Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherringford
Yes, I liked that part. What I didn't like was how he did it. First of all, no one ever tried to use those rules to solve a novel before(...or did the Umineko fandom do that?) he came up with it out of nowhere, used it, then explained why his never-used-before-approach-to-solve-novels was never used before.
|
Hm, I'll try to expand on what I meant. Although Erika is a caricature of a heartless detective in general, I don't think Ryukishi actually meant for her abuse of Knox itself to reflect on something real people were doing, at least beyond the level of generally ignoring the author's intentions. Instead, the abuse is a vehicle for the revelation that Beato had been following some kind of ruleset in the first place, even if it wasn't precisely equivalent to Knox. Does that make sense?
In the main part of EP7, Will only uses the Dine rules to establish a bare minimum basis of fair play between himself and Bernkastel, and doesn't rely on them for general reasoning. As for the prologue mystery, that was a situation where Will had already figured out the answer. He wasn't acting as a reader imposing a rule on the story, but as a proxy for the author in defense of the story, revealing a rule that had actually been followed. My understanding of the EP8 arguments is that they were qualitatively similar to that, although I haven't personally read that far yet.