it any less important.
So, what Ryuukishi is saying with Umineko is that without love, you cannot compromise. But once we admit to the faults of magic, we can understand what the games are all about.
Hopefully, at least.
SeagullCrazy
2010-04-26, 21:19
"Without love, it can't be seen."
If you aren't willing to let yourself be fooled, you'll never be able to enjoy the show.
That's the best interpretation of that line I've seen so far, IMO.
You raised a ton of interesting points about Kinzo's obsession with magic. Since Kinzo is dead, I wonder if his will was to have someone to put on one final magic show. I wouldn't put it past him, after all.
Imagine, for instance, that Battler is actually the first person murdered, shortly into the first day. Battler's ghost then meanders about investigating the mysteries, though he isn't aware that he died and thus never does anything that would necessitate suspension of disbelief. His perspective remains objective, he's merely mistaken when he thinks people are paying attention to him (this doesn't work with Umineko's narrative, but just pretend for a second). He refuses to accept a supernatural means for the crime and proceeds to attempt to investigate using the clues he has available, ep1 style.
This actually works in Umineko though. We take if for granted, but there is a scene where Virgilia dies without knowing she died. She didn't remember she was dead. So someone dying and becoming a ghost without knowing about it might work. You could argue that a medium could channel them and the ghost might not know about it either.
Kinzo's magic is stage magic
You remember the scene in episode 3 with the tarot cards? Kinzo kept playing hands until he got the one that was best. The narration said other people would think he's disrespecting the cards by doing that, but actually he understands the cards more than anyone. Tarot cards are just a random number generator to him. And he plays them over and over until he gets the numbers he wants.
EDIT: You guys remember when we were talking about how Ryukishi color codes everything in umineko, with red, blue, black, purple and gold? What if the "roulette" is color coded? You choose random colors and each time you get a different selection of people.
You know, this does fit in with what Kanon was talking about in EP6 with Kinzo being a prankster. I kept thinking the first twilight faking had to be some really serious, awful thing that scared even the siblings into submission.
Maybe it's Kinzo, scaring the siblings into submission... to prank Battler. 8)
I was thinking before that Battler's sin was some kind of joke about, "Oh, wouldn't it be great to have some secret murder mystery in this spooky Western style mansion?" And also, I was figuring that the reason Lucifer seems so interested in Battler romantically is if his sin was Pride. "I bet I can solve any mystery anyone makes for me!"
And so Kinzo decides to take him up on that?
I think we downplayed the possibility since it didn't seem like the whole family was in on any joke... just a few...
EDIT: Although just going over EP3 when the parents are scrambling around to find the servants. More than one keeps saying, "I wouldn't put it past Kinzo to pull a prank like this." referring to the magic circles and locked rooms. That's before they find the dead bodies though.
I don't intend to speculate who's in on it, or why they're doing it. I have no idea. However, if the stakes are props, it might fit the "stake people to confirm they're really dead" idea, and it might be a way the "magician faction" is fighting back against the actual killer. From what I can see, the killer is probably a defector from that group (whatever you want to call them), and the group itself is largely innocent. Again though, I don't know who or how.
Kaisos Erranon
2010-04-27, 01:19
Again though, I don't know who or how.
The "magician faction" basically has to be the servants/Nanjo. Not only are they the people most likely to have served as Kinzo's assistants, but only Shannon and Genji seem to know of the existence of Kinzo's will, which, under this theory, was most probably instructions to carry out the Ultimate Magic Trick which he could not.
The "magician faction" basically has to be the servants/Nanjo.
Servants and Nanjo plus George. He's an occultist don't you know. j/k
Not all of them have to be aware of the "magic tricks". A few of the members would be the people who go on stage and end up being part of the trick.
I don't intend to speculate who's in on it, or why they're doing it. I have no idea. However, if the stakes are props, it might fit the "stake people to confirm they're really dead" idea, and it might be a way the "magician faction" is fighting back against the actual killer. From what I can see, the killer is probably a defector from that group (whatever you want to call them), and the group itself is largely innocent. Again though, I don't know who or how.
The "who is in the groups" part is largely unimportant. The important part is who is the leader of the group and when you know that then you can figure out the how and the why. Different episodes probably have different members. It probably works like school sports. The different team leaders get to choose who would be the best members for the group in the scenario they want to act out.
The only question I have for you is: What about the bomb?
We know that Kinzo had a lot of occult stuff in his study. But was that really serious stuff?
According to Ootsuki much later, Kinzo was in the top five authorities on demonology in Japan, collecting rare texts which are not available as your regular paperback.
Which actually does not prevent the "stage magic" interpretation, because nothing stops Kinzo from actually doing both for further verisimilitude of his stage act, but makes it a little less elegant.
His expertise could be simply that. If you're an expert in fairy folklore it doesn't mean you believe in fairies. And Witch Hunters seem willing to believe just about anything that makes the tragedy more bizarre, so they're never credible.
I don't think it explains the actions or motives of the entire game, but it might explain the methods of the group which appears to at least contain Genji, Kumasawa, Nanjo, and possibly Shannon/Kanon (though if anyone is a defector, one or both of them seem like the pick). If a family member is also in the group, he or she is hiding it well.
EDIT: I mentioned some similarities between a magic act and a mystery novel (or other narrative) in a PM to Kaisos, but forgot to get a Sent copy for myself, so now I can't remember what I said. If you saw The Prestige, it's kinda like what Michael Caine's character says about the trick being a "narrative." The main similarity is that in a magic trick, you're expecting a trick; in other words, you anticipate the narrative yet are still "fooled" by it. A murder mystery is the same way; we all know a crime is going to take place in a mystery novel, so why are we always so surprised to see it happen?
I don't think it explains the actions or motives of the entire game, but it might explain the methods of the group which appears to at least contain Genji, Kumasawa, Nanjo, and possibly Shannon/Kanon (though if anyone is a defector, one or both of them seem like the pick). If a family member is also in the group, he or she is hiding it well.
Rosa may not actually be in the stage magic group, but I'm pretty certain she is somehow affiliated, possibly without knowing the full story, and Maria is very definitely a willing member of the audience. The rose and letter scene is trivial to disrupt, because it requires several things to happen:
Maria must find and notice a sick rose.
Rosa must tell Maria to stick around and look for it indefinitely.
Neither the first nor second can actually be randomly repeatable, and most importantly, Rosa actually approves of Maria sticking around when told:
In Ep1, it's Jessica who praises Maria for holding out, and Rosa is strangely not much annoyed at Maria even though you'd expect her to be -- she even lets an 'u-uu' slide even though she normally does not, and Battler remarks on that.
In Ep2, the whole post-rose scene is absent because Rosa actually stumbles in on the magic trick in progress even before rain starts, but the preconditions are there.
In Ep3, the post-rose scene is glazed over instead, and we don't see Rosa's reaction at all.
In Ep4, the post-rose scene consists of Rosa entering the parlor, where she makes a point to praise Maria for staying put in the most affectionate form ever in Battler's presence. Normally, Rosa doesn't do that, but this time she is unexpectedly pleased -- and Meta-Battler even sounds surprised up until the moment we find that he's actually surprised at Ange smashing her tea cup, which distracts our attention from the episode for a very extensive period, enough to completely forget it. :)
I expect that the Ep4 variant of the post-rose scene is the 'normal' one, when everything goes as planned. Notice also that George marks the rose with a candy wrapper, and not something else. It's always the wrapper from the 'candy Maria ate on the plane', but it's Eva who bought the packet of candy and even uses the receipt later to seal the study, so there has to be an arbitrary number of identical candy wrappers. It's Hideyoshi who asks her if she did buy candy, and he's also inevitably the first one to exclaim "I wouldn't put it past Kinzo!" or something to that effect when a chance comes up. And candy purchase is also one thing that seems to happen in all episodes.
rogerpepitone
2010-04-27, 09:57
If Rosa were somehow involved with a group faking Beatrice, wouldn't she provide a proper costume?
If Rosa were somehow involved with a group faking Beatrice, wouldn't she provide a proper costume?
If she were sufficiently deeply involved, I imagine that would be a natural role for her, yes. The question is how deeply involved is she really.
Don't you guys think that goats are actually people wearing goat masks? This was actually hinted in EP2
As far as I remember goats only appear after someone has been "killed". Which means that those who supposedly are dead can take the role of "goats".
Bluemail
2010-04-27, 10:26
Don't you guys think that goats are actually people wearing goat masks? This was actually hinted in EP2
As far as I remember goats only appear after someone has been "killed". Which means that those who supposedly are dead can take the role of "goats".
Which would mean the first twilight "victims". I wondered where they disappeared if the first twilight's were actually fake. This stage magician thing on the last pages seems like a good way to explain a separate magic faction. Probably by Kinzo's will. Then a murderer jumps on the oppoturnity, maybe for "people already died, so I could kill some nasty ones too (EP3 could be something like this)". Then another motive for the main murderer.
If this turns out to be true, I can say Umineko turned almost upside down on some points. And in essence "I let myself be fooled" :D
The medium theory sounds exciting also. I'd definitely pick Shannon/Kanon for this role. They still need to disguise though.
Raiza Sunozaki
2010-04-27, 10:36
According to Ootsuki much later, Kinzo was in the top five authorities on demonology in Japan, collecting rare texts which are not available as your regular paperback.
Which actually does not prevent the "stage magic" interpretation, because nothing stops Kinzo from actually doing both for further verisimilitude of his stage act, but makes it a little less elegant.
Actually, I can still see the occult texts as a part of Kinzo's madness. If we are to believe that the flashback scenes have some truth to them, Kinzo is truly heartbroken over losing Beatrice. His fascination with stage magic might have become mutated over the years after losing Beatrice into a desire for dark magic that could revive her, so he collected these tomes of demonology and magic. But towards the end of his life, he came to the realization that "true" magic was the magic he had known this entire time, his stage magic. The scene where he invites Genji and Shannon into the study so he can have his will written out (which I am assuming here is a flashback scene cleverly disguised as a part of the gameboard story), is him delivering his last request, put on one last grand magic show for the ghost of his beloved Beatrice, who I think was a woman who fell in love with his magic shows.
Bluemail
2010-04-27, 10:38
Has there been any hint of Kinzo performing somewhere?
He was probably called Lord Goldsmith...
And about the goats, who of the adults would be Goat-kun? :heh:
It is possible that Kinzo studied both "serious" books and stage magic textbooks. After all it is a lot more suggestive to create a stage magic show if it is based on actual mythology and occultism practices. But ultimately it seems that both Beatrice and Kinzo weren't really interested in substance but rather in appearance. Else Kinzo wouldn't have bought cheap stuff.
BTW I have the feeling that the winchesters are also replica and not the real stuff.
There is another thing to consider. the books that were auctioned were all from Kuwadorian, none of the ones in Kinzo's study survived. So it can be argued that those were actually Beatrice's books and not Kinzo's.
Raiza Sunozaki
2010-04-27, 10:51
There is another thing to consider. the books that were auctioned were all from Kuwadorian, none of the ones in Kinzo's study survived. So it can be argued that those were actually Beatrice's books and not Kinzo's.
Yes, but we've seen from Battler's perspective that occult books do exist in Kinzo's study. They've pulled an occult book out from the bookshelves in every Episode that they lock themselves in the study, I think.
And about the goats, who of the adults would be Goat-kun?
First thought, Gohda, because his name sounds the closest to the English word "goat." He's also shown to be childish on several accounts, and he also fairly large and shown to be pretty strong.
On the other hand, the Japanese word for goat is "yagi," if I remember correctly, and I don't know if that has any connection to Gohda.
Bluemail
2010-04-27, 10:58
If Winchesters are fake, they seem to be able to discharge though, making only bullets useless. We've never had a look at a bullet anyway. And this implies how they all got killed, because they had nothing to defend themselves (except by martial arts and hurling the weapons around, obviously).
Many murders are thought to be done with the shotguns, so if they're not actually working, the weapon must be something else. Never heard of pistols, but knives are mentioned and used, and a spear-shaped object is mentioned in TIPS, and the stakes (phony as well probably). And Battler's hatstand spear of course. And Rosa's handbag :heh:
They always have stakes in the spots where a gun would have shot. Is it all make-up, and all murders except those where there is another kind of wound is fake? Yeah not necessarily, because the "shotgun-wounds" could be done with a knife or spear, yes.
Dlanor .A. Nox
2010-04-27, 12:56
I thought Okonogi gave a good explanation on that "without love" quote. In ep 4 he explains it in detail with Ange.
Don't you guys think that goats are actually people wearing goat masks? This was actually hinted in EP2
As far as I remember goats only appear after someone has been "killed". Which means that those who supposedly are dead can take the role of "goats".
Episode 5 hints at it a bit too.
The history of Halloween does actually help with the goat mask idea. Since the idea was to dress up as monsters to scare away spirits.
EDIT:Or was that the Mexican holiday?
Dlanor .A. Nox
2010-04-27, 13:07
EDIT: Whoops it's only Halloween, in Mexico they celebrate the dead and want them to return.
Don't you guys think that goats are actually people wearing goat masks? This was actually hinted in EP2
As far as I remember goats only appear after someone has been "killed". Which means that those who supposedly are dead can take the role of "goats".
I think this was also strongly hinted in Episode 6
as in the end everyone was there wearing a goat mask except Beatrice, Battler and Kanon. (Kanon who reappeared and well the marrying couple)
Do we have to put stuff like that into tags or not. I don't remember anymore
Laserworm
2010-04-27, 15:43
Don't you guys think that goats are actually people wearing goat masks? This was actually hinted in EP2
As far as I remember goats only appear after someone has been "killed". Which means that those who supposedly are dead can take the role of "goats".
The only problem with this is if the people who are 'killed' are wearing the goat masks who is wearing the masks when Kanon and Jessica are attacked in ep2. There is almost no way the 1st twilight is fake in ep2. And if they were faking it, at the time Kanon and Jessica were attacked, the others were either in the chapel still or the door was locked.
SeagullCrazy
2010-04-27, 15:48
The only question I have for you is: What about the bomb?
Whoever planted the bomb was a bad magician. In some magic tricks, the magician will make something, usually a person, disappear, and then miraculously bring it back. But here, only half of the trick is done: the Ushiromiya family only disappeared, and never reappeared over the course of 12 years. A good magician would have shown that they are capable of bringing them back. If the bomb really killed them, then there was no chance at all for them to come back. This leads to another question: where did they go? Are we certain that they died? Or is it more likely that they planned on faking it, and miraculously returning 12 years later?
As absurd as it seems, I think that they are all alive in the real world.
I don't think the bomb is part of the magic trick .
At most maybe 5-7 people probably survived. I'm not entirely convinced that the Kuwadorian is the safe place and if it is I don't think that many people could be saved without knowing about it.
Since the only occult books we get to see are in Kinzo's room it's equally possible that Kinzo's room is "bomb proof" since it's the only room I know of that's on the third floor, which I think implies it was specially made.
However if one person survives in episode 3 it's possible that one person survives in every episode except maybe 4 due to the red.
If you add up the total of one persons surviving each episode it would add up to maybe 6 7 or maybe 8 people.
Whoever planted the bomb was a bad magician. In some magic tricks, the magician will make something, usually a person, disappear, and then miraculously bring it back. But here, only half of the trick is done: the Ushiromiya family only disappeared, and never reappeared over the course of 12 years. A good magician would have shown that they are capable of bringing them back. If the bomb really killed them, then there was no chance at all for them to come back. This leads to another question: where did they go? Are we certain that they died? Or is it more likely that they planned on faking it, and miraculously returning 12 years later?Well, let's not get so caught up in ideas that we assume every murderer must follow the same thematic pattern. The bomber could be separate from everybody else.
Still, while I admit it would be quite a trick, it would also be phenomenally dickish to Ange and Eva. Eva appears genuinely convinced her husband and son are dead, and Ange's entire life is messed up by the deaths of her family. I seriously can't imagine them doing something that hurtful even if they had a good reason for faking a mass death. That, at least, doesn't strike me as a particularly good trick. So I'm pretty sure it's not a trick.
That said, "half-assed magician" does sort of describe the ritual murderer. He kills everyone according to the epitaph, but unlike the witch of the epitaph, he can't bring everybody back.
Raiza Sunozaki
2010-04-27, 17:44
I don't think the bomb is part of the magic trick .
At most maybe 5-7 people probably survived. I'm not entirely convinced that the Kuwadorian is the safe place and if it is I don't think that many people could be saved without knowing about it.
Since the only occult books we get to see are in Kinzo's room it's equally possible that Kinzo's room is "bomb proof" since it's the only room I know of that's on the third floor, which I think implies it was specially made.
However if one person survives in episode 3 it's possible that one person survives in every episode except maybe 4 due to the red.
If you add up the total of one persons surviving each episode it would add up to maybe 6 7 or maybe 8 people.
While I find the "Magician Kinzo" theory more and more appealing, I still think the bomb has every intention of killing whoever the killer has been unable to kill, if he fails.
The problem with Kinzo's study being bomb-proof is the structural problems. While his study might survive the explosion, how would it survive the collapse of the rest of the house?
Verg Avesta
2010-04-27, 17:55
While this has not much to do with the current discussion, during my current re-play through episode 5, I found something that could, possibly, be a hint towards the whole "Erika does not exist" thing. It's nothing big, but after the First Twilight, with Erika doing all her detective stuff, Battler thinks:
......I can't understand it.
...Why is "her world" so different from ours?
It's almost like she's in a separate dimension from us...
Yeah, while this might be just normal Ryuukishi narration, I found it semi-interesting.
Oh, and another thing, but this time a question. When Gaap is moving Genji during the First Twilight, she mentions that she "Can't think of anyone good" amongst those who could make a slice like the one on Genji's neck, and wonders if anyone capable of slice like that has manifested yet. Is this referring to Dlanor (which I think is unlikely, seeing that Dlanor never takes part of the murders), and if it isn't, who is it referring to?
Whoever planted the bomb was a bad magician. In some magic tricks, the magician will make something, usually a person, disappear, and then miraculously bring it back. But here, only half of the trick is done: the Ushiromiya family only disappeared, and never reappeared over the course of 12 years. A good magician would have shown that they are capable of bringing them back. If the bomb really killed them, then there was no chance at all for them to come back. This leads to another question: where did they go? Are we certain that they died? Or is it more likely that they planned on faking it, and miraculously returning 12 years later?
Well I think EP 2's 1st twilight can easily be fake. Battler never did take a good look at the corpses in the dark chapel room. Same thing with not taking a good look at the corpses in the dark shed. It could be possible that he was tricked. After all, she never stated that they died and the chapel itself was likely unlocked when it was first discovered.
If you notice with the games first twilight someone is always trying to hold back another group of people from seeing the bodies. EP 1 it's Natsuhi, EP 2 its Rosa and the servants and EP 3 its all the parents combined. The second group trying to see the bodies always includes Battler and the cousins as well.
...I just wondered, who of Kinzo's four children would be the successor to his stage magic tradition, if any...
I once again get Rudolf -- the showiest of the four, pompous and uttering things Battler considers embarrassing like it's nothing special even when not in moments of emotional strain. Compare what little we see of Rudolf with Kinzo's speech in Ep4.
Lots of trains of thought unexpectedly and with no explanations stop at Rudolf because once you get to Rudolf, there's nowhere else to go from there. :)
I'd say none. None of the siblings would interested in magic tricks and Kinzo doesn't consider them worthy to learn. But I think he did had a pupil in Beatrice/sayo/kanon/shannon/personX/whateveryoucallit
Oh, and another thing, but this time a question. When Gaap is moving Genji during the First Twilight, she mentions that she "Can't think of anyone good" amongst those who could make a slice like the one on Genji's neck, and wonders if anyone capable of slice like that has manifested yet. Is this referring to Dlanor (which I think is unlikely, seeing that Dlanor never takes part of the murders), and if it isn't, who is it referring to?She could be hinting at a new character, though that character apparently wasn't manifested during ep5 unless referring to Dlanor, who does have swords. But it is out of character for Dlanor to participate in murders, so I don't know.
EDIT: The other possibility is she's wondering if a particular murder weapon will manifest itself as a character. The neck cuts seem to recur in several games, so it is apparently at least one killer's established method to use a blade of some sort. Other than the cleaver, I don't know of any that we've been shown.
I'd say none. None of the siblings would interested in magic tricks and Kinzo doesn't consider them worthy to learn. But I think he did had a pupil in Beatrice/sayo/kanon/shannon/personX/whateveryoucallit
Yes, yes. But can anyone else make an entrance like Kinzo in Ep4? :) I expect Rudolf can.
That sounds like it could be the seed of an enmity, to me -- Rudolf seeing someone being a pupil when he should have been one.
Verg Avesta
2010-04-27, 18:16
She could be hinting at a new character, though that character apparently wasn't manifested during ep5 unless referring to Dlanor, who does have swords. But it is out of character for Dlanor to participate in murders, so I don't know.
Hmm, well, there was that LIG which was mentioned few pages back, I think, but I'm not sure if the issue of that "cut" character was resolved already. Other than that, only one holding a sword and one Gaap wouldn't know would be Dlanor, but yeah......it doesn't seem likely.
EDIT: The other possibility is she's wondering if a particular murder weapon will manifest itself as a character. The neck cuts seem to recur in several games, so it is apparently at least one killer's established method to use a blade of some sort. Other than the cleaver, I don't know of any that we've been shown.
The cleaver seems to be the only murder weapon revealed at the moment capable of producing wounds like that........if they were real, that is. Too bad we don't have Clue-style list of the murder weapons.
Kaisos Erranon
2010-04-27, 18:16
Is this referring to Dlanor (which I think is unlikely, seeing that Dlanor never takes part of the murders), and if it isn't, who is it referring to?
Well, the only other character with any kind of association with blades is Kanon. One of the only other times the neck wounds have shown up is when Dark Kanon killed Kumasawa and Genji, and I believe he's the only person to use the cleaver/billhook.
Well I think EP 2's 1st twilight can easily be fake.
Impossible. The six people were already dead by the time they were discovered!
That said, it's possible for the organs to be fake, but judging by Rosa's reaction...
Raiza Sunozaki
2010-04-27, 18:17
I'd say none. None of the siblings would interested in magic tricks and Kinzo doesn't consider them worthy to learn. But I think he did had a pupil in Beatrice/sayo/kanon/shannon/personX/whateveryoucallit
Maybe this is what he meant when none of the siblings were able to succeed him. That none of them had the mindset or ability to perform magic, so none of them could become the next head of the family.
Linking this to the fact that solving the epitaph grants the solver headship, maybe knowledge of stage magic is important to solving the epitaph.
...I just wondered, who of Kinzo's four children would be the successor to his stage magic tradition, if any...
I once again get Rudolf -- the showiest of the four, pompous and uttering things Battler considers embarrassing like it's nothing special even when not in moments of emotional strain. Compare what little we see of Rudolf with Kinzo's speech in Ep4.
Lots of trains of thought unexpectedly and with no explanations stop at Rudolf because once you get to Rudolf, there's nowhere else to go from there. :)
It'd be interesting if Rudolf was making occult items. Like I've said before Rudolf's company is a niche company so what he makes is probably not part of any mainstream market.
If he's not making the stakes. The joke theory I'd have is that he does VN translations like witch hunt and Mangagamer. It's canon in both of Ryukishi's universes that Card captor Sakura existed in the 1980's. And providing VN's to foreigners would definitely be a "niche market".
When Gaap is moving Genji during the First Twilight, she mentions that she "Can't think of anyone good" amongst those who could make a slice like the one on Genji's neck, and wonders if anyone capable of slice like that has manifested yet. Is this referring to Dlanor (which I think is unlikely, seeing that Dlanor never takes part of the murders), and if it isn't, who is it referring to?
Kumasawa and Nanjo were found outside all sliced up in episode 2. The weapon is suggested to be a Katana in the tips. So this has happened before. Other than Kanon, Gohda is the only other person who touches any kind of Knife though.
Raiza Sunozaki
2010-04-27, 18:21
Oh, and another thing, but this time a question. When Gaap is moving Genji during the First Twilight, she mentions that she "Can't think of anyone good" amongst those who could make a slice like the one on Genji's neck, and wonders if anyone capable of slice like that has manifested yet. Is this referring to Dlanor (which I think is unlikely, seeing that Dlanor never takes part of the murders), and if it isn't, who is it referring to?
If Gaap is ignoring the fact that Genji might've done it himself, then it might've been Genji doing it himself. As an old companion of Kinzo's, I'd say Genji would be skilled in stage magic himself.
...I just wondered, who of Kinzo's four children would be the successor to his stage magic tradition, if any...
I once again get Rudolf -- the showiest of the four, pompous and uttering things Battler considers embarrassing like it's nothing special even when not in moments of emotional strain. Compare what little we see of Rudolf with Kinzo's speech in Ep4.
Lots of trains of thought unexpectedly and with no explanations stop at Rudolf because once you get to Rudolf, there's nowhere else to go from there. :)
Except Rudolf told Battler as a child that magic and demons don't exist and that people who make stuff up like that have nothing better to do than scaring people. Unless he was trying to turn Battler away from that stuff.
Except Rudolf told Battler as a child that magic and demons don't exist and that people who make stuff up like that have nothing better to do than scaring people. Unless he was trying to turn Battler away from that stuff.
if you look at it the other way around that means Rudolf's been tricked before right? He's just advising Battler not to look to deep into it. So yes I think he was trying to turn him away from it. :heh:
It'd be interesting if Rudolf was making occult items. Like I've said before Rudolf's company is a niche company so what he makes is probably not part of any mainstream market.
If he's not making the stakes.
*snip*
He actually could be. The interesting thing about Rudolf's business is that he managed to stumble into a trademark dispute in the US, essentially through no fault of his own. While Hideyoshi has problems because he didn't anticipate the chance of a hostile takeover upon IPO, Krauss has problems because he feels the wind better than anyone but runs ahead of it by about twenty years, and Rosa's problems are unclear in the first place, Rudolf's business is faced with an unforeseeable situation even businesses native to US stumble into now and again.
I wonder if there's a trademark filed on the word 'witch' somewhere. After all, Ion Storm did trademark the phrase 'Suck it down' for anything starting with baby Jesuses and ending with kneepads.
The six people were already dead by the time they were discovered!
That said, it's possible for the organs to be fake, but judging by Rosa's reaction...
When the six were killed in the chapel, the culprit was inside the chapel!
Nobody is hiding!
So obviously if this person was in the chapel they can't be the culprit and the discoverer right? Unless you argue Shannon did it. Rosa has a less than perfect alibi.
Kaisos Erranon
2010-04-27, 18:48
So obviously if this person was in the chapel they can't be the culprit and the discoverer right? Unless you argue Shannon did it. Rosa has a less than perfect alibi.
All that red means is that when the bodies were found by the survivors (Rosa + servants), they were dead at that point in time.
Raiza Sunozaki
2010-04-27, 19:05
I think Oliver managed to solve the chapel problem without using the key to open the door, but at the same time, I think there's some red truth that doesn't allow that to go through.
Also if I remember correctly, this is before Battler and Beato establish the details of "Beatrice's Closed Room Definition." So I think this is more of a situation of it not being a closed room, instead of a closed room. I think it's more likely that it only appeared to be a closed room, much like how a stage magician might lock something up in a box, give the key to a random audience member, and then proceed to remove the object from out of the box.
How to do this without breaking the red constraints, I'm not sure yet.
All that red means is that when the bodies were found by the survivors (Rosa + servants), they were dead at that point in time.
Or that they were dead by the time Nanjo arrived. There is no context about "when the culprit was in the chapel" in that scene with Lambdadelta and Bern when they made that red about the culprit. So I can pick any time after that that I want to.
I think Oliver managed to solve the chapel problem without using the key to open the door, but at the same time, I think there's some red truth that doesn't allow that to go through.
Also if I remember correctly, this is before Battler and Beato establish the details of "Beatrice's Closed Room Definition." So I think this is more of a situation of it not being a closed room, instead of a closed room. I think it's more likely that it only appeared to be a closed room, much like how a stage magician might lock something up in a box, give the key to a random audience member, and then proceed to remove the object from out of the box.
How to do this without breaking the red constraints, I'm not sure yet.
To reiterate, The chapel lock is broken, or otherwise is not a lock at all, but part of a completely different mechanism for another purpose entirely. Turning the key provides resistance, but does not actually move the bolt, and the lock does not have a 'locked' state. The door is held closed by friction, and the power of Kinzo's strict orders not to approach it. All other behaviour of the door is an illusion that results from our expectations that the lock is working fine.
The red only says that the chapel door cannot be unlocked without it's unique key -- but that is still true if it cannot be unlocked at all, and it does not actually follow from this red statement that the inverse is true. Therefore, it is impossible to lock the chapel door even if you do have the unique chapel key!
The red also says that if the door is locked, it prevents all methods of entry and exit, but if the door cannot be locked at all, this red is still true -- the door is merely never ever locked.
P.S. The unusual resistance of the door and it's unorthodox behavior is numerously hinted at whenever it is interacted with, as per Knox rules. Oh, and to satisfy the formal requirements of the blue. It must deny witches by itself. :) This makes it possible for a human culprit to enter the chapel at any time without ever laying hands on the key in Maria's bag!
Laserworm
2010-04-27, 20:59
To reiterate, The chapel lock is broken, or otherwise is not a lock at all, but part of a completely different mechanism for another purpose entirely. Turning the key provides resistance, but does not actually move the bolt, and the lock does not have a 'locked' state. The door is held closed by friction, and the power of Kinzo's strict orders not to approach it. All other behaviour of the door is an illusion that results from our expectations that the lock is working fine.
The red only says that the chapel door cannot be unlocked without it's unique key -- but that is still true if it cannot be unlocked at all, and it does not actually follow from this red statement that the inverse is true. Therefore, it is impossible to lock the chapel door even if you do have the unique chapel key!
The red also says that if the door is locked, it prevents all methods of entry and exit, but if the door cannot be locked at all, this red is still true -- the door is merely never ever locked.
P.S. The unusual resistance of the door and it's unorthodox behavior is numerously hinted at whenever it is interacted with, as per Knox rules. Oh, and to satisfy the formal requirements of the blue. It must deny witches by itself. :) This makes it possible for a human culprit to enter the chapel at any time without ever laying hands on the key in Maria's bag!
Not true the door can lock and has a locked state. Battler watches Rosa unlock and lock the door over and over again.
Not true the door can lock and has a locked state. Battler watches Rosa unlock and lock the door over and over again.
Uh... no he didn't... Rosa was already inside the chapel when Battler arrived. The people who saw her unlock the door were Shannon and Genji. So it falls under Knox's 9th.
Strangely though during that amount of time Battler actually does some investigating in the servant's room. That's the only time I really see him take his role seriously.
Laserworm
2010-04-27, 21:05
Uh... no he didn't... Rosa was already inside the chapel when Battler arrived. The people who saw her unlock the door were Shannon and Genji.
Yes he does. It is after they leave and are talking outside. Rosa takes the key and goes up the to chapel door locks it tries the door, it doesn't open. Then she unlocks it, then opens the door. and then repeat. Battler says something like "I noticed Rosa-obasan locking the door, then trying the door and then unlocking it over and over"
Yes he does. It is after they leave and are talking outside. Rosa takes the key and goes up the to chapel door locks it tries the door, it doesn't open. Then she unlocks it, then opens the door. and then repeat. Battler says something like "I noticed Rosa-obasan locking trying the door and then unlocking it over and over"
That demonstrates the unusual resistance of the door as per Oliver's blue truth no?
A door that can neither be locked nor unlocked is kind of interesting though I wonder if that would mean anything for the scene in Natsuhi's room too.
EDIT: on second thought probably not.
Yes he does. It is after they leave and are talking outside. Rosa takes the key and goes up the to chapel door locks it tries the door, it doesn't open. Then she unlocks it, then opens the door. and then repeat. Battler says something like "I noticed Rosa-obasan locking the door, then trying the door and then unlocking it over and over"
Rosa thinks that locking the door should prevent it from opening so she basically doesn't pull quite as hard. There's no way to tell if she is expending identical effort every time she pulls, and Battler neither does it himself nor has enough red about it. :)
EDIT: To expand a bit. Most locks with a handle you can turn, as the chapel door does, actually have two bolts, one flat bolt that holds the door locked, and one slanted bolt that holds the door closed when it is not locked. The slanted bolt is equipped with a spring and normally turns and opens when the key is turned.
In this case, the lock is broken so that the flat bolt never extends. The slanted bolt also works erratically and sometimes does not turn when the handle turns. It requires a specific angle to catch on the slanted bolt and open, and the door is also stuck and requires a certain force, as is hinted in other cases of interacting with that lock. Rosa thinks she locked the door, but just turns the handle at a different angle each time, sometimes catching and sometimes not. When she thinks she locked the door she gives up earlier.
Laserworm
2010-04-27, 21:30
Rosa thinks that locking the door should prevent it from opening so she basically doesn't pull quite as hard. There's no way to tell if she is expending identical effort every time she pulls, and Battler neither does it himself nor has enough red about it. :)
Found the point.
"There's no mistake! It was closed!! I opened it!! Definitely!!"
Rosa oba-san kept closing the door, locking it, pulling on it to check the lock, and opening it again.
Are there any clues to suggest Rosa wasn't pulling hard on the door? And Battler says he looked around the chapel for clues. (He does his job here) Also something that is a little strange is that George mentions that maybe 'Maria' is meaning the virgin Mary and then he mentions a little bit of occult stuff. Rosa asks him if he heard about that bit of occult stuff from Maria. And George says ".....Something like that."
I have two theories for the chapel. The door wasn't locked. but that makes it seem strange that Rosa goes to get the key. My other idea is. The chapel door can be locked without the key. The red states that the chapel can't be unlocked without the key, but never does it say it can only be locked with the key. Beatrice never said the Chapel was a closed-room. Though Oliver your theory sounds like it works too.
"something like that" probably means "yeah I heard it from someone, but not Maria".
I guess he heard it from "Shannon".
I have two theories for the chapel. The door wasn't locked. but that makes it seem strange that Rosa goes to get the key. My other idea is. The chapel door can be locked without the key. The red states that the chapel can't be unlocked without the key, but never does it say it can only be locked with the key. Beatrice never said the Chapel was a closed-room. Though Oliver your theory sounds like it works too.
It's actually rather immaterial which is correct, it's more important to explain what were all those people doing in there -- the door is just a problem because of the red, now, getting six serious adults to attend a childish party in the middle of the night when they have bigger problems is much harder.
I've already posted my take (http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=3015828&postcount=8600) that relies on the 'broken lock' theory, however, there's probably a better one possible. I like mine because it makes a good story to tell for the detective when he gathers everyone in the parlor and points 'you're the culprit!', but that doesn't make it correct. :)
Laserworm
2010-04-27, 22:04
It's actually rather immaterial which is correct, it's more important to explain what were all those people doing in there -- the door is just a problem because of the red, now, getting six serious adults to attend a childish party in the middle of the night when they have bigger problems is much harder.
I've already posted my take (http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=3015828&postcount=8600) that relies on the 'broken lock' theory, however, there's probably a better one possible. I like mine because it makes a good story to tell for the detective when he gathers everyone in the parlor and points 'you're the culprit!', but that doesn't make it correct. :)
Wow interesting theory. But it would be rather long for Ryu07 to explain wouldn't it? If all the games have answers like that it could easily take up a whole game just to explain all of that.
My theory is much like others. I'm sure.
Rosa dispite not allowing Maria to have a Halloween party because of the family meeting, talks with her siblings and they arrange a fantastic halloween party for her. And they think it would be really special if Maria thinks the party was planned by the witch Beatrice. So they unlock the chapel door and then give Maria the key. They want to make sure the place isn't found by Maria so they choose the chapel and because it only has one key it wouldn't be hard to perfectly preform this trick. Rosa and the other siblings and the servants are setting up the party. Rosa gets tired and the others tell her to get some rest and they will finish up. Shortly after Rosa leaves though the servants (Kanon, Shannon, Genji,) turn on the adults and kill them.
In episode 2, Rosa watched Beatrice repair Maria’s candy with magic. It could not have been a completely true scene unless magic actually exists.
We were also given the red truth:
The envelope which I gave to Maria, and the one Rosa opened are the same envelopes!!
However, the red truth does not specify exactly when Maria received her envelope. It only had to have happened before midnight.
Given the two points listed above:
The scene when Maria received the envelope from Beatrice must be at least partially false unless magic exists.
Maria received an envelope that contained the key to the chapel at some point during the day.
On the morning of October 5th Rosa had a hunch in the morning to look for the key in Maria’s bag. This does not necessarily mean that she witnessed Maria receiving the envelope during the scene when Beatrice repaired the candy with magic. Remember, this scene must be at least partially false unless magic exists.
Rosa and Maria separated while searching for the rose. Shannon (Beatrice) approached Maria and performed a “magic trick” for her. The trick was to simply exchange the broken candy with a repaired one that Kanon had earlier received. Maria thanked Beatrice and placed the candy in her bag. Rosa witnessed this from a far distance and did not clearly see what Maria had placed inside her bag. Rosa approached Shannon (Beatrice) and received an envelope from her. Maria did not receive her envelope at this point in the day.
Now, we were shown a scene where all of the adults, including Rosa, met Beatrice inside the chapel at midnight. This scene is probably partially false as well, unless all of the adults where fooled by the person disguising as Beatrice. Therefore, it is possible for the first twilight to have been executed well before midnight.
Maria received her envelope from Shannon (Beatrice) after the first twilight murders had already been executed. It was received before midnight. The chapel was properly locked before midnight. There was nothing unusual about the lock on the door to the chapel.
A more detailed version of this will be included when I finish writing the episode 2 section of my theory. ;)
Laserworm
2010-04-27, 22:53
On the morning of October 5th Rosa had a hunch in the morning to look for the key in Maria’s bag. This does not necessarily mean that she witnessed Maria receiving the envelope during the scene when Beatrice repaired the candy with magic. Remember, this scene must be at least partially false unless magic exists.
Rosa and Maria separated while searching for the rose. Shannon (Beatrice) approached Maria and performed a “magic trick” for her. The trick was to simply exchange the broken candy with a repaired one that Kanon had earlier received. Maria thanked Beatrice and placed the candy in her bag. Rosa witnessed this from a far distance and did not clearly see what Maria had placed inside her bag. Rosa approached Shannon (Beatrice) and received an envelope from her. Maria did not receive her envelope at this point in the day.
Now, we were shown a scene where all of the adults, including Rosa, met Beatrice inside the chapel at midnight. This scene is probably partially false as well, unless all of the adults where fooled by the person disguising as Beatrice. Therefore, it is possible for the first twilight to have been executed well before midnight.
Maria received her envelope from Shannon (Beatrice) after the first twilight murders had already been executed. It was received before midnight. The chapel was properly locked before midnight. There was nothing unusual about the lock on the door to the chapel.
If we trust Rosa's statments in her head. She says she saw Beatrice and that she witnessed Beatrice give Maria the envelope, this is what gives her the idea that the key is in the envelope.
If we trust Rosa's statments in her head. She says she saw Beatrice and that she witnessed Beatrice give Maria the envelope, this is what gives her the idea that the key is in the envelope.
I don't think you read what I posted at all. Well, trust me, I've had this theory for quite some time now. :heh:
Anyway, for those who did properly read it, Rosa witnessed Beatrice handing Maria something from a distance. It's only natural for her to assume that it was the envelope since that is what she found in Maria's bag.
Laserworm
2010-04-27, 23:08
I don't think you read what I posted at all. Well, trust me, I've had this theory for quite some time now. :heh:
Anyway, for those who did properly read it, Rosa witnessed Beatrice's handing Maria something from a distance. It's only natural for her to assume that it was the envelope since that is what she found in Maria's bag.
I read it and I think it is interesting and it would be cool if it were the truth. (I don't want Rosa to be the killer. Playing through the games right now trying to disprove Rosa being involved.)
But Rosa mentions that she sees Maria try to open the envelope. But Beatrice tells her not too.
Found the scene.
. . . . that's right, . . . . when I met that witch in the rose garden, didn't she hand Maria an envelope? That's right, there's no mistake, she handed it over. When Maria tried to open it, that witch told her not to open it yet, then she said "The time to open that will come soon."
Rosa was sure
...There could be no mistake
....that letter which had been handed to Maria
Though as you say Rosa could have been far away from Maria and only seen it from a distance and assumed she handed Maria and envelope because of Beatrice's words. That would be pretty interesting. I'm interested in hearing your ep2 theory since it sounds like a non Rosa culprit theory. (I want to prove she isn't a cuplirt nor accomplice.. though she has many points that make me question if I can)
Edit: Are there any hints that Maria got the envelope at a different time?
I read it and I think it is interesting and it would be cool if it were the truth. (I don't want Rosa to be the killer. Playing through the games right now trying to disprove Rosa being involved.)
But Rosa mentions that she sees Maria try to open the envelope. But Beatrice tells her not too.
Found the scene.
Though as you say Rosa could have been far away from Maria and only seen it from a distance and assumed she handed Maria and envelope because of Beatrice's words. That would be pretty internesting. I'm interested in hearing your ep2 theory since it sounds like a non Rosa culprit theory. (I want to prove she isn't a cuplirt nor accomplice.. though she has many points that make me question if I can)
If we trust how Rosa reacted to seeing Beatrice (who should have died 19 years ago from her point of view) then Rosa was intimidated by Beatrice at that time. "The time to open that will come soon." could have actually been said to Rosa herself instead of Maria.
Rosa may have lied about Kinzo to keep everyone calm but I don't think she was involved further than that.
I think the gold bars that were placed on the table near the first twilight victims are a huge clue to solving what occured in this episode. ;)
Edit: Are there any hints that Maria got the envelope at a different time?
Edit: The way Maria reacted to the first twilight seems to suggest that she was somehow involved with what occured. However, I don't think she killed anyone in this episode.
Laserworm
2010-04-27, 23:25
If we trust how Rosa reacted to seeing Beatrice (who should have died 19 years ago from her point of view) then Rosa was intimidated by Beatrice at that time. "The time to open that will come soon." could have actually been said to Rosa herself instead of Maria.
Rosa may have lied about Kinzo to keep everyone calm but I don't think she was involved further than that.
I think the gold bars that were placed on the table near the first twilight victims are a huge clue to solving what occured in this episode. ;)
True, good point. Rosa certaintly seems flustred about Beatrice. Your theory about Rosa lying about Kinzo is solid, because it sounds like she just chewed up what Genji and Shannon told her they were doing. Because in Jessica's room, she suspects Shannon at one point, and questions is she was with Kinzo. (But Rosa didn't you just say that you talked with Kinzo and he told you that Shannon and Genji were with him the whole time, and that he wasn't going to leave his room?) The one problem I have with Rosa is about the last letter in the Parlor.
The gold bars? I can't wait to hear what you have to say about them, because I really don't get them at all. :heh:
Shannon (Beatrice) approached Maria and performed a “magic trick” for her. The trick was to simply exchange the broken candy with a repaired one that Kanon had earlier received.
Minor nitpick. Maria is explicitly mentioned handing out candy to pretty much anyone she meets after disembarking and the full list remains undefined. Nobody is described actually eating it. There's still candy remaining in her bag to give away too. The candy Kanon got has special attention drawn to it, but it is not the only one floating around, so it does not specifically point to Shannon or Kanon as being Beatrice in the later scene all by itself.
Minor nitpick. Maria is explicitly mentioned handing out candy to pretty much anyone she meets after disembarking and the full list remains undefined. Nobody is described actually eating it. There's still candy remaining in her bag to give away too. The candy Kanon got has special attention drawn to it, but it is not the only one floating around, so it does not specifically point to Shannon or Kanon as being Beatrice in the later scene all by itself.
However, we have this narration earlier in the episode:
It seemed that each person had something called a wavelength, and that ability to perceive it varied greatly among different people.
Only Shannon and Kanon could interact with her enough to exchange words like this. There were a few people who could sense her presence, but most people couldn't even feel that much.
I think this is a huge clue for Shkanontrice supporters. However, as you said, it does not specifically point to Shannon or Kanon as being Beatrice. It also does not necessarily point to them being the same person.
Now, we were shown a scene where all of the adults, including Rosa, met Beatrice inside the chapel at midnight. This scene is probably partially false as well, unless all of the adults where fooled by the person disguising as Beatrice. Therefore, it is possible for the first twilight to have been executed well before midnight.
Minor comedy theory based on an assumption you missed.
The parents in this case helped set up a disguise for Maria's Beatrice (santa) for the halloween party who was originally planned to be one of the parents. Then when somebody found the gold they had a couple of servants bring lots of drinks and treats to the chapel and got super drunk and all passed out. Later on the culprit took advantage of the situation and cut them open with a Katana gutting them like fish.
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 00:19
Alright here I go trying to prove Rosa is not a culprit nor accomplice in ep2 (At least for now)
This one is easy. Rosa had all the keys, Battler suggests she hands one off, but we have red that proves Rosa is not guilty. The only time Rosa lent one of the keys was when she gave it to you to unlock the door.
Another not very hard one. Rosa was with Battler the whole time so she can't be the culprit. Accomplice is harder to stop. But I think I came up with something. If we are to assume that the 'demon kanon' people (Shannon, Genji, and Gohda) are the culprits that killed Nanjo and Kumasawa then we had 3 wolves & 2 sheep. If Rosa was an accomplice she could have not had Nanjo go, or even allowed George to go as well. 3 wolves & 3 sheep = bad. Now in the puzzle this would be fine, but in reality this is still bad after all if 1 person each stabbed 1 person that would equal the three victims getting stabbed before they knew what happened.
This one is easier in certain ways. For if Rosa was the culprit she would have to have had accomplices most likely Shannon and Genji. But then why does she suspect Shannon when it is brought up that they are friends? You could say she is faking it, but it seems kind of unlikely. For her to be an accomplice is almost pointless; what would she do? The only thing she could do was help get rid of Kanon's body (or if Shakannon is true nothing) or place the alibi for Genji and Shannon, but that doesn't work if she brings into question the abili itself. She makes herself seem like an unreliable source for no reason. (At least that I can think of)
Yeah; the hardest one of them all. There is nothing that can prove Rosa isn't involved with this one. And she has the most to gain from this murder. She is now the head of the family. But I'm going to say that if she is the culprit she is an amazing actress. Not many people in the world can puke so many times on purpose like that, I'm betting.
Any flaws in my reasoning?
This one is easy. Rosa had all the keys, Battler suggests she hands one off, but we have red that proves Rosa is not guilty. The only time Rosa lent one of the keys was when she gave it to you to unlock the door.
Two possibilities here.
The key she lent was the chapel key or a regular key not one of the master keys.
Or George was close to Rosa at the time and he's been known to be good at slight of hand tricks just like the servants. He would have the best chance to pickpocket a key from Rosa.
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 00:35
The key she lent was the chapel key or a regular key not one of the master keys.
Or George was close to Rosa at the time and he's been known to be good at slight of hand tricks just like the servants. He would have the best chance to pickpocket a key from Rosa.
Wah..? I don't understand the first one. Battler unlocked Natsuhi's room with the key Rosa lent him. Rosa then quickly takes it back (If I remember right)
The second one doesn't disprove my statment that I'm trying to make. I'm not trying to suggest the howdunits. I'm just trying to show Rosa is likely innocent.
Wah..? I don't understand the first one. Battler unlocked Natsuhi's room with the key Rosa lent him. Rosa then quickly takes it back (If I remember right)
The second one doesn't disprove my statment that I'm trying to make. I'm not trying to suggest the howdunits. I'm just trying to prove Rosa is innocent.
In other words if it's the chapel key George & Co can easily get into the chapel and do whatever they were doing.
EDIT: If it's a regular key it could be Natsuhi's key and if Rosa gave them Natuhi's key they would have 3 hours to find and kill Kumasawa and Nanjo and have a big scuffle in Natsuhi's room.
Second one assumes George is the culprit and that he ordered Shannon to do some malicious things.
I don't think Rosa could've killed anyone except the parents anyway so your alibi should be for the chapel the rest of the murders can't be something she did.
The second one doesn't disprove my statment that I'm trying to make. I'm not trying to suggest the howdunits. I'm just trying to prove Rosa is innocent.
You're actually trying to prove she can be innocent. To prove she is indeed innocent, you would need to either prove who actually did it or prove it would be impossible for Rosa to do it. :)
The latter doesn't work for quite a few of the murders, I'm afraid.
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 00:55
In other words if it's the chapel key George & Co can easily get into the chapel and do whatever they were doing.
EDIT: If it's a regular key it could be Natsuhi's key and if Rosa gave them Natuhi's key they would have 3 hours to find and kill Kumasawa and Nanjo and have a big scuffle in Natsuhi's room.
Second one assumes George is the culprit and that he ordered Shannon to do some malicious things.
I don't think Rosa could've killed anyone except the parents anyway so your alibi should be for the chapel the rest of the murders can't be something she did.
We were never told Rosa had Natsuhi's key. There is nothing to suggest that Rosa took Natsuhi's key out of Natsuhi's pocket.
What would be the reason for George to swipe a master key before Nanjo's murder (or at least when everyone thinks it happens) Shannon still has her key at that time. And we know when they go to Natsuhi's room Rosa is holding all the master keys Also if George had taken the chapel key, where did it go?
But I'm trying to also say it is unlikely for her to be an accomplice as well.
You're actually trying to prove she can be innocent. To prove she is indeed innocent, you would need to either prove who actually did it or prove it would be impossible for Rosa to do it.
The latter doesn't work for quite a few of the murders, I'm afraid.
I'm trying to prove that she is likely innocent. And as far as I can find it is impossible to prove (without pointing out the real killer) that she didn't kill her siblings.
Actually, about proof, I should mention a few abstract considerations with some long reaching consequences. Beatrice -- or is it Ryukishi himself? -- misuses many of the formal terms employed when talking to Battler.
Take, for example, Schroedinger's cat box. Schroedinger himself, when he proposed this thought experiment, did not say that the cat stays alive and dead indefinitely. The original definition involved a time limit of one hour, and over time, the probability of radioactive substance decay that kills the cat by triggering poison release approaches 1.
Similarly, seal a box with a cat in it hermetically enough for long enough and you can be certain the cat suffocated if one was there in the first place before the box was sealed. :) We may not know what's in the box, but if it remained actually sealed over a period of time, we can be absolutely sure that some time-based processes will occur inside, it doesn't become it's own universe just because it's sealed.
But that one is actually reasonably decently used to describe the social nature of truth regarding social facts. What I have the beef with is the concept of 'devil's proof'.
What a Devil's Proof does is actually merely shifting the burden of proof onto the opponent. However, that only works in certain kinds of arguments but not all, and the canonical form of the idea, 'to prove the existence of a devil you just need to demonstrate one, but to disprove the existance of a devil is impossible because you would need to demonstrate that one exists nowhere' is a logical fallacy.
It is quite sufficient to define a devil -- which would be required to recognise one in the first place, so that it can be demonstrated to exist or not to exist -- and then prove that it is impossible for a devil to exist because it logically follows from other accepted postulates. A device that shoots stakes with adequate power and precision to penetrate the skull at short distance may appear plausible because one can actually be made, but it may also be possible to calculate it's power requirements and size requirements and then prove it is impossible to conceal because it has to be the size of a suitcase or two, for example. Q.v. small bombs. :)
While Battler is the most egregious user of Devil's Proof, Beatrice's Hempel's Raven is similarly misrepresented. In it's canonical form, it works like this:
Hypothesis: All ravens are black.
If that hypothesis is true, everything that is not black is not a raven.
Statements 1 and 2 are logically equivalent, so if we find anything that is not black but is a raven, both are wrong, and if we find a black raven, both may be right.
Therefore, the observation "Nevermore, my pet raven, is black." is evidence supporting the hypothesis in statement 1.
Applying the same process to statement 2 we get "This green (and thus not black) object is an apple (and thus not a raven)" which we must also interpret as evidence to support the hypothesis in statement 1.
Hempel himself considered this a paradox, and it has several possible resolutions. :) Most conclude that while seeing a non-black non-raven improves the possibility of all ravens being black, the confirmation is in one way or another incomplete.
But Beatrice deals with a world sealed in a bottle and uses a much simpler format which actually misleads us:
There are 19 boxes.
Opening 18 of them I observe that not one of them contains a candy.
Therefore the 19th one contains the candy.
With variations that none of the boxes contains a candy and a 19th box doesn't exist which means that a witch did it.
That would certainly be correct if there was certainity that a candy actually exists in the first place, but that is an assumption that is not necessarily founded. Similarly, if two candies exist, and we open up boxes one by one, stopping with the first one we find candy in, we will never find the other one -- and we don't really know how many candies are there. If any at all.
It appears to me that what's actually happening is Ryukishi trying to pull an unexpected hanging paradox on us. The traditional form of the paradox works like this:
The judge condemns a prisoner to an execution by hanging during one of the work days of the next week. The added clause is that the execution will be a surprise for the prisoner. The prisoner, back in his cell, starts reasoning and proceeds this way:
The hanging day cannot be a Friday, as if by noon of Thursday I am not hanged, I will certainly know that I will be hanged on Friday, and there will be no surprise.
Therefore, Thursday is the last day I can be hanged. So if on Wednesday I am not hanged by noon, I will know I will be hanged on Thursday, and there will be no surprise. So Thursday is thus eliminated.
But the same reasoning also eliminates Wednesday, Tuesday and Monday. Therefore I cannot be hanged at all!
The prisoner is hanged at noon on Wednesday, and because the judge predicted this train of reasoning, the prisoner is utterly surprised.
So I'm betting that eliminating suspects further and further will get us... surprised. There has to be more than one candy in the box.
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 02:13
So I'm betting that eliminating suspects further and further will get us... surprised. There has to be more than one candy in the box.
Mysteries are not supposed to work like that. You do write the story in a way that if people didn't get the clues and didn't solve it they may be surprised. Some may be surprised but a mystery is supposed to be designed that whose who looked at it the right way and saw the clues won't be surprised. So some people if anyone figured out the answer shouldn't be surprised. And looking back after seeing the answer at stuff should be like 'oh how did I not see that before' or 'So that was why that happened' or even 'Now that makes sense.' In a mystery after knowning the answer all strange points should make sense. (Or at least that is what my mystery writing teacher told me)
I believe we should try to slim down suspects (Otherwise we will get lost in this maze of 16/15 people) But in the right way. Take each episode one at a time and see who could be connected in this kakera. But even if say Rosa dies early in every one but ep2, and we prove she doesn't have any thing to do with ep2's crimes, that doesn't mean we should 'shut the door' on her being involved. That would be the wrong way to do it. The only way to 'shut the door' on someone (besides Battler) is to use the clues and solve every mystery, figure out the answer. And isn't it kind of obvious that there are probably 2 or more groups doing the killings in some eps.
Then again maybe Umineko will try to break all normal mystery rules... I wouldn't put it past Kinzo.. uhem.. I mean Ryukishi.
Kaisos Erranon
2010-04-28, 02:16
So I'm betting that eliminating suspects further and further will get us... surprised. There has to be more than one candy in the box.
So, uh, what are you trying to say here? I don't quite get it, because I'm not very smart. :heh:
So I'm betting that eliminating suspects further and further will get us... surprised. There has to be more than one candy in the box.
So are you saying if the readers eliminate the wrong people from the equation they'll all end up being hanged?
or that Kanon is the culprit because he's the hanged man?
So I'm betting that eliminating suspects further and further will get us... surprised. There has to be more than one candy in the box.
This is precisely what's going on in my head. After Rosa and Eva are shown to possibly be 'trap' culprits.. (was it called red herrings?) and in EP5 Natsuhi is shown to be innocent, everyone I suspect now I also suspect to be innocent.
Genji, Kumasawa, Nanjo
Shannon
Kanon
George
Maria
Jessica
Rudolf
Kyrie
I guess the only one I don't feel the need to be innocent is Gouda and Hideyoshi, both of which have not really that much character development.
But I doubt I can construct the answer with just Hideyoshi. So, I'm naming names, ignoring my feeling that they *should* be innocent. I feel pretty much the same as Battler was feeling... (Except George is getting suspicious after all we've discussed about him...)
By the way, I understood Hempel's Raven but I thought I was stupid or something not understanding Beatrice's explanation. 8) Thanks for making me feel normal again. :heh:
EDIT: I think Oliver is saying that as we eliminate suspects, we'll end up with someone we thought should've been innocent?
EDIT: I think Oliver is saying that as we eliminate suspects, we'll end up with someone we thought should've been innocent?
But the surprise for the prisoner was about him being hanged so isn't the surprise a bad thing? In other words when it's finally revealed the culprit isn't who you suspect that's the surprise if your reasoning is wrong right?
So, uh, what are you trying to say here? I don't quite get it, because I'm not very smart. :heh:
So are you saying if the readers eliminate the wrong people from the equation they'll all end up being hanged?
I am trying to say that:
Beatrice's proof of witches hinges on everyone else being proven or assumed innocent. Which is what Battler is doing most of the time to the best of his incompetence.
But a mystery is supposed to be a surprise.
The number of possible single culprits is limited to 17. Some of them have been eliminated in red over time already, starting with Battler who is the detective, which brings us closer to being surprised.
It is likely that 'Beatrice'/'Ryukishi' expects us to further eliminate those who remain one by one and end up with one most likely singular culprit.
It will be a great surprise if in Ep7 we will get a complete denial of this person being a singular culprit or a culprit at all. In red. That would be fully in keeping with Beatrice's long treatise on culprits and candy. He can do this multiple times.
But if we assume that whichever singular culprit is not one because they're the most likely one and we know Ryukishi wants to surprise us, we risk stepping into the unexpected hanging trap -- i.e we will be surprised because someone we eliminated ourselves is the culprit.
Nevertheless, a large portion of the audience will end up being correct purely through randomness if any single culprit is assumed. That is not in Ryukishi's interest.
But unlike the surprised prisoner, we can be 'hanged', i.e. surprised, at multiple days of the week simultaneously, because our 'days of the week' - suspects - are not arranged in any consecutive order!
It is therefore very likely that every episode features more than one culprit. They either have to all be innocent of murder and it's all a giant magic trick, or many of them have to be guilty at the same time. That's the only practical way to keep the surprise up while we're working with single culprit theories because this way no single elimination will remove the surprise in the end.
I'm trying to prove that she is likely innocent. And as far as I can find it is impossible to prove (without pointing out the real killer) that she didn't kill her siblings.
By the way, this is a bit of a separate discussion than what you were talking about but I thought it's necessary.
In terms of 'proof' for a detective novel, we will never be able to come up with and solve using proofs. This is because what is presented are clues, rather than proofs and sometimes evidence.
I'm putting forth the idea that when Ryukishi gives us an 'answer' he gives us 'evidence.' Evidence like the word 'explosion' in Erika's tips or evidence like the statement that 'everyone choose a room to lie down in.' in EP6. But before we are given this evidence/answer, what are we given?
I'm thinking we are only given 'clues.' Clues like, Ange not being able to find the dock or the remains of the house. Or clues like the Battler saying 'murder means it wasn't a closed room.' And these clues are very easy to 'explain away.' I propose that if we are arguing away too many clues that our thought process is not proceeding down the correct path.
If we take a case example, the 10th Twilight Explosion, we can see that the clues provided:
- EP1 body parts were found rather than whole corpses
- EP1 only Maria's jaw being found
- EP2 Rosa feeling the need to get off the island no matter what on 10th Twilight
- EP3 Eva surviving by being 2km away from the mansion
- EP4 The murders being referred to as 'incident' and not 'murders' by police
- EP4 Massive geological changes when Ange visits
Now before the 'answer' was provided in EP6 these clues existed and maybe a lot of people agreed that it was possible... but no one took the clue and used it as a basis for other theories. There was a lot of arguing back and forth (and still was in the EP5 thread.) I don't remember what it was but there were a lot of arguments against the clues, especially the last two.
Ok, after the 'answer' was provided, I think we've all come to think this is true. Certainly we're coming up with theories on the idea that it's a rigged explosion of some kind. Although not everyone's accepted it and still attempt to explain away the EP6 TIPs. (Not here though. Especially not after that Ryukishi interview.)
So what I'm getting at is we'll never have proof. We can still argue away Ryukishi's blatant 'evidence' or 'answers' too. But if we start thinking once we have an 'answer' then really we'll have to be spoon-fed all the answers until the final answer is obvious.
So, no, I think the only method we have if we want to get anywhere is to base our ideas off of clues. It will be like being presented with half-played chessboard and imagining up the entire tree of possible outcomes.
Just food for thought. Not like I'm saying this will be easy though.. :heh:
Kaisos Erranon
2010-04-28, 02:57
It is therefore very likely that every episode features more than one culprit.
Well, yes. But we already knew that.
There can't be a singular culprit. No one person could pull off everything by themselves.
So some people if anyone figured out the answer shouldn't be surprised.
Naturally! However, the achievement of the writer would be measured by surprising the most possible people while still providing fitting, logical clues.
Notice that Battler never actually looks for a single culprit, and in his attacks against Beatrice always leaves the possibility of an undefined person doing it whenever possible. This is because he doesn't want to suspect anyone. However, if he suspects anyone, he would prefer it to be a single person -- sacrifice one to save everybody else from damnation, so to speak. This is why for every episode we end up with a 'most likely singular culprit' which is then exonerated or re-evaluated later or just dies early in the next episode. But murders still happen!
I am not advocating completely abandoning the idea of slimming down suspects, but I am insisting that no single episode has all the murders committed by one singular person or even faction, and so far, most of our theories concentrate on only exposing a single one, even when we're assuming more than one is present.
That would be the best way to surprise the most of us while we're trying to save the most people by sacrificing one, like Battler does.
Then again maybe Umineko will try to break all normal mystery rules... I wouldn't put it past Kinzo.. uhem.. I mean Ryukishi.
Considering that Umineko pretty much uses the list of Van Dine 'thou shalt not' rules as a checklist of cool things to try, oh yes I wouldn't put it past Ryukishi.
chronotrig
2010-04-28, 03:02
I am trying to say that:
Nevertheless, a large portion of the audience will end up being correct purely through randomness if any single culprit is assumed. That is not in Ryukishi's interest.
I disagree with this. After all, who cares if someone manages to guess the right culprit? If you don't know why or how they did it, you haven't really solved anything. For spoilers' sake, I won't mention specific names, but there are multiple Agatha Christie books where the true culprit is the most suspicious person from the beginning. In these books, the culprit is so suspicious that the reader discounts them, and soon on, the reader even gets "proof" that the culprit couldn't have done things the way everyone thought. It's only later that we learn that the culprit had an entirely different way to carry out the crime.
Some of these are some of her hardest mysteries to solve, even though the 'answer' is the most obvious.
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 03:10
So what I'm getting at is we'll never have proof. We can still argue away Ryukishi's blatant 'evidence' or 'answers' too. But if we start thinking once we have an 'answer' then really we'll have to be spoon-fed all the answers until the final answer is obvious.
So, no, I think the only method we have if we want to get anywhere is to base our ideas off of clues. It will be like being presented with half-played chessboard and imagining up the entire tree of possible outcomes.
Just food for thought. Not like I'm saying this will be easy though.. :heh:
When you read a mystery you base your theories on the clues that were presented, same with Umineko. That is how you solve a mystery. Think of Umineko ep1-4 like a mystery novel, but the last chapter is missing. So the book ends with the detective saying he knows the answer. Just like the detective the reader can still solve and figure out the answer and result. Now Chiru we can say is basically if tons of people complained that they couldn't solve this mystery novel. So the author wrote another book about the same mystery showing a different angle so the reader sees more clues and gets closer to the answer. Chiru is the sequel if you will, it is made to help those find the answer that couldn't in the first series. If it is a good mystery story the proof is when we solve all the questions and things make sense with each other, the answer will be starring at you in the face. It will seem that we should have figured it out before. That is what a good hard mystery is supposed to do, even if you didn't figure it out till the reveal or the tip end, as you look back at it you think 'it was starring at me in the face, I should have gotten it before'
It is therefore very likely that every episode features more than one culprit. They either have to all be innocent of murder and it's all a giant magic trick, or many of them have to be guilty at the same time. That's the only practical way to keep the surprise up while we're working with single culprit theories because this way no single elimination will remove the surprise in the end.
For some reason I like the idea that each story is an individual mystery with different culprits. It keeps the surprise factor for every episode that way. I guess if you follow author theory Rokkenjima prime would be caused by "Culprit prime".
I got that idea from this post here
http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=2964703&postcount=1821
Anyway I've been thinking that the people in different factions may be chosen at random or that the leaders of the factions are different in every episode and they choose different people to join their group. That's a good way to use the Roulette idea.
A different faction leader in every episode would explain a lot of things.
For example if Hideyoshi or Kyrie were one of the leaders of the faction in episode 4 that frames people in all the episodes it would explain why Kinzo was framed in episode 4.
If Jessica was the culprit in both episode 1 and 5 Natsuhi being framed could be explained.
When you read a mystery you base your theories on the clues that were presented, same with Umineko. That is how you solve a mystery. Think of Umineko ep1-4 like a mystery novel, but the last chapter is missing. So the book ends with the detective saying he knows the answer. Just like the detective the reader can still solve and figure out the answer and result. Now Chiru we can say is basically if tons of people complained that they couldn't solve this mystery novel. So the author wrote another book about the same mystery showing a different angle so the reader sees more clues and gets closer to the answer. Chiru is the sequel if you will, it is made to help those find the answer that couldn't in the first series. If it is a good mystery story the proof is when we solve all the questions and things make sense with each other, the answer will be starring at you in the face. It will seem that we should have figured it out before. That is what a good hard mystery is supposed to do, even if you didn't figure it out till the reveal or the tip end, as you look back at it you think 'it was starring at me in the face, I should have gotten it before'
What you're describing is after the answer has been provided. I expect that of course... I'm just saying that it's very difficult to solve before we get that answer, if people won't even accept the clues sometimes, arguing back and forth.
I'm looking for ways to solve it before we come to the end. In some ways we are late already as we've been given two episodes with answers already... 8)
Anyway I've been thinking that the people in different factions may be chosen at random or that the leaders of the factions are different in every episode and they choose different people to join their group. That's a good way to use the Roulette idea.
Actually, we have evidence already that one faction recruits somewhat random members for their objectives. (The first twilight.) And we sorta see that this faction doesn't operate so well in EP5 and perhaps has a different leader in EP6.
So this idea that even the factions, the leaders and who they may be recruiting will rotate is a good idea.
EDIT: I remember talking about this idea before. I was calling Umineko a result of Faction Wars...
A different faction leader in every episode would explain a lot of things.
For example if Hideyoshi or Kyrie were one of the leaders of the faction in episode 4 that frames people in all the episodes it would explain why Kinzo was framed in episode 4.
If Jessica was the culprit in both episode 1 and 5 Natsuhi being framed could be explained.
That's one way it's possible. I think a more likely variant would be that in the early morning of the 4th, a lot of plans and motives -- possibly as much as six or ten -- exist, some of them involving murder, some not involving murder at all, and some accepting murder as an option when the opportunity presents itself.
By the time 5th rolls in, some of them are shelved away, because other actions make them impossible -- people die and can't follow up, crucial accomplices die so plans become unfeasible, people learn new information, motives become more or less appealing due to that information -- and several play out simultaneously. Sometimes it results in a different person doing something in each episode, and no single person or faction committing all the crimes within the space of one episode.
Somehow all those plans by seemingly unrelated groups have a singular root, which is Ryukishi's excuse for saying we can actually uncover all of them if we find it.
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 03:25
What you're describing is after the answer has been provided. I expect that of course... I'm just saying that it's very difficult to solve before we get that answer, if people won't even accept the clues sometimes, arguing back and forth.
I'm looking for ways to solve it before we come to the end. In some ways we are late already as we've been given two episodes with answers already... 8)
By the end of ep4 we've already been given enough hints to find the answer Ryu07 said that in an interview. By ep4 the tale is solvable ep5 and on are just hints to get closer. And this is the whole point mentioned on trust in ep5, you have to accept clues otherwise your just sliting your own throat. Here is a hint, we know that the tale is not solvable by ep3, so ep4 contains big clues, we can't solve Umineko by 3, but we can by 4. What was mentioned in ep4 that we didn't have clues to in 1-3? If we can figure this out were probably closer to getting to the answer.
What was mentioned in ep4 that we didn't have clues to in 1-3?
The phones actually work. Just like in 5 also.
Somehow all those plans by seemingly unrelated groups have a singular root, which is Ryukishi's excuse for saying we can actually uncover all of them if we find it.
Isn't the root cause Battler's sin from 6 years ago? What could Battler have done to cause all this?
Could running away from his responsibilities to someone like Kinzo be the cause for anything? Responsibilities to Shannon?
Battler got more than one of the girls and women pregnant at the bright early age of 12! He takes too much after Rudolf. This is why at least two aunts like him. Although technically the women wouldn't really 'like' him if he did. :heh:
What was mentioned in ep4 that we didn't have clues to in 1-3? If we can figure this out were probably closer to getting to the answer.
Battler's sin of 6 years ago and a broken promise to 'Beatrice.' Looks like both threads arrived at this point. 8)
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 03:29
The phones actually work. Just like in 5 also.
The phone works in ep1. Maria was heard singing through it.
Kaisos Erranon
2010-04-28, 03:31
Some of these are some of her hardest mysteries to solve, even though the 'answer' is the most obvious.
This also ties into Poirot's constant mantra about how the murderer is always the most obvious person.
Who's the most obvious person in Umineko?
That's one way it's possible. I think a more likely variant would be that in the early morning of the 4th, a lot of plans and motives -- possibly as much as six or ten -- exist, some of them involving murder, some not involving murder at all, and some accepting murder as an option when the opportunity presents itself.
By the time 5th rolls in, some of them are shelved away, because other actions make them impossible -- people die and can't follow up, crucial accomplices die so plans become unfeasible, people learn new information, motives become more or less appealing due to that information -- and several play out simultaneously. Sometimes it results in a different person doing something in each episode, and no single person or faction committing all the crimes within the space of one episode.
Somehow all those plans by seemingly unrelated groups have a singular root, which is Ryukishi's excuse for saying we can actually uncover all of them if we find it.
So you're saying that Umineko is a bit like Murder on the Orient Express, but less unified and more convoluted? That is, EVERYONE is a culprit in some form or another?
This also ties into Poirot's constantly repeated philosophy that the murder is always the most obvious person.
Who's the most obvious person in Umineko?
I'd have to say Kanon. Although I don't *want* to.
At least in EP1, it's most likely him still sneaking around. EP3 he probably did kill Nanjo and led Jessica away. EP4 he may have gotten killed early.
You know what, maybe we weren't supposed to make any sense of EP4. Maybe it was the episode that showed us that none of the sequence of the events matter on the gameboard; if you know which factions want to do what you'd know the order anyways.
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 03:34
Battler's sin of 6 years ago and a broken promise to 'Beatrice.' Looks like both threads arrived at this point. 8)
I'm pretty sure there are other things fully shown in ep4 that is not shown in ep1-3. I can think of a few others.
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 03:39
I'd have to say Kanon. Although I don't *want* to.
At least in EP1, it's most likely him still sneaking around. EP3 he probably did kill Nanjo and led Jessica away. EP4 he may have gotten killed early.
You know what, maybe we weren't supposed to make any sense of EP4. Maybe it was the episode that showed us that none of the sequence of the events matter on the gameboard; if you know which factions want to do what you'd know the order anyways.
I really don't think of Kanon as the most. I think Nanjo is after all there are quite a few points we can blame on him, and he is a possible accomplice in many theories, because he can make people think others are 'dead.'
Ep4 was made to be hard, since people finally started to understand a bit about Umineko after the remade easier ep3. I think that the faction idea isn't to far off. I think that probably a number of people start each game board with the possibillity to commit murder. But small events on the game board cause who decides to do it, and who the victims are. This would fit with 'if you know the answer you could make your own story', and 'you can figure out the order of deaths', and 'what will happen next'
Isn't the root cause Battler's sin from 6 years ago? What could Battler have done to cause all this?
Could running away from his responsibilities to someone like Kinzo be the cause for anything? Responsibilities to Shannon?
I keep saying that if the sin causes everything to happen it has to be against Maria because she's central to everything Beatrice does. Umineko is more christian themed and Maria is the Mary figure see: episode 2. Sinning against Maria could cause people to dress up as Beatrice it could also cause the legend to get spread more like a virus. She's like a center piece at a thanksgiving dinner. She's the key to knowing almost everything about Beatrice. I don't think the sin is against the person who is caused to disguise as Beatrice because the red says it is not between him and her, so people who do that are using cheap semantics to get around the red.
The bomb is probably related to Kinzo's contract with Beatrice rather than the sin. It explains why everything had to be destroyed. It was for interest.
Isn't the root cause Battler's sin from 6 years ago? What could Battler have done to cause all this?
Could running away from his responsibilities to someone like Kinzo be the cause for anything? Responsibilities to Shannon?
No clue yet. It has to be something insignificant for Battler, so that he could forget it or only realise it's significance in Ep5, but significant in indirect consequences. Just like Ange realises how much she hurt Maria in Ep4. And Maria, who was now much more lonely, became totally dependent on Sakutaro, which triggered him being exposed to Rosa's rage, which made Maria completely change her outlook on magic, which significantly affected the attitudes of all Mariage Sorciere members.
In the same fashion, Battler's sin has to significantly change the strategic layout of the family's internal relationships, so much, that their own sins are committed or come to light or otherwise cause a cascade like an avalanche.
We have lots of clues that it is a promise to Shannon. But to work in the manner described, the ball has to proceed down from there to change the lives of every Ushiromiya in a significant manner. The buck doesn't stop with Shannon.
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 03:43
I keep saying that if the sin causes everything to happen it has to be against Maria because she's central to everything Beatrice does.
What is Battler's sin against Maria? And where are there clues that point to it?
So you're saying that Umineko is a bit like Murder on the Orient Express, but less unified and more convoluted? That is, EVERYONE is a culprit in some form or another?
That would be what I would write if I wanted to write an epic puzzle. :)
What is Battler's sin against Maria? And where are there clues that point to it?
Battler has made several half joking promises to Maria in just about every episode, and when he comes back to the island it's said he's reverted back to what he was like as a kid. Maria takes jokes literally and is very serious about people keeping promises. Most of them are perverted though. Like in episode 2 when he says "I'll eat you in ten years".
I don't know where it came from, but one of the members here suggested his sin was promising to return to play with her every year, and when he didn't people dressed up as Beatrice and taught her magic to cheer her up.
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 03:54
Battler has made several half joking promises to Maria in just about every episode, and when he comes back to the island it's said he's reverted back to what he was like as a kid. Maria takes jokes literally and is very serious about people keeping promises. Most of them are perverted though. Like in episode 2 when he says "I'll eat you in ten years".
I don't know where it came from, but one of the members here suggested his sin was promising to return to play with her every year, and when he didn't people dressed up as Beatrice and taught her magic to cheer her up.
As nice as that is, for ep1 it sounds like Battler didn't play with Maria 6 years ago. He says he remembers her as a cry baby. And to me taking Battler's personaity into account I don't think a 12 year old version of him would want to play much with a cry baby. But whoknows
As nice as that is, for ep1 it sounds like Battler didn't play with Maria 6 years ago. He says he remembers her as a cry baby. And to me taking Battler's personaity into account I don't think a 12 year old version of him would want to play much with a cry baby. But whoknows
In that case he just did it to be nice then. He didn't really want to come back or he lied knowing he wouldn't be.
The way I'd imagine it is that he promised to play something specific. Something childish or embarrassing maybe that he'd easily forget about.
Oooo Like a tea party.
I don't know where it came from, but one of the members here suggested his sin was promising to return to play with her every year, and when he didn't people dressed up as Beatrice and taught her magic to cheer her up.
Halfway through Ep4, I'm actually suspecting that Maria never actually met Beatrice. She summoned her in the same fashion Ange 'summons' Maria later, possibly using a document as the source. Since she never actually saw a living Beatrice, one didn't exist prior to, at least, April 1984 when the portrait was made, and possibly didn't even exist before the very start of the game.
That is why she so readily recognises Evatrice at first. Then derecognises her because her behaviour doesn't match the pattern Maria imagined previously.
Different handwriting is the only real hangup, but - Maria gets messages in her diary. She doesn't have to actually see anyone in a dress to get them, and messages magically appearing in there would be much cooler for her.
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 04:00
In that case he just did it to be nice then. He didn't really want to come back or he lied knowing he wouldn't be.
That is possible. But where is the hint that a promise was made to Maria? Mentioning him making promises now is only a tiny hint we need at least a mention of him saying something to Maria back then, otherwise I pretty sure Knox 8th won't be happy. And even if Knox 8th is my mystery teacher would so not be. Along with others, it is just too tiny of a hint. It is mostly guesswork.
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 04:08
Halfway through Ep4, I'm actually suspecting that Maria never actually met Beatrice. She summoned her in the same fashion Ange 'summons' Maria later, possibly using a document as the source. Since she never actually saw a living Beatrice, one didn't exist prior to, at least, April 1984 when the portrait was made, and possibly didn't even exist before the very start of the game.
That is why she so readily recognises Evatrice at first. Then derecognises her because her behaviour doesn't match the pattern Maria imagined previously.
Different handwriting is the only real hangup, but - Maria gets messages in her diary. She doesn't have to actually see anyone in a dress to get them, and messages magically appearing in there would be much cooler for her.
What about the Maria vs Erika battle in ep6. Where Maria claims This is a true event.
That is possible. But where is the hint that a promise was made to Maria? Mentioning him making promises now is only a tiny hint we need at least a mention of him saying something to Maria back then, otherwise I pretty sure Knox 8th won't be happy. And even if Knox 8th is my mystery teacher would so not be. Along with others, it is just too tiny of a hint. It is mostly guesswork.
We have a Maria who has it in her character to be extremely serious about keeping promises. I assumed it was whoever Beatrice was that imparted that seriousness into Maria.
But it could be the other way around too.
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 04:17
Whoa Shannon.. I didn't know you knew so much about magic. I didn't even realize in ep1 she talks about the scorpion.
What about the Maria vs Erika battle in ep6. Where Maria claims This is a true event.
Damn, not enough context in that wiki. Luckily, umineco comes with lots of context:
Erika (I think): 魔法なんてあり得ません。 あなたが、ありもしないウソ話をしている可能性があります！！
Maria: これは本当の話！！
I was thinking that either George or Jessica placed the candy inside the cup for her, so to her it is real magic. And the theory was that she doesn't know she's lying when she says magic exists, because she's been constantly shown it.
Is that what the '話/hanashi' refers to?
EDIT:
Whoa Shannon.. I didn't know you knew so much about magic. I didn't even realize in ep1 she talks about the scorpion.
Ohhh yah. Shannon knows a bit but look at how George confirms what she knows as true (like how the hell did he know?) and then coaches the situation. He tells Maria to look for a charm and then also confirms that Shannon should get back in time for something...
What about the Maria vs Erika battle in ep6. Where Maria claims This is a true event.
That would mean Maria did experience it, and claims nothing beyond that, but whether that experience is objective or subjective, the red does not really say, does it. Certainly seeing magic done is subjective, yet true.
Though, I'd need to see a fuller translation of this scene to give a proper answer. The real problem with the idea of Maria never seeing a living Beatrice is not that red, it's Knox 8th, because Maria would need knowledge about Beatrice, preferably in diary/grimoire-vessel format, to summon her. I don't see such a hint yet.
It's just that the possibility is very tempting because at least in certain situations Maria definitely does 'summon' Beatrice. That's why she's so quiet for most of Ep1 - they're watching TV and chatting about the fools who don't understand the ceremony, I bet.
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 04:23
Ohhh yah. Shannon knows a bit but look at how George confirms what she knows as true (like how the hell did he know?) and then coaches the situation. He tells Maria to look for a charm and then also confirms that Shannon should get back in time for something...
Actually they talk for a long time with Maria mentioning facts and George and Shannon acting surprised but agreeing. 'Rain' starts. (But only George and Shannon feel it?) Shannon looks at her watch and says its time for her to get back to work now.
I know I might be bashed for saying this but, Maria is a little bit of a spoiled brat don't you think?
Kaisos Erranon
2010-04-28, 04:26
I know I might be bashed for saying this but, Maria is a little bit of a spoiled brat don't you think?
I don't see how anyone can say this after Ep4. :heh:
Actually they talk for a long time with Maria mentioning facts and George and Shannon acting surprised but agreeing. 'Rain' starts. (But only George and Shannon feel it?) Shannon looks at her watch and says its time for her to get back to work now.
There's a bit more than that:
http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=2986374&postcount=7563
This list only includes the rose garden and beach talk.
I know I might bashed for saying this but, Maria is a little bit of a spoiled brat don't you think?
Not by her mother, probably.
But according to Nanjo, pretty much everyone on the island has engaged in Beatrice-supporting pranks for Maria's sake at least once in a while.
Which is more evidence for 'no living Beatrice' idea if I can only find the vessel for summoning.
Verg Avesta
2010-04-28, 04:31
Ohhh yah. Shannon knows a bit but look at how George confirms what she knows as true (like how the hell did he know?) and then coaches the situation. He tells Maria to look for a charm and then also confirms that Shannon should get back in time for something...
There are lot of things like that in Umineko, actually, if one reads the episodes carefully. People talking about things that they should not know that easily, that is. One that comes in mind is in ep5, when Eva reveals her "Receipt Seal" to Natsuhi. In the scene, it's not actually Eva who does the explaining, she never gets the chance. Hideyoshi interrupts and goes on to explain what the receipt means.
Which reminds me, both Eva and Hideyoshi are very, very aggressive during that scene. Strangely so.
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 04:42
I don't see how anyone can say this after Ep4.
Not by her mother, probably.
But according to Nanjo, pretty much everyone on the island has engaged in Beatrice-supporting pranks for Maria's sake at least once in a while.
Which is more evidence for 'no living Beatrice' idea if I can only find the vessel for summoning.
Why I say it; just look at her behavior. She throws temper tantrums when she doesn't get her way. She gets angry if you try to tell her otherwise, or don't listen to what she says. Just look at the rose garden scene in ep1.
Now the question is how did she get that way. This is a shot in the dark probably, but I think that when Maria was little 4-6; Rosa spoiled her like crazy. Rosa most of the time only gets angry with Maria after she acts childish, or spoiled. Beating the child is certainly not the answer, but when a child acts like this the parent can get angry. After all it makes them look bad, like they didn't raise their child right etc. Rosa probably feels that when Maria does those it shows once again how inferior to her siblings she is.
Kaisos Erranon
2010-04-28, 05:04
Why I say it; just look at her behavior. She throws temper tantrums when she doesn't get her way. She gets angry if you try to tell her otherwise, or don't listen to what she says. Just look at the rose garden scene in ep1.
I've actually wondered about this scene for a while. Maria acts like a two-year-old for that scene and for most of early Ep1, yet in every other game, and especially in the flashback in Ep4, she's clearly far, far more mature than her tantrums would indicate.
Oliver's theory that Rosa drugged her probably has some merit.
Now the question is how did she get that way. This is a shot in the dark probably, but I think that when Maria was little 4-6; Rosa spoiled her like crazy. Rosa most of the time only gets angry with Maria after she acts childish, or spoiled. Beating the child is certainly not the answer, but when a child acts like this the parent can get angry. After all it makes them look bad, like they didn't raise their child right etc. Rosa probably feels that when Maria does those it shows once again how inferior to her siblings she is.
Rosa has resented Maria ever since she was born, and I doubt she was spoiled much other than Rosa's clumsy attempts to make up for all the suffering she inflicts upon her daughter.
I can't believe you're defending Rosa here. Maria being a brat doesn't excuse Rosa taking her to the edge of a train platform and slapping the shit out of her, or neglecting her to go on trips to Hokkaido with boyfriends, or tearing her daughter's favorite toy in half and loudly declaring it "dead".
No, Rosa has NOT raised her child right. And that's entirely her own fault.
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 05:22
I've actually wondered about this scene for a while. Maria acts like a two-year-old for that scene and for most of early Ep1, yet in every other game, and especially in the flashback in Ep4, she's clearly far, far more mature than her tantrums would indicate.
Oliver's theory that Rosa drugged her probably has some merit.
Rosa has resented Maria ever since she was born, and I doubt she was spoiled much other than Rosa's clumsy attempts to make up for all the suffering she inflicts upon her daughter.
I can't believe you're defending Rosa here. Maria being a brat doesn't excuse Rosa taking her to the edge of a train platform and slapping the shit out of her, or neglecting her to go on trips to Hokkaido with boyfriends, or tearing her daughter's favorite toy in half and loudly declaring it "dead".
No, Rosa has NOT raised her child right. And that's entirely her own fault.
In ep3 Maria has a childish tantrum.
We were never told that Rosa hates Maria. We were told that Rosa used to find Maria's 'uu~" cute. No it doesn't excuse what Rosa does, but Rosa isn't that horrible of a mother, she could easily be way worse. Rosa has anger issues and may be even bipolar. She has a truck load of self hate and many other issues. What she does is terrible to Maria yes, but from other scenes I think we can see that Rosa does love Maria; it is just so jumbled because of all the other problems. Rosa isn't just this horrid person, she is this sad person whose happiness is being ruined by her struggles to control her own issues.
Dlanor .A. Nox
2010-04-28, 05:40
The only time I can recall Rosa ever stating that she hates Maria is that scene in Ep 4 where Maria tortures Rosa in her dream. I doubt that is much evidence of Rosa hating Maria to her core though since it's all in Maria's head. I know that being a single parent is hell, even though it doesn't justify Rosa's abuse there are alot of problems that stack up and take a tremendous toll on Rosa. Financial debt is a big freaking concern for one, child services, her company not doing well. Rosa isn't entirely at fault either, Maria made things worse with her tantrums. If Rosa really hated Maria she would have just given her up for adoption as well, but nope. Rosa wouldn't fight for custody of Maria if she didn't love her. Another thing, raising a company as well as a daughter doesn't leave much room for having a personal life either. Rosa is facing many social stigmas by raising a daughter on her own without a husband, so you can tell it's not easy for Rosa to actually find someone who would accept Rosa having a daughter. It's not justified either to abandon Maria for her boyfriend but it certainly wasn't easy for Rosa to find someone who accepts her either. Like Laserworm said isn't a horrible person she is just under extremely heavy circumstances which is why she is acting the way she is. It isn't a total justification for Rosa's actions but certainly she isn't entirely at fault as some claim it to be.
Kaisos Erranon
2010-04-28, 05:53
I said Rosa resents Maria. I didn't say that she hates her. Not quite the same thing. Notice Rosa's own tantrum towards her lover in Ep4... she blames Maria's existence for her own inadequacies and insecurities. Furthermore, Maria's tendencies to resort to crying and screaming to get her way are due to Rosa's bad parenting... but it's clear she doesn't actually know how to raise a child.
Rosa isn't a complete monster, but she is definitely a horribly screwed-up person, probably due to her own godawful childhood. Most people have parenting styles based on how they themselves were raised, which is why many victims of child abuse go on to become child abusers themselves.
So really, everything is Kinzo's fault. :heh:
Well, when rereading Ep4, I figured out why Maria seems to lack a skill to get her way quietly by guilt tripping her parent. Normally that ability develops by 6 or so. :)
Every time she does anything that would bestow any new guilt on Rosa, the existing reservoir of guilt bursts and Rosa hits her.
Kaisos Erranon
2010-04-28, 06:40
Every time she does anything that would bestow any new guilt on Rosa, the existing reservoir of guilt bursts and Rosa hits her.
Ah, see? There we go. Maria tantrums to get what she wants because she knows there's no other way.
Even if Rosa hits her a little, she'll usually give in to avoid further embarrassment.
That's actually a very well known parental mistake.
By ignoring constantly their kids except when they throw a tantrum, they reinforce such behavior because it's the only way the children can get their attention.
Ah, see? There we go. Maria tantrums to get what she wants because she knows there's no other way.
Even if Rosa hits her a little, she'll usually give in to avoid further embarrassment.
Mind you, Maria quite definitely is a prodigy otherwise. See the scene about teppou/raifuru on the test. Notice that this happened in the first grade of elementary school when she was 6. She was ahead of the school program by at least a year, possibly much more.
Unfortunately, in Japan in particular, a child prodigy is seen as a problem even more than in other countries, and her way to be one is also incompatible with the restrictive school grading system - she is smarter and better educated but can't get better grades for it. Rosa is embarrassed of her child being different rather than of her child being actually inferior to others, and imposes standards not so much strict as nonsensical, which she partly inherits from her own childhood, (which were more or less sensible for an ojousama from a rich family that Rosa was but are completely silly for a city apartment dweller with a lone mother) and partly twists into a complete mess on her own.
But if we're to be detectives, judging Rosa is not our job. What we need is to wrestle facts out of this messy narrative. :)
However I don't think that your usual detective like Miss Marple, Sherlock Holmes or Hercule Poirot would be of any help in this story. If you try to solve this mystery like a detective would, you are probably deemed to fail.
I think Erika was meant to show that to us.
Dlanor .A. Nox
2010-04-28, 07:18
I came to that conclusion too, Erika didn't view it as anything other than a mystery. Ep 4 made it clear that we aren't just supposed to look at it as just a plain mystery.
However I don't think that your usual detective like Miss Marple, Sherlock Holmes or Hercule Poirot would be of any help in this story. If you try to solve this mystery like a detective would, you are probably deemed to fail.
I think Erika was meant to show that to us.
I disagree about miss Marple in particular. She'd be able to pump far more information out of Maria than anyone else. She'd probably even understand magic. :) Still, waxing poetic that character X or character Y is in some way detestable or worthy of praise is hardly much help -- we need to accept that once we came to this, and see what follows from it and what causes it. Especially with how important Maria seems to be in the whole mess.
As I pointed out above, Nanjo's statement that pretty much everyone on the island played a Beatrice-affirming prank for Maria's sake at one point or another fits well with them seeing a need to somehow cheer the girl up and recognising her life is actually quite pitiful. So I expect they knew. I seriously wonder if Rosa visited more often than once a year, even though I don't see any hints stating that.
I'm also very much concerned about Maria's name. Kinzo wanted a very different name for Maria, bur Rosa made it into Maria on her own -- notice, she doesn't say she picked a different name, and the name still shows Kinzo's insane design pattern. I suspect this means a single kanji or even a sub-kanji difference -- a missing or an added stroke, or something similarly subtle that produces a very different reading.
So once again -- is there anyone versed in Japanese well enough to suggest a possible original name?
Again, let me stress: With a few limited exceptions, nobody credible ever sees what Rosa does to Maria, and Maria's own diary is a hopelessly biased source. The ep4 scene where Rosa says all the horrible things to Maria is also Maria's own dream. I realize how monstrous it sounds to question the sincerity of a child, but because Maria is so unusually intelligent yet emotionally immature, I have to question whether Rosa is really as bad as we think she is.
That said, she has hit her in the presence of Battler. I'm not denying that. But it may not be the pattern of abuse we think it is. Maria's bias helps explain ANGE's magic in the Golden Land, so it's not unimaginable to think that she is incredibly misrepresenting events.
I had no doubt that you'd disagree with that, Oliver.
anyway:
お父様はかつて真里亞に全然違う名前をつけるように言っていたの
otosama wa katsute Maria ni zenzen chigau namae wo tsukeru you ni itteita no
a "completely different name". I strongly doubt that Rosa would say that if there was just some minor change in the kanji composition.
otosama wa katsute Maria ni zenzen chigau namae wo tsukeru you ni itteita no
a "completely different name". I strongly doubt that Rosa would say that if there was just some minor change in the kanji composition.
Why exactly does it follow Kinzo's design pattern anyway then?
Rosa is still an Ushiromiya. While we know that Battler thinks that it's ridiculous to name people like that, we have never heard anyone else sharing this opinion. Maybe they all think it's cool and original.
There is also the fact that Rosa chose a name that at least phonetically is not so uncommon. So among the Ushiromiya, Maria has the least strange name of them all. I guess Rosa chose a compromise between Ushiromiya tradition and general norms.
There is also the fact that Rosa choose a name that at least phonetically is not so uncommon. So among the Ushiromiya, Maria has the least strange name of them all. I guess Rosa chose a compromise between Ushiromiya tradition and general norms.
Well, maybe...
Paradoxically, I think it also happens to be an epitaph hint anyway (http://jisho.org/words?jap=*%E4%BA%9E*&eng=&dict=edict&romaji=on), just not in the kanji they're thinking it is. That cross-like 'a' is a fairly uncommon one.
The strangeness is that the kanji
亜 亞
Are exactly the same thing, these two only represent two different ways to write the same symbol. The former became the standard simply because it's a lot easier to write (I guess). there are a lot of other examples of Kanji that were simplified in japanese.
Again this might be just to be "original", Battler himself admits that in this case it's "classy". Even Erika has a strangeness in he name normally it should be:
エリカ but instead she has ヱリカ
Abrupt, unrelated idea.
In Ep4 escape scene, Krauss says "Naturally, for a loving family like us." to Kyrie. While it's a moment filled with pathos up the wazoo, that particular line jumped out at me. It feels... A bit unwarranted even with all the stuff we're being shown.
Well, the scene is obviously buried under many layers of metaphor and noise, but earlier on the phone, Kyrie actually calls Battler her son, and it feels more than a sentiment -- rather, it sounds like she actually knows he is and is only able to say that now. And we know there's a good chance he is.
What if Battler is actually Krauss and Kyrie's son? If he were born a few months before Jessica, which is possible, he could actually be the true heir of the Ushiromiya cousin generation.
That offers lots of interesting possibilities.
P.S. ...anyone remembers the ending of Marmalade Boy? :heh:
no doubt that that would be quite an unexpected plot twist XD
NarkNarks
2010-04-28, 10:12
Abrupt, unrelated idea.
In Ep4 escape scene, Krauss says "Naturally, for a loving family like us." to Kyrie. While it's a moment filled with pathos up the wazoo, that particular line jumped out at me. It feels... A bit unwarranted even with all the stuff we're being shown.
When I first read that I assumed he was taking the piss about the situation. The fact that their working together when usually when their all together the adults at least are at each others necks.
... It'd be one hell of a plot twist though.
Raiza Sunozaki
2010-04-28, 10:14
Abrupt, unrelated idea.
In Ep4 escape scene, Krauss says "Naturally, for a loving family like us." to Kyrie. While it's a moment filled with pathos up the wazoo, that particular line jumped out at me. It feels... A bit unwarranted even with all the stuff we're being shown.
Well, the scene is obviously buried under many layers of metaphor and noise, but earlier on the phone, Kyrie actually calls Battler her son, and it feels more than a sentiment -- rather, it sounds like she actually knows he is and is only able to say that now. And we know there's a good chance he is.
What if Battler is actually Krauss and Kyrie's son? If he were born a few months before Jessica, which is possible, he could actually be the true heir of the Ushiromiya cousin generation.
That offers lots of interesting possibilities.
While delightfully entertaining, I honestly doubt Kyrie's the type of women who would sleep with her at-the-time lover's brother. Even more so, I don't think there's any evidence that the Sumadera family was acquainted with anyone from the Ushiromiya family, besides Rudolf.
I found Krauss' line about "a loving family" a bit of black humour by Ryuukishi, like that nothing brings a family closer that being threatened with murder.
As for Kyrie, we know from her various rants on her envy for Asumu that she has no idea that Battler is her son (assuming he is) coming to the island, and is usually not shown to be aware when she dies. She might have a gut feeling he is, but mostly I think it's just her trying to comfort Battler in a way only a mother could, especially since at that point Rudolf is apparently dead.
Such an assumption is interesting not only because of the shoujo manga style twist -- which would not be out of place considering the things we have actually seen to date -- but also because while that would make Battler a rightful heir right after Krauss, it would be impossible to publicise that fact without digging up a wardrobe full of family skeletons.
Which makes an ideal motivation to try to install him as the head by forcing him to solve the epitaph, not to mention motivation to oppose doing that. ;)
Mind you, Maria quite definitely is a prodigy otherwise. See the scene about teppou/raifuru on the test. Notice that this happened in the first grade of elementary school when she was 6. She was ahead of the school program by at least a year, possibly much more.
Unfortunately, in Japan in particular, a child prodigy is seen as a problem even more than in other countries, and her way to be one is also incompatible with the restrictive school grading system - she is smarter and better educated but can't get better grades for it. Rosa is embarrassed of her child being different rather than of her child being actually inferior to others, and imposes standards not so much strict as nonsensical, which she partly inherits from her own childhood, (which were more or less sensible for an ojousama from a rich family that Rosa was but are completely silly for a city apartment dweller with a lone mother) and partly twists into a complete mess on her own.
But if we're to be detectives, judging Rosa is not our job. What we need is to wrestle facts out of this messy narrative. :)
If Maria is a prodigy, it would explain why Maria is worried about the rose.
In EP1, they say that the Rose isn't healthy because it bloomed earlier and alone, and thus will wither earlier too. Maria noticed it and was sad because this rose was like her.
What if Battler is actually Krauss and Kyrie's son? If he were born a few months before Jessica, which is possible, he could actually be the true heir of the Ushiromiya cousin generation.
Geez. Two fathers and two mothers? We don't have to make it even more confusing for him do we? I think Kyrie and Krauss have a weird relationship yes, but it seems to be more of a rivalry than a friendship. I'd imagine Rudolf would only know about the mother though he'd have no knowledge about a father other than himself.
That is possible. But where is the hint that a promise was made to Maria? Mentioning him making promises now is only a tiny hint we need at least a mention of him saying something to Maria back then, otherwise I pretty sure Knox 8th won't be happy. And even if Knox 8th is my mystery teacher would so not be. Along with others, it is just too tiny of a hint. It is mostly guesswork.
Well tough. Knox's 8th can't be satisfied like that with any of the sins that have been theorized. All of them are pretty much guesswork. It can however be satisfied by being hinted to be able to cause things like the Beatrice disguise and the murders. Battler leaving the family doesn't have any hints for all the bad consequences, and denying magic as Ssol thought only has a few hints in the Manga.
There is only one time any promise has been specifically mentioned instead of hinted and that's pony theory, but that seems less possible now. It's revealed later that he got that line from Rudolf I think. Shannon also said a lot of things happened 6 years ago and that the person in question didn't want to remember so she decides not to talk about it. So there is information they know that we aren't getting. There is probably something that he did or said 6 years ago that we wouldn't be able to think of exactly since there is not a lot of information on him and 6 years ago. So therefore we have to figure out who would be most affected by a broken promise and since the promise was said to be not between him and Beatrice... Maria is the next person I'd think of who would obsess over a promise like that even if it was a joke.
and denying magic as Ssol thought only has a few hints in the Manga.
As for the truth behind Battler's sin and putting Beatrice to sleep, plenty of hints...no, in fact, the answer has already appeared in EP1-6. Quick readers reach the answer in EP4, even more weak points are exposed in EP5, and EP6 gives a nearly definitive answer.
You might think that there should be some trick, or that there’s some true nature behind it... If you have the time to think of something like that... it would be much more constructive to think of how not to damage the mood of whatever you’re facing... Even mistakenly... you must not say ‘In that case, try showing me magic’ ...Because to prove that, they will probably use an even more cruel way than before... to show you.
This is not the only answer but it's my theory anyway. ;)
Well here are my hints then
Kyrie: Anyways Maria is holding the key. The key to whether Beatrice is one of 18 people or a 19th person.
Battler:"...Maria is very stubborn right? That girl when she gets angry. It's pretty hard to make her feel better."
Battler: "In this game I'll finally turn the chessboard over"
Battler: "Just what on earth was Beato thinking?"
Rosa: That's right, Mama always tells you to to keep your promises.
There are probably more I could find in 3 and 4, but I find that episode 2 is where Maria talks the most out of all the episodes. Probably because she's around Rosa and Battler most of the time.
There's a scene in episode 2 where she talks entirely about the risk Beatrice took to making her promise in the letter so I think Maria is important and she knows a lot more than we give her credit for.
About that, during Battler's initial introduction of the characters he said that Rosa was the kind of person that would always keep her promises.
I guess that Battler isn't very good at understanding people.
This line from episode 6 makes it very probable that the sin is a broken promise in many people's eyes:
From this day forward, you will become the master of this island and wait for the day that he comes to fulfill his promise.
I believe that there was a broken promise. However, that does not necessitate it being the cause of the tragedy in my opinion.
About that, during Battler's initial introduction of the characters he said that Rosa was the kind of person that would always keep her promises.
I guess that Battler isn't very good at understanding people.
And this totally prove it. (http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/3079/battlerfuckno.png)
Also, in the beginning of EP1, I find really weird that Maria imitates EVERYTHING that battler does. She doesn't do it any more after the beginning of EP1, if I remember correctly.
Also, Kyrie/Rosa/Rudolf are talking about Asumu, and Kyrie has already mean words against her, and Rosa seems to be well informed.
I'd be interested in knowing some of the dialogue Battler has about his sin in episode 6. Or what exactly the hints are.
And this totally prove it. (http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/3079/battlerfuckno.png)
There is also this quote:
Rosa oba-san takes the bag with the present in it out from her suitcase. To think that she remembered the promise that she had apparently made last year and faithfully bought it. This kind of conscientiousness is just like Rosa oba-san. She's the kind of person who won't forget or break a promise.
I guess Rosa keeps promises to people she's close to then. Or rather it seems she keeps promises to adults better than her child. Maybe she just has trouble remembering childish promises like going to the movies and getting tickets to Delsney land.
The people she brought the tea for were Kumasawa and Natsuhi right? And She also seems to be chummy with Kyrie too. Most of the mothers seem to like her.
Besides that Battler has nothing, but good images of his family, whom he hardly knows, so it's not that surprising that his narration puts them in a good light. :heh:
EDIT: Actually if Battler is good at reading people that would be more of a reason to think Maria's diary was biased like Renall said. Is there anyone else he's read wrong besides Rosa?
This line from episode 6 makes it very probable that the sin is a broken promise in many people's eyes:
I believe that there was a broken promise. However, that does not necessitate it being the cause of the tragedy in my opinion.
I don't think there should be any doubt about that at this point.
I mean after what you see in EP5...
Beatrice: Liar. ......I'll never trust your promises again.
Battler: Huh? When did I ever make a promise to you and lie about it...?
*series of surprised and crying pictures of Beatrice*
Beatrice: ...........Heheheh, ...*cackle*cackle*cackle*. ......After hearing you say that, hell might not be so bad. ......Ehahahahahahaha, gahahahahahaha...!! Kill us! Bernkastel, Lambdadelta...!! Hyahhahahahahahahahahahaahahahaha!!
Kaisos Erranon
2010-04-28, 14:59
The former became the standard simply because it's a lot easier to write (I guess). there are a lot of other examples of Kanji that were simplified in japanese.
Come to think of it, Maria definitely isn't the only person associated with crosses...
Is there any way she could be connected to the Sumaderas?
EDIT: Actually if Battler is good at reading people that would be more of a reason to think Maria's diary was biased like Renall said. Is there anyone else he's read wrong besides Rosa?
Well, assuming that one or more people on the island is planning murder, and Battler wanted to believe them all innocent... yes, he is bad at reading people.
Well, assuming that one or more people on the island is planning murder, and Battler wanted to believe them all innocent... yes, he is bad at reading people.
Then count me as well, because I think he was right on that one ^^;
Come to think of it, Maria definitely isn't the only person associated with crosses...
Is there any way she could be connected to the Sumaderas?
Other than Rosa being good friends with Kyrie not that I know of.
Someone told me it's revealed in episode 6 that Hideyoshi used to be a Yakuza though and George seems to know about it from talking to his friends. Eva has no idea though.
The Sumaderas are probably Yakuza, and they're connected to Okonogi foods in episode 4 too so it all pieces together when you think about it.
someone told me it's revealed in episode 6 that Hideyoshi used to be a Yakuza
Uh? Whaat?!
EDIT: Actually if Battler is good at reading people that would be more of a reason to think Maria's diary was biased like Renall said. Is there anyone else he's read wrong besides Rosa?
There is, actually, a chance that Maria's diary is a complete and total fabrication, or at least that the grimoire is. It's not a very high chance, because it fits Ange's own memories, not communicated to much of anyone else, but it's source is highly questionable.
Ange got them both from 'Maria's belongings after her death'. But we know the endgame event wiped much of this stuff out - pretty much everything all the way to Kuwadorian. Ange doesn't have any physical memento of Battler other than the hair ornament he got for her. But if the guesthouse, where the guests to the island ended up and where their belongings were located was untouched by the endgame event, there would be no need for Rosa and Maria to escape in Ep2, and Maria's stuff, which was in a room right next to Battler's stuff, would be of much less interest to Ange - she could be wearing Battler's own shirt if she wanted to!
We know that Maria always carried her grimoire in the handbag, though. While a diary may have survived if it has never been on Rokkenjima, and remained in Maria's room when she left, Battler sees Maria pull the grimoire out several times. I can't see a reason why Eva could have possibly recovered Maria's handbag and then still let Ange get her hands on it if she did.
Uh? Whaat?!
Just something I heard. :D It's not true then?
I don't think there should be any doubt about that at this point.
I mean after what you see in EP5...
Meta-Battler also promised that he would be the one to kill Beatrice. I haven't read anything that proves that the broken promise caused the tragedy.
Come to think of it, Maria definitely isn't the only person associated with crosses...
Is there any way she could be connected to the Sumaderas?
And where are you going with this? :heh:
However bodies are reduced to little shreds, it's unthinkable that whatever happened to Maria left her grimoire intact if they were together.
Just something I heard. It's not true then?
I can't say I understood 100% of what I read. But this strikes me as something completely new. We need confirmation from someone more skilled than me.
Come to think of it, Maria definitely isn't the only person associated with crosses...
Is there any way she could be connected to the Sumaderas?
Highly highly unlikely - I think we should just chalk up Maria having a cross on her crown up to her occult obsessions or just the fashion of the clothes she wore for the conference (Maria was complaining about wearing Western clothes in EP 2). In EP 1 it was mentioned that part of Kinzo's idea of Western occultism had to do with burying people when they died, so that their souls can be revived in their bodies - something has a very obvious connection to Christianity and the belief of the messiah reviving, along with the rapture. It might not be a stretch to believe that if Kinzo follows a religion then it's most likely Christianity or maybe Catholicism.
Or you could chalk it up to creepy crosses, since Kasumi isn't wearing anything resembling a cross on her outfit. Kyrie is mentioned having a sort of gothic fashion taste in the 07thexpansion's online profiles and in the profiles on the anime site, so that's probably why she has a cross on her tie.
NarkNarks
2010-04-28, 15:13
Someone told me it's revealed in episode 6 that Hideyoshi used to be a Yakuza though and George seems to know about it from talking to his friends. Eva has no idea though.
What really!? Surely not he doesn't seem the type and if he was we'd surely have some fan art somewhere......want.....
Meta-Battler also promised that he would be the one to kill Beatrice. I haven't read anything that proves that the broken promise caused the tragedy.
Because of your sin, people die.
Due to your sin, a great many humans on this island die
That's good enough for me and I think there are enough hints that Battler did something to cause it.
There is also this one.
Six years ago for me, no person called Beatrice existed.
Kaisos Erranon
2010-04-28, 15:19
Or you could chalk it up to creepy crosses, since Kasumi isn't wearing anything resembling a cross on her outfit. Kyrie is mentioned having a sort of gothic fashion taste in the 07thexpansion's online profiles and in the profiles on the anime site, so that's probably why she has a cross on her tie.
It's not just Kyrie; Battler (most probably Kyrie's son) and Amakusa (if he's not a spy for that family I'll eat my socks) also have crosses.
So why wouldn't Maria, the only other person with a connection to crosses, NOT be connected to Kyrie and/or the Sumadera family in some way?
This is my line of thinking, at any rate.
Because of your sin, people die.
Due to your sin, a great many humans on this island die
That's good enough for me and I think there are enough hints that Battler did something to cause it.
There is also this one.
Six years ago for me, no person called Beatrice existed.
But what you are saying is that the sin that is the cause of the tragedy must be the broken promise. I don't think this can be concluded yet.
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 15:22
But what you are saying is that the sin that is the cause of the tragedy must be the broken promise. I don't think this can be concluded yet.
I'm pretty sure Battler's sin is the starting point, and from then on because of it things spiral out of control for everyone causing many to consider murder.
However bodies are reduced to little shreds, it's unthinkable that whatever happened to Maria left her grimoire intact if they were together.
Indeed. There's only a few possibilities:
Both documents are an exceedingly clever and elaborate fabrication prepared well beforehand.
Maria actually survived and returned to her apartment after 'death' at least once.
The handbag was hidden by Maria herself before death as a deliberate message.
The handbag was separated from Maria by someone else.
All of those have huge problems. Even the second, because then Ange should have realized Maria is alive. The first assumes someone actually cares enough about the contents of a 6 year old Ange's brain to twist it for the following twelve years, and all for what?
Unfortunately Ange says nothing at all about which of the possible sets of 'Maria's belongings' she had access to after the incident and could clandestinely remove.
It's not just Kyrie; Battler (most probably Kyrie's son) and Amakusa (if he's not a spy for that family I'll eat my socks) also have crosses.
So why wouldn't Maria, the only other person with a connection to crosses, NOT be connected to Kyrie and/or the Sumadera family in some way?
This is my line of thinking, at any rate.
Maria is wearing a crown from the black king in chess, which happens to have a cross on it. I think the fact that she's wearing the same crown as the black king has more symbolism than the fact that it also happens to have a cross on it. And Battler doesn't know that Kyrie is his mother, so saying that he just happens to wear crosses just because of her doesn't sound like a logical thread.
Sumadera family doesn't strike me as a family of Christian beliefs either. Especially since Kasumi implies that they torture people they do not like. It would make sense if Kasumi would be wearing a cross because she has obvious connections to the Sumadera family, while Kyrie's are pretty much cut off, but she isn't wearing one. Making the connection to the Sumadera's symbol being a cross is null if the future successor isn't even wearing the symbol on her outfit.
But what you are saying is that the sin that is the cause of the tragedy must be the broken promise. I don't think this can be concluded yet.
it doesn't have to be a promise, but knowing Ryukishi it's something abstract considering the other sins he's written about are entering the shrine storage and not giving a girl a doll.
It's simple though. Whatever it was caused a chain reactions of changes for the people on Rokken Isle. People started disguising as Beatrice people planned murder and for some reason we have a bomb confirmed. Whether the bomb is part of Kinzo's contract with Beatrice or Battler's promise is questionable.
The point is many people die due to his sin, but at the same time that doesn't mean everyone dies because of his sin.
A promise is almost guaranteed though.
ErenselTheJester
2010-04-28, 15:31
I don't think a promise is guaranteed, its more than likely that its a mere event disguised as a promise to Beatrice and Ryukishi is pulling a wool over our eyes.
.
I don't think a promise is guaranteed, its more than likely that its a mere event disguised as a promise to Beatrice and Ryukishi is pulling a wool over our eyes.
Here's the thing - Battler's sin has to be in EP 1-4. It is extremely hinted that Beatrice has an issue with promises: she thinks breaking one is the worst thing a human can do, she says she would never break one and when Battler says he never remembered making a promise to her she says she wants to die. Hell there was an entire song at the end of EP 5 about making a promise for love when Beatrice evaporates and is dead.
One small red herring is something, but Ryukishi is literally THROWING hints about a promise being the sin. EP 6 when the mysterious narrator talks about making "Beatrice" it even mentions waiting for a promise to be fulfilled.
I don't think a promise is guaranteed, its more than likely that its a mere event disguised as a promise to Beatrice and Ryukishi is pulling a wool over our eyes.
.
It doesn't matter. Whether it's an event or a promise to someone they both cause chain reactions. The reactions cause people to disguise as Beatrice. The sudden belief in the legend causes murders using the witch legend as a guise. Then B0mb
The only event you have anyway is Battler leaving the family. Otherwise we have too little information to come up with an answer that is completely satisfying.
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 15:38
I don't think a promise is guaranteed, its more than likely that its a mere event disguised as a promise to Beatrice and Ryukishi is pulling a wool over our eyes.
.
What is it then? It happen 6 years ago on the island. And Beatrice said that she doesn't care about Battler's family problems. And the sin means a lot to her, just look at her reaction.
I'm pretty sure Battler's sin is the starting point, and from then on because of it things spiral out of control for everyone causing many to consider murder.
Again, I agree that Battler's sin is the cause of the tragedy. I have a very detailed theory of my own on this. ;)
it doesn't have to be a promise, but knowing Ryukishi it's something abstract considering the other sins he's written about are entering the shrine storage and not giving a girl a doll.
It's simple though. Whatever it was caused a chain reactions of changes for the people on Rokken Isle. People started disguising as Beatrice people planned murder and for some reason we have a bomb confirmed. Whether the bomb is part of Kinzo's contract with Beatrice or Battler's promise is questionable.
The point is many people die due to his sin, but at the same time that doesn't mean everyone dies because of his sin.
A promise is almost guaranteed though.
I think it's possible that the cause of the tragedy was a broken promise. So yes, I think you're theory is valid as well. :)
Again, I agree that Battler's sin is the cause of the tragedy. I have a very detailed theory of my own on this. ;)
I think it's possible that the cause of the tragedy was a broken promise. So yes, I think you're theory is valid as well. :)
Well the sin is one of the causes. Battler even mentions something to Meta-Beatrice after Suit-Beatrice says that he doesn't care about his family issues - he wasn't obligated to come to the conference. He could have easily skipped out if he felt like it and I doubt Rudolf could do anything about it considering how bad their relationship is. What if Battler never came to the island? Would people still die, just because of his broken promise? Clearly the murderer wants him to suffer in some way if they keep leaving him until the end of October 5th as one of the last survivors. So if he never came, then what?
The sin can't be the only reason for the tragedy because of this. In EP 6 we know that the promise itself is why "Beatrice" is created and perhaps the broken sin is why the culprit ultimately abuses "Beatrice" into making her the culprit.
One small red herring is something, but Ryukishi is literally THROWING hints about a promise being the sin. EP 6 when the mysterious narrator talks about making "Beatrice" it even mentions waiting for a promise to be fulfilled.
Wait, idea.
Breaking the promise is not the sin. The very act of making the promise was the sin instead. Making this promise, otherwise purely innocent, is a sin against a third party and damages the said third party just by it being known that the promise exists! Ultimately breaking it anyway it is not 'the sin' itself, but damages Beatrice in turn! This way the promise is between Battler and whoever becomes the Suit-Beatrice, but the sin is still against someone else!
ErenselTheJester
2010-04-28, 15:56
Wait, idea.
Breaking the promise is not the sin. The very act of making the promise was the sin instead. Making this promise, otherwise purely innocent, is a sin against a third party and damages the said third party just by it being known that the promise exists! Ultimately breaking it anyway it is not 'the sin' itself, but damages Beatrice in turn! This way the promise is between Battler and whoever becomes the Suit-Beatrice, but the sin is still against someone else!
I wouldn't say that, Beatrice said that she wouldn't trust another promise made by Battler again, which means he made a promise and broke it.
What is it then? It happen 6 years ago on the island. And Beatrice said that she doesn't care about Battler's family problems. And the sin means a lot to her, just look at her reaction.
I know it means alot to her, but then that's the question: who the hell is she? I'm not trying to say what it is, I'm just saying that it doesn't have to be a promise, just a starter or a catalyst for what happens presently.
Breaking the promise is not the sin. The very act of making the promise was the sin instead.
Well... Beatrice is fickle. In other words she's not loyal in her affections. If Battler's sin is making the promise his sin would probably be prideful while Beatrice's sin would be being envious of the other party.
Oh no! Kyrie is coming back to haunt me again. :uhoh:
Well the sin is one of the causes. Battler even mentions something to Meta-Beatrice after Suit-Beatrice says that he doesn't care about his family issues - he wasn't obligated to come to the conference. He could have easily skipped out if he felt like it and I doubt Rudolf could do anything about it considering how bad their relationship is. What if Battler never came to the island? Would people still die, just because of his broken promise? Clearly the murderer wants him to suffer in some way if they keep leaving him until the end of October 5th as one of the last survivors. So if he never came, then what?
The sin can't be the only reason for the tragedy because of this. In EP 6 we know that the promise itself is why "Beatrice" is created and perhaps the broken sin is why the culprit ultimately abuses "Beatrice" into making her the culprit.
Yes, I would love to hear those questions answered for those who believe that the sin is a promise.
For my theory, let's see...
The culprit is trying to make a single person believe in the magic of the epitaph. That's why everything was shown with impossible closed rooms and the reason for the sequence of the murders.
In episode 1-4 Battler was chosen. In episodes 5 and 6 Erika was chosen.
As long as the one that was chosen believes in the epitaph's magic the murders do not necessarily have to occur.
As we were shown in episodes 5 and 6, there do not necessarily have to be any murders.
If Battler didn't return to the island then the plan would still be executed. However, a different person would be chosen to 'travel under the rules of the epitaph'. I believe the culprit would avoid killing anyone if possible.
I wouldn't say that, Beatrice said that she wouldn't trust another promise made by Battler again, which means he made a promise and broke it.
I guess people won't read it thoroughly even if I color-code it. :)
Of course he broke it! "Ultimately breaking it anyway it is not 'the sin' itself, but damages Beatrice in turn!"
Here's an example how it can possibly work:
Suppose you make a promise to Girl A to marry her.
Then, a few days later, caught up in the flow of conversation, you make a very similar promise to Girl B.
The second promise is a sin against Girl A all by itself, even if you ultimately fulfill the promise made to Girl A. You should not have made any such promise to Girl B because just uttering it constitutes treason towards Girl A.
Suppose you do ultimately marry Girl A in the end. But then you broke a promise to Girl B.
Marrying Girl B is not much better either, because Girl A suffers twice -- once by you making a promise incompatible with the one made to her, and once by breaking the original promise given to her.
But if neither promise is followed through with, the sin towards Girl A remains, and the damage inflicted on Girl B also remains!
P.S: A sacrifice to Knox 8th to satisfy it, blessed be it's name: Jessica: "A community of girls with the wrong impressions can be scary. They could have some secret feud behind your back, and hurt someone or make them cry without you noticing it, right?"
Yes, I would love to hear those questions answered for those who believe that the sin is a promise.
For my theory, let's see...
The culprit is trying to make a single person believe in the magic of the epitaph. That's why everything was shown with impossible closed rooms and the reason for the sequence of the murders.
As long as the one that was chosen believes in the epitaph's magic the murders do not necessarily have to occur.
:twitch: Uh... doesn't that mean that the only way to stop the murders is to flat out lie about what you beleive? It's not really all that interesting for the story if you ask me.
And if your trying to do that why chose someone who naturally has magic resistance?
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 16:09
I've got an idea. Beatrice's first letter (The one Maria normally gets.) It says that Beatrice will return all that she took, how ccan she do that if she kill people. But maybe the letter suggests the fake killings. That people are going to pretend to be killed. But than the rekiller comes along and actually kills them. This fits with Beatrice's letter, I mean why does it say she will return EVERYTHING she took. She can't revive the dead...
:twitch: Uh... doesn't that mean that the only way to stop the murders is to flat out lie about what you beleive? It's not really all that interesting for the story if you ask me.
And if your trying to do that why chose someone who naturally has magic resistance?
What have you been reading all this time? Beatrice's motive was to convince Battler to believe in magic and learn the truth. :heh:
Why choose Battler? I think the fact that he was not supposed to be there is the primary reason he was chosen.
You have to answer what was going on in episodes 5 and 6. Why does it appear that many people are putting on an act for Erika? She's a complete outsider who was not supposed to be there.
Uninteresting story? Heh, ok then let's hear your theory and so I can comment on it.
Uninteresting story? Heh, ok then let's hear your theory and so I can comment on it.
What I'm saying is it doesn't add anything interesting to the story. Believing in the witch is Battler's losing condition. Your theory doesn't help anyone stop the murders it makes them impossible for the detective to stop. There isn't even a need for a detective then.
What I'm saying is it doesn't add anything interesting to the story. Believing in the witch is Battler's losing condition. Your theory doesn't help anyone stop the murders it makes them impossible for the detective to stop. There isn't even a need for a detective then.
Well, that's just your opinion. :heh:
Anyway, I think it's an interesting story when there are multiple people plotting different things.
Of course, this doesn't make it impossible for the detective to stop the murders so I really don't have any idea what you are talking about.
The detective = the one traveling under the rules of the epitaph in this theory.
I think there are plenty of theories out there but I still want to hear everyone else's. :)
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 16:33
Ok either Jessica or Shannon must be the person who calls Battler in ep4. 'Beatrice' mocks Battler's english speaking skills. She even mentions that he used to speak that way before. So many people can be cut. Next we have; what is her reasoning to speak to Battler like this. And why does she mention he used to talk like that. It seems to me only the cousins +Shannon would remember that he talked this way. (Maybe Rudolf and Kyrie too) And Battler clearly says that the voice is female, so we are left with Maria, Jessica, and Shannon. Maria just left the room so it is impossible for her to be the person on the phone. Leaving us with only 2 choices.... well I suppose Kyrie is a possiblity too.
Edit: I find it creepy that a fantasy scene in ep4 implies that Beatrice and Kinzo have sex.. *shivers* Hope it isn't true.
Of course, this doesn't make it impossible for the detective to stop the murders so I really don't have any idea what you are talking about.
It contradicts the purpose of the human side's role. It sounds like what your saying is that the human side has to lose to win, which to me makes no sense because then the game is rigged.
There are also plenty of times Battler starts beleiving in the witch and the murders still happen in the early episodes. How much does he have to beleive to stop his suffering?
Example: episode 2: Battler says we should stop blaming the servants because it's a witch that did it. He says this to Rosa while crying. Then George says his heart is pure and all that. George & Co all die later even though Battler believes in the witch. Why?
It contradicts the purpose of the human side's role. It sounds like what your saying is that the human side has to lose to win, which to me makes no sense because then the game is rigged.
There are also plenty of times Battler starts beleiving in the witch and the murders still happen in the early episodes. How much does he have to beleive to stop his suffering?
Well, that's not what I'm saying at all. My theory is based on a real world explanation. You are thinking too much in terms of what is shown in the meta world scenes. I think that's what your problem is.
Let me turn over the chessboard on you.
Think in terms of the real world. Are you saying that someone is not trying to make someone else believe that the murders are occuring in accordance to the epitaph?
Example: episode 2: Battler says we should stop blaming the servants because it's a witch that did it. He says this to Rosa while crying. Then George says his heart is pure and all that. George & Co all die later even though Battler believes in the witch. Why?
That's simple to answer. There was never a plan to murder those people and set up a closed room. I believe that there was a conflict and they all died. Afterwards, the closed room was setup and the victims were staked in accordance to the epitaph. However, the closed room was not planned from the beginning because the culprit agreed to stop the murders at that point. I will go into specifics on this if I can ever get enough time to write everything up. :heh:
Think in terms of the real world. Are you saying that someone is not trying to make someone else believe that the murders are occuring in accordance to the epitaph?
No, but what they want them to beleive about what the epitaph is saying is never really shown.
Is it that a witch is the murderer?
Is it that they want to revive someone like Beatrice or Kinzo with sacrifices?
Or what I think is more likely is that the murders are an incentive to solve the epitaph. If they wanted to murder people to show people magic exists that wouldn't make as much sense since only the Servants and Maria really talk about that.
No, but what they want them to beleive about what the epitaph is saying is never really shown.
Is it that a witch is the murderer?
Is it that they want to revive someone like Beatrice or Kinzo with sacrifices?
Or what I think is more likely is that the murders are an incentive to solve the epitaph. If they wanted to murder people to show people magic exists that wouldn't make as much sense since only the Servants and Maria really talk about that.
Im sorry but:
Whether the epitaph's riddle is solved or not, this child stands nothing to gain at all.
Regardless of whether the epitaph is solved or not, Beato has nothing to gain.
Regarding the murders, in my theory, solving the epitaph is meaningless. However, traveling under the epitaph's rules is important. ;)
I never said Beatrice was the person that wanted it solved did I? Everyone else has something to gain from that. And I don't beleive the person disguising as Beatrice is the culprit in this case. She's the magic trick or a pawn.
Solving it isn't completely meaningless or they wouldn't put so much focus on it in Chiru.
I never said Beatrice was the person that wanted it solved did I? Everyone else has something to gain from that. And I don't beleive the person disguising as Beatrice is the culprit in this case. She's the magic trick or a pawn.
I don't understand your theory, I'm sorry. So are they after the gold then?
Solving it isn't completely meaningless or they wouldn't put so much focus on it in Chiru.
I meant with respect to the murders that occur. Obviously solving the epitaph doesn't stop what happens. So in your theory, why do the fake murders still occur (real murder in Krauss's case) after the epitaph is solved?
I don't understand your theory, I'm sorry. So are they after the gold then?
I think there might be one group of people on the island who are self righteous. In other words they feel it is their job to punish people and make Battler suffer. The others want the gold and try to get people to solve the epitaph.
To me that explains why there are always two people framed in every episode. Beatrice and a red herring culprit. Someone wanted everyone to think Natuhi, Eva, Rosa, And Kinzo were criminals. And they probably have some criminal backgrounds in the financial world.
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 17:30
I think there might be one group of people on the island who are self righteous. In other words they feel it is their job to punish people and make Battler suffer. The others want the gold and try to get people to solve the epitaph.
To me that explains why there are always two people framed in every episode. Beatrice and a red herring culprit. Someone wanted everyone to think Natuhi, Eva, Rosa, And Kinzo were criminals. And they probably have some criminal backgrounds in the financial world.
Don't forget the servants try to make Kanon out as Nanjo and Kumasawa's killer in ep2.
I think there might be one group of people on the island who are self righteous. In other words they feel it is their job to punish people and make Battler suffer.
If they want to make Battler suffer how could they have predicted that he would show up at the conference?
The others want the gold and try to get people to solve it.
Well, that's what was one of the suggested the motives back in episode 1 by the adults. I would be very disappointed if this turns out to be one of the motives in the end.
To me that explains why there are always two people framed in every episode. Beatrice and a red herring culprit. Someone wanted everyone to think Natuhi, Eva, Rosa, And Kinzo were criminals. And they probably have some criminal backgrounds in the financial world.
Remember, 'Beatrice' killed Battler at the end of episode 4. I agree that 'Beatrice' is a red herring culprit in some of the cases but 'Beatrice' is not just one individual person.
Laserworm
2010-04-28, 17:39
If they want to make Battler suffer how could they have predicted that he would show up at the conference?
In ep5 it was revealed that Battler calls Jessica a week or so before the conference and tells her his is going to be at it.
Well, that's what was one of the suggested the motives back in episode 1 by the adults. I would be very disappointed if this turns out to be one of the motives in the end.
Why would that be dissapointing. The motive is supposed to have clues that suggest it and that motive is very vaild. Greed can easily lead to murder. I would only be dissapointed if it was so far off thing that was only vaguely hinted at once, or there were no clues at all.
In ep5 it was revealed that Battler calls Jessica a week or so before the conference and tells her his is going to be at it.
The letters in the bottles. Battler was there in both stories. They are pretty complex murder mysteries after all. From the way they were described I don't think someone wrote both of them within a week:
Many scraps of paper had been stuffed into both of the wine bottles. It was an extensive notebook written by someone calling themselves Ushiromiya who wasn’t Maria, and which told of the events starting the day before the accident and up until the day of the accident in a diary-like way.
And its contents had been the beginning of ‘the Witch’s Legend Serial Murder Incident”, as well as ‘the Golden Witch Beatrice’s Puzzle’.
This bizarre diary-style notebook described how the Ushiromiya family members, nailed down on the island by the typhoon, were caught up in a ceremony for the resurrection of a witch, and killed one by one in inexplicable ways. And in the end, the Golden Witch Beatrice revived, and swallowed up everything into the Golden Land. ......It was written almost as though it was a complete account of the events on that day. Also, it depicted the current situation on the island at the time in great detail, and the former servants who used to work for the Ushiromiya family gave testimony that it had definitely been written by a human who knew the inside details of the island.
Inside both bottles were diary-style notebooks on which was written an account from the day before the accident until the day of the accident. However, while both of their contents were about the same two day period, they were completely different. It was as though one was the truth and one was a lie. Or perhaps both were lies. In any event, the beginnings and endings alone matched each other. In the beginning, the 18 relatives are sealed up on the island by the typhoon. And in the ending, everyone dies, the Golden Witch is revived, and everything is swallowed up into the Golden Land.
The contents of both message bottles wrote about the events of the day before the accident and the day of the accident. But the details were completely different. Both diaries outline a serial murder following the epitaph of the witch, but the order of the sacrifices, the ways they died, and even ‘the tale of the two days’ was different. However, in both, everyone died in the end and the witch revived, making for the same circumstances.
If there had been one message bottle, claiming that its story was the truth would be reckless, but not impossible. However, because there were two, that made both of them doubtful. If someone was plotting to make out those two days to be the work of a witch, that was really superfluous. And because there were two, it suggested that an undiscovered third one, or possibly even more might exist. ......In other words, the two differing contents made it harder and harder to swallow. But despite that, the contents of both matched in that they told of a witch in the tale. In other words, does that mean that this is what the writer wanted to tell us.........?
...in both tales that had been discovered, Eva oba-san had been included among the victims.
Why would that be dissapointing. The motive is supposed to have clues that suggest it and that motive is very vaild. Greed can easily lead to murder. I would only be dissapointed if it was so far off thing that was only vaguely hinted at once, or there were no clues at all.
Well, it was probably tone of first theories I came up with and doesn't require a lot of thought. It pretty much is given to us. It's a valid theory but for me... disappointing.
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.