2010-12-17, 11:58 | Link #19861 | |
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
He said we need to pay attention to them and to what they say. He said what they say is very important and touches on some of the most important themes of the story. That's definitely true. That doesn't mean they are speaking in plain and ordinary truth, and if you think that I can't imagine why given that theatrics is basically their gimmick. It's like trying to untangle Shakespeare. No doubt their words are full of truth. That doesn't follow that their words are necessarily true.
Quote:
People are apparently unable to distinguish between facts as evidence and testimony as evidence. There is a huge and essential difference between "x is true" and "this person says x is true." There is also a huge difference between "this person says x is true" and "this person actually believes x is true." Hypothetically, if Bern knew (or personally believed) the ep7 TP wasn't true, would she still have motive to tell Ange it was? Of course she would. I get the strange sense people are not used to unreliable narrators or untrustworthy witness accounts, and Umineko is clearly full of those. These themes exist whether Ryukishi intended them to be there or not, and whether he specifically addresses them in the end or not. Excercises in trust and doubt, and in reading in what was meant behind what was actually said, are essential elements of a literary interpretation of this story. It's perfectly rational to wonder where to draw those distinctions.
__________________
|
|
2010-12-17, 12:46 | Link #19862 |
Miss Kimi
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Residing as the 18th guest of Rokkenjima
Age: 28
|
Wow. You guys are really taking this seriously, huh? Absolutely no offense (as in, don't get mad at me D:], but please cool it, take some chill pills, aren't we just supposed to discuss theories and what-not? Let's just talk normally, okay? Umineko is just a game, I don't want everybody arguing about the ways they think and speculate. I know I'm sounding so cheesy right now, just calm down, people...
__________________
|
2010-12-17, 14:48 | Link #19864 | |||
The True Culprit
|
Quote:
And also, Kanon only received his reward in the Golden Land. Which they said was an option from the beginning. Everyone is fighting for the right to have their love fulfilled in the real world. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
|||
2010-12-17, 14:58 | Link #19865 |
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
It might have other meanings, but in the context of Kanon and Shannon character development, it basically wouldn't matter unless two people named Kanon and Shannon actually existed on R-Prime... which I don't think is anyone's thesis at this point, and if it were, would require an entirely different sort of reading.
If it metaphorically represents a conflict Yasu actually had, that's fine too. I'm just not specifically addressing that, as with respect to Kanon and Shannon as fictional characters (regardless of any "true" existence in whatever form), they serve as representatives in the metaphor, rather than the actual aspects of the conflict itself. Which is to say, they don't matter as concerns the two servant characters as they appear in the fictions we've read, which is where they've gained development and "become human." It's like asking what Erika's disappearance means about the fate of Furudo-Prime. It's two different discussions that we'd have to examine thematically. Which I haven't done.
__________________
|
2010-12-17, 15:50 | Link #19866 |
Miss Kimi
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Residing as the 18th guest of Rokkenjima
Age: 28
|
What if one day a girl named Yasu decided to write a mystery novel? She loved it so much she decided to add magic? Then she went crazy and began to imagine herself in the story. People she knew of were were ones characters were based on. To escape her horrible life, she "put" herself in the story as a woman named Beatrice. I bet at the end of EP8 Yasu will be in a mental hospital, trapped in her own "logic error".
I will literally laugh if that is the case.
__________________
|
2010-12-17, 16:05 | Link #19867 | |
Thought Being
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Canada
|
Quote:
This is one general problem I've found with putting everything into one 'speculation' thread, but that's a different issue.
__________________
|
|
2010-12-17, 16:16 | Link #19868 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
|
Quote:
And Episode 5 was meant to be incredibly easy as well, wasn't it? |
|
2010-12-17, 16:54 | Link #19869 | |||
18782+18782=37564
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: InterWebs
|
...Hu...h...?
What I said with Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
|||
2010-12-17, 17:28 | Link #19870 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
|
I've never understood the whole difficulty rating in Umineko, it starts as "just watch" to "just surrender" and gets progressively "easier" until EP7 where it goes back up. I have a general idea that its the amount of hints given out on those arcs would make it far easier to solve the previous arcs and the people that already had solved it or had a good idea of how the events where really being played out where just corroborating what they already new. How did EP7 change that?
|
2010-12-17, 17:42 | Link #19871 | |||
Mystery buff
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Gone Fishin!
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Episode 1's difficulty was "standard" and it went on to episode 2 by being "first rate" which is probably the highest difficulty. Episode's 5 was 'fairly easy' and it went to episode 6 by having absolutely no difficulty at all. Episode 3 was made "equal" as in fair for both sides to make it gradually easier for the readers to come to conclusions. Episode 7's difficulty was risen for the opposite reason because you don't need it to be any easier. Episode 4's difficulty "depended entirely on the player". But episode 8 is not stated to be an opposite of this. So I don't beleive it's a breakdown. The interview states it has choices that some of them will be difficult probably depending on the reader. So rather than being a reflection I think it will be the same difficulty as episode 4.
__________________
|
|||
2010-12-18, 01:27 | Link #19872 | |||
別にいいけど
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
|
Quote:
Wow this could be the start of a new trend: "Don't get the wrong impression! It's not like I hate you or something, Geez!" Quote:
Whatever is its true meaning what we have seen is its realization in the metaworld. So how can this be a surprise? Of course the metaworld is by itself a metaphorical world. So the fact that it happens in the metaworld means as much as the statement itself, you must interpret it in a certain way. But whatever is your interpretation it must work for both. Quote:
Like for example the importance of semantic in this story: the fact that the actual meaning of a word could have important implications. And you can't really say that you didn't know that, not after Battler in various occasions asks for the definition of certain concepts. Not after the "names are not exclusive" argument was brought up. Not after Battler declared in red that he would kill Beatrice. Denying this would be more insulting for your intelligence than for mine.
__________________
|
|||
2010-12-18, 02:41 | Link #19874 |
rule 63, pl0x
Join Date: Aug 2008
|
To be honest, I think Jan-poo is just looking for a fight. She's being contrary and combative for the sake of being contrary and combative.
Anyways, I agree with Renall on most of his points about themes, narratives, and especially that segment on Kanon and Shannon. The narrative in Umineko is shaky at best, and as per knox rules, it's only the detectives perspective (Battler & Erika's) that should be trusted. Aren't we given the whole "cat box" routine with every episode anyways? I'm not sure what Jan-poo is trying to argue with since the narrative in Umineko is something that's only subject to interpretation rather than taking it to heart. |
2010-12-18, 03:54 | Link #19875 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
|
I think she (?) is rightfully pressing some points that Renall was either unclear, or unsatisfactory on. From a dramatic standpoint, I can't accept a dismissal of the love duel, even though it makes sense in the context of his theory. Ultimately, the mystery of this story is the concrete, real events that happened on R-Prime. The duel could be a clever Author thing-a-ma-jig, but without concrete relevance to the mystery, I can't see it being as important as Ryukishi says.
I agree with what Renall is saying, for the most part, but I want to see it more integrated into core Rokkenjima. Assuming it's the truth -- how do we interpret it in context of the mystery? I think the love duel holds relevance in this sense, as well, and we shouldn't handwave this aspect of it. |
2010-12-18, 04:26 | Link #19876 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
|
Quote:
What is it that can't be allowed to occur at the same time? Kanon and Shannon's existence off the island, or just their relationships? We all know it's the latter, so let's look at it from a different perspective, here. The love duel isn't about Shannon and Kanon personally, but rather, it's about the nature of the relationships they're trying to pursue up until the events of the massacre. One can happen, while the other is doomed to failure. We already understand the fact that "Shannon" does not exist. We are assuming that "Kanon" is similar in that regard, hence the Shkannon interpretation. Only one can get off the island and live a full life with their loved one. Naturally, this can also mean that, if we discard Ninja Master Yasu as a possibility, the only other interpretation that's applicable would be a more literal one. Namely that only one of the relationships presented, or even individuals from those relationships, have a chance at surviving the events of the explosion. If we pursue this line of thought, it leads us back to the George-culprit theory (George would kill to be with Shannon, etc etc), which renders Shkannon pointless, and renders "Kanon" as little more than a better developed Genji, in regards to his overall relevance to the actual mystery. We are told that Yasu and the Love Duel are key. Yasu is a sneaky as hell method of getting past Dine, but you have to really ignore the spirit of Knox in order for her to be the culprit. On the other hand, Yasu provides motive for Shannon to act in the manner required to set up the events the way she did. Essentially enabling someone she had taken into her confidence to hijack the plan and commit actual murders. The true culprit. This means that either one of her usual prankster confidants (i.e. the servants) would be the result of things going awry (a violation of Dine), or rather, someone else (Jessica or George, for example). The Love Duel demonstrates that under natural conditions, Jessica does not possess the capacity to kill another human being. George does demonstrate that. Ugh. Basically, no matter how you approach Yasu and the Love Duel together, the logical conclusion is a George-culprit theory. Rudolf and Kyrie have no bearing on the Love Duel, so unless it's there purely for the sake of beating us over the head with Shkannon (which would be heavy-handed and a blatant insult to readers), it logically has to have something to do with the actual motives for the murders. Man, that was a lot of rambling. Essentially, all roads lead to George. |
|
2010-12-18, 04:50 | Link #19878 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
|
Quote:
So ultimately, it doesnt really make a difference how Ryukishi intended for us to take the love duel or Yasu, in the end, George is the culprit despite shitty red herrings. |
|
|
|