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 2011-02-02, 12:42   Link #701
witchfan
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Thanks for finding that. I did find it odd this red existed. I know my avatar belongs to the series' iconic 80 year old depressed (senile) alcoholic, people, but come on.

Last edited by witchfan; 2011-02-02 at 13:25.
witchfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-02-02, 13:28   Link #702
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:
"quite possibly deliberate". I say it right there in the text you quoted.
You're not following.

Quote:
Read what you quote. I am not saying red text has to be objectively true, I opted to say it has to be objectively true to (that is, possible when accounting for) the past. Unfortunately, this is where I'm being the most sketchy, as you need to be somewhat liberal when interpreting certain reds (but hey, I haven't seen a theory where this wasn't true yet). I still need to check if this holds, though.
"Objectively true to the past"? What the fuck does that even mean in the context of statements like "Eva died in this room"?

Quote:
No, stop being stupid. Whatever fictional Kanon symbolises outside the story, inside the story he is Kanon. Kanon is not different than any other character in the stories in that regard. The only thing I am doing is attributing Kanon a different meaning outside the gameboard. (This is not, mind, the same as Shkannon. For example, I do not assume Shannon and Kanon are interchangeable, or that they are somehow one entity).
That doesn't really solve the problem. It's just saying "Alright, in the context of the stories, Kanon and Shannon aren't the same person." What's the difference, then, from IRL Shkanon with them being portrayed as separate people in the fiction like canonically portrayed?

Quote:
Oh wait, you will not find that line anywhere in Umineko. Oops.

The only time Eva is even remotely associated with being "dead in red" is in ep2 and ep6's First Twilights, where she is never actually specifically named.

Matter of fact, the only red we ever get about Eva's life-death status specifically and solely is Eva is alive in ep3. Granted, that doesn't mean she couldn't be declared dead in red within a story, or that some other tomfoolery (such as the Battler is dead/Battler is alive dichotomy) couldn't get around it.

But at no point does anybody come right out and say "Oh yeah, Eva is dead."
The power of context, though, means that statements like Eva is Dead are possible.

And even if we follow this reasoning ("Stuff being objective in the past"), then Witchfan's argument doesn't refute the "No one can take Kanon's name" thing like he thinks. It's just big example of doublethink he's constructing to avoid an idea he doesn't like.
__________________
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 2011-02-02, 13:47   Link #703
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
The power of context, though, means that statements like Eva is Dead are possible.
Possible yes, but not certain. I honestly see no problem with being able to say it though (Eva definitely dies in some of the stories, so why can't you call her dead?), so I technically agree with you.
__________________
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 2011-02-02, 14:01   Link #704
witchfan
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Quote:
You're not following.
Cliffhanger. I suppose I'll have to wait for the sequel to understand how.

Quote:
"Objectively true to the past"? What the fuck does that even mean in the context of statements like "Eva died in this room"?
Where Eva died, and the circumstance of her death, is something that we leave to the cat box. I am saying something very simple: red text must not contradict the events of the past before the catbox begins. From the point the catbox begins, you're allowed to make up whatever shit you want (within other rules of the game). This is in no way a statement particular to my own theory. "Eva died" is (probably) fair game when referring to the family conference, even if this never happened in R-Prime. "Eva died when she was 19" is not, because we are assumed she is alive at the point she arrives at the family conference. And again: I am assuming this is only true about the games attributed to Beatrice.

Quote:
That doesn't really solve the problem. It's just saying "Alright, in the context of the stories, Kanon and Shannon aren't the same person." What's the difference, then, from IRL Shkanon with them being portrayed as separate people in the fiction like canonically portrayed?
I don't understand the question. Nowhere did I say Shkanon existed, in fiction or R-prime (I am actually saying the exact opposite). If you have any questions about the theory, go ahead and ask them.

Quote:
And even if we follow this reasoning ("Stuff being objective in the past"), then Witchfan's argument doesn't refute the "No one can take Kanon's name" thing like he thinks. It's just big example of doublethink he's constructing to avoid an idea he doesn't like.
You still don't understand the difference between a character appearing in fiction, and a character appearing in the "real world". There is no contradiction in saying "No one can take Kanon's name", and then letting Kanon, as written in fiction, take it, for the exact same reason you don't go "You know that story about Genghis Khan? Yeah, turns out it isn't Genghis Khan. It's a fictional dude with the same name". Assuming this gets us into all sorts of crap, such as we have to assume anything ever said about Kanon actually refers to things the supposed R-Prime Kanon did. And god, man, don't tell me I'm doing doublethink when you spent the last several pages defending Shkanon.

Last edited by witchfan; 2011-02-02 at 14:17.
witchfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-02-02, 14:29   Link #705
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:
Where Eva died, and the circumstance of her death, is something that we leave to the cat box. I am saying something very simple: red text must not contradict the events of the past before the catbox begins. From the point the catbox begins, you're allowed to make up whatever shit you want (within other rules of the game). This is in no way a statement particular to my own theory. "Eva died" is (probably) fair game when referring to the family conference, even if this never happened in R-Prime. "Eva died when she was 19" is not, because we are assumed she is alive at the point she arrives at the family conference. And again: I am assuming this is only true about the games attributed to Beatrice.
Even then, though, it's not fully valid. Things that happened before October 4th 1986 are included in the catbox by nature of the only people who knew about the events dying, and whatnot. Did Eva really have a little girl split personality as a teenager? Yes/no, Catbox.

Quote:
I don't understand the question. Nowhere did I say Shkanon existed, in fiction or R-prime (I am actually saying the exact opposite). If you have any questions about the theory, go ahead and ask them.
I'm not SAYING You did! Oh my god, reading comprehension...

As far as I can understand you, you're proposing this idea that Kanon and Shannon are separate people, Kanon died, Shannon took on his identity, then in the fictional Games, the two continued existing separately. What does this say about the red about Kanon's identity being only his own? How does this address any of the assloads of symbolism in EP6 and onward that pretty much shove Shkanon into the reader's face? What the hell is the point of Shannon pretending to be Kanon for all of two seconds if it's not going to have any relevance to anything?

In trying to avoid Shkanon you're either A) Producing an even more incoherent and ridiculous and unnecessary idea, or B) Simply stumbling over and failing to explain your idea because you're, at this point, borderline rambling and running on steam and anger and hatred that totally isn't proportional to the thing you're angry at.

Quote:
You still don't understand the difference between a character appearing in fiction, and a character appearing in the "real world". There is no contradiction in saying "No one can take Kanon's name", and then letting Kanon, as written in fiction, take it, for the exact same reason you don't go "You know that story about Genghis Khan? Yeah, turns out it isn't Genghis Khan. It's a fictional dude with the same name". Assuming this gets us into all sorts of crap, such as we have to assume anything ever said about Kanon actually refers to things the supposed R-Prime Kanon did. And god, man, don't tell me I'm doing doublethink when you spent the last several pages defending Shkanon.
I understand quite well, but I don't think you're understanding the consequences of your idea. If you're not proposing that Shannon is impersonating a dead Kanon (you did in a line before but apparently you're retracting it), then how does this address issues like Zepar/Furfur and the Love Duel, or Yasu's backstory portraying Shannon and Kanon as synonymous or atleast heavily connected, collective entities? How does this answer Shannon and Kanon debating about who gets to be the real person, even in EP8 where all the other problems, tensions, and stress of the characters, including Kinzo being dead, stop existing?

If your answer to this problem is that "Kanon died and he's being portrayed as alive", how come Kinzo doesn't have trap demon twins coming out of his jewelry and quizzing him about love and eternity and shit?

By the way, I can defend Shkanon without invoking doublethink or any other similar fallacy, because like it or not, the idea is canonical to Ryukishi's writing. He doesn't insert any implications or intentions for any other answer. You can hate the idea all you like, but it's there and it's not going to go away.
__________________
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 2011-02-02, 14:40   Link #706
witchfan
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
Even then, though, it's not fully valid. Things that happened before October 4th 1986 are included in the catbox by nature of the only people who knew about the events dying, and whatnot. Did Eva really have a little girl split personality as a teenager? Yes/no, Catbox.
Fair enough. I don't know why this is important, though.


Quote:
I'm not SAYING You did! Oh my god, reading comprehension...
Yes!

Quote:
As far as I can understand you, you're proposing this idea that Kanon and Shannon are separate people, Kanon died, Shannon took on his identity, then in the fictional Games, the two continued existing separately. anything?
--
I understand quite well, but I don't think you're understanding the consequences of your idea. If you're not proposing that Shannon is impersonating a dead Kanon (you did in a line before but apparently you're retracting it), then how does this address issues like Zepar/Furfur and the Love Duel, or Yasu's backstory portraying Shannon and Kanon as synonymous or atleast heavily connected, collective entities? How does this answer Shannon and Kanon debating about who gets to be the real person, even in EP8 where all the other problems, tensions, and stress of the characters, including Kinzo being dead, stop existing?
See, this is just stuff you're assuming I said and I have no idea why. I never said anything like that. The proposition is this: there is a Kanon in the real world who is dead. Then there is fiction Shannon wrote in which Kanon is "alive". Whatever Shannon meant the fictional Kanon to symbolise (Kanon in the flesh combined with part of her psyche or what), it doesn't matter to the in-story character.

Quote:
B) Simply stumbling over and failing to explain your idea because you're, at this point, borderline rambling and running on steam and anger and hatred that totally isn't proportional to the thing you're angry at.
The only person here running on steam and anger is the guy who's been frantically arguing with and calling me a hypocrite for the last two-three pages. If you can't write your arguments without being a complete dick I am not going to waste my time answering them.

Quote:
If your answer to this problem is that "Kanon died and he's being portrayed as alive", how come Kinzo doesn't have trap demon twins coming out of his jewelry and quizzing him about love and eternity and shit?
Because Beatrice's games are intended, as far as I understand, to contain, but also conceal, the events of Rokkenjima. Exactly what does writing a piece of fiction where it's stated in red witches exist accomplish (and before you rush to turn this on me, take the time to re-read my original post and see how I already mentioned this)?

Last edited by witchfan; 2011-02-02 at 15:08.
witchfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-02-02, 14:44   Link #707
Leafsnail
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Possible yes, but not certain. I honestly see no problem with being able to say it though (Eva definitely dies in some of the stories, so why can't you call her dead?), so I technically agree with you.
If you can't (at least for the first 4), it does lead to the rather odd implication that Jessica is alive.
Leafsnail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-02-02, 14:52   Link #708
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafsnail View Post
If you can't (at least for the first 4), it does lead to the rather odd implication that Jessica is alive.
Who knows? So long as the catbox remains forever closed, you may as well speculate anybody lived.
__________________
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 2011-02-02, 15:09   Link #709
Number1-Syaoran-Fan
Your's In Gold, Beatrice
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by witchfan View Post
The proposition is this: there is a Kanon in the real world who is dead. Then there is fiction Shannon wrote in which Kanon is "alive". Whatever Shannon meant the fictional Kanon to symbolise (Kanon in the flesh combined with part of her psyche or what), it doesn't matter to the in-story character.

Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from. So you're saying Shannon wrote her story in which there is a character named Kanon, who is alive. But then there is also a Kanon in the real world who is dead and so they can say he is dead or alive and both would be true? And then if in her narrative Kanon dies after say Jessica. You could say Kanon was second to die and it would still be true even though irl he died before the conference?
__________________

"I... I really like your bow."
Number1-Syaoran-Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-02-02, 15:24   Link #710
witchfan
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
You pointed out the biggest problem here. This is where I'm being sketchy; the duality that isn't a duality, as a manner of speaking. My assumption is that, no - because real Kanon is already dead, and hence fictional Kanon is not an accurate portrayal of him, we are not permitted, under the red, to talk about the fictional Kanon's life and death status (it would contradict the past to grant fictional Kanon the right to be alive or dead independently of Kanon). We are permitted to portray a fictional Kanon that is "alive", in the sense that he is allowed to take certain actions within the story, however. When those actions are taken we may assume them legal, perhaps through liberal interpretation of the reds, or perhaps through avatar-play (though one that is dissimilar to Shkanon). The important thing is that they do not contradict the past, even if taken liberally (but within the bounds of what the Author intended).
witchfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-02-02, 16:04   Link #711
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:
Fair enough. I don't know why this is important, though.
It was mostly a nitpick. Also, that idea will bite you in the ass in EP8, if you haven't read it yet.

Quote:
See, this is just stuff you're assuming I said and I have no idea why. I never said anything like that. The proposition is this: there is a Kanon in the real world who is dead. Then there is fiction Shannon wrote in which Kanon is "alive". Whatever Shannon meant the fictional Kanon to symbolise (Kanon in the flesh combined with part of her psyche or what), it doesn't matter to the in-story character.
This isn't how other posts of yours read. It's very difficult to follow what you're typing, I must admit. English isn't my first language and if I remember right I think you said it's the same for you.

The "Kanon is dead but being treated as alive" thing, though, still stands to my other point: It doesn't explain any of the Shkanon-implying major plot points.

Quote:
The only person here running on steam and anger is the guy who's been frantically arguing with and calling me a hypocrite for the last two-three pages. If you can't write your arguments without being a complete dick I am not going to waste my time answering them.
I recall you calling me stupid, first. I tend to lose my temper when people resort to personal insults.

Regardless, I find the idea of people criticizing Shkanon for being ridiculous and unnecessary, then trying to explain it away with an even more obtuse and baseless theory, to be hypocritical.

Quote:
Because Beatrice's games are intended, as far as I understand, to contain, but also conceal, the events of Rokkenjima. Exactly what does writing a piece of fiction where it's stated in red witches exist accomplish (and before you rush to turn this on me, take the time to re-read my original post and see how I already mentioned this)?
But that's not even the same thing. Shkanon is never outright stated in the text, it's implied with fantasy scenes and magical scenarios, and there's only "two sides" of the story, going by the narration in EP6.

So, we have a fantasy scene to cover up for another lie that covers up yet another lie to cover a truth that's not the slightest bit relevant to anything except that Jessica's sort of a necrophiliac?

Um, okay.

Quote:
You pointed out the biggest problem here. This is where I'm being sketchy; the duality that isn't a duality, as a manner of speaking. My assumption is that, no - because real Kanon is already dead, and hence fictional Kanon is not an accurate portrayal of him, we are not permitted, under the red, to talk about the fictional Kanon's life and death status (it would contradict the past to grant fictional Kanon the right to be alive or dead independently of Kanon). We are permitted to portray a fictional Kanon that is "alive", in the sense that he is allowed to take certain actions within the story, however. When those actions are taken we may assume them legal, perhaps through liberal interpretation of the reds, or perhaps through avatar-play (though one that is dissimilar to Shkanon). The important thing is that they do not contradict the past, even if taken liberally (but within the bounds of what the Author intended).
And yet people say "personality death" is cheap, obtuse nonsense that needlessly fucks with the very simple Red.
__________________
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 2011-02-02, 16:43   Link #712
RockReborn
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Classified
If you ask me, maybe Syaoran-Fan should explain it, cause his\her post was the most coherent concerning what you're talking about.

So what you're saying, Witchfan, is that because Fictional Kanon =\= Real Kanon, we can't apply the red (which refers to the real Kanon) to the fictional one?

If I understand what you're saying correctly, then I like the way you're thinking, Witchfan, but I'm more inclined to say that I think that the red would be applied to Fictional Kanon first before considering Real Kanon.

On a side note, are we still talking about Ep8? Is there more to translate? I don't remember seeing the ???? here...
RockReborn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-02-02, 16:47   Link #713
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
Meotwister will summarize the ???? when she can. We're just rambling and arguing about other crap in the meantime.
__________________
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 2011-02-02, 16:53   Link #714
witchfan
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Quote:
This isn't how other posts of yours read. It's very difficult to follow what you're typing, I must admit. English isn't my first language and if I remember right I think you said it's the same for you.
Yes, I can relate. I think I could've been clearer on my points. Although, as I said before, you should ask if there's something I didn't express clearly enough, or that you don't understand.

Quote:
I recall you calling me stupid, first. I tend to lose my temper when people resort to personal insults.
I would like to say I was not the first to resort to personal insults. If you would re-read our conversation, you are the one that first told me "I'm being stupid", hypocritical, and that you don't respect any of my objections. With that said, I wasn't very polite throughout this conversation either, so I apologise. Let's try and show more respect for each other, even if we disagree on many points.

Quote:
The "Kanon is dead but being treated as alive" thing, though, still stands to my other point: It doesn't explain any of the Shkanon-implying major plot points.
I don't see a great difficulty here, to be honest. I have yet to find a satisfying explanation for the motive, even from Shkanon standpoint. I can start off with a possible explanation for one of your points.

Let's discuss the Shannon and Kanon "not being human", and the symbolism that they need to become whole to love. I personally like the idea that this is actually Kanon (the fictional character) trying to 'surpass' his author. Let's consider Kanon's romance with Jessica canon. The Love Duel can be interpreted as a battle between three fictional characters, each of which was written to symbolise part of Yasu (Shannon). The idea here is that perhaps Shannon, as a reaction to Kanon's death, became increasingly unstable. She began to see in the fictional Kanon something more than a fictional character; attribute human qualities to him. The Love Duel symbolises the desires and feelings of that half-real character, versus the desires of the author (this theme, mind, is actually pretty common in literature, and I believe it is very human for an author in grief to think so). If you want to go with wild assumptions, the Love Duel could at the same time show us that Shannon killed Kanon IRL, but god knows whether this is true, or even necessary to know.

An alternate theory is a Six Characters in Search of an Author-esque thing.

With that said, one benefit of this theory is that I don't purport to have one explanation for the motive. If you have a better one, I'd love to hear it.

Quote:
But that's not even the same thing. Shkanon is never outright stated in the text, it's implied with fantasy scenes and magical scenarios, and there's only "two sides" of the story, going by the narration in EP6.

So, we have a fantasy scene to cover up for another lie that covers up yet another lie to cover a truth that's not the slightest bit relevant to anything except that Jessica's sort of a necrophiliac?

Um, okay.
I suppose we'll simply have to agree to disagree here, since, like I said before, I don't think Shkanon is what's being implied. Shkanon is one possible interpretation of the material. My interpretation is another. I'll mention that, while I don't like Shkannon at all, I don't have a problem with accepting that many people interpret the text like that. My problem is when they claim that Shkanon, and only Shkanon, is the one possible truth behind everything.

Quote:
Regardless, I find the idea of people criticizing Shkanon for being ridiculous and unnecessary, then trying to explain it away with an even more obtuse and baseless theory, to be hypocritical.
--
And yet people say "personality death" is cheap, obtuse nonsense that needlessly fucks with the very simple Red.
I don't think there is a theory which explains this story without having anything ridiculous about it. With that said, I think my theory is less ridiculous than Shkannon because of several points:

- It does not require absurd amounts of liberal interpretation of the red, it merely assumes it as a precondition for what might be stated in red. This is not unique to my theory. The vast majority of us believe this is true (how else do you explain the "Kanon is rescuer" in EP6 otherwise, Shkanon or not?)
- It does not require less assumptions, but it requires less implausible ones. I am not asking you to believe Shannon faked being two people of different genders for years (I know you disagree with this, but I still don't like it. I do remember you mentioned you did something similar to this so at the very least I can respect that). I am not asking you to accept she has meta-awareness and avoids the red on purpose (or that, at the very least, she had one hell of a fluke).
- Lastly, this is really a personal preference, but I am simply not satisfied with the common Shkanon Whydunnit, or the Shkanon interpretation of the story. I think this theory allows more options here, even if it comes at loss of certainty (at present) about them.

Edit: I might as well mention that I am not particularly "attached" to my theory, and would love it if you guys were to offer better ways to make it work. My purpose here is just to offer an alternate interpretation of the story, not to pose my own theory against Shkanon. I know people here often have ideas that are much better than mine.

Last edited by witchfan; 2011-02-02 at 17:22.
witchfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-02-02, 17:26   Link #715
Mikachiru
test
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Age: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Who knows? So long as the catbox remains forever closed, you may as well speculate anybody lived.
Well, if the personallity can die theory really is true...

Like the whole Battler is dead thing with Bern...

...Why can't Jessi-sama live?
__________________
Mikachiru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-02-02, 17:40   Link #716
Sherringford
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikachiru View Post
Well, if the personallity can die theory really is true...

Like the whole Battler is dead thing with Bern...

...Why can't Jessi-sama live?
Everyone died and was reborn as another personality. Krauss moved to America and was renamed Rocky Balboa. Maria went to America as well, and grew up to be Ugly Betty. George became a sumo wrestler. Gohda became a magical chef. Rudolf became a sheriff in a random city. Genji became a rockstar. Shannon became a writer. Rosa became a florist. Natsuhi became Krauss' wife again because fuck it, she looks like Adrian. Eva became Batgirl. Hideyoshi became a Yakuza. Kyrie became a psychologist.

Jessica however really died.
Sherringford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-02-02, 17:43   Link #717
witchfan
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Quote:
Gohda became a magical chef.
Duuuuuuuuude. Gohda was always a magical chef. Except now he is also a detective.
witchfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-02-02, 17:47   Link #718
Mikachiru
test
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Age: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherringford View Post
Everyone died and was reborn as another personality. Krauss moved to America and was renamed Rocky Balboa. Maria went to America as well, and grew up to be Ugly Betty. George became a sumo wrestler. Gohda became a magical chef. Rudolf became a sheriff in a random city. Genji became a rockstar. Shannon became a writer. Rosa became a florist. Natsuhi became Krauss' wife again because fuck it, she looks like Adrian. Eva became Batgirl. Hideyoshi became a Yakuza. Kyrie became a psychologist.

Jessica however really died.
__________________
Mikachiru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-02-02, 19:02   Link #719
Number1-Syaoran-Fan
Your's In Gold, Beatrice
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
I completely agree that everything can be constructed without Shkanon. However, I do believe it is the most likely conclusion. I admit it would be a stretch to consider it earlier on. But after EP 6, 7, and even 8, I think it is something Ryukishi gave us because he realized it was somewhat difficult to reach this on our own. I avoided spoilers so I could reach my own theories and I'll admit after EP5 I had some crazy ones (all of which have required many more stretches of the imagination than Shkanon). However, I reached the Shkanon theory on my own during EP6 so I do believe the facts points to it and not the other way around. And during EP7 I feel I was reaffirmed maaannny times. And many of the things Ryukishi had written in the question arcs do make a lot more sense with this idea and most of them feel too cooincidental for him to have written them without Shkanon in mind (I address the idea of it as a red herring 2 paragraphs below).

All the theories I've read since have been much less realistic than Shkanon and most have made incredible assumptions and jumps in reasoning. Out of all of them I do believe Shkanon fits best with the facts presented.

And although it was possible that he used it as a red herring to let us think we were onto the solution only to tell us we were way off (like Beato did to Battler in EP2), I believe that after the series is over it isn't sensible to treat it as a red herring.
__________________

"I... I really like your bow."
Number1-Syaoran-Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-02-02, 19:56   Link #720
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:
I don't see a great difficulty here, to be honest. I have yet to find a satisfying explanation for the motive, even from Shkanon standpoint. I can start off with a possible explanation for one of your points.

Let's discuss the Shannon and Kanon "not being human", and the symbolism that they need to become whole to love. I personally like the idea that this is actually Kanon (the fictional character) trying to 'surpass' his author. Let's consider Kanon's romance with Jessica canon. The Love Duel can be interpreted as a battle between three fictional characters, each of which was written to symbolise part of Yasu (Shannon). The idea here is that perhaps Shannon, as a reaction to Kanon's death, became increasingly unstable. She began to see in the fictional Kanon something more than a fictional character; attribute human qualities to him. The Love Duel symbolises the desires and feelings of that half-real character, versus the desires of the author (this theme, mind, is actually pretty common in literature, and I believe it is very human for an author in grief to think so). If you want to go with wild assumptions, the Love Duel could at the same time show us that Shannon killed Kanon IRL, but god knows whether this is true, or even necessary to know.

An alternate theory is a Six Characters in Search of an Author-esque thing.

With that said, one benefit of this theory is that I don't purport to have one explanation for the motive. If you have a better one, I'd love to hear it.
I like the idea of a character becoming real and rebelling against it's author, I will admit that on the basis of my sense of romanticism. However this view is wholly compatible with regular Shkanon for the most part, anyway. Moreover...well...

It seems to make the Love Duel seem kind of petty,and not really demonstrative of a major truth like it's supposed to. I'm pretty sure Shannon didn't kill Kanon IRL; both because there's nothing implying any such thing, and the both of them keep lamenting, "We should've done this much sooner" and blah blah blah. It just seems like an obtuse explanation.

Putting aside the silliness or believability of Shkanon for a moment, it seems more reasonable to me that the Love Duel represents someone who is love-torn as we're apparently supposed to think; if it was done sooner, the conflict wouldn't have happened to this extent; Jessica's love wouldn't be ripe and Battler wouldn't be there. Moreover, if it's just a "fictional character rebelling" thing, well...Why are they fighting? If it's a fiction where both characters are treated as real people instead of Kanon being dead, why can only one of them be alive? Why can't they both have a happy ending in this fictional narrative? Why is it only one or the other? And moreover, why even bother trying? The story, and thus the romance, will be ended and/or rebooted back to where you started when the book ends.

What do you mean by "motive" in this context, by the way? Motive for the murders? Motive for Kanon to rebel against his author and try and become real and stuff? Motive for Shannon to write a living Kanon into the story? What?

Quote:
I suppose we'll simply have to agree to disagree here, since, like I said before, I don't think Shkanon is what's being implied. Shkanon is one possible interpretation of the material. My interpretation is another. I'll mention that, while I don't like Shkannon at all, I don't have a problem with accepting that many people interpret the text like that. My problem is when they claim that Shkanon, and only Shkanon, is the one possible truth behind everything.
Well, that's a whole other problem. Shkanon's not THE ONLY TRUTH HERP A DERP DERP, and only an idiot would think so since it's so ridiculously clear that Yasu doesn't have it in her to be a murderer on this sort of scale, but I think we do have to accept that Shannon, Kanon, and Beatrice are fictional characters of Yasu's in their entirety, and that she is synonymous with them. Whether she acted as them in the real world or simply substituted them for herself is debatable, but the latter option sort of implies that George and Jessica are dating the same person, are aware of this, and just don't give a shit, unless we say the romances are also utterly fictional. I'm not even going to entertain that option because it renders most of the text meaningless, and was spoken against by Ryukishi at the least.

I like Fictional Shkanon as an idea, but honestly, I can't deny that the original Shkanon theory is the most consistent with the text, probably what was intended by Ryukishi, and honestly doesn't create as many problems as people think.

It may be stupid, but it's not plothole-inducing, and I maintain that people are overreacting to it a bit. I admit I was fucking pissed off at first too, but it was mostly an emotional reaction because Shkanon sort of makes an 100% happy ending impossible.

Quote:
I don't think there is a theory which explains this story without having anything ridiculous about it. With that said, I think my theory is less ridiculous than Shkannon because of several points:

- It does not require absurd amounts of liberal interpretation of the red, it merely assumes it as a precondition for what might be stated in red. This is not unique to my theory. The vast majority of us believe this is true (how else do you explain the "Kanon is rescuer" in EP6 otherwise, Shkanon or not?)
- It does not require less assumptions, but it requires less implausible ones. I am not asking you to believe Shannon faked being two people of different genders for years (I know you disagree with this, but I still don't like it. I do remember you mentioned you did something similar to this so at the very least I can respect that). I am not asking you to accept she has meta-awareness and avoids the red on purpose (or that, at the very least, she had one hell of a fluke).
- Lastly, this is really a personal preference, but I am simply not satisfied with the common Shkanon Whydunnit, or the Shkanon interpretation of the story. I think this theory allows more options here, even if it comes at loss of certainty (at present) about them.
-I don't think the red is being liberally abused as much as people say. We were only told that it was always true, not that it was ever objective. We know it's contextual and used in fictional stories, and is essentially "Word of God". If we can apply it to fictional characters that don't exist in the real world, such as Erika, I don't see the problem with applying it to costume personas that are accepted as real as a premise of the setting.

-I wouldn't call it "Shannon being meta-aware or red-dodging" or "Shannon having a fluke" so much as "Beatrice being a dishonest bitch like always who's writing the story to her advantage." But yea, I like the idea that Erika killed Kanon when she shot through the door EIGHT TIMES. This idea is satisfactory with every theory and it's also fucking hilarious. I win.

-Also, what's the "Shkanon Whydunnit?" I honestly don't know. People have always used Shkanon as a "how was this done" as far as I've seen. What would it even be? "I dressed up as a meido, therefore murder"?

Quote:
Edit: I might as well mention that I am not particularly "attached" to my theory, and would love it if you guys were to offer better ways to make it work. My purpose here is just to offer an alternate interpretation of the story, not to pose my own theory against Shkanon. I know people here often have ideas that are much better than mine.
In the heat of the argument, I might have misunderstood something, so let me make sure: What, EXACTLY, are your complaints about Shkanon, preferably in a concise, bullet-point list (it's easy for me to gather my thoughts this way and helps flow the convo).
__________________
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
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 10:52.


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