AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > Anime Discussion > Older Series > Retired > Umineko

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2010-12-16, 10:24   Link #19821
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronotrig View Post
@Cao Ni Ma:

Well, this is neither a double nor twins. It's one person playing two separate parts. Yeah, it's improbable that two completely different people would look alike, but this is one person dressing up as two parts. Anyone in the world can do that, though not everyone could pull it off as a member of the opposite sex.
I'm pretty sure the spirit of that rule is violated by Disguise Shkanon. Sorry, but you can't possibly argue that the literary cheapness that "lol twin brother with no evidence" constitutes is somehow any different from "lol one person disguised as two with no evidence."

At least with twins we have the option to find evidence showing one person is in the same place at the same time (thus indicating there are two people). There is absolutely no way to present affirmative evidence that two people are one person. "They never appear at the same time" is not evidence.
Quote:
The point here is that incredible powers of disguise are not needed. Why does everyone on the island seem to believe that Kanon and Shannon are different people? It's not because they look different. On the contrary, people call them siblings several times even though they claim not to be. And Kanon is often described as a slender boy, who, incidentally, rarely ever talks to anyone or interacts with anyone.
Ignoring that nobody is that stupid, let me present a scenario that is very likely to happen at some point and completely outside the control of this disguise ninja:

Natsuhi says "I'd like all the servants to be present for a meeting. I'll need Runon, Manon, Shannon, and Kanon present on that day."

Shkanon does... what now?

It's fiction.
Quote:
Of course, I'm not saying "therefore they must be the same person". That would be insane. I'm just saying that, given this information, and the fact that Battler never sees them together in any question arc, this possibility is fair game. If evidence elsewhere supports this conclusion, then we should be able to accept it.
Game is solvable by ep4.

No affirmative evidence exists before ep6.

Sooooooooooo...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keriaku View Post
I still think that the truth behind Kyrie as a culprit is that she was just as likely to kill everyone as the other adults. The acceptance Battler has for it is that his parents could have done this, but so could all the other adults on the island.
In the words of the poets, B.S.

I have more faith in these people than that. The adults are flawed as hell, but they've been shown to rise to the occasion just as often, if not more often, than they falter. This "any of them could be blinded by money, enough to mass murder" goes too far.

Do they need money? Yes. Are they desperate for money? Yes. Are they desperate enough to kill? I don't know, I hope not. Desperate enough to kill everyone? Come on, are you kidding me?

EDIT: And Spectator's Authority didn't prevent Maria from putting her own spin on her meetings with Beatrice, remember. Similar to her red in ep6; Maria believes things in the context that she believes them. If it were possible that Eva willfully distorted her own truth to the point that she believed events as they were depicted in the Tea Party, it's theoretically possible to say that was some sort of Spectator Authority - Eva scenario.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-16, 11:22   Link #19822
Arcanis
Sticky Fingers
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Passione
Send a message via MSN to Arcanis
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
Can you quote that part? If it's as you said I totally missed it, it's also the first time that I hear someone pointing this out.

If I look at the text... the first one to talk as soon as the play begins is Hideyoshi...
Here you see Ange screaming at the witches asking that if after reading aloud, if this time it was theaterwatching, and telling them to begin already that she's bored, etc:

Spoiler:


Then there's a page saying that there was no sound (at first), but then comes the next one that says that someone answered and it resounded in the middle of the theater:

Spoiler for Anouncing:


This is the important page. The final line says "まるで、演目の始まりを告げるかのようだった。", which is basically: "almost as if to inform of the beginning of a musical".

And the very next page is:

Spoiler for hesodemokande:


Spoiler for babaa:


Eva.
Arcanis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-16, 11:53   Link #19823
ijriims
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: HK, China
I am dubious about the EP7 tea party being narration of Eva's point of view,

because I don't think she knew or thought that Shannon loved Battler before loving George, and the meeting was supposedly secret between Shannon and George, Eva should not have any idea about it, while being in the mansion all the time.
__________________
Kýrie, eléison

Battler, you have already known it, right?

Without Love, it cannot be seen.
ijriims is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-16, 11:55   Link #19824
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Hmmm. You are right, I completely forgot about that, or rather at the time I thought that was just another way for Bern to mock Ange.

But the problem still remains. How could Eva have misunderstood that much? Frankly speaking I think Musouka's idea that it's all true makes more sense than the idea that it was just a huge misunderstanding from Eva's part.

If anything I'd say this is the version of the story of an Eva that lost her sanity since a long time, or something she made up completely to torture Ange and hide the truth.


@Ijirmis: Or maybe the true culprit is George and Eva created that story to give Ange the worst answer to her persisting questions. That of course means that Eva realized the "truth" of Shannon, George and Battler in that unfortunate day.
__________________

Jan-Poo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-16, 12:19   Link #19825
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
I'm pretty sure the spirit of that rule is violated by Disguise Shkanon. Sorry, but you can't possibly argue that the literary cheapness that "lol twin brother with no evidence" constitutes is somehow any different from "lol one person disguised as two with no evidence."
I agree with you completely, but how exactly do you define 'evidence'? Do you mean a trick like this isn't fair unless you can prove absolutely that they're the same person?

To put it another way, could you prove that Kinzo was dead before the reveal in EP4? Many of us guessed it, since it was the easiest of Umineko's secrets, but I don't think there's any absolute evidence for it. However, even though it can't be proven, it makes many scenes add up in a way they didn't before, so people accept it as a good theory.

Shkanon is the same. Whether you noticed them or not (I didn't), there are plenty of hints to let people think up the theory. This has been proven beyond any doubt by the simple fact that it existed before EP5. And, if you apply that theory, several scenes like the (now confirmed) lack of Shannon's corpse in EP1, the EP2 backstory scenes (which must be reread to be understood), the EP3 first twilight (why did the culprit choose to make a closed room of that complicated shape), and the lack of Kanon's corpse in EP2 and EP4 all make sense.

To simplify this even more, EP3 is the only time in any game when both corpses are found, and in every other game, at least one of them disappears at or immediately after the first twilight, never to be seen again, dead or alive.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Ignoring that nobody is that stupid, let me present a scenario that is very likely to happen at some point and completely outside the control of this disguise ninja:

Natsuhi says "I'd like all the servants to be present for a meeting. I'll need Runon, Manon, Shannon, and Kanon present on that day."

Shkanon does... what now?

It's fiction.
More or less covered that here. It isn't really that hard to get out of this situation, and Shkanon doesn't require anyone to be stupid, with the possible exception of Natsuhi. You can't just say "oh, such a thing sounds stupid". You have to actually look critically at the facts and see, for every person, whether they were likely to notice or respond to Shkanon.

I'll add that, if Natsuhi instead says "I want to meet all of the servants right now", Genji or Shannon can just say that Kanon is in Kinzo's study. Natsuhi isn't allowed in there, and the rumors suggest that some servants have spent large amounts of time alone with Kinzo in his study. The fact that Kinzo's sudden whims make for an excellent excuse has been pounded into us over and over again by now.

Quote:
"They never appear at the same time" is not evidence.
Not entirely true. That they never appear at the same time is not proof, but it is suspicious. If a detective investigating this case was aware of that fact, they would be smart to question both servants at the same time, especially when there's a history of pranks in this mansion, which must either have been the doing of a family member or a servant. And since some of the more complicated pranks would seem to require multiple people, at least one servant is probably implicated. In fact, since the pranks seem to be of an occult nature, and the old shut-in of a family head is fascinated by the occult, it's very possible that even he is somehow involved.

The point of Umineko is that we can't open the cat box and question the witnesses. No matter how much we suspected that Kinzo was dead, we couldn't have proven it until the answer was confirmed in EP4. But we could still make theories about it and find the answer.
__________________
"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers


www.witch-hunt.com Theory page

Last edited by chronotrig; 2010-12-16 at 12:45.
chronotrig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-16, 12:43   Link #19826
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
But Renall still has a point that a normal person would begin to suspect something if two servants never showed up at the same time and place for three years. And if you add to that the fact that they also look very similar...

There's another interesting thing to consider. Is there are any proof that a male fukuin servant ever existed before Kanon?

Regardless of Yasu's true sex we can be pretty sure that she was introduced as a female. We have also never seen any servant that wasn't female. In addition Yasu was the only one that stayed in a single room. I strongly doubt that Natsuhi would allow mixing male and female servants in the same bedrooms, so you can't postulate that there was a single male fukuin servant, there should have been at least two. But that's very unlikely considering another proof:

Jessica was surprised when she saw a male fukuin servant. Which means it was something unusual.

Considering all this, it is very unlikely that Kanon would pass unobserved. Natsuhi and Krauss would probably consider him an anomaly as much as they did with Yasu.
__________________

Jan-Poo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-16, 14:11   Link #19827
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronotrig View Post
I agree with you completely, but how exactly do you define 'evidence'? Do you mean a trick like this isn't fair unless you can prove absolutely that they're the same person?

To put it another way, could you prove that Kinzo was dead before the reveal in EP4? Many of us guessed it, since it was the easiest of Umineko's secrets, but I don't think there's any absolute evidence for it. However, even though it can't be proven, it makes many scenes add up in a way they didn't before, so people accept it as a good theory.
I'm a lawyer, and we define evidence essentially as "a fact which tends to make a claim more or less true."

Seeing them at the same time would be evidence that tends to prove they are not the same person. Asking to meet one while the other is present and repeatedly getting excuses (a la Will's insistence in ep7) would be evidence that tends to prove they are (or at least that something is wrong with seeing both at once). Finding Shannon's outfit hastily tossed on a bed in a guestroom you saw Kanon leaving would tend to prove they are (even if there might be some other reason, like Shannon slipping out a window naked for some reason).

In ep1-4, Battler never puts himself in a circumstance in which he would be suspicious that Kanon and Shannon are not directly present at the same time. In fact, the only time he believes himself to be in proximity to both is ep1's First Twilight, and he can't confirm it. Nor does he seem to think it impossible, or follow up on it in any way. This is exactly the opposite of evidence. It's barely even considered to be circumstantial.

It isn't "proof" in the sense that it isn't a fact that tends to make something more or less true. Not seeing two people together at the same time is a fact, it's just not a fact that tends to show that a conclusion (they are one person/they aren't one person) is more likely to be true. It may be a fact worth investigating, but it isn't proof of anything.

And note that they do appear together, out of Battler's sight. Disguise theories require us to believe every single scene of this nature is deceptive or metaphorical.

Kinzo in fact is different, because there is evidence that tends to show this is true. Scenes with Kinzo in his office being magical or inconsistently-characterized. Refusal by Krauss and Natsuhi to ever let anyone see him under any circumstances. The way Rosa dismisses protecting him after "speaking" with him. The reaction Krauss has to Kyrie's suggestion (and the suggestion itself) that Kinzo is already dead. The fact that his body is always incinerated. It's a mountain of circumstantial evidence and one direct piece of affirmative evidence (the constantly burned corpse).

To make the two remotely equivalent, people would only have gone as far as "No one can see Father." "Okay." And then never discussed it again or cared. "No one can see Kinzo because he doesn't want visitors" by itself is not evidence that tends to prove it more or less true that he's alive or dead. It's the dearth of evidence that damns it, not the circumstantial nature.
Quote:
I'll add that, if Natsuhi instead says "I want to meet all of the servants right now", Genji or Shannon can just say that Kanon is in Kinzo's study. Natsuhi isn't allowed in there, and the rumors suggest that some servants have spent large amounts of time alone with Kinzo in his study. The fact that Kinzo's sudden whims make for an excellent excuse has been pounded into us over and over again by now.
My point is, it looks really really suspicious. See Jan-Poo's speculation as to whether male Fukuin servants even exist. Ep7 actually insinuates exactly the opposite. Kanon would be one odd duck.
Quote:
Not entirely true. That they never appear at the same time is not proof, but it is suspicious. If a detective investigating this case was aware of that fact, they would be smart to question both servants at the same time, especially when there's a history of pranks in this mansion, which must either have been the doing of a family member or a servant. And since some of the more complicated pranks would seem to require multiple people, at least one servant is probably implicated. In fact, since the pranks seem to be of an occult nature, and the old shut-in of a family head is fascinated by the occult, it's very possible that even he is somehow involved.
Yeah... except Battler never does that. Nobody does that, until Will does it. In ep7. Three episodes after we're told we can solve things.
Quote:
The point of Umineko is that we can't open the cat box and question the witnesses. No matter how much we suspected that Kinzo was dead, we couldn't have proven it until the answer was confirmed in EP4. But we could still make theories about it and find the answer.
Prove it? I prove things on a daily basis that I can't absolutely determine are true. Sometimes, I prove things that maybe aren't true. If your standard of provability is set as high as you claim, nothing can ever be proved to anyone who didn't directly experience it. There is ample evidence to "prove," at least beyond any reasonable doubt, that Kinzo is dead. Alternately, it's certainly provable that Kinzo is more likely than not to be dead. In a criminal trial, the former would pass muster for a conviction; in a civil trial, you just have to prove the latter.

Of course we're warned against that in ep5. But the point is, "proof" is not an absolute standard. It depends on what you're willing to accept. If you can accept Erika's circumstantial evidence, then you can accept her conclusion. If you can't, you won't. If you can accept Bernkastel's presentation, you can accept her conclusion too. If not, you can't. If you can accept Battler's answer in ep8 (presumably), you can accept his conclusion.

Could any case be wrong? Could Ryukishi flat-out say "This is the truth: <statement answering everything>," and could we still doubt it? Yep. But I don't think Disguise Shkanon passes any reasonable standard of "proof" on the evidence of ep1-4 alone. A fiction approach avoids all these problems and is actually supported by more evidence and by direct evidence that physically exists (or at least, that we're told exists).
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-16, 14:30   Link #19828
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
I don't agree that the oddity of Shannon and Kanon never being together didn't reach any warning level. Like at all.

Why are you creating your argument on piece Battler's perspective? Who the hell cares? For us readers there were tons of hints to reach that conclusion.

Id didn't say that I was 99% sure that there was a reason for them to never show up together in front of Battler back when EP5 still needed to be released for nothing.

I rarely say that I'm totally sure about something, but when I do I'm almost always correct, because when I do, I have pretty damn good evidences and rational arguments to support that claim. The evidence of Shannon and Kanon never showing up together and the strangeness related to the excuses that made that possible paired with the persistence of that pattern throughout the various episodes were alarmingly high.

It was also noticed, and not only by me, that Kanon seemed to work like an internal conscious for Shannon, considering that he just happened to see scenes involving Shannon while remaining completely unnoticed by others, as if he was some kind of ninja.
__________________

Jan-Poo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-16, 14:36   Link #19829
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
If we don't focus on Piece-Battler, then there is mountainous evidence that Shannon and Kanon are separate people. People who favor Shkanon have to work hard to deny those things, and forcing Piece-Battler's primacy is usually the way they do it. I'm just playing that game.

Regardless, are you using meta-fictional knowledge to draw conclusions from the facts made? The same way we could use, say, Knox and Dine to attempt to eliminate culprits? I'd be careful with that. Makes you wonder whether that's some kind of trap. A fair mystery shouldn't require us to look to outside "rules" or meta-knowledge of how a genre "works" to solve it. If ep1-4 are fair mysteries (or a fair mystery), we should not need facts not in evidence (i.e. outside sources).
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-16, 14:37   Link #19830
AuraTwilight
The True Culprit
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Golden Land
Send a message via AIM to AuraTwilight Send a message via MSN to AuraTwilight
Quote:
Also, even if I discard my whole Jessica-Gaap notion, I'm still a little bothered by the fact that Jessica has been living well over half her life going to school with this person, eventually crushes on them, but is somehow unable to see through the multiple roles thing to some degree. Something feels not right here.
"Oh hey a new servant that looks sort of like Shannon. Maybe he's actually...."

Thump.

"SUPER HOT LOL TEEN HORMONES."

Jessica's consistently shown to be not that smart.

Quote:
Ignoring that nobody is that stupid, let me present a scenario that is very likely to happen at some point and completely outside the control of this disguise ninja:

Natsuhi says "I'd like all the servants to be present for a meeting. I'll need Runon, Manon, Shannon, and Kanon present on that day."

Shkanon does... what now?

It's fiction.
Clearly Natsuhi is in on it in order to troll the fuck out of George and Jessica. It's their own fault for disgracing the Ushiromiya name by wanting the fuck the help.

Also, "Try and do anything about my evil Shkanon plot or try and fire me or I tell everyone about Kinzo, bitch."

Quote:
If anything I'd say this is the version of the story of an Eva that lost her sanity since a long time, or something she made up completely to torture Ange and hide the truth.
Asspull theory time: In Eva's final moments, "WHY DONT YOU GIVE UP AND DIE? AHAHAHA" was a fantasy scene. What actually happened was that she trolled Ange by telling her the EP7 Tea Party story (which is a lie), and it caused Ange to emotionally break down and become suicidal.

EVERYTHING SEGUES TOGETHER HAHA I WIN.

Quote:
I'm a lawyer
Oh, okay, that explains everything. Being a lawyer, it is impossible for you to understand this thing we humans call love.
__________________
When the Silent Spirits Cry: An Umineko/Silent Hill crossover fanfiction
http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=4565173&postcount=531
AuraTwilight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-16, 14:43   Link #19831
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
If we don't focus on Piece-Battler, then there is mountainous evidence that Shannon and Kanon are separate people. People who favor Shkanon have to work hard to deny those things, and forcing Piece-Battler's primacy is usually the way they do it. I'm just playing that game.

Regardless, are you using meta-fictional knowledge to draw conclusions from the facts made? The same way we could use, say, Knox and Dine to attempt to eliminate culprits? I'd be careful with that. Makes you wonder whether that's some kind of trap. A fair mystery shouldn't require us to look to outside "rules" or meta-knowledge of how a genre "works" to solve it. If ep1-4 are fair mysteries (or a fair mystery), we should not need facts not in evidence (i.e. outside sources).
If you focus on Piece-Battler then there is not enough evidence to claim that Kinzo doesn't exist.

You are using the usual double standard on the matter. You have clearly used evidence that was outside of piece-Battler's perspective to prove your point on Kinzo just on the post before.

Quote:
Scenes with Kinzo in his office being magical or inconsistently-characterized.
So how come you can use this evidence to prove that "hey it was evident that Kinzo didn't exist", but you can't use the equivalent evidences for Shkanon?
Admit it, you are using a double standard. You can't see this matter objectively.
__________________

Jan-Poo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-16, 14:52   Link #19832
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
And note that they do appear together, out of Battler's sight. Disguise theories require us to believe every single scene of this nature is deceptive or metaphorical.

Kinzo in fact is different, because there is evidence that tends to show this is true. Scenes with Kinzo in his office being magical or inconsistently-characterized. Refusal by Krauss and Natsuhi to ever let anyone see him under any circumstances. The way Rosa dismisses protecting him after "speaking" with him. The reaction Krauss has to Kyrie's suggestion (and the suggestion itself) that Kinzo is already dead. The fact that his body is always incinerated. It's a mountain of circumstantial evidence and one direct piece of affirmative evidence (the constantly burned corpse).
I'm not sure I see how this helps your case. There have been many scenes with Shannon and Kanon together that seem inconsistent, and there are actually more magical scenes involving them than there are involving Kinzo. In fact, there are very few magic scenes throughout all question arcs that don't involve Kanon or Shannon in some way, and Kinzo only appears in magic scenes to die once per game (plus Goldsmith in EP4).

Spoiler for Inconsistant characterization:


Spoiler for Refusal to let people see Kinzo:


And I don't see how the burned corpse in any way proves that Kinzo was dead before the start of the games. If you're going to count that, why don't you count the fact that either Kanon's corpse or Shannon's corpse is missing in nearly every game, and Kanon's corpse was only checked once in EP3 at the end of a suspicious chain of closed rooms?
__________________
"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers


www.witch-hunt.com Theory page

Last edited by chronotrig; 2010-12-16 at 15:04.
chronotrig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-16, 15:27   Link #19833
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
If you focus on Piece-Battler then there is not enough evidence to claim that Kinzo doesn't exist.

You are using the usual double standard on the matter. You have clearly used evidence that was outside of piece-Battler's perspective to prove your point on Kinzo just on the post before.
What evidence is there outside of Piece-Battler's perspective in support of Shkanon, again? Oh right, none. I'm not picking and choosing evidence here. There simply isn't any for me to criticize.
Quote:
So how come you can use this evidence to prove that "hey it was evident that Kinzo didn't exist", but you can't use the equivalent evidences for Shkanon?
Admit it, you are using a double standard. You can't see this matter objectively.
I'm not using any double standard. I'm pointing to circumstantial evidence which shows Kinzo's behavior is inconsistent. Kanon and Shannon do not behave inconsistently with what little we're led to know about them. Quite the opposite, in fact, they have a very clear character arc.

I won't be so foolish as to get into a shouting match over who is viewing this matter "objectively." No one can view this matter objectively. My position is very clear on what I think is true. As is yours. Pot, kettle, much? Accusing me of being non-objective is an empty argument. I'm not objective, but I am capable of looking at a situation rationally.

And I can see nothing that would permit a rational conclusion as to what is being proposed. "Shkanon" can still be true, but it cannot be true that Shannon and Kanon are one character within the fiction (even if Yasu was essentially both of them at heart in her own existence) because the story simply does not address that. A matter which is not even relevant to the fiction cannot be portrayed as such a critical element. It would be as foolish as believing Huck Finn is secretly Abraham Lincoln. We can't find anything saying otherwise, but we don't have any proof they're not. All we can really say is "I don't think Mark Twain was trying to even address that possibility." The difference here is I think Ryukishi, consciously aware of Shmion, knew everyone would jump to the Shkanon conclusion and let the fictional characters aspect slip right under their noses because they'd willfully misread all the scenes as "evidence" of Shkanon rather than evidence of something else.

You're looking at "suspicious circumstances" and concluding that only one answer could possibly explain it. As to whether only one answer can explain it, I can't say. As to whether your answer does explain it, it does not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronotrig View Post
I'm not sure I see how this helps your case. There have been many scenes with Shannon and Kanon together that seem inconsistent, and there are actually more magical scenes involving them than there are involving Kinzo. In fact, there are very few magic scenes throughout all question arcs that don't involve Kanon or Shannon in some way, and Kinzo only appears in magic scenes to die once per game (plus Goldsmith in EP4).
Where in magic scenes are Kanon and Shannon inconsistent? Kinzo behaves like a completely different person in three separate episodes. Their behavior is unusual and sometimes breaks the fourth wall. But it does so relatively consistently.
Quote:
Spoiler for Inconsistant characterization:
It doesn't hint at anything you are describing. It's just unusual behavior from two characters who are supposed to be pieces. They are commenting as if they are fictional characters aware of the fictional framework in which they exist. Nothing about their conversations suggests they are acting out of character for what they are as characters, nor suggests they are one existence. That's absurd.
Quote:
Spoiler for Refusal to let people see Kinzo:
Incorrect. Most of the "Kinzo" scenes are, essentially, transmitted through Krauss. So he and Genji are in fact the ones propping up that idea. If other people could hear Kinzo, he wouldn't be dead, would he?

And it's patently untrue that "no one saw Kinzo." Kinzo was seen four times by Battler. In fact, he supposedly saw him every single episode.
Quote:
And I don't see how the burned corpse in any way proves that Kinzo was dead before the start of the games.
It is physical evidence which must be taken in context with the other evidence. This is what Shkanon lacks. I can't point out all the things that are missing because they're not there. The story just doesn't address them.
Quote:
If you're going to count that, why don't you count the fact that either Kanon's corpse or Shannon's corpse is missing in nearly every game, and Kanon's corpse was only checked once in EP3 at the end of a suspicious chain of closed rooms?
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The fact that Battler fails to see a corpse is not proof that there is no corpse. The fact that Battler does see a corpse is proof that a corpse exists. The consistent destruction of the corpse is evidence suggesting that the corpse, in its undamaged form, would be suspect for some reason. Based on this and the circumstantial evidence, it is trivial to conclude that Kinzo was dead prior to the 5th.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-16, 16:03   Link #19834
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
It doesn't hint at anything you are describing. It's just unusual behavior from two characters who are supposed to be pieces. They are commenting as if they are fictional characters aware of the fictional framework in which they exist. Nothing about their conversations suggests they are acting out of character for what they are as characters, nor suggests they are one existence. That's absurd.
Personally, I'd say that a character acting in a way that's impossible is a fairly huge hint, much bigger than some slight differences in how they behave in separate episodes. I think it's hard to argue that they really encountered a person who performed magic on them, or even who they thought performed magic on them, and who was planning to kill everyone on the island to regain her full magical power. Sure, it's possible, but I think anyone can see that it's fishy. Also, you sort of brush aside the fact that they comment about other worlds. It might not prove anything, but I don't see how that is somehow less suspicious than a person's behavior changing.

You call Kinzo's behavior inconsistent, but can you provide some concrete examples of how? You demand examples from Shkanon supporters, so this is hardly an unfair request. It needs to be something more solid that "well, in one game, he decided not to write a will, but in another, he reluctantly agreed". That's not a change in character, it's just a different decision he made, and could have been caused by a slightly different series of events preceding the story or after the story starts.

Quote:
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The fact that Battler fails to see a corpse is not proof that there is no corpse. The fact that Battler does see a corpse is proof that a corpse exists. The consistent destruction of the corpse is evidence suggesting that the corpse, in its undamaged form, would be suspect for some reason. Based on this and the circumstantial evidence, it is trivial to conclude that Kinzo was dead prior to the 5th.
You're speaking in absolute terms here, as though there's something fundamentally different about the two cases, but I think the real difference is in how obvious the answer is.

I'll take EP4, since it's the easiest to argue. According to Battler, Kyrie claimed that Kanon's corpse fell into the well as they were climbing out. It seems very unlikely that it was even possible to enter or exit the well, so this part is almost certainly a lie, either by Kyrie or someone holding Kyrie hostage.

So, why would anyone lie about this? If we use your own reasoning, the most likely reason for hiding a corpse is because the corpse, in its undamaged form, would be suspect for some reason. Why would Kanon's corpse be suspect? Unlike Kinzo's case, the answer isn't obvious, but the problem is still just as clear.
__________________
"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers


www.witch-hunt.com Theory page

Last edited by chronotrig; 2010-12-16 at 16:15.
chronotrig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-16, 16:30   Link #19835
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
The main differences are Weepy Kinzo, Brooding Kinzo (these two are self-evident and not entirely inconsistent), Natsuhi's Kinzo (which is blatantly out of character with the others), and Goldsmith. Those are quite different interpretations of Kinzo, and that's fine if they're interpretations. But that is circumstantial evidence that he himself is fictional. The difference is Kinzo's existence is an acknowledged "reality." However, the Kinzo we see is a fiction. Because there is no "living Kinzo." "Ushiromiya Kinzo" is dead, and filling his role is a fictional Kinzo.

I think there is a blatant overlooking of the unusual nature in which Kanon and Shannon seem to have character development between episodes. They are not suddenly more or less knowledgeable about Beatrice; they actually gain knowledge as they interact with her more. This is impossible given an episodic structure, but it is entirely consistent with the idea of a continuous narrative (and we do have one of those in Umineko in spite of episodic structures).

Pretend for a moment that 1-4 are a continuous narrative in spite of the looping:
  • Shannon begins clumsy and disrespected. She is in love with George, but shy and somewhat reluctant to make her choice. She knows about Beatrice but is not certain whether she should resist her. She meets Beatrice and vows to make her love happen for sure. Beatrice tells her it won't last. She becomes more confident, more capable and respected, more open about her acceptance of George's proposal, and more defiant of Beatrice. She becomes willing to fight for George's sake and for her and Kanon's sake. By ep6, she is resolute enough to literally fight for George, even at a cost. She even takes on a near-mythical nature in ep7, at least to Yasu.
  • Kanon begins withdrawn and suspicious. He doesn't approve of Shannon's closeness to George, and he is defiant of Beatrice from a very early point. He meets Beatrice as well, but unlike Shannon is unable to accept her (probably due to "earlier" experiences). His relationship with Jessica is initially problematic, but he begins helping her, and eventually desires to fight for her. By ep6, he has come to "understand" what Shannon told him, which makes no sense if it's a looping character but perfect sense if his existence as a character is continuous from the beginning to the present. Now, he is open about his love. Kanon also gains combat experience. His first battle, he struggles with a goat and is outmatched by the Stakes. His second, he can match the Stakes but not defeat them all. His third, he can battle an army.
  • Who else behaves in this fashion, with this same degree of development? Beatrice. BATTLER. ANGE. Sakutarou. MARIA.
You have to really be trying to overlook a character arc to not see it there. Shannon and Kanon develop. This shouldn't happen. Every piece ought to be like Battler, whose narration shows no signs of recognition of any prior events. Yet Kanon and Shannon not only appear to remember them, they even discuss them and act as if they have learned from them. This has no relevant meaning in a "disguising ninja Yasu" variant of Shkanon. It's not just that it can't explain this development arc, it has no reason to want to.

The question of something like "why can't furniture love?" is misstated. Why can't fictional characters love? Of course they can. They just need to work their way to it.

Again, that doesn't mean Shannon and Kanon != Yasu. It just means Yasu isn't in her own stories, and later stories unknowingly omit her. Yet those that seek the "truth" pay the fictions their due and allow them their happy ending in ep6. But those aren't the only "characters" that matter, as George says.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-16, 17:15   Link #19836
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
The main differences are Weepy Kinzo, Brooding Kinzo (these two are self-evident and not entirely inconsistent), Natsuhi's Kinzo (which is blatantly out of character with the others), and Goldsmith. Those are quite different interpretations of Kinzo, and that's fine if they're interpretations. But that is circumstantial evidence that he himself is fictional. The difference is Kinzo's existence is an acknowledged "reality." However, the Kinzo we see is a fiction. Because there is no "living Kinzo." "Ushiromiya Kinzo" is dead, and filling his role is a fictional Kinzo.
You have a good point with the Natsuhi's Kinzo, and that was one of the clues Ryuukishi left for us. I'd point out that, while this behavior of his is extremely improbable, I don't believe it's ever contradicted in EP1-3.

Goldsmith can hardly count as a different interpretation of Kinzo, since we only see him after Kyrie suggests that Kinzo might be dead. Hints after the answer has been stated, whether it's confirmed or not, can hardly be used in an analogy with Shkanon.

So, in the end, there isn't much of a contradiction in behavior at all. Just one scene where he displays an improbable but not impossible regard for Natsuhi. The real problem with his personality is how crazy it is, not that it changes a lot. And I don't think mood swings in a character like Kinzo count as a personality change.


As for your arguments about Shannon and Kanon, I agree that there's something strange about them, but why are you assuming that it's an entirely different 'strangeness' from the one we see in Kinzo? By that, I mean assuming that it's a level of fiction that exists outside of the games, not inside.

The fact that Kinzo doesn't make sense might hint that he's a fictional character, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he died at time X before the crime and people A, B, and C knew about it and kept quiet for reason Y. In the same way, even if we guess that Shannon and Kanon are fictional characters, that doesn't necessarily explain all the details of why that is the case. We could go with a Double-trice theory where both Shannon and Kanon are assumed personalities, if we want.

That's why you need to consider external evidence. For example, do you have an explanation for why Kanon's corpse was hidden in EP4?
__________________
"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers


www.witch-hunt.com Theory page
chronotrig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-16, 17:21   Link #19837
Zekses
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
*troll mode ON*
Shannon and Kanon are actually ... Kinzo That's modern cosmetology for you Oh, and Battler too XD
*troll mode OFF*
Zekses is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-16, 17:24   Link #19838
Judoh
Mystery buff
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Gone Fishin!
While I think Kanon's corpse probably should be explained I want to point out that this is not the only thing Kyrie lies about during that phone call. She's also not the only person who does this in that episode. Minus a phone call from George to Jessica of the same reliability there is no reason Jessica should know any of the things she says she does.
Judoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-16, 17:32   Link #19839
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judoh View Post
While I think Kanon's corpse probably should be explained I want to point out that this is not the only thing Kyrie lies about during that phone call. She's also not the only person who does this in that episode. Minus a phone call from George to Jessica of the same reliability there is no reason Jessica should know any of the things she says she does.
I agree completely, but the real question is why they would tell those lies, or why someone else would threaten them at gunpoint and force them to tell those lies.
__________________
"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers


www.witch-hunt.com Theory page
chronotrig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-16, 17:33   Link #19840
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Kyrie suggesting Kinzo is dead is not the same as "the answer has now been provided that Kinzo is dead." Kinzo is only confirmed dead at the end, by Beatrice. A character suggesting something may be true is not a solvability lock, else Shannontrice would've been locked down halfway through the first or second episode.

chronotrig also clearly did not read what I wrote if he thinks Fictional Shkanon and Fictional Kinzo are any different. I believe this represents a fundamental misunderstanding, which is pretty annoying because you've always been very close to the idea as I'm advancing it.

Getting over the disguise hump is incredibly liberating. There's no need for all this backpedaling and scrambling to explain anything. You no longer have to defend a concept which is not necessary or essential. It makes thematic sense, is supported by multiple story elements and general forms of evidence, and is a repeated concept in both the original stories and Chiru. The Battler thing becomes both a hint and misdirection, the ep5 scene requires no bending on anyone's part to explain, and the ep6 resolution has an answer that relies on neither physical nor personality death.

Really, does it benefit to hold out on it? Based on what you've told me yourself, chronotrig, this works quite well with theories you've held forever, bar some minor modifications. And, I should note, it allows Yasu to exist as a character in the ep1-4 story without actually existing in Shannon, Kanon, or Beatrice.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:54.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.