[Game] Umineko no Naku Koro ni Chiru - Ep. 7 Requiem of the golden witch

[Oliver]

I just don't want to make any announcements before making sure I'm right. If I'm wrong, it would be rather embarrassing.

You know, that never stopped me from posting some highly questionable things. :)

-Can anyone confirm to me if the games the exact same amount of time?(Game Board wise, not as in how long it takes to finish the episode)

It is commonly believed that the endgame event always occurs at 24:00 on the 5th, but there is little hard evidence to say this is indeed the case -- the events very close to the endgame event seem to dissolve into magical scenes Battler can observe, and it's not clear at all when exactly this starts -- before the clock chime or after. It is fairly clearly demonstrated that alterations in events occurring on the early morning of the 4th even before anyone gets to the airport produce at least a subtly different progression. Characters variously refer to the 4th as being the start of the game.

-Can anyone clarify to me the forgeries/books thing? I just want to make sure I got that down correctly.

According to later episodes, two "message bottles" exist detailing the content of episodes, in both of them, no survivors are mentioned. It is generally presumed these are episodes 1 and 2, as at the moment this was described, episodes 1 and 2 had no survivors but episode 3 did (Eva) but nothing specific is said about it. Everything else is termed "forgeries" according to episode 4.

In later episodes, Hachijou claims to have written the forgeries signed "Itouikukuro Reigonamu", veracity of this claim is not really confirmed.

Someone else will need to field the ones relating to Word of God. :)

[ArcticHelm]

I think it's pretty hard to clarify the books/episodes. :< A lot hinges on whether or not they (the first two) were written before or after the event on Rokkenjima. If it's before, you could say that all the information about that two day period are really based on some story and hope that Beatrice had in regards to Rokkenjima and felt that whatever hope that was wouldn't be fulfilled on the game board. They perhaps felt that it could only come true if, as a witch, made everyone believe that it came true. Perhaps the story Battler will give in EP8 will show that something more than an illusion came out of these stories, and that the hope Beatrice wrote about was actually fulfilled in some manner. If the stories were written -after- it's curious who actually managed to survive and wrote these particular variations of the events on the island. The stories in this case could actually contain tidbits of information on the true events.

My personal interpretation is leaning more towards the first of these two, which would be an interesting fake-out on Ryukishi's part. Actually it'd be the nastiest bait-and-switch I've ever read. >.> It would be possible to suggest that even though Bern says in red that this story will have no happy ending, that it only applies to the story which was forged out of the bottled messages. The story one Rokkenjima itself may actually unexpectedly be a much different story than the one which Beatrice expected and launched into the sea, and one in which a good ending could be met.

[musouka]

So then what was Will's answer to the actual question, anyway? Who killed Beatrice? Answering the question of who Beatrice may be is a hint, but does it actually demonstrate her "killer?"

This was answered in the game itself. Lyon "killed" Beatrice, because it was impossible for Beatrice to exist if he was there.

[Jan-Poo]

In later episodes, Hachijou claims to have written the forgeries signed "Itouikukuro Reigonamu", veracity of this claim is not really confirmed.


Also it is said that a few witch hunters speculate that since Itouikukuro Reigonamu's forgeries are so similar to Beatrice's then they aren't really forgeries but other messages in the bottles that this mysterious author acquired somehow.
Which is the truth of this whole story is impossible to tell with certainty at this point.

-Do we have Word of God about the definition of "alternate truth" or "red"? Did Ryuukishi ever talk about Red in detail?

not that I know of.

-What exactly did Ryuukishi say about Umineko being solvable again?

Among the interviews I know of, he only explained why he didn't want to give us the assurance that this game is solvable, without ever telling us if it's solvable or not. However in EP6 the characters state pretty clearly that the "games" must necessarily be solvable. In theory this should also be true for the game we are playing.

[Axilios]

Do we have Word of God about the definition of "alternate truth" or "red"? Did Ryuukishi ever talk about Red in detail?

One interview from ep2/ep3 was talking about it. I'll try to find it again later, when I will not be busy like now. It is not really, really a definition, but he is talking about red during a long time.

*edit*

http://community.livejournal.com/witchhunters/7366.html here, nothing new but still.
He is also talking about it in... is it anti-mystery vs anti-fantasy?
Well, basically by itself the red worth nothing.
that's all we know about it.
A long time ago it leads me to a theory, saying that the red is not necessarily saying the truth of the gameboard by itself, but is a notice in order to guide Battler to a certain point, which his the truth. Well. I've abandoned this since a long time ago, but I still think that there is a trick with the red itself.

He was also ""clear"" about alternative truth... Well... Clear as Ryukishi can be.
Alternative truth and, right after, talking about THE truth again.

*edit*
http://darenome.wordpress.com/2009/07/23/ryukishi07-interview/

right here; when he is talking about the "several possible answers" aspect which exist as well.
And nothing else about it after this. He flips the table and talks about the same hint which can lead to the answer in different ways.

That's the only time I've read something with Ryukishi talking about alternate truth, personally.


Among the interviews I know of, he only explained why he didn't want to give us the assurance that this game is solvable, without ever telling us if it's solvable or not. However in EP6 the characters state pretty clearly that the "games" must necessarily be solvable. In theory this should also be true for the game we are playing.

Maybe he was talking about the game being solvable with ep 1-4?
I don't know, but since he just finished to read 1-4 again, it could be about this part...
If it is about this, we don't have anything precise. Only a
"Beato managed to communicate everything she wanted to Battler at the end of EP4."

and a
Quick readers reach the answer in EP4, even more weak points are exposed in EP5, and EP6 gives a nearly definitive answer.

When talking about Battler's sin and Beatrice. So theorically this part is solvable in 1-4.

Also, a part that a lot of people forget way too often, to me;

"It is possible to solve the "who dunnit", "why dunnit", and "how dunnit" for up to EP4 at least, but this is from Ryuukishi's perspective. Just because it would be possible for him doesn't mean that it will be possible for all the readers, coming from their own perspectives.


Well, that's everything we have from Ryu. He is not really talkative.

[Jan-Poo]

There is only one truth in Rokkenjima

I find this statement extremely interesting. I always believed it, but I didn't know it was confirmed so clearly. Well It's a relief to see Ryuukishi actually said it.

[Rui Brennan]

Also, please don't have too high hopes for this. I might be very very wrong. Just assume I'm an arrogant newbie until proved otherwise, that's the best approach. Still need to finish checking a few things before knowing one way or the other.

From another newbie here that also tried to analyze the four games but stopped thinking :( , can you write some hints of your theory in your future post besides the explanation of the theory itself? That can give me the motivation to see things from another PoV and find that "single truth" that I also seek :) .

[TehChron]

ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff ..........

...Well, I admit I was dumb for a while. This really was a fair mystery from the start, and I was complaining because I couldn't see the answer. I can't believe I was this blind. I think I understand the single truth now.
I know crap about Beatrice-1/2/3 whatever. Lion/Yasu...Not a clue about that. Well, a clue or two.

But I think I managed to understand what happened in the island, and who is the culprit. I need to finish some University stuff and edit a few things my editor asked me, but I'll be back in around a week to present my theory with reds and screenshots to prove it. I can't believe that no one(including me) noticed that before. It's...UGH.

When I tried reading eps 1-4 as one single golden age book, the answer practically screamed at me. Will's "illusions" make a lot of sense when you think like this.

Well played Ryuukishi, you fooled me completely for a while. It's not only fair, it satisfies both Knox and Dine...It abuses a few wordings, but it satisfies them both,

Guaranteed, I could still be wrong, but it fits so well...And if I am wrong further investigation will prove it. Either way this is a fun line of reasoning.

Man if I'm right about this, it will be awesome.

I'm not the expert you are, but I'll take your word for it. Looking forward to seeing how it differs from my own suspicions.

[Renall]

This was answered in the game itself. Lyon "killed" Beatrice, because it was impossible for Beatrice to exist if he was there.That's the most immediately obvious answer, but I'm not sure that's it all by itself. That's the answer which most readily hurts Lyon, much like how the Tea Party hurts Ange. They were put there as spectators for a reason. To say Beatrice was "killed" by the non-existence of Yasu (well, so to speak) is a bit misleading; it doesn't make the concept of Beatrice cease to exist, it just changes the legend.

I think there's something more to it, because of that epilogue. That book in the coffin and Battler's brief presence at the beginning and end could be a hint, though he didn't really speak of Beatrice at all in the epilogue. Though it might be interesting if his answer to "who killed Beatrice" is somehow different from Will's.

Not that I'd fault Will. It's a correct answer, and clearly the one he was intended to reach. But that's my problem with Will generally; he reaches the conclusions he's clearly meant to have been reaching from the start. They follow from the evidence he's been presented, but I sort of feel like he's not as critical of the evidence as he perhaps could be.

[TehChron]

That's the most immediately obvious answer, but I'm not sure that's it all by itself. That's the answer which most readily hurts Lyon, much like how the Tea Party hurts Ange. They were put there as spectators for a reason. To say Beatrice was "killed" by the non-existence of Yasu (well, so to speak) is a bit misleading; it doesn't make the concept of Beatrice cease to exist, it just changes the legend.

I think there's something more to it, because of that epilogue. That book in the coffin and Battler's brief presence at the beginning and end could be a hint, though he didn't really speak of Beatrice at all in the epilogue. Though it might be interesting if his answer to "who killed Beatrice" is somehow different from Will's.

Not that I'd fault Will. It's a correct answer, and clearly the one he was intended to reach. But that's my problem with Will generally; he reaches the conclusions he's clearly meant to have been reaching from the start. They follow from the evidence he's been presented, but I sort of feel like he's not as critical of the evidence as he perhaps could be.Unlike Battler did, Will has no reason to really doubt the evidence presented before him.

Sure he may not like it, but he's not really in a position where he needs to be too critical of what he's presented with. I suppose thats just laziness.

[Jan-Poo]

That's the most immediately obvious answer, but I'm not sure that's it all by itself. That's the answer which most readily hurts Lyon, much like how the Tea Party hurts Ange. They were put there as spectators for a reason. To say Beatrice was "killed" by the non-existence of Yasu (well, so to speak) is a bit misleading; it doesn't make the concept of Beatrice cease to exist, it just changes the legend.

I think there's something more to it, because of that epilogue. That book in the coffin and Battler's brief presence at the beginning and end could be a hint, though he didn't really speak of Beatrice at all in the epilogue. Though it might be interesting if his answer to "who killed Beatrice" is somehow different from Will's.

Not that I'd fault Will. It's a correct answer, and clearly the one he was intended to reach. But that's my problem with Will generally; he reaches the conclusions he's clearly meant to have been reaching from the start. They follow from the evidence he's been presented, but I sort of feel like he's not as critical of the evidence as he perhaps could be.

Even so, I don't think this is such an important question.
It was a question made by Bern for Will concerning a crazy game she created herself by placing in a quantum coexistence two different worlds.

This question most probably won't even appear anymore, it born and died with EP7.

If I had to tell who really killed Beatrice ignoring Bern's game, then that's Battler. Both in the metaworld and in the real world. Once Yasu lost her will to play the game she created for Battler to solve, Beatrice died. So in that way Battler killed Beatrice.

[Oliver]

Random minor realisation.

Rudolf was "in elementary school" when the family already lived in the mansion. Mansion was completed in 1952. School in Japan starts at 6 years of age, elementary school continues for six years afterwards. It is therefore not possible for Rudolf to have been born earlier than 1940. He cannot have been younger than 20 at the time of Battler's birth, as he needs to be an adult for that, so latest possible birth year is 1948.

Japan was in the war between 1939 and 1945. While in Ep7 Kinzo says he wasn't drafted due to influence of the family elders, he nevertheless volunteered. It is not said exactly when this happened, but generally, birth rate drops during a war not only because many men are drafted, but also because families don't like to raise children in an economically and politically unstable situation, so being born during the war is in itself somewhat doubtful.

But the kicker is... That leaves Rudolf only two time windows to be born from Kinzo -- after 1940 but before Kinzo volunteered (so Kinzo went off with the intention to be killed when he just got a third child, the bastard) or after Kinzo was demobilised (no earlier than 1945) but before 1948. Now that time window is definitely while Beatrice Castiglioni was still alive.

That's even worse than with Rosa, what gives? :) Is Rudolf even Kinzo's son?

[Jan-Poo]

I exclude that Rudolf was born in the 45-48 timespan. That would make Rudolf way too young, and from what Kyrie said it appears that Rudolf has been a womanizer for a while before meeting Asumu.

So I think it's more probable that Rudolf was born between 40-44 and that Kinzo only managed to volunteer after a few years Japan was in war.

At any rate Rudolf must be Kinzo's son. Else Battler wouldn't be qualified to play Beatrice's game. And please... don't tell me that he's Krauss' son...

[Oliver]

So I think it's more probable that Rudolf was born between 40-44 and that Kinzo only managed to volunteer after a few years Japan was in war.

Which would make Rudolf 25 at the time of the revival of Western occurs with the so called "spaghetti westerns", which start with 1964 Italian release of A Fistful of Dollars. He's barely the right age to be part of the "Western film loving generation" if he's born in 1948.

Sorry, no matter how you twist it, something has to be a lie. :)

[TehChron]

Which would make Rudolf 25 at the time of the revival of Western occurs with the so called "spaghetti westerns", which start with 1964 Italian release of A Fistful of Dollars. He's barely the right age to be part of the "Western film loving generation" if he's born in 1948.

Sorry, no matter how you twist it, something has to be a lie. :)

He's probably just exaggerating when he says that. And besides, its a fantasy scene, there's no reason to get too serious about it.

[Oliver]

He's probably just exaggerating when he says that. And besides, its a fantasy scene, there's no reason to get too serious about it.

Then Ep7 says he owns a lever-action weapon. Exaggerating, you say?...

EDIT: And I think I have located the only case of a Western where someone uses a sawed-off rifle. Problem is, it's a TV series on CBS that ran 1958-1961 (http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2543163392/tt0051327).

[Judoh]

Sudden realization. What if it's not that someone was born 19 years ago, but that Rudolf was 19 when Battler was born?

[TehChron]

Then Ep7 says he owns a lever-action weapon. Exaggerating, you say?...

EDIT: And I think I have located the only case of a Western where someone uses a sawed-off rifle. Problem is, it's a TV series on CBS that ran 1958-1961 (http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2543163392/tt0051327).

Then what does that have to do with how old he is? He could be 3 years younger than Battler, own said gun, and still consider himself a part of the western-film loving generation.

[Oliver]

Sudden realization. What if it's not that someone was born 19 years ago, but that Rudolf was 19 when Battler was born?

Actually, that would change quite a lot. For one, pressure on Rudolf to marry would be far higher due to the associated scandal.

[TehChron]

Actually, that would change quite a lot. For one, pressure on Rudolf to marry would be far higher due to the associated scandal.

It wouldn't necessarily change much, I don't think. Ultimately, Asumu and Kyrie were both trying to get Rudolph to marry them. Unless there's something Im missing?

[Oliver]

Then what does that have to do with how old he is? He could be 3 years younger than Battler, own said gun, and still consider himself a part of the western-film loving generation.

First I wrote out a long answer detailing why I think it can be important.

Then I decided against posting it.

[Used Can]

Back to the Battler's Beatrice and Yasu's Beatrice discussion, it actually makes me wonder how that works. We were indeed told the reason Beatrice died in EP5 was because she had lost the will to keep playing. Featherine told us that reviving that Beatrice is impossible. However, reviving Beatrice seemed to be the main theme in EP6.

The whole deal about how people can change depending on their experiences is talked to in great detail in EP6 (with chick-Beato as an example) and in EP7 (with the parallel stories of Yasu and Lyon).

If I were to draw a parallel between what we saw about chick-Beato in EP6 and Yasu's stories in EP7, both of them were created to love Battler. We're also told the Golden Witch (i.e. the complete Beatrice) depends on several factors other than love towards Battler - amongst these things are the rumours in Rokkenjima, the Epitaph, etc... Beato's flashback in EP6 connects perfectly well with what we saw in EP7. Beatrice was created because Shannon/Yasu couldn't bear with having to wait for Battler.

I'm still wondering why the deal about how people's personalities are moulded according to their experiences has been brought up as something crucial. Sure, there's Lyon, but no matter what happens, the life Yasu has lead won't change. So, in that regard, Beatrice couldn't have died, unless Yasu has completely given up on Battler, to the point nothing will make her like him again. However, if Battler can do something about that, then I'd find Featherine's Red about not being able to revive Beatrice completely pointless.

[Disz]

Will,in your theory all I ask of you is to say that George did something bad and I am satisfied.Good Luck.

[TehChron]

Back to the Battler's Beatrice and Yasu's Beatrice discussion, it actually makes me wonder how that works. We were indeed told the reason Beatrice died in EP5 was because she had lost the will to keep playing. Featherine told us that reviving that Beatrice is impossible. However, reviving Beatrice seemed to be the main theme in EP6.

The whole deal about how people can change depending on their experiences is talked to in great detail in EP6 (with chick-Beato as an example) and in EP7 (with the parallel stories of Yasu and Lyon).

If I were to draw a parallel between what we saw about chick-Beato in EP6 and Yasu's stories in EP7, both of them were created to love Battler. We're also told the Golden Witch (i.e. the complete Beatrice) depends on several factors other than love towards Battler - amongst these things are the rumours in Rokkenjima, the Epitaph, etc... Beato's flashback in EP6 connects perfectly well with what we saw in EP7. Beatrice was created because Shannon/Yasu couldn't bear with having to wait for Battler.

I'm still wondering why the deal about how people's personalities are moulded according to their experiences has been brought up as something crucial. Sure, there's Lyon, but no matter what happens, the life Yasu has lead won't change. So, in that regard, Beatrice couldn't have died, unless Yasu has completely given up on Battler, to the point nothing will make her like him again. However, if Battler can do something about that, then I'd find Featherine's Red about not being able to revive Beatrice completely pointless.

The definition of "Revival" has always been murky at best, actually.

Chick-Beato regains the memories of Yasu-Beato in Episode 6, near the end. Independently of Battler, but also for the sake of rescuing him and understanding herself.

So rather than a "revival", more like a "reincarnation"? In understanding and grasping the true nature/purpose of her own existence, Beatrice is able to complete herself once more? In that case, while it's true that "That Beatrice can not be resurrected", it's more like she...fixed herself?

I understand that the connotation of a revival is someone bringing another back from the dead, so in that case, as it was Chick-Beato that came back to her full self under her own volition, it'd be a self-reincarnation, which is something done independently, I believe.

I may just be grasping at straws here, however. So if we put this in perspective of Yasutrice, then that would mean that...Yasu would have fallen in love with Battler again? Or decided to pin her hopes on him again, now that he needed her most?

Either way, the central trait of Yasu-Beato is "Loving Battler", right? Therefore, in order for Yasu-Beato to exist, requires that Yasu be in love with Battler, or else it's simply not the same thing.

So if the death of Beato in Episode 5 is due to the death of those feelings. Then Beatrice's revival would be to those feelings of love being rekindled? In that sense, Beatrice would be the "love Yasu has for Battler from 6 years ago". And Beato's revival at the end of Episode 6 is "The love Yasu has for Battler right now". Including the feelings from six years ago.

I understand that both points Ive made in this post are mostly unrelated...But I put a lot more store in the latter point.

Beatrice is Yasu's love for Battler. Chick Beato is an echo of that, and Yasu's love for Battler would have been revived in full at the end of Episode 6, hence the memories and personality returning.

[Jan-Poo]

Which would make Rudolf 25 at the time of the revival of Western occurs with the so called "spaghetti westerns", which start with 1964 Italian release of A Fistful of Dollars. He's barely the right age to be part of the "Western film loving generation" if he's born in 1948.

Sorry, no matter how you twist it, something has to be a lie. :)

Why Rudolf needs to be a fan of the spaghetti western in particular? Western movies existed a lot earlier and they probably arrived with some delay to Japan. I always assumed that Rudolf was part of that generation and not the one that grew up at the time of the spaghetti western.

If I look at golden age of the western movies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Age_of_the_Western), wiki dates it between 1930 and 1950.

Even if some of the spaghetti western are considered among the best western movies ever produced, they came when the genre was already dying.


BTW what it's said is that Rudolf only possesses a shotgun with a similar mechanism of those winchester, he doesn't actually possess the very same thing. This makes sense considering it would be illegal and he would have a lot of a harder time playing with it while living in tokyo.

[Will Wright]

Will,in your theory all I ask of you is to say that George did something bad and I am satisfied.Good Luck.

I seriously go out of my way to make George seem like the worst person possible in any interpretation of the game I have. For some reason I just hate him so much.

[Oliver]

Why Rudolf needs to be a fan of the spaghetti western in particular? Western movies existed a lot earlier and they probably arrived with some delay to Japan. I always assumed that Rudolf was part of that generation and not the one that grew up at the time of the spaghetti western.

Western genre had multiple extra-high worldwide peaks which would form a "generation" - silent movie era, 1939-1942 (look up Stagecoach) and 1964-1970 in particular (spaghetti era) are prominent, but the 50s had their share of high profile Westerns, which do have theatrical release dates for Japan at most the next year after the US release. It's hard to say if they were popular enough to form the "western loving generation" in Japan or not, even if in the US they apparently didn't, so I guess I'll have to drop Rudolf's age in particular out of this equation, as we can't really conclusively date him based on that. (I would think Gojira would be more popular at the time, but it's bloody hard to tell.)

But looking up the westerns produced an even more interesting question. A sawed-off lever action rifle is a very distinctive weapon, and it originates with a very specific character (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mare%27s_leg).

Now, that raises eyebrows.
It comes from a CBS TV series. This is well before the era of home video or satellite broadcasts -- or even a movie release, which was 1987. How exactly did Kinzo know it was cool? What exactly was Kinzo doing during the 60s anyway? Testimony shows him obsessed with magic at the time, rather extremely obscure (in Japan) US TV series. For that matter, how did Ryukishi know about it? I could not find any evidence it was ever aired in Japan, and there was no Japanese DVD release either.

[Redriel]

I seriously go out of my way to make George seem like the worst person possible in any interpretation of the game I have. For some reason I just hate him so much.

Of course, a telephone pole isn`t a lovely thing.

[TehChron]

I seriously go out of my way to make George seem like the worst person possible in any interpretation of the game I have. For some reason I just hate him so much.

It's the busty maid waifu.

And that tacky green outfit.

And how he acts just so damn cocky, yet he's completely useless in every arc despite his attempts to be cool.

I don't blame you at all.

[Jan-Poo]

@Oliver
Imho the answer is simply this:

There have been a number of toys based on the Mare’s Leg, from small cap guns to larger detailed toys complete with a holster.

[Oliver]

@Oliver
Imho the answer is simply this:There have been a number of toys based on the Mare’s Leg, from small cap guns to larger detailed toys complete with a holster.

That might explain how Ryukishi knows about it. But how does Kinzo? Or you wouldn't put it past him to see a toy replica and then order an illegal real one just based on how cool the toy is? :)

With all the silly things he is supposed to have been doing, I wonder when Kinzo had any time for his magical research...

[Jan-Poo]

Or maybe he bought the replica themselves.

I guess no one really wanted to believe that the stakes were just cheap paperweights. I guess you would say "how could everyone seriously believe that those junk were weapons?"
But guess what, they are worthless junk.

Despite all of his money it appears that Kinzo doesn't care too much about the actual value of the stuff he buys from america. A man like him could have gotten some real occult tools, but he was satisfied with those cheap paperweights.

So would it be that surprising if the four winchester were actually just toy replicas?

[Oliver]

So would it be that surprising if the four winchester were actually just toy replicas?

Would Rudolf not notice, if we're to buy the Ep7 revelation that he actually owns a real lever action gun, whether it's a legal shotgun or not? And what was everyone with obvious bullet holes shot with? Stake launcher?

EDIT: For a moment I thought that them being toy guns would explain why there's four of them. Toys for the four siblings. Then I realised that it can't be earlier than 1958, which makes the time window when all four siblings could have been expected to play together with toy guns very, very short, if not zero...

[Jan-Poo]

Illusion to illusion.

Beatrice's game has been a charade since the beginning.


BTW about Rudolf, I just realized that Japan most certainly didn't receive any movie from USA from 1939 to 1945, however as soon as it surrendered it must have been literally flooded with made in USA products, including all the movies it didn't get until that point.

EDIT: For a moment I thought that them being toy guns would explain why there's four of them. Toys for the four siblings. Then I realised that it can't be earlier than 1958, which makes the time window when all four siblings could have been expected to play together with toy guns very, very short, if not zero...

Toys for the four cousins. Alternately Kinzo used to play survival games with Genji, Nanjo and Kumasawa, he owned a whole forest to use as a battlefield!
Okay seriously I have no clue why he wanted four of them.

[DgBarca]

Illusion to illusion.

Beatrice's game has been a charade since the beginning.


BTW about Rudolf, I just realized that Japan most certainly didn't receive any movie from USA from 1939 to 1945, however as soon as it surrendered it must have been literally flooded with made in USA products, including all the movies it didn't get until that point.

Paperweights too, I guess.

[Oliver]

Illusion to illusion.

Beatrice's game has been a charade since the beginning.

But then so was Bernkastel's Kyrie Rampage story. Can't be done with toy guns. :)

BTW about Rudolf, I just realized that Japan most certainly didn't receive any movie from USA from 1939 to 1945, however as soon as it surrendered it must have been literally flooded with made in USA products, including all the movies it didn't get until that point.

That is certainly true, but that was the Akira Kurosawa era -- he started in 1943, made his most famous films during the 50s, and US film industry has been impressed ever since. :) Japan had it's most influential native films made during this period. Much of it samurai drama.

[littlegal100]

I have a small question. For people who believe that the EP7 tea party was just some well made story from Bernkastel, what does it say about that incomplete red truth Bern was going to say?

[Oliver]

I have a small question. For people who believe that the EP7 tea party was just some well made story from Bernkastel, what does it say about that incomplete red truth Bern was going to say?

The "This is all true!" one? If we subscribe to the dominant theory that red is confined to the boundaries of a single game unless it is sufficiently generic or specifically says it is not, it should be obvious that no matter how much of a hand Bernkastel had in writing that story, it can be "true" within the boundaries of that one game, but that says nothing about it being the truth of Rokkenjima-Prime, nor it prevents it having a divergence point not on the morning of the 4th like all of the other stories seem to, but much earlier, like 19 years in the past.

[Will Wright]

I have a small question. For people who believe that the EP7 tea party was just some well made story from Bernkastel, what does it say about that incomplete red truth Bern was going to say?

Can counter with the "only Red used by Beatrice counts for Rokkenjima-prime while other reds only apply to the game board"(after all, Beatrice did say that "When I say the truth I will use red) or even "didn't finish. Doesn't count."

[TehChron]

Can counter with the "only Red used by Beatrice counts for Rokkenjima-prime while other reds only apply to the game board"(after all, Beatrice did say that "When I say the truth I will use red) or even "didn't finish. Doesn't count."

Actually, we don't even have to go that far, we can just outright claim that since this is Bernkastel's game, it's entirely divergent from the other games up until this point. Or at least an entirely new gameboard constructed by Bernkastel for the sake of trolling Ange for the amusement of Featherine and herself.

[Disz]

I seriously go out of my way to make George seem like the worst person possible in any interpretation of the game I have. For some reason I just hate him so much.
*Satisfied*

:)

[chounokoe]

Actually, we don't even have to go that far, we can just outright claim that since this is Bernkastel's game, it's entirely divergent from the other games up until this point. Or at least an entirely new gameboard constructed by Bernkastel for the sake of trolling Ange for the amusement of Featherine and herself.
But doesn't that sound terribly like 'I don't like it -> doesn't count!!'?!
I still do not want to go down that path, because it would basically make all of Chiru practically worthless in any kind of reasoning.

[Used Can]

The definition of "Revival" has always been murky at best, actually.

Chick-Beato regains the memories of Yasu-Beato in Episode 6, near the end. Independently of Battler, but also for the sake of rescuing him and understanding herself.

So rather than a "revival", more like a "reincarnation"? In understanding and grasping the true nature/purpose of her own existence, Beatrice is able to complete herself once more? In that case, while it's true that "That Beatrice can not be resurrected", it's more like she...fixed herself?

I understand that the connotation of a revival is someone bringing another back from the dead, so in that case, as it was Chick-Beato that came back to her full self under her own volition, it'd be a self-reincarnation, which is something done independently, I believe.
The problem with this is Featherine's Red:

あのベアトリーチェが蘇ることは、二度とない。

The word used by her for revival is 蘇る, which also works for resurrection as well. She's basically saying the old Beatrice will never be back again.

I may just be grasping at straws here, however. So if we put this in perspective of Yasutrice, then that would mean that...Yasu would have fallen in love with Battler again? Or decided to pin her hopes on him again, now that he needed her most?

Either way, the central trait of Yasu-Beato is "Loving Battler", right? Therefore, in order for Yasu-Beato to exist, requires that Yasu be in love with Battler, or else it's simply not the same thing.

So if the death of Beato in Episode 5 is due to the death of those feelings. Then Beatrice's revival would be to those feelings of love being rekindled? In that sense, Beatrice would be the "love Yasu has for Battler from 6 years ago". And Beato's revival at the end of Episode 6 is "The love Yasu has for Battler right now". Including the feelings from six years ago.

I understand that both points Ive made in this post are mostly unrelated...But I put a lot more store in the latter point.

Beatrice is Yasu's love for Battler. Chick Beato is an echo of that, and Yasu's love for Battler would have been revived in full at the end of Episode 6, hence the memories and personality returning.
Well, I think a way to see it would be to remember the 2 Beatrices in EP4 and what we've learned about her creation in EP6 & EP7. We've learned that one girl fell in love with Battler, she waited him for years, but at some point she just lost all hope. I believe we may think of this person as the original Beatrice - i.e. the "Mother" chick-Beato was talking about. This makes even more sense if we remember Yasu was already playing the whole witch thing even before she met Battler. Anyway, after she lost hope on Battler returning, she "transferred her feelings to Beatrice". So, Beatrice's purpose was no longer to help Yasu play pranks and/or idle from her life as a servant, but to love Battler. If we remember, it was at this point that Beatrice no longer looked like Claire, but took the figure of the woman in the portrait. Then she solved the Epitaph and became the Golden Witch.

So, basically, we have proto-Beatrice, which is the one who fell in love with Battler, and final-Beatrice which is the one who received the love towards Battler from proto-Beatrice. In EP4, after battler failed his test, we saw two Beatrices. I believe the one who tested him was probably proto-Beatrice, who hadn't completely given up on him. However, after her failed, she gave up completely and only final-Beatrice remained. However, Battler beat the shit of that Beatrice in EP4, and then after all the events in EP5, Yasu finally gave up, and as a result killed Beatrice.

Now, why can the Beatrice we saw in EPs 1-4 cannot be revived? I believe there are several possibilities. 1) The original Beatrice is from 6 years ago, as time passed she changed too. Thus, she cannot go back to who she was. 2) She has no purpose, if Battler has remembered, then there's no need for the previous Beatrice to exist (i.e. the one who trolled Battler, etc.). 3) She's moved on. 4) Featherine's Red refers to something else. 5) There may be another person who also uses the legend of Beatrice and loves Battler. There may be other possibilities, but I cannot think of any.

I seriously go out of my way to make George seem like the worst person possible in any interpretation of the game I have. For some reason I just hate him so much.
Haters gonna hate.

I have a small question. For people who believe that the EP7 tea party was just some well made story from Bernkastel, what does it say about that incomplete red truth Bern was going to say?
It's hard to say. Sometimes I even believe that Red didn't even happen, since you cannot back-log to it.

[Disz]

EP8:

George is culprit.

Kannon is real.

Shannon and Jessica and all moms fall for Ghoda.

Ghoda vs George.

Ghoda wins and solves epitaph.

He becomes MAGICAL CHEF Ghoda.

Kinzo sacrifices sheep to god.

Ghoda and Battler later grow up to be best friends with Amasuka and go on great gun action adventure as the three musketeers.

Yes!:D

[TehChron]

EP8:

George is culprit.

Kannon is real.

Shannon and Jessica and all moms fall for Ghoda.

Ghoda vs George.

Ghoda wins and solves epitaph.

He becomes MAGICAL CHEF Ghoda.

Kinzo sacrifices sheep to god.

Ghoda and Battler later grow up to be best friends with Amasuka and go on great gun action adventure as the three musketeers.

Yes!:D

That would be possibly the most epic opening to Episode 8 that could be imagined, only to be followed up with a grinning BATTLER telling Kid-Ange "Got ya there didnt I? Ihihihihihi!"

[Disz]

That would be possibly the most epic opening to Episode 8 that could be imagined, only to be followed up with a grinning BATTLER telling Kid-Ange "Got ya there didnt I? Ihihihihihi!"
If that were to happen I would punch a pregnant lady in the stomach.Then cry myself to sleep.

[TehChron]

If that were to happen I would punch a pregnant lady in the stomach.Then cry myself to sleep.

Yes.

YES

Such trolling is indeed something to look forward to after all this time. It's high time Ryukishi pulled out all the stops here, we need something on the same level as Akasaka appearing out of nowhere and demolishing an entire detachment of goons single-handed.

Hope being fulfilled? Psh?

Love? Boring.

Murder? Passe'.

Umineko has always had trolling at it's heart, it's time Ryukishi took off the gloves and show us what hes really made of.

[Jan-Poo]

But doesn't that sound terribly like 'I don't like it -> doesn't count!!'?!
I still do not want to go down that path, because it would basically make all of Chiru practically worthless in any kind of reasoning.

But I always said from the time I developed my author theory that red truths only refer to the truth of the games when they are related to events that happens in the games.

It's not like I'm changing anything because I don't want to accept Bern's story.

Yeah, I don't think Bern's story is true and I don't like it one bit, but I'm not creating any new theory to bypass that red truth. Simply using what I've always thought about red truth and author theory, that statement Bern said only means "so far I haven't shown any fake scene", which I can totally believe.

As for her statement that she's not the gamemaster, how can I believe her, when in the ura tea party you clearly see her behind a chessboard?

Plus why Will used quotation marks when referring to Bern's "truth"?

And if it wasn't enough BATTLER tells Ange that the truth about Rokkenjima isn't a scary story.

I think there's more than enough here to doubt what Bern's has shown to Lion and Ange.

[ijriims]

Hmm... in the ???, I suppose Bern took the chessboard from Featherine and said she hadn't been a GM at all, so she had to make her own EP8 and gave the red text "this story will not be given a happy end"

You could say Featherine was the GM (観劇の魔女たち) or there was no GM. But Bern had no reason to lie behind the scene in the ???.

[Jan-Poo]

I don't think this is what Bern meant there. The way I see it she simply said she wasn't done being the gamemaster or that she didn't really mastered the game the way she wanted to.

Also Featherinne clearly stated in EP6 that she wanted Bern to be the GM of EP7. What do we do about that? Forget it was ever said?

[ArcticHelm]

Well according to Featherine, Bern wasn't simply the GM, but her "reader" which seems to imply that all the information was from Featherine herself and Bern was just there to spin it into the episode. Perhaps Bern had conclusions of her own that weren't involved in the story?

[Jan-Poo]

Was it actually ever said? Bern was Featherinne's miko, but I don't remember that the term "reader" was ever used for Bern.

[ArcticHelm]

It's possible I could be remembering incorrectly, I'll look for it again.


Edit: Bern says that she's the reader, and that the answers will be strangely interpreted since she has no love. Featherine goes further to say she can be the GM of the tale, and that she only cares about the answers not how they're presented as a tale. I suppose it matters if you think "reader of the answers" and "GM of the tale" are mutually exclusive or not, although I'm not necessarily sure they are exclusive.

[EndlessMugen]

There is one thing to ask of a trolling Ryukishi, what will appear in Umineko Daybreak?

[momobunny]

There is one thing to ask of a trolling Ryukishi, what will appear in Umineko Daybreak?

You'd have to ask if it'll come to exist first.

[Gohan78]

The problem with this is Featherine's Red:

あのベアトリーチェが蘇ることは、二度とない。

The word used by her for revival is 蘇る, which also works for resurrection as well. She's basically saying the old Beatrice will never be back again.


Red Truth concerning meta characters is tricky. What does it mean for a fictional character to be "dead"?
I think it means that the original author won't write the character anymore.
In this case, Yasu is satisfied that Battler reached the truth and has no need to play Beatrice anymore. Battler can make his own Beatrice with "magic" (=imagination) but she will never be the same as the original. Similarly, I can write a Sherlock Holmes novel but he will never be Doyle's Holmes, even if I understood his character perfectly.

[Smeckledorf]

But doesn't that sound terribly like 'I don't like it -> doesn't count!!'?!
I still do not want to go down that path, because it would basically make all of Chiru practically worthless in any kind of reasoning.

I wouldn't say that. I also discount Bernkastel's truth. That truth lacks similarity to most of the games we have seen up to this point, I am not going to say that Kyrie and Rudolph have not killed anyone in any other game but take a look back to the original 4 games. To me, we see some of 3 and 4 in Bern's truth but anything we saw in episodes 1 and 2 is pretty much ignored.

And if it wasn't enough BATTLER tells Ange that the truth about Rokkenjima isn't a scary story.

I think there's more than enough here to doubt what Bern's has shown to Lion and Ange.
But Battler has a reason to lie.

[Renall]

But Battler has a reason to lie.But ryukishi doesn't, unless it's the most pointed and important lie in the entire series that makes the right answer click properly and the lie is really easy to spot.

He has a reason to lie, but he can't, or there'd be riots.

[Number1-Syaoran-Fan]

I have a question. Don't judge me... Who is Yasu?

[Oliver]

I have a question. Don't judge me... Who is Yasu?

Is that a "I didn't read Ep7 and I want to know what the word refers to anyway" question, or a more deep and metaphysical question about the nature of this personage? It's seriously hard to tell. :)

"Yasu" is the nickname of a certain character, derived from the last name "Yasuda" who is a Fukuin student selected for service at Ushiromiyas at a tender age of six (sounds like someone we know, right?) and is later claimed by other characters to be "the man from 19 years ago", the surviving baby Natsuhi dropped off the cliff. Most of Ep7 is devoted to the life story of that character, who takes over much of Shannon's previously known biographical details. That "Yasu" eventually goes on to become Beatrice through solving the epitaph and being acknowledged by Kinzo as the only child of Beatrice-2 and Kinzo himself. (And thus both Kinzo's child and grandchild, yes.)

The text remains weasely about whether "Yasu" is equivalent to Shannon or Kanon or not, because at least once a character refers both to Shannon and Yasu as distinct people in the same sentence. It does apparently want us to believe it's the hypothetical character who plays both Shannon and Kanon, but it is not quite conclusive on the subject.

"Yasu" is also the name of the culprit in a very famous ancient murder mystery text adventure game for NES and other machines of that era, so the name is clearly a reference.

[Smeckledorf]

But ryukishi doesn't, unless it's the most pointed and important lie in the entire series that makes the right answer click properly and the lie is really easy to spot.

He has a reason to lie, but he can't, or there'd be riots.

If Kyrie killed everyone and then said she didn't care about Ange, do you think Battler would tell Ange that? There is more than one character in this story, maybe someone else will present us with the truth.

[Renall]

If Kyrie killed everyone and then said she didn't care about Ange, do you think Battler would tell Ange that? There is more than one character in this story, maybe someone else will present us with the truth.I don't think there'd be any point to that epilogue if Battler's entire POV after this entire series happened is "lol whatever she's full of crap, the truth is everything was cool, trust me, nah I ain't gonna prove nothing" and then have everything Bern suggested be confirmed.

If delivering on his promise required him to a spin a B.S. story, I'd have to reject him as a protagonist. He's gotta have something better than that up his sleeve for ep8 to even be worth writing.

[musouka]

I don't think there'd be any point to that epilogue if Battler's entire POV after this entire series happened is "lol whatever she's full of crap, the truth is everything was cool, trust me, nah I ain't gonna prove nothing" and then have everything Bern suggested be confirmed.

I think the point of the last part isn't that what Bern said was a lie, only that our perspective of it will shift once we see the heart of the matter. What Bern shows in the Tea Party is probably like reading a newspaper article reporting nothing but the facts of a killing. Knowing motivation can make even brutal acts take on a different light.

In fact, a key scene to me was how Kyrie acted upon finding out Rudolf was dead. To me, I can easily see that being spun in a sort of beautiful (if very, very dark) way. It certainly made me like Kyrie more than I did.

[Jan-Poo]

If Kyrie killed everyone and then said she didn't care about Ange, do you think Battler would tell Ange that? There is more than one character in this story, maybe someone else will present us with the truth.

Somehow I don't think Battler would outright lie to Ange if Kyrie and Rudolf are actually the murders. He'd probably say it in a more tactful way than Bern, but he would still tell her the truth. Now if it was Kumasawa, she would lie without a second thought, but Battler imho is different.

Also if he was going to lie, then at that point he would tell a nice story with a happy ending, but from the way he talked he gave me the impression he was going to tell a sad story.

[Used Can]

It makes you wonder how a story that involves murder doesn't involve some degree of evilness. I can understand the idea that motives may make you see things in a more understanding way - for example, Takano's case, or why Rosa behaves the way she does. However, in the end, murder is still murder. It's not even for defence purposes, but mass murder.

The only way none of them would be evil would be if they all died due to some accident, but that sort of resolution would probably be very tasteless, in my opinion that is.

[TehChron]

It makes you wonder how a story that involves murder doesn't involve some degree of evilness. I can understand the idea that motives may make you see things in a more understanding way - for example, Takano's case, or why Rosa behaves the way she does. However, in the end, murder is still murder. It's not even for defence purposes, but mass murder.

The only way none of them would be evil would be if they all died due to some accident, but that sort of resolution would probably be very tasteless, in my opinion that is.

No, I agree.

In fact, I think that the reason for the murders will be tied up in love as a motivating factor. Thatd be a nice twist on the theme after its been harped on as a positive force the entire story.

[chounokoe]

It makes you wonder how a story that involves murder doesn't involve some degree of evilness. I can understand the idea that motives may make you see things in a more understanding way - for example, Takano's case, or why Rosa behaves the way she does. However, in the end, murder is still murder. It's not even for defence purposes, but mass murder.

The only way none of them would be evil would be if they all died due to some accident, but that sort of resolution would probably be very tasteless, in my opinion that is.
Not necessarily tasteless, just very, very tragic. Many modern mysteries work that way, they build on the hopes of the reader for a great evil mastermind, who is the root for all evil and for love to save the day, but in the end all you can do is find out the truth. It's not like people can't still be happy after it, at least they know the truth and the dead can finally rest...

Of course there have to be people who did wrong things, maybe even evil things, but evilness does not necessarily have to be the reason for murder.
Sadness, loneliness, love, loyalty, those are all feelings we can understand, the only thing that keeps us from committing murder is because we have options...but in most of these stories the culprits just don't see any options for them left, maybe they don't even have any because of other characters faults.

For example that moment in Episode 1, when Eva is taunting Natsuhi and nobody stands up to help her, her kid is busy with her own problems, deep down she knows that she will never be accepted as a part of the family and that despite the fact that she gave up everything for it...
Would any of us really have been able to judge her if she had snapped and killed Eva? Of course it would have been wrong, of course it would have been sad, because had they sat down and talked, they would have seen how much alike they are...but they didn't and in that scenario they couldn't...

We still have to differentiate between two ways of a mass murder.
There is the method we know from Higurashi, planned slaughter of a great ammount of people, with no regards to their feelings. In that moment Takano stopped being a vulnerable little girl and became evil.
In Umineko there is still the chance that every murder is a distinct act on it's own, only connected by the culprit being the same. They could still all be acts of desperation. Like with Shion in Higurashi, practically the only murder you can count as purely evil is that of Satoko and she regretted doing it the minute it was over.
Of course we don't know for sure who the culprit of Umineko is, yet, but it is still possible that this is all just a string of unfortunate events.

[TehChron]

Not if a telephone pole is the culprit.

For him the absolute worst thats happened to him is that he's a pampered rich kid with a bright future who's only major failure in life was the fact he got the unreasonably hot maid to be his wife, and she used to be into his significantly more awesome younger cousin back when they were kids.

I mean, seriously. Im honestly betting that George is the mastermind behind the killings themselves, and he better have a damn interesting motivation for it. Other possible culprits I just dont see happening.

[chounokoe]

Not if a telephone pole is the culprit.
I never got the telephone pole joke...must have missed it or must have came from 4ch. Mind explaining it to me? Please...:heh:

For him the absolute worst thats happened to him is that he's a pampered rich kid with a bright future who's only major failure in life was the fact he got the unreasonably hot maid to be his wife, and she used to be into his significantly more awesome younger cousin back when they were kids.
Well, you can see it from that side, or you can see his perspective.
He has been born to an overbearing mother, whose only goal is to live her dream of becoming family head (on a remote island somewhere of the coast) through her son.
He has pretty much his whole life planned out by her, starting with what he learns, his freetime activities, who he is going to marry, even if that means scaring off any prospect of love that doesn't fit her idea of his future.
His father is a spineless wimp, who can't even stand up to his own wife, if he thinks she's being to hard on their son. The only thing he does is joke about the situation and tries to laugh off every problem in sight, while his son is desperately unhappy.
His whole childhood he had his younger cousin jumping in front of him, having more freedom to decide what to do, being better looking, having more friends and having parents who actually seemed to care about him and not about what he is to become. Still that younger cousin decided to run off at the slightest sight of instability in his life, which was the first chance for George to shine among his cousins.

You know, there's always 2 sides to a medal and I think you can sketch such a map for almost everybody on the island.

[TehChron]

I never got the telephone pole joke...must have missed it or must have came from 4ch. Mind explaining it to me? Please...:heh:
Ange outright compares him to a telephone pole during Episode 6, during the her reading of George's "confession".

Well, you can see it from that side, or you can see his perspective.
He has been born to an overbearing mother, whose only goal is to live her dream of becoming family head (on a remote island somewhere of the coast) through her son.
He has pretty much his whole life planned out by her, starting with what he learns, his freetime activities, who he is going to marry, even if that means scaring off any prospect of love that doesn't fit her idea of his future.
His father is a spineless wimp, who can't even stand up to his own wife, if he thinks she's being to hard on their son. The only thing he does is joke about the situation and tries to laugh off every problem in sight, while his son is desperately unhappy.
His whole childhood he had his younger cousin jumping in front of him, having more freedom to decide what to do, being better looking, having more friends and having parents who actually seemed to care about him and not about what he is to become. Still that younger cousin decided to run off at the slightest sight of instability in his life, which was the first chance for George to shine among his cousins.

You know, there's always 2 sides to a medal and I think you can sketch such a map for almost everybody on the island.
Yes, poor George.

Battler, on the other hand, rather than assume the fetal position at the first turbulent moment of his life, went the ultimate rebel route and told his father where to shove it when Rudolf married Kyrie practically before Asumu was put into the ground.

Screw being rich(?)!

And George didnt just seize an opportunity, he apparently made it as well, taking advantage of Battler's absence to woo the maid that had ignored him and his "greatness" when they were younger.

Every murderer thinks they're justified. Doesnt make the ones with such ridiculously flimsy justifications any less of a sociopath, though.

[Judoh]

I never got the telephone pole joke...must have missed it or must have came from 4ch. Mind explaining it to me? Please...:heh

It's from episode 6. Ange is joking about George being a boring person by comparing him to a telephone pole.

http://a.imageshack.us/img641/9650/georgecreepyvirgin3.jpg

[chounokoe]

Yes, poor George.

Battler, on the other hand, rather than assume the fetal position at the first turbulent moment of his life, went the ultimate rebel route and told his father where to shove it when Rudolf married Kyrie practically before Asumu was put into the ground.

Screw being rich(?)!
Well, I don't know if I wouldn't actually call Battler's act hotheaded and stupid instead of courageous. He did not consider it one moment how Rudolph felt about the whole situation, maybe he loved Kyrie all along, but the family (Kinzo) favoured Asumu and he just had to marry her.
Of course you can't expect a teenager to think about their parents feelings instead of their own, especially if one of them died, but even here there are two sides to that discussion. Battler also assumed a form of 'fetal position' because he just ran out on his family instead of actually trying to communicate with his father. He is as uncommunicative and ignorant than any other member of the family, just his approach is different. For several years he favoured to completely bail on his family and people who seemed to care about him, because he was too stubborn to accept that his mother died.

I would never say that George is better, but everybody on the island made mistakes and Battler is no blazing example of goodness either.

And George didnt just seize an opportunity, he apparently made it as well, taking advantage of Battler's absence to woo the maid that had ignored him and his "greatness" when they were younger.

Every murderer thinks they're justified. Doesnt make the ones with such ridiculously flimsy justifications any less of a sociopath, though.
Flimsy justification is always a question of perspective, but that is obviously something that regards personal moral values as well. If you believe in a universal moral that upholds society and forbids us to kill, of course, then they are immoral. In fact of course they are immoral, but morality has nothing to do with being able to understand someone who is desperate.

I think what murder mysteries can show us, among other things, is that there is more to murder than just a question of good and evil. If you just search for the 'evil mastermind' who murdered the innocent victims, then you will often end of with the wrong solution.
Sociopath is a word that many seem to have grown to throw easily around if it comes to murder, but I think it's just a quick way to brush such things off as something that could just never happen to them.

[TehChron]

Well, I don't know if I wouldn't actually call Battler's act hotheaded and stupid instead of courageous. He did not consider it one moment how Rudolph felt about the whole situation, maybe he loved Kyrie all along, but the family (Kinzo) favoured Asumu and he just had to marry her.
Of course you can't expect a teenager to think about their parents feelings instead of their own, especially if one of them died, but even here there are two sides to that discussion. Battler also assumed a form of 'fetal position' because he just ran out on his family instead of actually trying to communicate with his father. He is as uncommunicative and ignorant than any other member of the family, just his approach is different. For several years he favoured to completely bail on his family and people who seemed to care about him, because he was too stubborn to accept that his mother died. No, he didn't "abandon everyone that apparently cared about him", the exact circumstances have yet to be shown. We should avoid commenting on just how far that abandonment went.

But he did it, not because of denial about his mother's death, but because he couldn't forgive his father for the disrespect shown to her by marrying Kyrie so soon after she passed. It was something he found to be morally repulsive.

I would never say that George is better, but everybody on the island made mistakes and Battler is no blazing example of goodness either.Hes certainly more awesome. Which is just as good as being a blazing example of goodness, in my book.


Flimsy justification is always a question of perspective, but that is obviously something that regards personal moral values as well. If you believe in a universal moral that upholds society and forbids us to kill, of course, then they are immoral. In fact of course they are immoral, but morality has nothing to do with being able to understand someone who is desperate.

I think what murder mysteries can show us, among other things, is that there is more to murder than just a question of good and evil. If you just search for the 'evil mastermind' who murdered the innocent victims, then you will often end of with the wrong solution.
Sociopath is a word that many seem to have grown to throw easily around if it comes to murder, but I think it's just a quick way to brush such things off as something that could just never happen to them.Yes.

Willing to kill his own mother for no other reason than to "blaze a new path forward" or whatever. Manipulating someone into falling for him by convincing them that he is their only shot at happiness.

Totally valid scenario for arguing moral relativity.

Listen, Im not so naive as to claim that violence is never the answer, but you know...there are times when it's simply not necessary, by any stretch of the imagination.

Murdering people when there is no immediate threat to your life or the safety of others falls under the latter designation.

[chounokoe]

But he did it, not because of denial about his mother's death, but because he couldn't forgive his father for the disrespect shown to her by marrying Kyrie so soon after she passed. It was something he found to be morally repulsive.
Hes certainly more awesome. Which is just as good as being a blazing example of goodness, in my book.
Some find him awesome, some a blindly idealistic child with no grasp of the real world, I have grown to think that this line, in Battler's case, is pretty thin.
This disrespect you speak of would only exist if he ever loved Asumu in the first place, which is not proven, of course neither is the opposite. Why does he assume that his mother is right and his father is wrong? Because she is dead and can't do anything wrong anymore...but who says she never did anything wrong?

That is of course also because Battler so far has refused to ever adress the background of either Rudolph or Kyrie ... and that is exactly why the end of EP7 was able to strike us and Ange so hard. Battler refused to sketch out those two any further than necessary (possibly affraid to find out a truth that he already knows or suspects more about than we do) and this makes it so absolutely possible to sketch them as homicidal maniacs, because we have never really started to adress them.

Wether the end of EP7 was actually really the truth, a fragment of truth or a lie is beside the point here. It just shows how affraid Battler was, even in his own game, to show us anything about Rudolph and Kyrie, yet he was ready, without hesitation, to paint them as murderers or at least accomplices back in Episode 3.
I think there is a reason why so far we know the least about those two...not because they are culprits (at least not the central one) I think, but because they would shed a new light on the whole story...I think it's been hinted at enough already, that Asumu wasn't the innocent angle she is made out to be by Battler's actions.

Listen, Im not so naive as to claim that violence is never the answer, but you know...there are times when it's simply not necessary, by any stretch of the imagination.

Murdering people when there is no immediate threat to your life or the safety of others falls under the latter designation.
You are right there and that is exactly why I can't exactly believe in any George-culprit theories. It's very easy to suspect him, because he has an obvious motive and moments where he flies into almost sociopathic fury because of Shannon (Episode 1 in the study where he says he could kill for her, or Episode 4 where he vows to murder his family for her).
But still he could escape his life, technically even take Shannon with him if he really wanted to. It would even be easier than having to resort to actual murder.
He also has perfect alibis for almost every murder in every scenario, which would call for an accomplice who is doing more work than he himself and who would need a motive on his or her own. Shannon would come to mind, but again, if she wanted to run away with George, why not just do it?

Of course the cheap 'crazy lover' solution could be the right one, but you would still have to find solutions to several questions in the scenarios that couldn't be solved with George culprit or need heavy pre-arrangements.

If Shannon is not an active accomplice, why does she write the letters? (She did not plan to send them does not count, because they are IN a bottle)
Who commited the murders after the 1st twilight in Episode 1?
Who killed Kumasawa and Nanjo in Episode 2? And why did Shannon die first, then Gohda and then George?
In Episode 3, was Rudolph also an accomplice when he checked Shannon's body or did George kill the servants? If yes, why?
In Episode 4, how could he be found in the arbour, when Beatrice was still alive in the mansion? Why should the culprit die before the last victim?
Why should he show pity when killing Maria (she has no gruesome death in any of the first 4) but not Shannon?


I agree there are similar problems with the Shkannon theory, which is why I'm still working on a proper one. Especially the problem of Shannon's corpse being found in a way that needs special tampering that cannot be down by herself (stake in Episode 2&4, her body turning up on 1st twilight in 3 and half her face missing in Episode 4).

[TehChron]

Some find him awesome, some a blindly idealistic child with no grasp of the real world, I have grown to think that this line, in Battler's case, is pretty thin.
This disrespect you speak of would only exist if he ever loved Asumu in the first place, which is not proven, of course neither is the opposite. Why does he assume that his mother is right and his father is wrong? Because she is dead and can't do anything wrong anymore...but who says she never did anything wrong?

That is of course also because Battler so far has refused to ever adress the background of either Rudolph or Kyrie ... and that is exactly why the end of EP7 was able to strike us and Ange so hard. Battler refused to sketch out those two any further than necessary (possibly affraid to find out a truth that he already knows or suspects more about than we do) and this makes it so absolutely possible to sketch them as homicidal maniacs, because we have never really started to adress them.

Wether the end of EP7 was actually really the truth, a fragment of truth or a lie is beside the point here. It just shows how affraid Battler was, even in his own game, to show us anything about Rudolph and Kyrie, yet he was ready, without hesitation, to paint them as murderers or at least accomplices back in Episode 3.
I think there is a reason why so far we know the least about those two...not because they are culprits (at least not the central one) I think, but because they would shed a new light on the whole story...I think it's been hinted at enough already, that Asumu wasn't the innocent angle she is made out to be by Battler's actions. Hrm, I think they may just be a red herring, but thats just me.


You are right there and that is exactly why I can't exactly believe in any George-culprit theories. It's very easy to suspect him, because he has an obvious motive and moments where he flies into almost sociopathic fury because of Shannon (Episode 1 in the study where he says he could kill for her, or Episode 4 where he vows to murder his family for her).
But still he could escape his life, technically even take Shannon with him if he really wanted to. It would even be easier than having to resort to actual murder.
He also has perfect alibis for almost every murder in every scenario, which would call for an accomplice who is doing more work than he himself and who would need a motive on his or her own. Shannon would come to mind, but again, if she wanted to run away with George, why not just do it?

Of course the cheap 'crazy lover' solution could be the right one, but you would still have to find solutions to several questions in the scenarios that couldn't be solved with George culprit or need heavy pre-arrangements.

If Shannon is not an active accomplice, why does she write the letters? (She did not plan to send them does not count, because they are IN a bottle)
Who commited the murders after the 1st twilight in Episode 1?
Who killed Kumasawa and Nanjo in Episode 2? And why did Shannon die first, then Gohda and then George?
In Episode 3, was Rudolph also an accomplice when he checked Shannon's body or did George kill the servants? If yes, why?
In Episode 4, how could he be found in the arbour, when Beatrice was still alive in the mansion? Why should the culprit die before the last victim?
Why should he show pity when killing Maria (she has no gruesome death in any of the first 4) but not Shannon?


I agree there are similar problems with the Shkannon theory, which is why I'm still working on a proper one. Especially the problem of Shannon's corpse being found in a way that needs special tampering that cannot be down by herself (stake in Episode 2&4, her body turning up on 1st twilight in 3 and half her face missing in Episode 4).

Ive addressed those issues before, actually.

[chounokoe]

Ive addressed those issues before, actually.
You did? In recent posts or further back? Could you refer me back to those, please?

[Used Can]

Not necessarily tasteless, just very, very tragic. Many modern mysteries work that way, they build on the hopes of the reader for a great evil mastermind, who is the root for all evil and for love to save the day, but in the end all you can do is find out the truth. It's not like people can't still be happy after it, at least they know the truth and the dead can finally rest...
I really have no problem with the cold hard truth. However, Battler one said this one wasn't a sad or pain story. Of course, he never said it was a happy one. However, I don't see how can this be a tragedy when it is not sad nor painful.

Of course there have to be people who did wrong things, maybe even evil things, but evilness does not necessarily have to be the reason for murder.
Sadness, loneliness, love, loyalty, those are all feelings we can understand, the only thing that keeps us from committing murder is because we have options...but in most of these stories the culprits just don't see any options for them left, maybe they don't even have any because of other characters faults.
Yeah, but whether evilness is the reason behind the murders, that doesn't change the fact that cold murder happened in the island... mass murder to boot. I really cannot see how a person involved in this cannot be seen as evil, despite their motives. However, Battler said no one was evil.

For example that moment in Episode 1, when Eva is taunting Natsuhi and nobody stands up to help her, her kid is busy with her own problems, deep down she knows that she will never be accepted as a part of the family and that despite the fact that she gave up everything for it...
Would any of us really have been able to judge her if she had snapped and killed Eva? Of course it would have been wrong, of course it would have been sad, because had they sat down and talked, they would have seen how much alike they are...but they didn't and in that scenario they couldn't...
I can get Natsuhi's frustration and inferiority complex, but I honestly don't see how that could excuse her from committing murder. Even if she killed out of frustration or pain, she'd still be killing an innocent person. For me, she's evil disregarding her motive.

We still have to differentiate between two ways of a mass murder.
There is the method we know from Higurashi, planned slaughter of a great ammount of people, with no regards to their feelings. In that moment Takano stopped being a vulnerable little girl and became evil.
So? Natsuhi would be okay because she killed spontaneously, yet Takano is evil because she planned it, despite the fact both of them killed due to frustration - not to mention Takano's case was far worse than Natsuhi's? I honestly cannot agree.

I swear, I could understand if they killed out of self-defence or if they did it in order to protect someone else (i.e. assuming the ones they killed were about to kill them). However, I don't see how many other situations in which anyone would slaughter a lot of people (their own family to boot) and not being considered evil.

They could still all be acts of desperation. Like with Shion in Higurashi, practically the only murder you can count as purely evil is that of Satoko and she regretted doing it the minute it was over.
Shion killed because she was under the influence of the Hinamizawa Syndrome, though.

Of course we don't know for sure who the culprit of Umineko is, yet, but it is still possible that this is all just a string of unfortunate events.
I really cannot see how this whole "no one is evil" yet massive murder happens, without some sort of vapid motivation behind. I mean, they could be motivated by sorrow, jealousy, whatever, and I still don't see how that'd make them any less evil. Maybe I'm just too rational and I cannot see things with love, but hey, only 15 people died, it's not as if that matters, no?

Naturally, one could say that there's no such thing as an inherently evil person, because even a person that does a lot of evil can do good too, and I agree. However, the issue at hand is whether these actions can be considered evil or not, and I honestly see no reason not to considering this massacre evil.

[Used Can]

Not necessarily tasteless, just very, very tragic. Many modern mysteries work that way, they build on the hopes of the reader for a great evil mastermind, who is the root for all evil and for love to save the day, but in the end all you can do is find out the truth. It's not like people can't still be happy after it, at least they know the truth and the dead can finally rest...
I really have no problem with the cold hard truth. However, Battler said this one wasn't a sad or painful story. Of course, he never said it was a happy one. However, I don't see how can this be a tragedy when it is not sad nor painful.

Of course there have to be people who did wrong things, maybe even evil things, but evilness does not necessarily have to be the reason for murder.
Sadness, loneliness, love, loyalty, those are all feelings we can understand, the only thing that keeps us from committing murder is because we have options...but in most of these stories the culprits just don't see any options for them left, maybe they don't even have any because of other characters faults.
Yeah, but whether evilness is the reason behind the murders, that doesn't change the fact that cold murder happened in the island... mass murder to boot. I really cannot see how a person involved in this cannot be seen as evil, despite their motives. However, Battler said no one was evil.

For example that moment in Episode 1, when Eva is taunting Natsuhi and nobody stands up to help her, her kid is busy with her own problems, deep down she knows that she will never be accepted as a part of the family and that despite the fact that she gave up everything for it...
Would any of us really have been able to judge her if she had snapped and killed Eva? Of course it would have been wrong, of course it would have been sad, because had they sat down and talked, they would have seen how much alike they are...but they didn't and in that scenario they couldn't...
I can get Natsuhi's frustration and inferiority complex, but I honestly don't see how that could excuse her from committing murder. Even if she killed out of frustration or pain, she'd still be killing an innocent person. For me, she's evil disregarding her motive.

We still have to differentiate between two ways of a mass murder.
There is the method we know from Higurashi, planned slaughter of a great ammount of people, with no regards to their feelings. In that moment Takano stopped being a vulnerable little girl and became evil.
So? Natsuhi would be okay because she killed spontaneously, yet Takano is evil because she planned it, despite the fact both of them killed due to frustration - not to mention Takano's case was far worse than Natsuhi's? I honestly cannot agree.

I swear, I could understand if they killed out of self-defence or if they did it in order to protect someone else (i.e. assuming the ones they killed were about to kill them). However, I don't see how many other situations in which anyone would slaughter a lot of people (their own family to boot) and not being considered evil.

They could still all be acts of desperation. Like with Shion in Higurashi, practically the only murder you can count as purely evil is that of Satoko and she regretted doing it the minute it was over.
Shion killed because she was under the influence of the Hinamizawa Syndrome, though.

Of course we don't know for sure who the culprit of Umineko is, yet, but it is still possible that this is all just a string of unfortunate events.
I really cannot see how this whole "no one is evil" yet massive murder happens, without some sort of vapid motivation behind. I mean, they could be motivated by sorrow, jealousy, whatever, and I still don't see how that'd make them any less evil. Maybe I'm just too rational and I cannot see things with love, but hey, only 15 people died, it's not as if that matters, no?

Naturally, one could say that there's no such thing as an inherently evil person, because even a person that does a lot of evil can do good too, and I agree. However, the issue at hand is whether these actions can be considered evil or not, and I honestly see no reason not to considering this massacre evil.

[chounokoe]

Yeah, but whether evilness is the reason behind the murders, that doesn't change the fact that cold murder happened in the island... mass murder to boot. I really cannot see how a person involved in this cannot be seen as evil, despite their motives. However, Battler said no one was evil.
Well that depends on your definition of when exactly a person or an action is evil. Is a person automatically evil because he or she commits an evil deed, or is just the action evil and the person is just tilting towards a direction on a scale?
For me there is no such thing as inherently evil people, well very few and even they are often so disfigured by legends and myths that you can't tell the real person from fiction anymore, just as well as there are no inherently good people.

And evil person, for me, would be a person who does evil things just for the sake of being evil. Like if for example, Rosa went around the island and just killed all people because it is such an evil thing to do and she enjoys being evil so much. Of course killing people is an evil thing to do nonetheless, the question is wether a person did it for the sake of doing it, or for some other reason and was just to stupid, incapable, weak, disillusioned or whatever to do it.

So? Natsuhi would be okay because she killed spontaneously, yet Takano is evil because she planned it, despite the fact both of them killed due to frustration - not to mention Takano's case was far worse than Natsuhi's? I honestly cannot agree.
But let's see it from another perspective.
Natsuhi lived together with those people for all those years and did her best to fit in, yet she never did, she even gave birth to a daughter that does not at all fulfill the expectations of the family and has a sister-in-law that constantly rubs it in her face how a failure-at-life Natsuhi is. For her it felt like she acchieved nothing for herself and nobody cared for who she was.

Takano stopped thinking in human perspectives from a certain moment on. Her life was equally tragic and it is understandable what became of her, but on a scale I would still call her the more evil one. Instead of wanting to cure people (which was what her grandfather wanted) she only wanted to win her bet against god and stopped caring for people all together, they became her toys during those last few years. She not only killed them, but robbed them of their humanity.

Of course we don't know the scope of the true cuplprit's plan in Umineko yet, so I don't know wether s/he really is less evil (in an empirical sense), but there is a chance s/he might be.

Shion killed because she was under the influence of the Hinamizawa Syndrome, though.
But that is also only a higher output of stress hormones that heightens paranoia. In the end Ryukishi only made it more likely for something to occur that happens to many mass murderers.

However, the issue at hand is whether these actions can be considered evil or not, and I honestly see no reason not to considering this massacre evil.
Exactly, but does an evil act make a person evil? That's a question that was adressed so many times during the series, wasn't it?
Did Rosa do evil things? Definitely! Is she a bad mother? Maybe. Is she an evil person? No!

[Renall]

Murder is never justified under the input circumstances existing in the closed-off setting of Umineko. There is not one single valid reason for any person on the island to take the life of any other person, unless that death was because the person killed was going to kill others themselves (i.e. self-defense, but then we just shift the question of why murder was planned to the person who was killed).

I mean, murder may be understandable, but it's rarely if ever justified. If the true culprit has an intent to kill everyone, it's even less likely that there is any valid justification. No matter who you have a grudge on, even in broad strokes, there will always be somebody you have no reason to kill: If you hate the family, then leave the servants out of it. They just work here. Even if you think they're pawns of the family, Gohda isn't, so at least one of them has nothing to do with that grudge.
If you hate the siblings, there's no reason to harm their children. In fact, the Ushiromiya Group might well be better off under their guidance, as they at least initially appear to be better people than their parents.
If you for some reason want to kill the servants, pick them off when they're off duty. Why involve the family?
If you hate Kinzo... well, he's dead. Sorry.You can start spinning a line about how you had particular beefs but other characters "got in the way," but at that point you're just admitting that you're a sociopath who trapped him/herself in a situation where those killings of necessity were required to get away with your crime.

In short, the very best a culprit can hope for is a justified - but still wrong - reason to kill every single person, as failure to justify even one killing means you intended that somebody die who had nothing to do with it. The old "Love Killer" theory is about the only thing that ever did this, and it might still exist as the "Quantum Suicide Beatrice" idea that cropped up a few pages back. Otherwise I really can't think of a good justification for any one character that isn't pretty much flat-out sociopathy and evil.

[Jan-Poo]

And evil person, for me, would be a person who does evil things just for the sake of being evil. Like if for example, Rosa went around the island and just killed all people because it is such an evil thing to do and she enjoys being evil so much. Of course killing people is an evil thing to do nonetheless, the question is wether a person did it for the sake of doing it, or for some other reason and was just to stupid, incapable, weak, disillusioned or whatever to do it.

Exactly, but does an evil act make a person evil? That's a question that was adressed so many times during the series, wasn't it?
Did Rosa do evil things? Definitely! Is she a bad mother? Maybe. Is she an evil person? No!

That's an interesting thought. An Evil person is not the one who commits evil acts, but the one who enjoys them. Of course if someone doesn't enjoy being evil then she will only do evil things when she isn't in full control of her emotions (like Rosa) or out of desperation and so on. A really evil person however will do such stuff even in cold blood and even if it has no real purpose.

Kyrie for example has been definitely depicted as evil in EP7 tea party. Even accepting that half-assed greed motive (which was never really hinted in Kyrie) Kyrie had absolutely no reason to punch Jessica's face to the point of disfiguring her. That was totally meaningless. She didn't even had any grudge against Jessica not a single reason to hate her.

The Kyrie described in EP7 just enjoys being a killing machine, without the slightest remorse. In a way this can also be said for Rudolf, which seems to act like a kid playing the role of a bandit of a western movie.


In short, the very best a culprit can hope for is a justified - but still wrong - reason to kill every single person, as failure to justify even one killing means you intended that somebody die who had nothing to do with it. The old "Love Killer" theory is about the only thing that ever did this, and it might still exist as the "Quantum Suicide Beatrice" idea that cropped up a few pages back. Otherwise I really can't think of a good justification for any one character that isn't pretty much flat-out sociopathy and evil.

What I'm more concerned about is the intelligence of the culprit. I really do not want an idiot culprit. If a culprit exists he should have a reason to kill which I would recognize as an intelligent plan regardless of the lack of morality.

The EP7 didn't show me a particularly intelligent culprit. To blindly trust a suspicious person who claims to be a witch just screams gullibility. And to trust her to the point of initiating a mass murder is really incredibly stupid.

Who the hell can believe in the story of the 900tons of explosive? There are a thousands of reasons to seriously distrust such a claim. Even if it's true in the end, how the hell Kyrie could blindly believe it? If I was in her shoes I'd only believe it if I see it. And most certainly I wouldn't stake my life on it! Because clearly if that was fake nothing would save Kyrie and Rudolf from the death penalty.

And if it wasn't enough, why after both her and Rudolf recognized that the gold was worthless because you couldn't really convert it into money, they so easily believe that Beatrice was able to convert a part of that into 10 billion yens? Why they didn't even think for a second that it could have been a lie? Was it worth the risk?

The Kyrie I knew so far would have used chessboard thinking. The Kyrie I knew so far would have asked herself "why this Beatrice prepared four guns?! Why did she loaded all of them and left them here?"
Clearly there is absolutely no point to use four guns, you just need one and recharge it, at best you need two. This whole situation screamed "trap". The Kyrie I knew would have definitely realized that Beatrice was planning to make the siblings kill each other. Even if it's false in the end, in the situation that was the most logical assumption to make and Kyrie shouldn't have dismissed it. If that was the case then it could be easy to imagine that Beatrice held some grudge against the Ushiromiya family and wanted to destroy it. And what better way to destroy a family than making them kill each other?

In conclusion an intelligent person wouldn't have trusted Beatrice, wouldn't have risked to lose everything and to become known as a cruel mass murderer if there wasn't at least a 95% assurance to get away with it and to get the big prize. Kyrie and Rudolf didn't have half of that.

[Renall]

Moreover, Rudolf is initially reluctant until he starts doing it, then he likes it. That's just eight kinds of screwed up. Depicted as they are in the Tea Party, Rudolf and Kyrie are arbitrary psychopaths who enjoy the pain of others and who cause needless violence well beyond the point where it's necessary.

That makes a good villain in an shoot-em-up action movie, but not so much in a mystery.

[bigemperor]

Well i didn't played the game but i always want to know

1) How long is the game?
2) In general was the episode well received? animesuki like episode 7?
3) did it give answers or dis/approved theories like shakannon

i only want to know that and i will not enter here again until i played the traslation from whitchhunt :)

[chounokoe]

In short, the very best a culprit can hope for is a justified - but still wrong - reason to kill every single person, as failure to justify even one killing means you intended that somebody die who had nothing to do with it. The old "Love Killer" theory is about the only thing that ever did this, and it might still exist as the "Quantum Suicide Beatrice" idea that cropped up a few pages back. Otherwise I really can't think of a good justification for any one character that isn't pretty much flat-out sociopathy and evil.
But I wouldn't even want a scenario where the killings are justified.
I think that's a difficult thing, because it is a concept that calls for justice and like you indirectly said already justice and murder are two mirror concepts, because we consider murder as injustice.
I just want a scenario where I can believe why a character would come to the conclusion that murder is the only option and then feel sorry for him/her, because to me it's obvious that it isn't the only way. I want to see the full scope of tragedy, but at the same time understand that nobody actually wanted to harm anyone he cared for.

An evil sociopath by the way is something that is illogical in itself, because a real sociopath would be completely devoid of feelings. Sure, we often consider 'absence of feelings' and 'evil' to be the same, but it isn't.
A sociopath is also normally very impulsive and unable to coherently plan ahead, will disobey prefixed rules as often as possible and tends to have outbursts of rage again and again.
Yes, Kyrie/Rudolph killing spree from the end of EP7 was, in the way we saw it, a sociopath ending. But I don't believe that is the answer. I believe that the culprit is neither a sociopath nor inherently evil.

I think the culprit is rather clever, even intelligent, but he lacks social abilities that would enable him or her to adress the problems that cause the tragedy. I think in the end it will be everyone's and noone's fault that the murders happened. There will just be someone who carried them out.

[musouka]

In conclusion an intelligent person wouldn't have trusted Beatrice, wouldn't have risked to lose everything and to become known as a cruel mass murderer if there wasn't at least a 95% assurance to get away with it and to get the big prize. Kyrie and Rudolf didn't have half of that.

Then turn the chessboard around and think about it.

Might I point out that going by the shrine explosion during the summer, Yasu has been preparing for this for anywhere for three to five months in advance. Don't you think it's a little odd she could pinpoint with such accuracy that Ange would not be going to the island in said plans?

[AC-Phoenix]

Then turn the chessboard around and think about it.

Might I point out that going by the shrine explosion during the summer, Yasu has been preparing for this for anywhere for three to five months in advance. Don't you think it's a little odd she could pinpoint with such accuracy that Ange would not be going to the island in said plans?

I consider EP 1 as true event, since the META battles were just started because of it.
Following this, we can assume that she only killed the adults and never intended on killing the children. The bomb wasn't her fault as it was stated that the whole thing has something to do with Battler's sin.

Well I think a bomb that explodes after 6 six years could be considered 'an unknown device' at least if we are considering the games timeframe...

[Used Can]

Well that depends on your definition of when exactly a person or an action is evil. Is a person automatically evil because he or she commits an evil deed, or is just the action evil and the person is just tilting towards a direction on a scale?
For me there is no such thing as inherently evil people, well very few and even they are often so disfigured by legends and myths that you can't tell the real person from fiction anymore, just as well as there are no inherently good people.
Indeed, and this is precisely why I wanted to judge their actions and not them as people, because, ultimately, there's no such thing as good or bad people. However, if we were to categorise the murder of 15 innocent people, then that action itself can be considered evil, because there's simply no way to justify it, no matter how sad or tragic the background of these killers may be.

For example, I'm sure those kids who went on rampage and killed several people before killing themselves had their own complicated circumstances, but I'm quite sure most if not all the people they killed didn't deserve nor did they want to die. Thus, no matter what motive they had to kill people, their actions are still evil, even if they weren't evil people.

But let's see it from another perspective.
Natsuhi lived together with those people for all those years and did her best to fit in, yet she never did, she even gave birth to a daughter that does not at all fulfill the expectations of the family and has a sister-in-law that constantly rubs it in her face how a failure-at-life Natsuhi is. For her it felt like she acchieved nothing for herself and nobody cared for who she was.

Takano stopped thinking in human perspectives from a certain moment on. Her life was equally tragic and it is understandable what became of her, but on a scale I would still call her the more evil one. Instead of wanting to cure people (which was what her grandfather wanted) she only wanted to win her bet against god and stopped caring for people all together, they became her toys during those last few years. She not only killed them, but robbed them of their humanity.
I can make the same case for Takano. She went through that hell of an orphanage, to Hifumi's house. There she tried to keep up with her life, despite all the horrible things she went through before. Then shit kept on happening, she ended up losing the last person she held dear, and the ideals of this person were trampled on, so she cracked, and decided to have revenge on the town that (according to herself) had made her suffer so much.

But that is also only a higher output of stress hormones that heightens paranoia. In the end Ryukishi only made it more likely for something to occur that happens to many mass murderers.
Indeed, but because of that, Shion was practically not being herself. Whenever she's not under the effects of the syndrome, she never killed anyone.

Exactly, but does an evil act make a person evil? That's a question that was adressed so many times during the series, wasn't it?
Did Rosa do evil things? Definitely! Is she a bad mother? Maybe. Is she an evil person? No!
No, but depending on the extent of their actions, it certainly says a lot about the person in question.

[Renall]

Then turn the chessboard around and think about it.

Might I point out that going by the shrine explosion during the summer, Yasu has been preparing for this for anywhere for three to five months in advance. Don't you think it's a little odd she could pinpoint with such accuracy that Ange would not be going to the island in said plans?I'm a little fuzzy, in general, on how long Battler had announced his return leading up to the conference. But let's be generous and assume there was lots of time to write message bottles where he is present before the conference.

What about Ange? Everyone seems to know she's sick, but it seems unlikely she came down with anything well in advance. Logically, the message bottles ought to be depicting both Battler and Ange present, but they don't. So either they were written on incredibly short notice almost the instant the writer knew Battler was coming and Ange wasn't... or they were written after, by a person who knew exactly who did and didn't come.

I know which one I suspect to be more likely.

[chounokoe]

I consider EP 1 as true event, since the META battles were just started because of it.
Which is quite problematic, because Eva seems pretty 'the deader the better' to me and she does not seem to solve the Epitaph either. Also we have Kinzo appearing and Kanon being staked in the boiler room, all pretty blatant magical scenes, only we didn't know back then.

Well I think a bomb that explodes after 6 six years could be considered 'an unknown device' at least if we are considering the games timeframe...
The bomb does not explode 6 years later, it explodes the day it is set at exactly 24:00 and it has probably been installed by Kinzo when he moved to the island.

[...] so she cracked, and decided to have revenge on the town that (according to herself) had made her suffer so much.
Though that's still proxy-revenge, because actually at fault would be Tokyo who laughed her grandfathers ideas off, but she can't do anything against them instead become god through their help.
But let's agree to disagree, morals are something of subjectivity.

What about Ange? Everyone seems to know she's sick, but it seems unlikely she came down with anything well in advance. Logically, the message bottles ought to be depicting both Battler and Ange present, but they don't. So either they were written on incredibly short notice almost the instant the writer knew Battler was coming and Ange wasn't... or they were written after, by a person who knew exactly who did and didn't come.

I know which one I suspect to be more likely.
There is something that popped into my mind just now, so please accept that there will be probaby some mistakes in the idea that you may and should all flatten out.
Let's assume a part of the tea party was true and Kyrie and Rudolph really did kill people, let's not say everyone, but let's say they were involved. Maybe at least Kyrie got informed not to bring Ange into this from the very beginning, because they knew it would be dangerous.
That would again fit into, why Kyrie would make such a hell of a deal out of it, to make Eva feel pity for Ange, because she has 'such a terrible mother'. She just lied to get Eva to take Ange in, in case she really did die.
If Rudolph was in on it, it would also explain the 'I will probably die tonight' phrase and why he could inspect Shannon during Episode 3 and not detect that she was still alive. Maybe he did and just held his mouth shut.

But that would mean, that Hideyoshi is probably in on it too (whatever IT is). He inspected Shannon's corpse in Episode 1 and went with Rudolph and Kyrie to the mansion in Episode 3...maybe they didn't go because they suspected Hideyoshi and Eva, but because the three of them needed to check out something. If they actually knew someone among the servants was planning something and she got the idea that somebody (maybe besides Shannon) was faking their death, maybe that was the reason why she suddenly changed her mind to go to the mansion although she did not want to get food.

[Jan-Poo]

Then turn the chessboard around and think about it.

Might I point out that going by the shrine explosion during the summer, Yasu has been preparing for this for anywhere for three to five months in advance. Don't you think it's a little odd she could pinpoint with such accuracy that Ange would not be going to the island in said plans?

Are you suggesting that Beatrice Kyrie and Rudolf planned the whole thing together?

How does that makes any sense? For what it was shown in EP7 Rudolf and Kyrie have no other objective but to get their hands on the bank account card. However if they were contacted by Beatrice in advance then why they didn't get it from her directly?

Even assuming that Beatrice promised she would give them those money if they helped her killing off all the other relatives, why they had to take part on that charade? In the first place wasn't it easier to just blow up the whole island? Why would Beatrice need their help?

In addition, if Ange was left home because Kyrie was aware of the planned mass murder, then why the same reasoning failed to trigger in Battler's case?

No it wasn't Beatrice's idea to get Battler back at all costs, It was said in many ways that Battler coming back that very year was something that Beatrice really didn't want to happen. And Rudolf was shown to care a lot about Battler, even in that cruel and merciless tea party.


Granted, the idea that Beatrice and Kyrie somehow are accomplices would explain the Ange's case, and it might be possible. But then the EP7 tea party is still full of inconsistencies. It can't possibly have gone that way.

[ijriims]

I agree that Kyrie was being dumb in the tea party. But if Kyrie was accused of being dumb for not questioning Beatrice's claim of 900tons of explosives, then every adult should be accused of as well.

Basically all of them just accept that as fact.

And who was the first to pick up the gun? Eva, surely she failed to realize it was a trap. (Come to think of it, isn't there a similar scene in And Then there were none where the culprit placed fully loaded guns in one of the rooms)

Obviously the rational choice under that condition was for the siblings to negotiate with Krauss. Ultimately, getting less of a quarter of 20 billions was better than just 1 billion from the bank card and bearing the guilt and risk of murdering.

All the adults were dumb, Eva was being dangerously hot-blooded.


Still, apparently there was some illogical behaviour in EP7 tea party. Why on earth would someone sitting in the underground VIP room dressed in Beatrice's costume while this someone was supposed to be serving inside the guesthouse?

There should be just a maximum of 4 rifles on Rokkenjima (otherwise, in EP3, the adults would take the extra to give to George and Battler, since Battler was taught how to use the gun in case there was extra gun) , if Beatrice had taken all to the underground VIP room, how did the adults get the guns in EP3 and EP6?



Therefore, EP7 tea party should not be the whole truth. I suppose Bern's red should be like this: これは全て真実じゃない。でも、あなたの両親が犯人であることは真実だ

[Jan-Poo]

Yeah all the adults were pretty dumb, but at least they all were depicted as either not particularly smart (Rudolf, Natsuhi, Hideyoshi) outright retarded in their future planning (Krauss) or prone to let their emotions cloud their decisions (Eva, Rosa).
Kyrie however has always been depicted as a person who can keep a cool mind in almost every situation, a person who can understand the situation surrounding her better than anyone else, a person who can always make the best decision. In addition she's never been shown as a person that can take chances or that easily trusts others.

No one was more out of character than Kyrie in that EP7 party, at least inside the underground vip room.

[ijriims]

Kyrie however has always been depicted as a person who can keep a cool mind in almost every situation, a person who can understand the situation surrounding her better than anyone else, a person who can always make the best decision. In addition she's never been shown as a person that can take chances or that easily trusts others.

I suppose the scene of EP6 where Kyrie v.s. Jessica pretty much showed that she can quickly adapt to situation. She just summoned Leviathan, created a closed room satisfying Beatrice's definition, and understood that magic will be dispelled by a witness. For a person who was logical and realistic, she displayed astonishingly ability to understand the unfamiliar situation and acted quickly.

Still, I don't understand why Bern said Kyrie would be killing everyone in Leon's world. Without knowing the existence of explosive and 4 rifles lying in the VIP room, Kyrie killing everyone was even more out of character to me.

[erneiz_hyde]

Just finsihed Ep.7 and the first thing I want to write:

Who's U.N. Owen? A 495 years old witch? Why am I imagining a small girl with a red goth-loli fashion that can use Laevatinn as a plaything? :D

Still, tricks aside, after playing this episode I can say that the whole ep.6 is a troll. The whole ep.7 suggests that Yasu=Shannon=Kanon=3rd Beatrice, meaning BATTLER, Jessica, and George is battling over the same person.

Following Yasu's life story, I think Gaap is a personification of Yasu's mental disorder caused by the fall which probably damaged the brain somehow, making Yasu somewhat of a klutz (yet maintaing the high intelligence). Also, I think "Shannon" really existed, but somehow went away and her role was taken by Yasu (at the moment Yasu depicted becoming a witch). My point is, if this flashback is real, then I think I can sympathize with why the killings occurred.

Edit: Also, there is still one major riddle that might change how we view the whole story: WHO THE HELL IS BATTLER?

[ijriims]

Well, Shannon does need to be Yasu.

Because in Leon's world, there was no Shannon at all (Leon did not recall Shannon's name, while she had been supposedly working for ten years already).

If Shannon was a separate being from Yasu and Shannon was already working on Rokkenjima when Yasu came, then Leon should not be unable to recognize Shannon at all. As Shannon should have been working on Rokkenjima for quite a bit time as well.

Moreover, when all the senior servants resigned, Shannon said Yasu was the only senior servants left. This could not be true unless Shannon was the imaginary persona of Yasu.


To further elaborate, Yasu's full name should be Yasuda Sayo (安田　紗代）, official codename Shannon, but was not used by senior servants at all (they called her Yasu instead, a derogatory nickname). After successfully solving the epitaph, she was named Leon by Kinzo, so she now had the name Ushiromiya Leon as well. At least this is what EP7 main part wants us to believe....


On the other hand, the existence of a real servant Kanon was more unclear.

[Jan-Poo]

U.N. Owen is the mysterious character that invites the 10 protagonists of "and then there were none" to the island. That's a famous mystery novel by Agatha Christie


As for Shannon existing as a separate entity from Yasu, it is possible, assuming she was a servant that worked in 1980 which only stayed there for the regular 2-3 years.
Then Yasu somehow modeled her new persona around her once she left.

There'd be no problem with Lion not remember Shannon, because he wouldn't remember the Yasu/Shannon not the Shannon that might have existed 6 years before.

The only weak point in this theory is that you either need to imagine that somehow Yasu was able to change her own fukuin servant name, or that at one point in time two servants named Shannon existed.
It's hard to explain why Genji would give to Yasu a name that was already taken by another servant.

[erneiz_hyde]

U.N. Owen is the mysterious character that invites the 10 protagonists of "and then there were none" to the island. That's a famous mystery novel by Agatha Christie

Yes, well, I know that duh. Clearly you don't get the easter egg then. What I stated earlier was a reference to Flandre, a Touhou character whose theme song is "U.N. Owen was her?" :D

As you know, Ryuukishi is an avid fan of the Touhou fandom too (petan pettan tsurupettan comes to mind)


Also,


As for Shannon existing as a separate entity from Yasu, it is possible, assuming she was a servant that worked in 1980 which only stayed there for the regular 2-3 years.
Then Yasu somehow modeled her new persona around her once she left.

There'd be no problem with Lion not remember Shannon, because he wouldn't remember the Yasu/Shannon not the Shannon that might have existed 6 years before.

The only weak point in this theory is that you either need to imagine that somehow Yasu was able to change her own fukuin servant name, or that at one point in time two servants named Shannon existed.
It's hard to explain why Genji would give to Yasu a name that was already taken by another servant.

Yes, originally Yasu and "Shannon" were two different persons. It is possible that Yasu became Shannon, when the "Shannon" that Yasu knew quit, or something...

Because, isn't it possible that the name given to an already retired servant can be bestowed to a new servant? Also, Yasu's original servant name was never stated, and Yasu started extremely early in servitude. It is possible Yasu didn't have a servant name until the point Yasu became mature enough and held the name Shannon.

[Jan-Poo]

Yes, well, I know that duh. Clearly you don't get the easter egg then. What I stated earlier was a reference to Flandre, a Touhou character whose theme song is "U.N. Owen was her?" :D

As you know, Ryuukishi is an avid fan of the Touhou fandom too (petan pettan tsurupettan comes to mind)

Ah sorry I practically know nothing about touhou ^^;


It is possible Yasu didn't have a servant name until the point Yasu became mature enough and held the name Shannon.

Uhm I don't think that's possible. According to Claire's narration Yasu should have been called with her fukuin name but the servants preferred to call each other by surname and that's something that Yasu disliked. If Yasu didn't have a fukuin name to begin with, she wouldn't have any reason to complain.

Also fukuin names should be created using the first kanji of the real name, it's not like you can get any name you like, and I don't think there are many kanji that can be read as "shan".

[erneiz_hyde]

Also fukuin names should be created using the first kanji of the real name, it's not like you can get any name you like, and I don't think there are many kanji that can be read as "shan".

Actually, the first syllable in Shannon's name (紗) is spelled Sha, so the correct spelling is Sha-non in Japanese, and yes there plentiful kanji that can be read as "sha". In fact (砂) comes to mind. Not only does it look similar, it sounded similar (sa).

[Renall]

We assume quite a bit, of course, but for the sake of argument let's say a lot of servants resign at once, leaving "Yasu" the seniormost.

At this point, what stops her from claiming she's any old name she wants, as long as Genji backs her up on it? A real "Shannon" could exist, she could style herself after such a person (or simply make them up), and the new servants would be none the wiser. How would any of them know?

Of course, if their behavior is unchanged, then we have... a problem. With a lot of things that story is telling us.

[Jan-Poo]

Well there are several problem with that.

First, why would Yasu think she has any power to tell Genji what to do? Or where was it hinted that she knew Genji enough to ask him that troublesome favor? Everything suggests a cold relationship between the two.

Even assuming that Genji backed her up, what about Natsuhi, Krauss and more importantly Jessica? Didn't they think it was strange that suddenly Yasu changed name?

Also Yasu was attending a public school, so her identity including name and surname should appear in official registers.
While this identity was certainly forged through the fukuin orphanage, that was for the world the true Yasu's identity and not even Genji could change that. So you still need to think that Yasu's name somehow happened to be compatible with "Shannon", else Jessica wouldn't be so sure that Kanon's name must start with "KA" or "YOSHI"

[ijriims]

Ah sorry I practically know nothing about touhou ^^;


Too bad. You cannot appreciate fully Jessica's stage singing in EP2 then.

[SilverSyko]

Not usually one to post in this topic but I'll ask anyway cause I'm curious and I can't find any info anywhere else.

Just who the heck is Yasu? I see this person mentioned a lot now and I'm completely in the dark about who they are. I think they're the only character from EP7 who I know nothing about.

Don't worry about spoiling me. I prefer to stay up-to-date even if I'm behind on reading/watching something.

[TehChron]

Not usually one to post in this topic but I'll ask anyway cause I'm curious and I can't find any info anywhere else.

Just who the heck is Yasu? I see this person mentioned a lot now and I'm completely in the dark about who they are. I think they're the only character from EP7 who I know nothing about.

Don't worry about spoiling me. I prefer to stay up-to-date even if I'm behind on reading/watching something.

Sorry about the completely unrelated bit, but is that some kind of Battler-Luffy fusion in your sig?

That being said, Yasu is the individual that Episode 7 puts forth as the base personality for Shkannontrice, which Im assuming you've heard of before now? Thats more or less the short of it. Ill leave it to others to post the in-depth spoilers.

[SilverSyko]

Sorry about the completely unrelated bit, but is that some kind of Battler-Luffy fusion in your sig?

That being said, Yasu is the individual that Episode 7 puts forth as the base personality for Shkannontrice, which Im assuming you've heard of before now? Thats more or less the short of it. Ill leave it to others to post the in-depth spoilers.

Nah, it's just Luffy in the outfit he wears for the climax of the 10th One Piece movie.

And I take it Shannon has some multiple-personality disorder or something? And Yasu's one of these personalities?

[TehChron]

Nah, it's just Luffy in the outfit he wears for the climax of the 10th One Piece movie.

And I take it Shannon has some multiple-personality disorder or something? And Yasu's one of these personalities?

Other way around, but thats the apparent gist of that presentation, and supposedly Kanon is another one. But it hasn't been confirmed yet in the red, only strongly implied.

So it could either be the actual truth, or Ryukishi epically trolling us. Of course, we realize this possibility and are coming up with interpretations and theories that can account for this being a troll on Ryukishi's part.

[Ayu-ayu]

Yes, well, I know that duh. Clearly you don't get the easter egg then. What I stated earlier was a reference to Flandre, a Touhou character whose theme song is "U.N. Owen was her?" :D

As you know, Ryuukishi is an avid fan of the Touhou fandom too (petan pettan tsurupettan comes to mind)



Speaking of this, while I'm still catching up on the thread now I just finished Ep 7, I was wondering if anyone noticed that (in a certain sense) Ryuukishi07 validated the anime kakera in this episode?


Will refers to both Tsurupettan AND Dokkyun☆Hato when talking to Jessica about her school performance. :heh:

[erneiz_hyde]

Also Yasu was attending a public school, so her identity including name and surname should appear in official registers.
While this identity was certainly forged through the fukuin orphanage, that was for the world the true Yasu's identity and not even Genji could change that. So you still need to think that Yasu's name somehow happened to be compatible with "Shannon", else Jessica wouldn't be so sure that Kanon's name must start with "KA" or "YOSHI"

I consulted a japanese dictionary program, and find that the (紗) in Shannon's name can also be read as: Tae or Suzu. The second half of Yasu's name can be anything, but I think it will be a quite feminine name.

[Jan-Poo]

The recent post on the Epitaph thread made me think.

This guys asking us what's the homeland. Of course that was never revealed until EP7, however at the same time EP7 makes it clear that knowing which is the hometown is basically a necessary element in order to solve the epitaph. All the adults knew which it was in advance and Genji tells Yasu that it's Taiwan in order to give her a fair chance to solve the epitaph.

So if someone wants to know which is the hometown from someone who already knows the solution he's not cheating, it's actually Ryuukishi that cheated by not telling us.

He only gave us a very faint hint with EP5, and that's still after the 4 core arcs.


I think that there are two main elements that are necessary to solve this epitaph, at least for the people inside the games:

1) You need to know which is Kinzo's hometown (why the heck the cousins never asked to their parents?)
2) You need to know the chapel's inscription


Shannon is officially a dick:

Battler: "...Shannon, you've fed a lot of sake to Grandfather, haven't you? Hasn't he ever told you about his hometown?"
Shannon: "...The Master almost never speaks of his past. ...However, he speaks of the Great Kanto earthquake as though it was someone else's story, so he may have been living far away from the Kanto area."

"He may have been living far from kanto area"???
You knew that he lived in Taiwan! Genji told you!
You refused to give Battler that very hint that was granted to you?
You suck!

[Renall]

See? She and George are made for each other.

[Oliver]

He only gave us a very faint hint with EP5, and that's still after the 4 core arcs.

Um. I have discovered the Taiwan connection just based on Ep3 and some history researched, as I have previously mentioned. It's not like I didn't hear about the Taiwan connection before that, but it is possible to arrive at it before Ep5.

2) You need to know the chapel's inscription

Actually... Why chapel? The guesthouse is suspiciously completed just around the time the epitaph goes up.

[Renall]

Yeah, but Taiwan isn't confirmed in any way and Kinzo could have lived anywhere off the information we actually have available. I think Jan-Poo's point is that, for absence of any actual reference to the location, you do have to take a guess and see if the Taiwan Theory makes sense from there. It does, but that doesn't really mean you had any reason to think of Taiwan besides random speculation.

[Oliver]

No, I guess it isn't. My logic leaves it a tossup between Taiwan and Okinawa with a slight bent towards Taiwan. Do we have any other words to which the key may apply though?

I think I'm going to bruteforce it. :) That is, I'll search the entire translated text for a word "qilian" can be applied to as the key.

[Jan-Poo]

Um. I have discovered the Taiwan connection just based on Ep3 and some history researched, as I have previously mentioned. It's not like I didn't hear about the Taiwan connection before that, but it is possible to arrive at it before Ep5.

Actually... Why chapel? The guesthouse is suspiciously completed just around the time the epitaph goes up.

I wish you had told me about Taiwan before the qilian theory was proposed, not thinking about the fact that the Japanese territory was wider at the time Kinzo was young was the biggest flaw in my reasonings.


But remind me exactly... what was the connection you made?


as for the chapel, it was a lot better than the guesthouse. First off it's never been Kinzo that wanted the guesthouse built but Krauss. Second the chapel was said to be very important for Kinzo even so there was apparently no use for it. The fact that Kinzo didn't want people to run around it was yet another hint (and EP7 even confirms this). Then in EP2 part of the inscription was revealed and it basically says: "hello! this is the door to the golden land"
Plus the mere fact that Ryuukishi was so mysterious about it, was very suspicious.
Lastly in EP3 Eva says that she will go to a place fit for sacrifices.


In fact I think it is a lot easier to make a connection between the chapel inscription and the epitaph (and therefore to quadrillion) than thinking that "kyou" must be read as the numeral "ten quadrillion" (there are a hundred of different kanji with that reading! A hundred!!!) and then you need to think you only need 1/10 of it, and then you need to translate it in english... what the hell?!

Rosa claiming that Eva would have never solved the epitaph if it wasn't for her suggestion was total bullshit. That was the worst hint ever and totally unnecessary.

[Oliver]

But remind me exactly... what was the connection you made?

It was well after it was proposed. I actually knew about it and immediately forgot. :) Then I stumbled on Taiwan when analysing Ep3.

My logic went like this:

Rudolf says "..But the townscape had changed completely from Father's time. After all, it was caught up in the war, wasn't it? It was impossible to even figure out where Father actually lived."
Japanese mainland was only bombed for a very short period, because for most of the war, land-based bombers simply didn't have the range and IJN ruled the seas, so carriers couldn't get close enough. Japanese mainland was never invaded with the exception of Okinawa (which isn't mainland). Sakhalin and the related islands were taken relatively quietly as far as I am aware.
The first air raid listed is actually the air raid on Taiwan in 1943, which resulted in displacing 10000 people. Other than Taiwan, only the Kanto area, Okinawa, Hiroshima and Nagasaki actually suffered enough bombing or land battles to "change completely".
"that place has had a remarkable revival." Therefore it has to be a population center in 1986.
Eva went there as a vacation and has no problem dismissing it as such. Therefore this is a suitable vacation spot for a wealthy Japanese woman. That basically rules out everything except Okinawa and Taiwan. (And if I was mistaken about Sakhalin, it too, because there's no way Eva would go to USSR for a vacation.)
Eva actually prefers foreign countries because she mentions different ones every time the issue of vacations comes up. That makes Taiwan preferable.


Plus the mere fact that Ryuukishi was so mysterious about it, was very suspicious.

Everything he's so mysterious about makes me doubtful and it's not like I don't have the computing power for a brute force search. :)

[Jan-Poo]

You know what was the problem about that?
At the time I read EP3 it totally looked like they were saying that Eva went to Odawara. That's because nothing hinted that the adults knew anything about the real homeland, so it was unthinkable that Eva went to a place no one knew anything about.

The translation was changed after EP5. You were able to understand it correctly because you re-analyzed that part recently.

[Oliver]

The translation was changed after EP5. You were able to understand it correctly because you re-analyzed that part recently.

"I believe all of us siblings are thinking of the same place."

Did that part change too? Because, well, I analysed it back when Ep6 translation wasn't out.

[Jan-Poo]

I think that's exactly the sentence that was changed. I might be wrong...

[Judoh]

I haven't updated my translation for the question arcs so the script I have is the one before the update.

I just checked and that line was there before it.

[Jan-Poo]

How old it is? They made several updates. If you find the sentence

"Six years ago, you might've been mistaken for a servant's daughter who lent a hand at your parent's work"

then it isn't the oldest one.

[Judoh]

It's version 4.2

[Oliver]

Meh. The entire text contains something on the scale of 700 unique 11 and 13 letter English words.

Of them, only four words contain every letter in 'qilian':

liquidation
quadrillion
qualification
unqualified

If we take a long shot and remember that the new name of the original Qilian station, "Shipai", is also a six-letter word, more words fit, but none of them sound particularly meaningful:

atmospheric
craftsmanship
hospitality
philosophical
relationships
sophisticated
sportsmanship
swordsmanship
sympathetic
sympathized
unhappiness

[Jan-Poo]

Okay I managed to find an older version of the WH patch. This is how that line looked like when I read it:

"............That is definitely where he was born, but I think Odawara probably wasn't a beloved homeland for Father. I believe that all of the siblings have the same feelings regarding that."

[Oliver]

Japanese is too laconic for it's own good. :)

[Jan-Poo]

True. Plus the fact that everyone thinks "Taiwan" and no one mention it was definitely a narrative artifact.

[cmos]

I think that there are two main elements that are necessary to solve this epitaph, at least for the people inside the games:

1) You need to know which is Kinzo's hometown (why the heck the cousins never asked to their parents?)
After reading ep7 I thought about this. The original episodes are fictions, written by Beatrice, they describe things from her perspective. Beatrice didn't know about Kinzo's hometown before Genji told her, so maybe she thought that the relatives don't know it either, not realizing that it's a common knowledge among them. Makes you wonder how accurate other descriptions and characterizations are.

[Renall]

I dunno, there's something about Bernkastel's discussion of the epitaph solution that makes me question that. She mentions how difficult it is to actually wrangle the location out of anybody in the stories; they all seem to conspicuously avoid saying it outright (until ep7, anyway).

That, to me, speaks of an author (or authors) who don't actually know Kinzo's beloved hometown, but do know his children probably know. This would apply only to ep1-4, but possibly to ep5-6 as well. Of course, that then makes you ask how anyone could write about Eva solving the epitaph without knowing the actual answer themselves (especially since the ep3 details strongly suggest they do know of the railroad part), but I guess they could pretend they knew. Not like anything exists anymore to check.

[kiby]

Just finished ep 7 a few hours ago and I had to think about it ...

It's pretty obvious that the "multiple author theory" helps to solve two kind of possibilities in the cat box. One would be yasu's fantasy and the other one would be the "truth" we saw in the tea party. The problem is we are surching "The Truth" (well it's the first goal that was presented in umineko).

Still I do not want to believe that umineko is just a acumulation of fake stories till we have the true one, because it would mean that only ep8 is important after all.
But i guess we have two choises....wait for ep8 or play again and again beato's game like bern does.

As I've found leon and will too cool I want them back in ep 8 (ok it's not related to the mystery ^^")

[Ayu-ayu]

Thinking back on Yasu and his/her injury, is it possible that the damage was to their face rather than their private parts? Serious damage to the face is another reason some think themselves ruined for marriage.

If so, and they have to literally "wear a face" all the time (presumably with a good make-up job), then this changing of identities could have a more literal meaning. Furthermore, it would be easy to fake a mutilated face if their real face is hideously disfigured underneath the make-up.

[erneiz_hyde]

Thinking back on Yasu and his/her injury, is it possible that the damage was to their face rather than their private parts? Serious damage to the face is another reason some think themselves ruined for marriage.

If so, and they have to literally "wear a face" all the time (presumably with a good make-up job), then this changing of identities could have a more literal meaning. Furthermore, it would be easy to fake a mutilated face if their real face is hideously disfigured underneath the make-up.

...difficult. yasu sustained the injury not a year after s/he was born, and I find it hard to imagine very little kids are already a hollywood-grade make-up artist. Unless there's someone's backing (Genji comes to mind), but there's no hint pointing at that at all.

[chounokoe]

Thinking back on Yasu and his/her injury, is it possible that the damage was to their face rather than their private parts? Serious damage to the face is another reason some think themselves ruined for marriage.

If so, and they have to literally "wear a face" all the time (presumably with a good make-up job), then this changing of identities could have a more literal meaning. Furthermore, it would be easy to fake a mutilated face if their real face is hideously disfigured underneath the make-up.

I thought about that too, but it doesn't really work when we suppose that the injury occured when s/he dropped down the cliff as an infant. The scene at the end implies that it was something that Yasu was not fully aware off and a disfigured ace would be rather hard to hide from Yasu...unless they entered her sleeping quarter every night and applied heavy make-up to her face and taught her to never wash her face...

But I thought of something else just now, when I read this.
There is still an event that we cannot really trace back to an actuall event and that is the servant that fell down the stairs and suffered a horrible injury that lead him or her to leave Rokkenjima.
The sources to this are rather blurry, some say that ghost story was around when Yasu started, but thinking about it, the legend of Beatrice was not that strong among the servants (it was more about random ghosts).

So what if that is an event that actually happened and Yasu suffered that injury they were talking about in exactly that incident. It always bothered me when they were talking about that servant and the injury (not even just an injury, but a huge injury 大怪我), but it never got any more detailed. And then as you said, we have greatly disfigured corpses randomly popping up...just as if somebody was hiding something through that alteration.

[Jan-Poo]

I came to the conclusion that Yasu's wound is a very hideous scar on the chest.

[Ayu-ayu]

I thought about that too, but it doesn't really work when we suppose that the injury occured when s/he dropped down the cliff as an infant. The scene at the end implies that it was something that Yasu was not fully aware off and a disfigured ace would be rather hard to hide from Yasu...unless they entered her sleeping quarter every night and applied heavy make-up to her face and taught her to never wash her face...

Good point, I was having a hard time thinking how it would go back to being an infant, although perhaps that's why Yasu's narrative doesn't start until they are old enough to consider it. But yeah, it doesn't sound like it would work out too well.


But I thought of something else just now, when I read this.
There is still an event that we cannot really trace back to an actuall event and that is the servant that fell down the stairs and suffered a horrible injury that lead him or her to leave Rokkenjima.
The sources to this are rather blurry, some say that ghost story was around when Yasu started, but thinking about it, the legend of Beatrice was not that strong among the servants (it was more about random ghosts).

So what if that is an event that actually happened and Yasu suffered that injury they were talking about in exactly that incident. It always bothered me when they were talking about that servant and the injury (not even just an injury, but a huge injury 大怪我), but it never got any more detailed. And then as you said, we have greatly disfigured corpses randomly popping up...just as if somebody was hiding something through that alteration.


Now that's interesting. I did think it was a bit odd about that flashback (in that Yasu seems to be complaining to Nanjo and Genji at a more mature age at some unspecified point in time), but if it was a more recent injury, it makes a good bit more sense, as well as why the "servant that fell down the stairs" story keeps popping up.

[erneiz_hyde]

But I thought of something else just now, when I read this.
There is still an event that we cannot really trace back to an actuall event and that is the servant that fell down the stairs and suffered a horrible injury that lead him or her to leave Rokkenjima.
The sources to this are rather blurry, some say that ghost story was around when Yasu started, but thinking about it, the legend of Beatrice was not that strong among the servants (it was more about random ghosts).

So what if that is an event that actually happened and Yasu suffered that injury they were talking about in exactly that incident. It always bothered me when they were talking about that servant and the injury (not even just an injury, but a huge injury 大怪我), but it never got any more detailed. And then as you said, we have greatly disfigured corpses randomly popping up...just as if somebody was hiding something through that alteration.

What if that servant who fell down the stairs is instead the original Shannon that Yasu based her "Shannon" from?

[cmos]

Beatrice blames Genji and Nanjo for that they saved her and made her live with such body at some point after she solved the epitaph, became the head and received qualifications to know all the truth. Before that she had no right to speak to them in such tone. If that is more recent injury, I think that she would know that they saved her for a long time already and maybe somehow get over it. It makes more sense if the injury was when she wasn't conscious and therefore didn't know until recently that they saved her.

[Jan-Poo]

Heh, I'm sorry but the connection is very far-fetched. The episode of the servant that got injured happened very recently, since the portrait was already displayed. However Yasu's injury goes back to when she was a newborn baby. There's at least a 17 years difference.

[LyricalAura]

After reading ep7 I thought about this. The original episodes are fictions, written by Beatrice, they describe things from her perspective. Beatrice didn't know about Kinzo's hometown before Genji told her, so maybe she thought that the relatives don't know it either, not realizing that it's a common knowledge among them. Makes you wonder how accurate other descriptions and characterizations are.

On the other hand, since Eva actually took a trip over to Taiwan to check it out, it seems like the adults seriously discussed it as a possibility at some point. It would be kind of strange for some of that not to have leaked out to the servants along the way unless they were being excessively secretive about it. As long as the trip didn't happen until after Yasu solved the epitaph, there wouldn't be any contradiction with her needing a hint... Did that trip have any kind of date associated with it?

I'll yank this bit over from the epitaph thread:

There is also Shannon in EP1 that says that Kinzo's hometown was probably very far from the Kanto region.

Idle speculation here. If she did know that the adults knew, it's interesting that she didn't make any effort to give the cousins information parity during this scene. Since the epitaph isn't solvable without that information, maybe she never intended for them to properly challenge it in the first place? She's got this big fantasy murder performance laid out for them, so maybe she wanted to make sure they'd focus on that.

[Jan-Poo]

Maybe she wanted a miracle even bigger than the one Kinzo wished for.
But seriously Battler (the piece) really had zero chances to solve the epitaph. Yasu herself needed several days to solve it and she knew the two basic hints well.

Battler didn't know either of those. At least on EP2 he was brought in front of the chapel, but as for any other episodes he had absolutely no way to remember that place.

[LyricalAura]

But on the other hand, Beatrice doesn't care whether the epitaph is solved or not. She gains nothing regardless of the outcome. So to the extent that she's looking for a miracle to occur, it doesn't seem like it can be connected to successfully solving the epitaph.

[Jan-Poo]

True. But then I wonder why she wrote those letters for.
Anyway I'm fairly sure now that her real objective is to test the cousins somehow, at least Jessica, Battler and George. I just can't quite understand what kind of test this is supposed to be.

[Ayu-ayu]

Heh, I'm sorry but the connection is very far-fetched. The episode of the servant that got injured happened very recently, since the portrait was already displayed. However Yasu's injury goes back to when she was a newborn baby. There's at least a 17 years difference.

Was the portrait already displayed? I got the impression that the story of the servant could be older, as a handed-down anecdote, but maybe I'm misremembering the context. I know that the baby was said to be injured, but it would be interesting if the injury referred to in the "flashback" Lyon sees near the end was not referring to the same injury--the scene doesn't give us any context in that particular case.

But yes, the connection is feeling a bit strained now.

On a side note, I just re-watched all the Umineko Motion Graphics in reverse order, and it was a bit unnerving how many of the selected quotes used in them seemed to fit together after finishing Requiem. It feels so....close. If the whole Yasu/Lyon thing is a troll (and I'm not saying it is or isn't--I remain on the fence for now), it certainly is a good enough one to let the theatergoers sleep easily in the meantime. But I'm not ready to stop thinking yet.

[Jan-Poo]

Yep it was revealed in EP6:

Jessica: "Yeah, was it last year or the year before? Didn't one servant fall down some stairs and get so badly injured that they quit? Wasn't there a rumor that it was Beatrice's curse?` Ihhihihihi~!"

Jessica told it like a ghost story, trying to scare Erika, but Erika just laughed disdainfully.

Battler: "C, come on, that's creepy... It was probably just an accident, right? Just a coincidence?"

George: "......It happened just after Grandfather had this portrait hung here, so it was probably the year before last. ......In fact, if I remember, this here is the staircase that servant fell down, right?"

[Kitsu]

Battler: "C, come on, that's creepy... It was probably just an accident, right? Just a coincidence?"

George: "......It happened just after Grandfather had this portrait hung here, so it was probably the year before last. ......In fact, if I remember, this here is the staircase that servant fell down, right?"

And this made me wonder...
What if there was a real servant called Shannon who was nice to Yasu? You know one time one of the seven maids of purgatory called out both Shannon and Yasu. So what if the servant who fell down the stairs was the real Shannon and Yasu then took her place as Shannon?

[Jan-Poo]

While I think it's possible that a real Shannon existed, I don't think it's possible that it's the servant that fell from the stairs.

1976 is the year where we see Shannon in Yasu's memories. So if this Shannon was still working in 1984 she'd have been working for 8 years (at least), which is something unusual.

[cmos]

But in earlier episodes they say, that the servant fell down even before Shannon started working there and nobody objects:

Ep1 on the beach with all cousins:
Shannon: `"...Yes. I heard that, just before I began working, someone who spoke badly about Beatrice-sama fell down the stairs and quit after receiving a large injury to their back. Because of that, there was a rumor between the servants that Beatrice-sama's anger had been brought down upon this person..."


Battler in the kitchen:
Kanon: "Beatrice-sama sometimes changes her form into glittering butterflies and shows herself. ......On the rare occasion that you spot them somewhere in the mansion, there is a rule that you absolutely mustn't chase after them. It is whispered that you will meet with disaster if you follow them. ...In fact, there was a servant who broke that rule and quit because of a great injury."

Ep2 George and Shannon in the arbor:
Shannon: "......For us servants, Beatrice-sama is another master of this mansion. ......Some say something like we were influenced by the Master and spread that rumor.........but since the time I started working here, the story of Beatrice-sama was already whispered about."
George: "I heard about it before. ...There was a servant who didn't respect her, was cursed, and actually had an accident."

Ep3 Gohda in the kitchen:
"So, if you make fun of the witch of the portrait, there is a curse. ......It seems that there was even a servant who received a serious injury and quit. ...I'd hate to be injured. I am already this old. I probably wouldn't be granted a workplace this hospitable again... Aaah. Witch of the portrait. I'm working sincerely, so please give me some peace."

[chounokoe]

Heh, I'm sorry but the connection is very far-fetched. The episode of the servant that got injured happened very recently, since the portrait was already displayed. However Yasu's injury goes back to when she was a newborn baby. There's at least a 17 years difference.
The story existed already when Gohda started working at Rokkenjima, because he adresses it in his TIP, so the accident probably happened around the same time as Yasu solved the Epitaph.

If that is more recent injury, I think that she would know that they saved her for a long time already and maybe somehow get over it. It makes more sense if the injury was when she wasn't conscious and therefore didn't know until recently that they saved her.
And that also is not neccessarily the case. The question is how believable it is to hide a hideous scar that convinces someone that he is unable to be loved from a person for about 16 or 17 years. And if Yasu actually knew about that scar, there is no sense why she would freak out about it after her Episode with Battler.

That is what bothered me. What kind of injury could they have hidden from Yasu, that actually convinces her immediatly that she would have been better off dead but at the same time was unknown to her for such a long time?!
An internal injury of the reproductive organs seemed possible, but still quite farfetched. There is also no apparent reason why she would be mad about having been saved as an infant...
If she was actually the person falling down those stairs and suffered a serious injury that disfigured her it qould explain why she would be mad at the servants saving her. She would have now forever lost the right for love and in her eyes lost Battler forever (giving her a reason to give Shannon and Kanon a chance at love).

It also explains the conveniently placed story about the servant suffering that injury, especially when at least in Episode 1 and 3 it is Shannon who brings it up.

[Jan-Poo]

Uhmmm the other sentences do not necessarily imply that the maid fell long time ago, but the first one does.

This is strange. Isn't Shannon mixing up the story of the maid that fell from the cliff with the story of the maid that fell from the stairs?


That is what bothered me. What kind of injury could they have hidden from Yasu, that actually convinces her immediatly that she would have been better off dead but at the same time was unknown to her for such a long time?!

It's not necessarily true that Yasu was never aware of her injury. That scene could be simply explained because only at that moment Yasu learned how she received that injury and under which circumstances.
In fact I believe it's most probable that she knew and that's why she was given a single bedroom while every other servant got a double or even a triple.

[Ayu-ayu]

Uhmmm the other sentences do not necessarily imply that the maid fell long time ago, but the first one does.

This is strange. Isn't Shannon mixing up the story of the maid that fell from the cliff with the story of the maid that fell from the stairs?




It's not necessarily true that Yasu was never aware of her injury. That scene could be simply explained because only at that moment Yasu learned how she received that injury and under which circumstances.
In fact I believe it's most probable that she knew and that's why she was given a single bedroom while every other servant got a double or even a triple.

The inconsistency is a bit odd, perhaps a reflection of how anecdotes change in the telling over time from person to person. But then which one is true? :/

Also as for the length of Shannon's employment, I remember in one of the prior arcs (I forget the specific one) Battler introduced her as having worked at the mansion for ten years/from the age of six...which struck me as rather unbelievable back at the time! But this would certainly explain why the rest of the servants were at a loss why this kid was working there and going to school.

[erneiz_hyde]

Umm, excuse me and sorry if I sound silly now.

Why is everyone talking about any scar? I don't remember any scar being mentioned in the game and Yasu found out and made her despaired about.

[Oliver]

The story existed already when Gohda started working at Rokkenjima, because he adresses it in his TIP, so the accident probably happened around the same time as Yasu solved the Epitaph.

...which definitely happened after Gohda started working on Rokkenjima.

[Volcanic]

Umm, excuse me and sorry if I sound silly now.

Why is everyone talking about any scar? I don't remember any scar being mentioned in the game and Yasu found out and made her despaired about.

Yasu, if I remember correctly, says that after the fall the injury left her "unable to love". We're interpreting that as some sort of scar to her chest or (cough) genitals, that would stunt her growth, as mentioned in the game, and possibly obscure her gender (as shown by Leon's ambiguous gender).

[erneiz_hyde]

Hmmm...A permanent scar doesn't get bigger as your body gets bigger too. And since the scar was inflited during infantile, it cannot be that big. So the question is what wound that is not really big but enough to make Yasu says "unable to love", that so?

[Ayu-ayu]

Yasu, if I remember correctly, says that after the fall the injury left her "unable to love". We're interpreting that as some sort of scar to her chest or (cough) genitals, that would stunt her growth, as mentioned in the game, and possibly obscure her gender (as shown by Leon's ambiguous gender).

Well, that's part of the thing. We see this as one of the quick flashes before Lyon is sent to be shot by Kyrie. But it's unclear why Lyon sees this, when it took place, and it never mentions the fall specifically, just protesting to Nanjo and Genji as being left in this "unable to love" state.

[Jan-Poo]

Uhmm let's see...
We see a flashback with Genji and Nanjo. They keep silent all the time. The one speaking is apparently Yasu/Beatrice.

どうして…！！ どうしてあなたたちは私を助けたんですか？！
Why! Why you saved me?!

どうして死なせてくれなかったんですか？！　私はあの時の大怪我で、……こんな体で生きさせられている！！ 　こんな体で、生きていたくなんかなかった！！
Why you didn't let me die?! At the time I received that big injury you decided to made me live with this body!! I would have never wanted to live with this body!

こんな、恋をすることも出来ない体で……！！ そんなの、そんなの、生きる価値がないんじゃないですか？！　そんなのニンゲンじゃない…！！　家具じゃな いですか！！
With this body unfitted to love!! Is... is there any worth in living like this?! This isn't a human body!! It's furniture!!

そう、私は、家具……！　家具なんだ…！！
Yes, I'm furniture! I'm furniture!!

　どうして、………私をあの時に死なせてくれなかったんですかッ！！　ぅわぁああああぁあああああぁああぁ ああ……！！！
Why.... you didn't let me die at that time!! Uwaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!

[LyricalAura]

Uhmmm the other sentences do not necessarily imply that the maid fell long time ago, but the first one does.

This is strange. Isn't Shannon mixing up the story of the maid that fell from the cliff with the story of the maid that fell from the stairs?

George, Shannon, Kanon... Wait a minute. From Gohda's notebook and Kumasawa's testimony in EP6, it seems like there's a history of the one-winged eagle servants hazing other servants by pranking them and making it look like the witch did it. Maybe this story is just something that was made up as part of that hazing, and never really happened at all?

It's not necessarily true that Yasu was never aware of her injury. That scene could be simply explained because only at that moment Yasu learned how she received that injury and under which circumstances.
In fact I believe it's most probable that she knew and that's why she was given a single bedroom while every other servant got a double or even a triple.

If all of the "child from nineteen years ago" elements were subtracted out, how significantly would that impact the rest of Yasu's history? Is it possible that was grafted on by Bernkastel trying to make the pieces fit?

[Jan-Poo]

Well if you doubt Claire's story I guess there's a lot of possibilities open to you.

But personally I prefer to think it's true for the most part. Kinzo's perfectly timed death and magic scenes apart everything made perfect sense to me, plus Will didn't have any problem with that.

Hmmm...A permanent scar doesn't get bigger as your body gets bigger too. And since the scar was inflited during infantile, it cannot be that big.

Are you sure? I thought it's exactly the opposite. As far as I know scars grow with you. So if Yasu got a scar that covered her whole chest as a baby it would still cover her whole chest at 19 years.

[chounokoe]

どうして死なせてくれなかったんですか？！　私はあの時の大怪我で、……こんな体で生きさせられている！！ 　こんな体で、生きていたくなんかなかった！！
Why you didn't let me die?! At the time I received that big injury you decided to made me live with this body!! I would have never wanted to live with this body!

And isn't it strange that at this place the term 大怪我 appears again?!

It's not necessarily true that Yasu was never aware of her injury. That scene could be simply explained because only at that moment Yasu learned how she received that injury and under which circumstances.
But why then would she allow herself to fall in love with Battler?! The scene makes it clear that knowledge of the injury made it clear to her that she was now in a body that is unable to love. Had she known about this scar before there would have never been a romantic involvement with Battler in the first place.
More than that, up to the point that we witnessed in Episode 7 as a coherent line, we never once hear about the servants refering to themselves as 'furniture'. It seems to be that this 'incident' is what created the concept of 家具 in the first place.

[cmos]

Yasu, if I remember correctly, says that after the fall the injury left her "unable to love". We're interpreting that as some sort of scar to her chest or (cough) genitals, that would stunt her growth, as mentioned in the game, and possibly obscure her gender (as shown by Leon's ambiguous gender).
Lion didn't experienced the fall though. Yet his gender is still ambiguous. So unless his appearance is a mere symbol for our Yasu's gender ambiguity, we can say that it's not related to the injury and probably inherited.

[Ayu-ayu]

And isn't it strange that at this place the term 大怪我 appears again?!


But why then would she allow herself to fall in love with Battler?! The scene makes it clear that knowledge of the injury made it clear to her that she was now in a body that is unable to love. Had she known about this scar before there would have never been a romantic involvement with Battler in the first place.
More than that, up to the point that we witnessed in Episode 7 as a coherent line, we never once hear about the servants refering to themselves as 'furniture'. It seems to be that this 'incident' is what created the concept of 家具 in the first place.

Yes, I was noticing that too about 大怪我 reappearing. Interesting!

My thoughts were the same about this scene probably signifying the origin of the "Furniture... however there is one other instance in Yasu's story--when Maria is helping Beatrice make names, she does refer to Ronove as being suitable for her head furniture if I recall...? Or was it just head servant in that case? If so, then should we place the flashback scene before this scene with Maria, or after?

[Oliver]

Are you sure? I thought it's exactly the opposite. As far as I know scars grow with you. So if Yasu got a scar that covered her whole chest as a baby it would still cover her whole chest at 19 years.

Definitely does not. Got my own childhood scars to prove it... most of them very, very faded. If it is explicitly scar tissue, it doesn't grow with the body.

[LyricalAura]

Well if you doubt Claire's story I guess there's a lot of possibilities open to you.

But personally I prefer to think it's true for the most part. Kinzo's perfectly timed death and magic scenes apart everything made perfect sense to me, plus Will didn't have any problem with that.

It just bugs me. We never had an indication that Shannon had any kind of injury in EP1-4 other than her calling herself furniture, and in the meantime she was happily planning with George to build a big family with lots of kids. And then this "child from nineteen years ago" thing comes out of nowhere in EP5, and we're supposed to believe an infant not only survived falling off a tall cliff onto rocks, but wasn't physically or mentally crippled by it in an immediately obvious way?

[Jan-Poo]

And isn't it strange that at this place the term 大怪我 appears again?!

But the whole story doesn't fit with a fall from a staircase. Apparently Shannon is able to move so she didn't break her spine. She also doesn't show any kind of walking impairment.

The only kind of death threat that can happen from falling from the stair is that you break your neck, but that's not something you can recover from.


Plus it was hinted before that Genji thought that the baby was dead when he brought it to Nanjo, so it can be well assumed that the baby suffered some kind of bad injury.
Everything fits here.

[Volcanic]

Lion didn't experienced the fall though. Yet his gender is still ambiguous. So unless his appearance is a mere symbol for our Yasu's gender ambiguity, we can say that it's not related to the injury and probably inherited.

...I should have worded that differently. :heh:

Yasu's ambiguous gender is represented by Leon's, I should put it. Bernkastel even flat-out states Leon's appearance is a "placeholder."

[Ayu-ayu]

Lion didn't experienced the fall though. Yet his gender is still ambiguous. So unless his appearance is a mere symbol for our Yasu's gender ambiguity, we can say that it's not related to the injury and probably inherited.

Oh ho, interesting, I hadn't thought of that and had been taking it more or less symbolically. But that is a rather good point if building the case the injury was some other part of the body (be it face or chest or what have you).

Speaking of heredity and such, I wonder if Lyon has extra toes, too (not that this has to do with anything)...:heh:

[chounokoe]

My thoughts were the same about this scene probably signifying the origin of the "Furniture... however there is one other instance in Yasu's story--when Maria is helping Beatrice make names, she does refer to Ronove as being suitable for her head furniture if I recall...? Or was it just head servant in that case? If so, then should we place the flashback scene before this scene with Maria, or after?
I think we can safely assume that this meeting with Maria did probably occur rather late due to several reasons.
If Yasu is Beatrice and Ronove does really derive from Genji it is quite probable that she wouldn't imagine him as part of the ''witche's court'' until after she had solved the epitaph and received the trust of the servants.

Maria is already talking about quite many 'furnitures' and I think even the bunnies (later Siestas). If I remember correctly she only received them after she got Sakutarou, which is either in 1984 or 1985.

They are in the garden of Kuwadorian (of course this might have been part of an illusion), assuming that they really were there it would have to be 1985 already.

When Battler hears about the servants refering to themselves as 家具 does he wonder about the term in the beginning?! My memory is a bit fuzzy concerning that part, but if he doesn't remember we can additionally assume that the concept was created sometime between 1980 and 1984/85 (when we first see flashbacks of Shannon and Kanon).

EDIT:
It just bugs me. We never had an indication that Shannon had any kind of injury in EP1-4 other than her calling herself furniture, and in the meantime she was happily planning with George to build a big family with lots of kids. And then this "child from nineteen years ago" thing comes out of nowhere in EP5, and we're supposed to believe an infant not only survived falling off a tall cliff onto rocks, but wasn't physically or mentally crippled by it in an immediately obvious way?
We have the fact that she calls herself 'furniture', she says the she is unable to love because she is furniture and several other things that implied she did not see herself as exactly human. Just a quick question regarding that...can somebody grow colourblind by losing one eye?! ^^°
And the baby did not fall and crash onto the rocks it was a maid that did that and probably softened the impact. You never heard of a mother jumping from a high building and shielding her child with her body? Sometimes it works.
BUT another thing...if we were to assume that Gaap is at least partly Nanjo, then we could interprete the whole affair with a servant dropping the child altogether. Imagine that Natsuhi refused the baby, so the only chance there would have been was for it to go to Kuwadorian like his mother and Kumasawa, Genji and Nanjo probably didn't want that. So the three made up the whole story of the baby dropping from a cliff and dying not only towards Kinzo, but also in front of Natsuhi so that she wouldn't reveal it to Kinzo. Maybe there never was a maid that dropped from a cliff with the child, but just Dr. Nanjo who faked a report that said something like this happened.

But the whole story doesn't fit with a fall from a staircase. Apparently Shannon is able to move so she didn't break her spine. She also doesn't show any kind of walking impairment.

The only kind of death threat that can happen from falling from the stair is that you break your neck, but that's not something you can recover from.
There are many injuries that you could suffer by falling down from a certain height and a death threat can come from several things. She could have also smashed her head and suffered a serious injury that did leave a hideous disfigurement. Imagine she hit her ace against a sharp edge of the stairs, or landed on the floor face forward...the bloodloss alone would have been life threatening, so death threat does not have to come in form of an injury to the spine.

[musouka]

It just bugs me. We never had an indication that Shannon had any kind of injury in EP1-4 other than her calling herself furniture, and in the meantime she was happily planning with George to build a big family with lots of kids.

And you never wondered why Kanon seemed to treat that plan with flat, utter derision? EP6 makes it especially obvious that it's "impossible" for that dream in particular to come true for Shannon, no matter what happens.

Ryukishi made you think "furniture = can't love" when it was the reverse "can't love = furniture", which totally changes the dynamic of nearly every scene where Shannon and Kanon talk about the concept.

[Ayu-ayu]

I think we can safely assume that this meeting with Maria did probably occur rather late due to several reasons.
If Yasu is Beatrice and Ronove does really derive from Genji it is quite probable that she wouldn't imagine him as part of the ''witche's court'' until after she had solved the epitaph and received the trust of the servants.

Maria is already talking about quite many 'furnitures' and I think even the bunnies (later Siestas). If I remember correctly she only received them after she got Sakutarou, which is either in 1984 or 1985.

They are in the garden of Kuwadorian (of course this might have been part of an illusion), assuming that they really were there it would have to be 1985 already.

When Battler hears about the servants refering to themselves as 家具 does he wonder about the term in the beginning?! My memory is a bit fuzzy concerning that part, but if he doesn't remember we can additionally assume that the concept was created sometime between 1980 and 1984/85 (when we first see flashbacks of Shannon and Kanon).

Right, I knew the Maria sequence was pretty late (if not later than the flashback, but more likely that would seem to be the case). But I wonder how far back the flashback is then? Too bad there's not any more context given with it, it seems a pretty significant scene. Was the background image to the scene anywhere unique? I should go back and check now.

[Jan-Poo]

When Battler hears about the servants refering to themselves as 家具 does he wonder about the term in the beginning?!

First instance when Battler is seen hearing the word in 1986 is from Kanon during their first meeting.

Second instance is when Battler tries and fails to touch Shannon's boobs.

In both cases Battler doesn't show any particular reaction.
It's interesting to note... Shannon and Kanon do not say "I am furniture" they say "We are furniture".

[chounokoe]

Right, I knew the Maria sequence was pretty late (if not later than the flashback, but more likely that would seem to be the case). But I wonder how far back the flashback is then? Too bad there's not any more context given with it, it seems a pretty significant scene. Was the background image to the scene anywhere unique? I should go back and check now.
The background is one of the screens in Kinzo's study. We can assume that Yasu was never in there before she solved the Epitaph, but there is no definite proof to that. Yet the fact the she is in the study with Nanjo and Genji implies pretty much that it is in or after November 1984.

First instance when Battler is seen hearing the word in 1986 is from Kanon during their first meeting.

Second instance is when Battler tries and fails to touch Shannon's boobs.

In both cases Battler doesn't show any particular reaction.
It's interesting to note... Shannon and Kanon do not say "I am furniture" they say "We are furniture".
Hm, interesting...I also notived that they often use plural when they refer to being furniture. And then we have the image of the broken brooch again, two parts of a whole, but useless as it is.

[Ayu-ayu]

The background is one of the screens in Kinzo's study. We can assume that Yasu was never in there before she solved the Epitaph, but there is no definite proof to that. Yet the fact the she is in the study with Nanjo and Genji implies pretty much that it is in or after November 1984.


Hm! Okay, to me at least that would seem to imply that this occurs after Kinzo's death, either after the events told by Yasu/Claire or somewhere in the middle and omitted. Perhaps there were more revelations made then, and in turn there were more instructions she gave, such as establishing the role of furniture. Perhaps she glossed over things a bit here in her retelling and it wasn't as simple as "continue on as things were" after all?

[cmos]

I think we can safely assume that this meeting with Maria did probably occur rather late due to several reasons.
If Yasu is Beatrice and Ronove does really derive from Genji it is quite probable that she wouldn't imagine him as part of the ''witche's court'' until after she had solved the epitaph and received the trust of the servants.

Maria is already talking about quite many 'furnitures' and I think even the bunnies (later Siestas). If I remember correctly she only received them after she got Sakutarou, which is either in 1984 or 1985.

They are in the garden of Kuwadorian (of course this might have been part of an illusion), assuming that they really were there it would have to be 1985 already
Actually, we can say that it was 1984, because in that meeting Beato suddenly remembered that she needs love, etc, Maria says that Beato doesn't have enough power, and they decide to solve the epitaph.
And judging by background, it was rose garden arbor, which creates a contradiction with ep4, because of Sakutaro in Kuwadorian.

http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/3153/resultq.jpg
Backgrounds to the left are named garden_r1<letters>.bmp and it's the arbor, because George proposed there and the corpses were found there in ep3. To the right is Kuwadorian and they are named garden_se<1-2><letters>.bmp

Bernkastel even flat-out states Leon's appearance is a "placeholder."
Could you please post a quote? It seems that I missed that and can't find anything like that in those scenes, where they discuss Lion.

[Jan-Poo]

And judging by background, it was rose garden arbor, which creates a contradiction with ep4, because of Sakutaro in Kuwadorian.

It doesn't create a contradiction. The scene shown in EP7 happened in a later instance, because Sakutaro has been made already.

[cmos]

It doesn't create a contradiction. The scene shown in EP7 happened in a later instance, because Sakutaro has been made already.

She hasn't solved epitaph yet, when that meeting in ep7 takes place, so she shouldn't have access to Kuwadorian. But Sakutarou appears in his human form, that was created, according to ep4, during their meeting in Kuwadorian.

Well, it's not a fatal logic error and you can explain it in several ways, making some assumptions, but still.

[Jan-Poo]

Okay that's odd...

Either the kuwadorian flashback has been embellished with a fake background, or Ryuukishi didn't told us the whole story in Ep7.

I'm going for the first. It's doubtful that Beatrice brought Maria to the Kuwadorian, walking 2km back and forth just to play in a different environment is kinda pointless.

[Renall]

There's a lot of kludging to make the Baby From 19 Years Ago story fit.

Rosa's Beatrice-2 story never made sense to me, especially with some of the embellishments in ep7 when Will asks about it. So she just happens to go running into the woods and by pure luck locates Kuwadorian, and then after Beatrice dies she runs away and just happens to spot the chapel and get home? It's a wonder everyone hasn't been to Kuwadorian if it's that easy to get there and back.

Will mixes the two "falling" stories told by Rosa and about Natsuhi's baby to insinuate some degree of similarity between incidents, which serves as the foundational basis to explain L[y/i/e]on and Yasu. I don't really see a lot of reason to do that, but he does. Even if we keep them separated, it's possible to still derive the Yasu story from it, but it becomes stranger and stranger.

We have ep6, where Natsuhi has no idea what Beatrice is talking about. The only three explanations that can possibly derive from this is heavy denial, outright lying, or that there never was any such incident and thus, no baby. If she's in denial, it's strange her memory is never jogged. It's unlikely she's lying, because she seems to have no motive to. But if the baby didn't exist, or the fall incident didn't happen (i.e. the baby was in fact Jessica or something), then Yasu can't possibly be that child (though Yasu could still exist and merely think she is), and neither can L[y/i/e]on. So it would wind up denying his existence at least.

Yasu speculates on being an Ushiromiya long before any such thing is "confirmed." It's not an incredible leap of faith really (why bring somebody there at such a young age and keep them around so long?). But it is very... narratively convenient.

By the way, isn't it weird we have three stories about a person falling, and Battler and Asumu both have that complex about falling? What's up with that? Half the falling stories are looped back onto the Yasu thing which, so far as we've been shown, has nothing whatsoever to do with Battler or Asumu. Either this family gets involved in or causes an awful lot of falling accidents, or there is some kind of theme not being properly parsed here.

EDIT: And of course, Ange survives her miraculous fall from the building. There's got to be something more to this falling motif.Ryukishi made you think "furniture = can't love" when it was the reverse "can't love = furniture", which totally changes the dynamic of nearly every scene where Shannon and Kanon talk about the concept.What does that make Genji then?

Admittedly, that time someone proposed he was a homosexual and attracted to Kinzo in a way that could never be fulfilled was about the most sensible way to make it seem like it fit in light of the Shannon/Kanon dynamic proposed, but I see no proof anywhere of it.

[Jan-Poo]

It's a wonder everyone hasn't been to Kuwadorian if it's that easy to get there and back.

Actually if there's something that doesn't make sense is that Krauss didn't know that Kuwadorian existed especially after he called people to make an investigation about the area.
I don't understand how it can be so hard to find that house in a merely 2km wide island especially a Mansion that has a huge fence surrounding it and a port on its vicinity.

Rosa stumbling on that fence sounds pretty reasonable to me. What doesn't sound reasonable at all is that Krauss or his men didn't.

[Renall]

Actually if there's something that doesn't make sense is that Krauss didn't know that Kuwadorian existed especially after he called people to make an investigation about the area.
I don't understand how it can be so hard to find that house in a merely 2km wide island especially a Mansion that has a huge fence surrounding it and a port on its vicinity.

Rosa stumbling on that fence sounds pretty reasonable to me. What doesn't sound reasonable at all is that Krauss or his men didn't.Well, people say his surveyors didn't find anything, but I'd think they would have to have found Kuwadorian, especially if they did any aerial photography whatsoever (and they assuredly must have).

So I think the better question is why Krauss is lying about not knowing Kuwadorian exists, because he almost certainly does.

[Jan-Poo]

Krauss is the kind of man that likes to keep informations to himself (for example he believes that the gold must exists but he pretends to think it's just a legend).

He might have decided to keep the story of the Kuwadorian to himself, but I wonder why he didn't tell anything when Rosa said she's been there in the past.
Well Krauss is sort of a dick, he's George's uncle after all.

[musouka]

What does that make Genji then?

Someone sympathetic to their master's mental plight.

[Erisette]

We have ep6, where Natsuhi has no idea what Beatrice is talking about. The only three explanations that can possibly derive from this is heavy denial, outright lying, or that there never was any such incident and thus, no baby. If she's in denial, it's strange her memory is never jogged. It's unlikely she's lying, because she seems to have no motive to. But if the baby didn't exist, or the fall incident didn't happen (i.e. the baby was in fact Jessica or something), then Yasu can't possibly be that child (though Yasu could still exist and merely think she is), and neither can L[y/i/e]on. So it would wind up denying his existence at least.

But there is also the possibility, as chounokoe said, that the baby exists and is Yasu but the incident is a lie to make keep her away from Kinzo and Kuwadorian or something like that.

[TehChron]

We have ep6, where Natsuhi has no idea what Beatrice is talking about. The only three explanations that can possibly derive from this is heavy denial, outright lying, or that there never was any such incident and thus, no baby. If she's in denial, it's strange her memory is never jogged. It's unlikely she's lying, because she seems to have no motive to. But if the baby didn't exist, or the fall incident didn't happen (i.e. the baby was in fact Jessica or something), then Yasu can't possibly be that child (though Yasu could still exist and merely think she is), and neither can L[y/i/e]on. So it would wind up denying his existence at least.



About that, it actually took quite a lot of prodding from Lambda while she was on the phone before Natsuhi took the bait and recalled what the man from 19 years ago was actually referring to, if you remember.

It could just be simple repression.

[Klashikari]

Was busy for quite a while.
07th expansion confirmed that the official romaji is Lion. We have changed things accordingly.
Amusingly, they weren't sure how to spell correctly Will's full name, so we helped them, but it was the only character they asked a help from us.

[LyricalAura]

What did they say about Claire's full name?

[Klashikari]

What did they say about Claire's full name?
As we suspected: Clair Vaux Bernardus, originally from Bernard de Clairvaux.

By the way, even if the choice of katakana was weird, Beatrice's last name is unsurprisingly Castiglioni, not Castillioni as the pronunciation suggests.

[Jan-Poo]

Was busy for quite a while.
07th expansion confirmed that the official romaji is Lion. We have changed things accordingly.

Oh yeah! XD


By the way, even if the choice of katakana was weird, Beatrice's last name is unsurprisingly Castiglioni, not Castillioni as the pronunciation suggests.

I always thought it was Castiglioni, it sounds a lot better. I guess it's difficult for a non italian to understand how to pronounce the "gl" sound but the closest transliteration you can make in katakana is exactly as Ryuukishi wrote it. And I guess he took the surname from here:

http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%94%E3%82%A6%E3%82%B98%E4%B8%96_(%E3%83%AD%E 3%83%BC%E3%83%9E%E6%95%99%E7%9A%87)

[ameskitty]

Was busy for quite a while.
07th expansion confirmed that the official romaji is Lion. We have changed things accordingly.
Amusingly, they weren't sure how to spell correctly Will's full name, so we helped them, but it was the only character they asked a help from us.
Ah, a gender-neutral spelling, just as I thought : D. (one of my reasons for preferring that and, well, admittedly moreso Lyon over Leon)

...though hopefully there'll be some kind of pronunciation note because we all know what people are going to say at first :heh:.

[Jan-Poo]

As we suspected: Clair Vaux Bernadus, originally from Bernard de Clairvaux

Uh, was that a typo?

[Oliver]

Lithium Ion. Like a battery... Quite a bit ahead of his time too. :)

[Ssol]

Was busy for quite a while.
07th expansion confirmed that the official romaji is Lion. We have changed things accordingly.
Ah, that's what I suspected. Thanks for finding out for us early. :)
Amusingly, they weren't sure how to spell correctly Will's full name, so we helped them, but it was the only character they asked a help from us.
Yes, that is interesting that they were not sure about that. :heh:
Lithium Ion. Like a battery... Quite a bit ahead of his time too. :)
:heh:

[Renall]

How did they... mess up "Willard H. Wright?" I mean, it's literally a real person's name! And they didn't mess up Dlanor and that was a name all scrambled up!

[Dr. Casey]

How old was Kinzo in 1974?

[Jan-Poo]

What's with 1974? °°

anyway Kinzo should have been around 70 years old, but there's no real certainty about his age.

[Klashikari]

Uh, was that a typo?
It was 3am on my side, but yes it was a typo. There is a missing R. Correcting.

[Will Wright]

How did they... mess up "Willard H. Wright?" I mean, it's literally a real person's name! And they didn't mess up Dlanor and that was a name all scrambled up!

As someone who is named Willard Wright in real life(that's one of the reasons I began to read Umineko to be honest :heh:) I can attest that people misspell Willard a lot. So much that I gave up on having them spell it correctly and just ask to be called Will.

[Jan-Poo]

As someone who is named Willard Wright in real life(that's one of the reasons I began to read Umineko to be honest :heh:) I can attest that people misspell Willard a lot. So much that I gave up on having them spell it correctly and just ask to be called Will.

What? Seriously? Is that a coincidence or your parents really love mystery novels?

[Oliver]

...I honestly can't figure out what's there to misspell. O_o Mispronounce, possibly, misspell?...

[Renall]

I'm honestly not sure. His data folder is WIL so unlike some of the other more creative romanization prospects, he seems fully on the up-and-up, which is why I figured they had him locked down. Go figure.

[Gohan78]

I'm honestly not sure. His data folder is WIL so unlike some of the other more creative romanization prospects, he seems fully on the up-and-up, which is why I figured they had him locked down. Go figure.

Maybe the problem wasn't "Willard" but "Wright" since ライト can also be romanized "Right" or "Light".

[Jan-Poo]

I wonder why they didn't simply check the wiki

http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%E3%83%BBS%E3%83%BB%E3%83%B4%E3%82%A1%E3%83%B3%EF %BC%9D%E3%83%80%E3%82%A4%E3%83%B3

[Used Can]

07th expansion confirmed that the official romaji is Lion.
Boo... that was the shitty version. In fact, Lion is not even a name. Well, nor is Battler. Oh well, the boobs are still fake. So, I shouldn't care about a name.

[Oliver]

...look at the bright side, now you can imagine a lion with fake boobs when thinking about this character.

That's gotta put a smile on your face.
See also: Sakutarou. A blond, vegetarian lion.

[Klashikari]

Just remember that the way how Lion is read in Japanese isn't an allusion to the king of the jungle.

[Used Can]

...look at the bright side, now you can imagine a lion with fake boobs when thinking about this character.

That's gotta put a smile on your face.
See also: Sakutarou. A blond, vegetarian lion.
You know, that reminds me of some furry porn comic I stumbled upon once... shit.

Just remember that the way how Lion is read in Japanese isn't an allusion to the king of the jungle.
I know dude, you don't read that as Simba.
Just kidding, but either way, other than Battler, I think R07 had nailed on all the names, but Lion, which is not a name. But well, I guess you can keep things regarding Lion/Yasu's sex up in the air this way.

[Volcanic]

Just kidding, but either way, other than Battler, I think R07 had nailed on all the names, but Lion, which is not a name.

Actually, it is a name (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion_(name)), just a very odd one used more for surnames than given names. One of the people with it as a given name is German, so maybe it counts as an Ushiromiya name.

...I wouldn't put it past Natsuhi and Krauss, at least.

[Used Can]

Actually, it is a name (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion_(name)), just a very odd one used more for surnames than given names. One of the people with it as a given name is German, so maybe it counts as an Ushiromiya name.
Oh, my bad then.

[Will Wright]

What? Seriously? Is that a coincidence or your parents really love mystery novels?

My parents really love mystery novels. And my grandparents. I come from a long line of detective fans.

...Which is weird now that I became a mystery writer.


...I honestly can't figure out what's there to misspell. O_o Mispronounce, possibly, misspell?...

People misspell Willard as Williard an awful lot. Just trust me on that!

@Battler debate:
I liked Battler because it made me think of Mr.Battle from Agatha Christie.

[Judoh]

Battler isn't really a name no, but it is a word that means a "warrior" or someone who Battles. And like Will said it does have that Christie reference.

Battler isn't really a first name, but there are western names that have the meaning of "Battler" like the names Boris and Tracy.

And there was a WWII ship in the royal navy called the HMS Battler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Battler)

[TehChron]

Battler isn't really a name no, but it is a word that means a "warrior" or someone who Battles. And like Will said it does have that Christie reference.

Battler isn't really a first name, but there are western names that have the meaning of "Battler" like the names Boris and Tracy.

And there was a WWII ship in the royal navy called the HMS Battler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Battler)

Oh god, again with the Evangelion nods? Lion being the official romanization completes that joke, but now theres also a possible habit of naming the kids after ships?

Urgh, I hope were reading too much into this.

[Helmet-kun]

Battler isn't really a name no, but it is a word that means a "warrior" or someone who Battles.

Note that suffix -er doesn't apply to everything. It only works for people who use things for their occupations/jobs (painter meaning someone who paints, etc). The word 'battle' means 'any conflict or struggle', which is not a job more or less, so sticking -er in the end grammatically does not make sense.

I'm thinking the name Battler came from those western flicks Rudolph adores so much. Not anything WWII-ish. Perhaps a coincidence?

[erneiz_hyde]

yes, the name Batora 戦人　never really made sense even in Japanese pronunciation. It's more like Battler's name is the translation of his name's letters.

[Oliver]

Just got it confirmed by my German friend - Lion is not a unique name in Germany, antiquated like Friedrich, August or Ferdinand, and not very common, but not unique. Was popular among Jewish families.

Which puts Lion in the Eva/Krauss/Rudolf/Rosa German names group, incidentally.

[SilverSyko]

Y'know, has anyone ever actually asked Ryukishi why he named Battler what he is because it's such a weird name?

I s'pose the reason could be obvious or totally unexpected, but it's still an interesting question.

[Jan-Poo]

Just got it confirmed by my German friend - Lion is not a unique name in Germany, antiquated like Friedrich, August or Ferdinand, and not very common, but not unique. Was popular among Jewish families.

Which puts Lion in the Eva/Krauss/Rudolf/Rosa German names group, incidentally.

Eva and Rosa are german?
Well Eva has the same pronounce in a plethora of different languages and derives from the hebrew Ḥawwāh

Rosa is more frequent in spain, portugal and Italy I think, and derives from the latin "rosa" (rose).

[Oliver]

Eva and Rosa are german?
Well Eva has the same pronounce in a plethora of different languages and derives from the hebrew Ḥawwāh

Rosa is more frequent in spain, portugal and Italy I think, and derives from the latin "rosa" (rose).

Rosa Luxemburg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Luxemburg) prompted the popularity of the name in Eastern Germany, though she wasn't a native German. Eva Braun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eva_Braun) prompted the un-popularity, but was a native. Rudolf is natively Germanic, Klaus is a Germanic-shortened form of Nicholas.

They are all used throughout Europe, but I think Germany is the only country where all five (Krauss/Rudolf/Eva/Rosa/Lion) have seen widespread use.

[Will Wright]

My mom comes from Portugal(moved to England when she was little) and her name is Rosa. It's definitely a popular name over there from what she tells me.

[Jan-Poo]

at any rate they are names from Latin origin (Eva is the latinisation of the hebrew name), so it's kinda odd to classify them as "german" names.

It's the same situation of "Gertrude" which is used in Italy, but it isn't really an italian name.

[theplane2]

I was always under the impression Ryu probably got the name Battler from 'Le Bateleur,' aka the Magician tarot card. Then again I think it was something I read on the WMG page at TVtropes, but you know. Made sense in my head.

[chounokoe]

My mom comes from Portugal(moved to England when she was little) and her name is Rosa. It's definitely a popular name over there from what she tells me.

Though in the way it is pronounced in Umineko, with a stressed O and a voiced S, it is a lot more similar to the German pronounciation of Rosa than the Spanish one which has a much shorter O and a voiceless, sharp S.

Eva's name is a lot more similar to the English version actually, having a voiced V instead of a voiceless one (like an F) as in the German version of the name.
Rudolph is rather unspecified an used in many Germanic languages, though in Germany it would probably be spelled Rudolf.
Krauss is probably really meant to imply Klauss and as someone already said is the German adaption of the name Nikolaus.

[Jan-Poo]

Though in the way it is pronounced in Umineko, with a stressed O and a voiced S, it is a lot more similar to the German pronounciation of Rosa

The italian and latin pronounce is like that.


Eva's name is a lot more similar to the English version actually, having a voiced V instead of a voiceless one (like an F) as in the German version of the name.

Eva is not a proper english name, the standard is "Eve". If a "Eva" exists in english speaking regions it must have been imported recently.

[Helmet-kun]

Eva's name is a lot more similar to the English version actually, having a voiced V instead of a voiceless one (like an F) as in the German version of the name.

Eva is actually Spanish. So is Maria.

....According the my Spanish textbook, anyway.

[Jan-Poo]

As I said Eva is name you can find in a lot of different countries. It isn't more spanish than it is italian, portuguese or slavic.

The same can be said for Maria. Both Eva and Maria are latinisations of biblical names that were spread in all europe.

[DgBarca]

Does anyone has the Dine Rules said in red in EP7 ?
Because I am reading the original and...

"8. The problem of the crime must he solved by strictly naturalistic means."
But oh man red truth.

[cmos]

Does anyone has the Dine Rules said in red in EP7 ?
Because I am reading the original and...

"8. The problem of the crime must he solved by strictly naturalistic means."
But oh man red truth.

There are only three: 11 (that was used in another story), 1 and 7. But that rule is basically the same as Knox's 2nd.
And you can't use red as a basis for your theory, see ep5. You need to have a human proofs. Red can just direct your thoughts and lay some restrictions.

[Renall]

If we go by a loose definition of "natural" to include "those clues which are necessarily derived from processes comprehensible to the detective," we're fine with red truth. Meta-Battler exists in an environment which is not itself bound by strictly naturalistic laws, but what laws do exist have consistent rules (red statements are truth and non-true statements cannot be stated in red). The board characters never intuit using red to their advantage, so the pieces do not break Knox or Dine. The board mysteries are solvable without the red anyway, albeit not easily.

[Digdri]

To end this discussion about the attribution of the name to different country to find a pattern: I guess its really pointless.

IMO its safe to say that R07 was aiming for a broad theme of not names typical of a specific country but considered typical of western origins.
For the most part he choose names which go back to ancient origins and just took a very specific variation of it which may still get attributed to multiple languages or may be in use (or have been in use) in the corresponding countries. Thats why IMO its rather pointless to try to find the very meaning behind this as those names are just so old that they may literally exist in every western language in some minor or major variation.

Just a few of the examples cite more often:

As was already discussed: Eva and Maria go back to at least biblical ages.
But while the alternative to Eva is Eve it actually comes from an Hebrew name.
For Maria we also have Mary, Miriam/Mirjam, Marie etc.

George is attribute to Ancient Greece and as many kings took this name its now wonder that even Wikipedia list at least 30 variation of this name constructed over the ages which you wouldn't even consider linked to this. (Juri? Jörg/Jürgen? Duran? Göran?)

For Rosa while it's wide spread in Spanish and Portuguese its also much older.
But I see where the suggestion that it may be German could come from. Not only is/was it a rather often used name in Germany but its also the German name for the color "pink". But still it goes back at least to Latin so it will most likely get used in all those languages that don't change up original Latin spelling for their "native" words.

For Krauss I have to agree with chounokoe that it is really unlikely as as a German given name. But there are German people with the surname "Krauss" which fits the theme of borrowing names from individual features of persons ('krauss' is German for 'curly')
On the other side Klaus is still a really wide spread and typical German name (but I think their is no 'Klauss' variation of it and its just a double "error")
But its origin is indeed refers to Nikolaus or even before Nicholas which is once again from Greek and so we once again have something like 30 variation on Wikipedia. Still 'Kraus' is also in use as Danish, Norwegian and Finnish names as I found out later.

Even Jessica which sounds perfectly fine as English name is attribute back to complete different biblical name and while Rudolf sounds very typically German its actually in use in at least 6 languages.

I guess I could go on like this for every single family member with (remotely realistic) western name.
German only seem like a good place to start looking for pattern because this language usually does change up the original Latin or Greek names at all in spelling and/or pronunciation when adapting them unlike e.g. English (with a few exceptions like adding umlauts or morphing i/j or c/k as I already stated before in the translation thread)

So in conclusion I consider grouping them by those national flavors as a dead end (if it's not the Eiserne Jungfrauen characters :p )

If you really want to overthink the names to this extend I guess looking for the actually MEANING behind all those original names could have much more subtle plot relevance then where they are used today. After all most examples above go back at least 2k year and this tale has significant link to biblical topics and ideology.
At least for Maria this idea was already confirmed in EP7 and Rosa => Maria's rose also is a long standing theory. Perhaps it doesn't end there. ;)

[Leafsnail]

If we go by a loose definition of "natural" to include "those clues which are necessarily derived from processes comprehensible to the detective," we're fine with red truth. Meta-Battler exists in an environment which is not itself bound by strictly naturalistic laws, but what laws do exist have consistent rules (red statements are truth and non-true statements cannot be stated in red). The board characters never intuit using red to their advantage, so the pieces do not break Knox or Dine. The board mysteries are solvable without the red anyway, albeit not easily.
Most of the early red truths are things you'd probably infer from the writing normally anyway. I mean, you probably wouldn't suspect that there are random secret passages everywhere, for instance.

Later on, though, some red truths ("Kanon was the 9th victim" sticks out to me) which are vital but which you wouldn't normally pick up.

[Renall]

You could, however, reach a solution for the 4th game which does not require knowing that red. And inasmuch as Meta-Battler is not the detective on the board, this is fine; Piece-Battler is not aware of this red, so if he is the detective of ep4 (I don't know that he is, but let's say he is), he's not coming to any conclusion with red text. The rule is not broken on the board or in the meta-world, and there is no information transfer between the two.

Again, it depends how loosely you'd read the rule. But I think it fits the spirit of the rule, since red text has a coherent ruleset and is introduced and explained to Meta-Battler long before it starts confirming things that are unconfirmed.

[ijriims]

A little bit off the current topic:

I am curious about how the readers view the "answer" provided in EP7. I am not talking about whehter you think it is lame or your other emotional responses to it, but rather I would want to know if you think Ryu07 really have exposed all the core truths in EP7. Do you think there is still a big reveal waiting in EP8.

Frankly, if we look at only the main part of EP7 (excluding tea party and ???), it seemed that Ryu07 had already told us whodunit (Yasu, aka Shannon), howdunit (for EP1-4, through persona death and bomb) and whydunit (frustration over love between Battler and George), as well as the backstory of Beatrice. If these are really the complete truth, then really what happened on 4th and 5th Oct, 1986 did not matter much, no matter it was Kyrie and Rudolf taking advantage of the accident or anything, if Yasu had setuped the murder plot and prepared the bomb already.

We had already used 60 pages to discuss the stuff in EP7, many people have voiced their suspicion on tea party and main part as well. So what do you think, is EP8 just a telling of how Yasu's plan gone wrong on that day, or there is actually a deeper core behind Yasu's story which led to the Rokkenjima incident?

[Jan-Poo]

I don't think EP8 actually gave an answer on the howdunnit, it barely showed some hints.
There are a lot of mysteries, closed room cases and so on, that we needed to solve through the various games and no definitive answer has been set yet.

So a good portion of EP8 will certainly be used to give those answers. I hope it will also explain the mysteries of EP5 and EP6, and I hope there will be acceptable explanations.

The issues of shkanon and ghosterika should also be clarified since ryuukishi definitely teased us by providing hints of both.

Oh and Battler's truth about his birth should be clarified. Including maybe more insight on Asumu. We have only heard Kyrie's pov so far.

What kind of role Yasu had in the rokkenjima incident is also not fully clear. Why the letters? Why the messages? Why killing everyone?
We have theories, but the author needs to give us a confirmation and he has yet to do so.


And still since Bernkastel is obviously still in play and she's up to no good I expect a battle in the metaworld too. Maybe BATTLER and Will will team up? I hope so, I want to see the two characters interact.

The story arc of Ange from 1998 also needs a proper conclusion.

Anyway I think there will be a lot of confirmations of stuff that have been theorized so far, but I also think that Ryuukishi still has a few secret cards that no one or very few actually predicted.

There's a lot of stuff to do in this EP8....

[Will Wright]

And still since Bernkastel is obviously still in play and she's up to no good I expect a battle in the metaworld too. Maybe BATTLER and Will will team up? I hope so, I want to see the two characters interact.

Me too. This is what I hope for the most in episode 8.


Frankly, if we look at only the main part of EP7 (excluding tea party and ???), it seemed that Ryu07 had already told us whodunit (Yasu, aka Shannon), howdunit (for EP1-4, through persona death and bomb) and whydunit (frustration over love between Battler and George),

Not sure about that though.

The howdunnit was always painfully easy(at least in a matter of possibilities), but the whydunit and the whodunit...Eh...

It goes Whydunit>Whodunit>Howdunit in a matter of difficulty.

Besides, Dine makes me uneasy to accept Shannon as the culprit.

edit: Yes I know Dine might not count for the main mystery, but it still goes against my principles to break it.

[TehChron]

Me too. This is what I hope for the most in episode 8.
Epic Cape and Epic Trenchcoat buddy cop story.

One's a formerly incompetent investigator with a chip on his shoulder and a hot, blonde, imaginary waifu.

The other is a past-his-prime ace detective with a newly found heart of gold, out to avenge his lover of questionable gender.

The twist is that they both fell for, and lost, the same person. Do they know? How will it affect their teamwork when it comes to light?

Two loose cannon vigilantes out to get revenge on the blue-haired loli that set them both up with ridiculous feats of deductive reasoning and imaginary sword swinging.

Epic Cape and Epic Trenchcoat, coming to Comikets near you December 2010.



Not sure about that though.

The howdunnit was always painfully easy(at least in a matter of possibilities), but the whydunit and the whodunit...Eh...

It goes Whydunit>Whodunit>Howdunit in a matter of difficulty.

Besides, Dine makes me uneasy to accept Shannon as the culprit.

edit: Yes I know Dine might not count for the main mystery, but it still goes against my principles to break it.

Shkannon is just the howdunnit, the why and who are the more difficult parts remaining to be sure, although I remain confident about the answer to those two myself.

[Renall]

Shkannon is just the howdunnit, the why and who are the more difficult parts remaining to be sure, although I remain confident about the answer to those two myself.
Don't you mean the whodunnit? Because "Shkannon" is not, and never has been, the "how." Except maybe in Double Shkanon.

[TehChron]

Don't you mean the whodunnit? Because "Shkannon" is not, and never has been, the "how." Except maybe in Double Shkanon.

Which I am a believer of.:p

[Jan-Poo]

Don't you mean the whodunnit? Because "Shkannon" is not, and never has been, the "how." Except maybe in Double Shkanon.

There is one case that seems to hint that shkanon is the how:

第３のゲーム、第一の晩。連鎖密室が繋ぎし、６人の骸。
Clair: 3rd Game, first twilight. The six bodies in the chained closed rooms.

幻は幻に。……輪になる密室、終わりと始まりが、重なる。
Will: Illusion to illusion. ........... the closed rooms are in a circle whose beginning and end overlap.


Shannon was the first who was discovered, Kanon was the last.

[Renall]

That would be possible even without Shkanon though. But that's not really the point I'm making here. If you're in favor of this you have the who, why, and how. It doesn't really make sense even given what we're supposedly told: WHO: Shannon/Yasu/Lion/Whoever.
WHY: lol im sad / praying for miracle / Battler u suck / I always hated that carpet and I do have 900t of explosives...
HOW: I have a bomb that's all but certain to kill everyone. Therefore, I will challenge them to solve the epitaph, then shoot them if they don't. Then, for some reason, I will impersonate another person who doesn't really exist and whose apparent existence helps me in no way whatsoever when I could just shoot everyone in their sleep or drug them and then shoot them or just allow them to blow up. Also I'll keep killing one of me off even though I still have to pretend to be alive as the other one, complicating matters if anyone ever notices my "corpse" missing.Even if I accept the who/why making sense, "I have access to the bomb" and "I'm going to shoot everyone in da face" seems like more than sufficient how. The impersonation is simply never actually necessary. Even if you ask me to accept everything about Yasu, this doesn't actually help her.

[Jan-Poo]

I have exactly the same opinion on double shkanon, I'm sure you know that.

[Renall]

The problem with Double Shkanon falls not in the "how" but the "why." It's basically exactly reversed; it works, but there's no clear reason for two people to be doing it.

When you multiply entities you make the howdunnit easier but the whydunnit harder (as you must justify more than one motive), and the reverse when you reduce entities (as one person has a harder time acting than more than one person does).

[TehChron]

The problem with Double Shkanon falls not in the "how" but the "why." It's basically exactly reversed; it works, but there's no clear reason for two people to be doing it.

When you multiply entities you make the howdunnit easier but the whydunnit harder (as you must justify more than one motive), and the reverse when you reduce entities (as one person has a harder time acting than more than one person does).

I claimed that its done because Kanon would be incompetent and Shannon was simply covering for him. At least, to establish that behavior prior to the murders.

[ijriims]

Using Shkanon (or Double Shkanon) to solve EP1-4, howdunit:

EP1:
Shanon used Kanon's corpse to pose as Shannon and she imposed as Kanon.
She murdered Eva and Hideyoshi, with Genji helping him to cover up the closed room.
She faked her death in the boiler room. Nanjo helped her to cover up.
She murdered Genji, Kumasawa and Nanjo while telling Maria to sing song.
SHe shot Natsuhi in the duel, dressing like the Portrait Beatrice.

Question: why did this reconcile with Battler overhearing Kanon's speech inside the kitchen?

EP2:
She dressed up as Beatrice to meet Rosa and Maria.
She called the adults to meet at the chapel and treat them a meal since the dinner was interrupted.
AFter the group quarreled with each other, she murdered the six, after letting Rosa left.
Rosa killed Jessica, or Shanon killed Jessica. Kanon persona was discarded.
She killed Nanjo and Kumasawa in the disguise of Kanon (but not in Kanon persona), while Genji coerced Gohda to cover up.
She kiled George, Gohda and suicided.
Finally the explosive exploded, and everyone died.

EP3:
She played dead in the parlor, placing Kanon's real body in the chapel.
After the adults left, she followed them to murder every other servants.
Shanon persona was discarded and it was Beatrice persona afterwards.
Eva accidentally murdered Rosa and straggled Maria.
Kyrie's group went to mansion and had a fight among themselves. Hideyoshi shot Rudolf, Kyrie shot Hideyoshi but Hideyoshi retaliate in his last breath and hurt Kyrie. Kyrie met Beatrice and Beatrice helped Kyrie to fake her death. Kyrie said Eva has solved the epitaph, Beatrice told Kyrie the explosives and the passcode for the bank card inside the underground VIP card
Eva murdered Krauss and Natsuhi, dragging their bodies to the garden. Beatrice stabbed the stakes on them.
George came to mansion and found Shannon (in George's eye, Beatrice is SHannon), thinking she was resurrected. Kyrie killed George and perished.
Latter the group came, Beatrice imposed as Kanon for the blind Jessica, killed Nanjo and both died in the explosion.
Eva killed Battler and survived.

EP4:
Because of Kyrie's word, Krauss would not hide Kinzo's death. Latter Shannon came and offered to take the responsibility (then Krauss would say the concealment of Kinzo's death was only an order from the current head of family) if he accepted her to be the head of family and followed her planned test. Krauss agreed.
Shannon announced this to everyone in the meeting and they were obliged to follow the plan because she also offered the gold in exchange. She recruited Kyrie, hoping her to convince Battler in believing who he was going to see was Beatrice.
Soon, she killed the 6 adults and murdered the children who failed the test.
She abandoned Kanon's persona after she killed Jessica.
She told Kyrie of the explosive so Kyrie said the magic stuff to Battler.
She shot herself and the gun slipped into the well. She offered the poison to Maria.
Battler died in explosion.


Whodunit, howdunit for EP1-4, using information from EP7 (like Tea party, Will's response to Kureru, etc)

For whydunit, well, she was kind of over-imaginative and believed deeply in magic so after Battler failed to remembered his promise she thought killing the people according to epitaph would really create a Golden Land where everyone would be happy (GeorgeXShannon, BeatriceXBattler, KanonXJessica).


Does anyone buy this kind of "Answer"? I dont'. I was expecting a subversion of all the above theories in EP8

[kiby]

Using Shkanon (or Double Shkanon) to solve EP1-4, howdunit:



EP2:
She dressed up as Beatrice to meet Rosa and Maria.
She called the adults to meet at the chapel and treat them a meal since the dinner was interrupted.
AFter the group quarreled with each other, she murdered the six, after letting Rosa left.
Rosa killed Jessica, or Shanon killed Jessica. Kanon persona was discarded.
She killed Nanjo and Kumasawa in the disguise of Kanon (but not in Kanon persona), while Genji coerced Gohda to cover up.
She kiled George, Gohda and suicided.
Finally the explosive exploded, and everyone died.






Ok, let's roll this possibility one more time....

I thought that Will sayed something like this about ep 2 about natsuhi's room ..." a coffin is not a closed room". It's just that I don't get why would Shannon kill herself at that time. Furthermore Will todl that Kumasawa and Nanjo were not dead (wich would explain goda's silence...).
So why would she let em alive? I hope she actually did chalenge battler before midnight just like it is in ep 2.

[Jan-Poo]

I think I've found an evidence that maybe demonstrates without any doubt that Yasu and Shannon were the same person from the beginning:


"ねぇ、ガラシさん～。何でヤスだけは３人部屋じゃないわけですかー"
"Hey, Garashi. Why only Yasu isn't in a 3 persons room?"


I wonder who is Garashi but since she seems to hold the highest authority I suppose it's Maid-Lucifer. Anyway what matters here is that the three "first generation" servants are all holed up in a single room, and they ask why Yasu is the "only one" who isn't in a 3 persons room.

Shannon was supposed to be be in Yasu's room. So why they don't mention Shannon here?


And then there is this sentence:

"ですよねー！　普通、２ぃ２ぃにしますよねぇ？"

Now depending on how it's translated it can make a difference.

if it is: "normally it's 2 and 2". You could presume that in Rokkenjima usually servants are assigned to double rooms. But in this case the odd one wouldn't be Yasu's and Shannon's room, it would be the 3 persons room they are in! Why rather than complaining about Yasu, they don't complain about their own room? Why they would complain that Yasu is in a double, if it is normal to be in a double?


So I think it makes more sense if it is: "normally you'd make 2 and 2".

So it goes like: "We are four servants, it would make more sense if we were split between two double rooms rather than 3 in 1 and 1 in a single".

But then that means there are only 4 servants and not 5.
If there were 5 servants, the split in "2" and "3" wouldn't be anything strange.
The other way you can do it is by "2", "2", "1". But then rather than complaining about Yasu they should have complained that they holed them up in a single room rather than in two.

[Will Wright]

Epic Cape and Epic Trenchcoat buddy cop story.

One's a formerly incompetent investigator with a chip on his shoulder and a hot, blonde, imaginary waifu.

The other is a past-his-prime ace detective with a newly found heart of gold, out to avenge his lover of questionable gender.

The twist is that they both fell for, and lost, the same person. Do they know? How will it affect their teamwork when it comes to light?

Two loose cannon vigilantes out to get revenge on the blue-haired loli that set them both up with ridiculous feats of deductive reasoning and imaginary sword swinging.

Epic Cape and Epic Trenchcoat, coming to Comikets near you December 2010.


I would seriously pay 500 dollars to see that. With that exact tagline and description.

Don't you mean the whodunnit? Because "Shkannon" is not, and never has been, the "how." Except maybe in Double Shkanon.

I take it as howdunnit, not who.

Although Double Shkanon is one way to get around Dine.

"Shannon did all the work for both of them so Kanon was never a servant he just pretended to be one"

so we could get away with saying that Shannon/Kanon is the culprit.

I have a pretty good who and why, but I am fairly sure that they are wrong even if that's the conclusion I arrived at.

Also I'm 90% sure that the why is going to be "LOVEEEEEEEEEEEE MAKES YOU CRAAAAAAAAAAAAZY" or something like that. But I sure hope it isn't.

[Leafsnail]

For the ep2 Natsuhi's closed room - wouldn't it be quite difficult to smash a stake into your own head like that? I mean, I always assumed it would require a bit of post-mortem smashing to get it in.

[Judoh]

For the ep2 Natsuhi's closed room - wouldn't it be quite difficult to smash a stake into your own head like that? I mean, I always assumed it would require a bit of post-mortem smashing to get it in.

I would assume (if the body is not fake as some suggest) that for that to be possible someone would have to smash her head pretty hard, suggesting a blunt weapon of some type or they'd have accidentally hit her against something that would give a big enough gap to stick a stake in her head.

Of course Gohda's big an burly, but he's not a murderer due to Dine. Therefore that automatically makes the person responsible a certain somebody inside the room or a certain milady outside the room. Either way somebody really hates Beatrice's guts I take it. But as Kyrie says "love can turn into a motive to kill". I think that's because, love being a strong emotion, can turn into hate when it's betrayed and it's possible to take an action you'll regret later from that. Of course that's not just with Romantic love, it's the same with friendships and blood relations too.

[Leafsnail]

Yeah, it'd probably be possible with a hammer, or by, say, slamming someone's head against it. However, neither of these things really work if you're doing it to yourself...

I guess George culprit works fine for that.

[erneiz_hyde]

I think I've found an evidence that maybe demonstrates without any doubt that Yasu and Shannon were the same person from the beginning:


"ねぇ、ガラシさん～。何でヤスだけは３人部屋じゃないわけですかー"
"Hey, Garashi. Why only Yasu isn't in a 3 persons room?"


I wonder who is Garashi but since she seems to hold the highest authority I suppose it's Maid-Lucifer. Anyway what matters here is that the three "first generation" servants are all holed up in a single room, and they ask why Yasu is the "only one" who isn't in a 3 persons room.

Shannon was supposed to be be in Yasu's room. So why they don't mention Shannon here?


And then there is this sentence:

"ですよねー！　普通、２ぃ２ぃにしますよねぇ？"

Now depending on how it's translated it can make a difference.

if it is: "normally it's 2 and 2". You could presume that in Rokkenjima usually servants are assigned to double rooms. But in this case the odd one wouldn't be Yasu's and Shannon's room, it would be the 3 persons room they are in! Why rather than complaining about Yasu, they don't complain about their own room? Why they would complain that Yasu is in a double, if it is normal to be in a double?


So I think it makes more sense if it is: "normally you'd make 2 and 2".

So it goes like: "We are four servants, it would make more sense if we were split between two double rooms rather than 3 in 1 and 1 in a single".

But then that means there are only 4 servants and not 5.
If there were 5 servants, the split in "2" and "3" wouldn't be anything strange.
The other way you can do it is by "2", "2", "1". But then rather than complaining about Yasu they should have complained that they holed them up in a single room rather than in two.

I see...I kinda agree with you because 4 is one possible explanation if there is one room filled with 3 and another 1, but can be made into a pair. There is also 10, with 3-3-3-1 setup, but somehow 10 is just rather big a number imho. However, it's Kinzo who employ them, and you know what they say about Kinzo.

Also, I wonder who Kumazawa gets a room with :p

[Jan-Poo]

Kumasawa like Gohda and Genji has a room all for herself (as seen in EP5). I guess it's only the fukuin children that are normally placed in double or triple rooms.

As for the servants being in higher number than we have seen, if it's 3-3-3-2... then why they say normally the rooms should contain 2 people each?
If it's 3-2-2-2... then why they say that Yasu is the only one that doesn't stay in a triple room?

The only way it can really make sense is by having 4 fukuin servants in total.

[Judoh]

Yeah, it'd probably be possible with a hammer, or by, say, slamming someone's head against it. However, neither of these things really work if you're doing it to yourself...

I guess George culprit works fine for that.

I was thinking of a table leg since George is said to be holding a table leg as a weapon when Battler is holding his hatstand spear in episode 4. Or just the magic of martial arts. But a hammer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpCV2wgoxC8) is fine too.

[Leafsnail]

My old theory was that the stakes are actually spearheads (hence the odd shape) which would make them a bit more practical as weapons.

[Renall]

If they're really paperweights, I'm not even firmly convinced they're all that sharp.