Quote:
Originally Posted by Patchwork Chimera
But even then, one cannot be so sure... so the scarce theories existed. Ryuukishi pointed clearly that Black Buttler was a product of those crazy goat theories about "Battler as a culprit". They're so impossible you'd have to create a new character, cuz all the sheer OOC would destroy real Battler.
Even then, people still posted them. When it was almost so clear Battler didn't kill anyone, they made him as an (evil) acomplice.
|
Bern seems to think he's capable of being an accomplice. Why would she think that? Just for the shits of it?
Besides, we don't
know that's actually OOC for Battler. Oh, sure, it's out of character for
the Battler character we're familiar with, but that doesn't mean anything. He's a character, just like Kanon. His personality is a fictional construct. It may be based on real information, but we don't have enough of that real information ourselves to guess how accurate the portrayal actually was.
It's
possible Battler-Prime had a motive. But there's no
evidence for one. That he lacks motive and inclination in his story form is not evidence that he didn't have any, but no positive evidence exists to suggest otherwise. Yet the author of the work pushes forward a notion that, based solely on what we know about the original character, doesn't appear to make sense.
How can we really know Black Battler isn't a closer portrayal of Battler-Prime than Message Bottle Battler? We know almost nothing about Battler-Prime to say.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo
Anyway he remembered he was 18 years old, which is different from remembering the number 18. This suggests that Tohya lost his memory at that age and Battler went missing at exactly that age. While you can state that there are a lot of people that are 18 years old, this adds quite a lot to the convenience of Ikuko finding an amnesiac moldable as Battler that also casually believes to have the same age Battler had when he disappeared.
|
It seems like "just happening upon" Battler himself would be by far the biggest coincidence and that coincidence is made far less so if it was only the encounter that was coincidental and not the specific individual encountered. If you're going to make arguments about probability, perhaps you should actually consider the likelihood of all such events.
Meeting
a person with amnesia by chance is unlikely. Meeting
a specific and particular person with amnesia by chance is essentially near-impossible.