2011-02-14, 09:38 | Link #864 |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
|
Out of curiosity, in ep 3 was it ever explicitly stated that all "victims" of the first twilight were dead?
To be specific, was it ever stated, at the time of the first twilight, individually, that all specific people suspected to be dead at that time were in fact dead? I recall it being stated that all the deaths were non-accidental, that all the deaths were caused by another person, that all of the deaths were not caused by traps, but I do not recall at any time that it was stated all the people whom appeared to be dead, at the time, were in fact dead. Reason I bring this up is because I'm deliberately trying to tell how far the red truth is being stretched, and where. Because if, for example, it never was explicitly stated that all of those characters were dead, then it makes perfect sense for Wright's solution, since in fact everyone who was dead was killed by another person, directly, without a trap. "Two" of the "dead" people just weren't really dead. This could likewise be extended to other arcs and potentially to things like the golden truth. So essentially is there any place where something stated in red is, in Arc 7 and 8, specifically contradicted, or is it merely fudged with semantics? |
2011-02-14, 11:08 | Link #866 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
The closest to the original would be something along the lines of: "Kinzô, Genji, Shannon, Kanon, Gôda, Kumasawa, those 6 have passed away!" I find it misleading to translate nin (人) with people here, even though it is the most often used meaning. It's more of a way to count anything that is perceived as 'human'. You would still count a character in a book (登場人物) with nin (人) even though it may turn out he was an illusion. Even ghosts and stuff like that are counted with 人... Especially if we take into consideration that the Red Truth is probably spoken from an author perspective it's not weird to count the characters as 人 and still not actually have 6 humans (6人の人間). |
|
2011-02-14, 11:42 | Link #867 |
別にいいけど
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
|
"have passed away" gives you a lot more freedom of interpretation than "死亡している". If witch hunt translated it like that, people would have speculated that death wasn't necessarily implied in that sentence, which isn't true.
__________________
|
2011-02-14, 12:06 | Link #868 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
Then let's settle for "have died". The problem is that "死亡している" doesn't specify when death hit that person. "are deceased" might be another way to put it. Yeah, I know...translations are a bitch. |
|
2011-02-14, 12:52 | Link #869 |
Dea ex Kakera
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sea of Fragments
|
I personally found "All of them had wounds resembling gunshot wounds which became fatal!" to be even more deceptive for that twilight. It directly implies Shannon and Kanon had separate bodies unless you hit on the idea of fake wounds AND notice the time shift between when the wounds were witnessed and the death confirmation.
__________________
|
2011-02-14, 15:20 | Link #870 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
What I find very interesting is that she talks about 傷痕 (which is a scar that resulted from a wound) at this point and not of 傷 (a wound, cut or bruise), 傷口 (a gapping wound) or 傷創 (a wound or injury). Why would it be a scar if they were just killed some hours ago?! Just google some pictures with 傷痕 and you know why it's strange. The only sentence that really gets in the way is the sentence 金蔵を除く5人の殺人の際、殺人者は必ず同室していた! (In the case of the murder of the 5 excluding Kinzô, the murderer was definitely in the same room!). There is the theory from the battle against Eva-Beatrice's Nanjô trick, that the Red also depends on where in the game it is uttered...but I still don't know if I like that theory. If it were correct there'd be no problem with the Red because it was uttered in Episode 4, long after those Episode 3 characters died, but still... This brings me to another question I'm still asking myself... Is it possible that Shannon and Kanon do exist seperately and that they are both the Beatrice of 1986?! If we don't consider Kanon a complete illusion they could have both solved the epitaph...though that does make some scenes with Kinzô rather strange and would raise the question who of both would be the child from 19 years ago and the real grandchild of Kinzô and Beatrice Castiglioni... |
|
2011-02-14, 15:49 | Link #871 |
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
The original [mis]translation of that red was also very misleading in English because it implied inevitable fatality, rather than apparent fatality. That is, it cast doubt on whether the wounds were made by a gun, but asserted they were fatal, rather than simply suggesting - as the later retranslation did - that they had apparent wounds which, if real, would be fatal.
__________________
|
2011-02-14, 17:43 | Link #873 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
|
Don't look at red too much. Despite all the talks about "bla-bla, it's a weapon", its main purpose (outside of denying absolutely ridiculous theories, that no sensible person should consider) was to mislead and stagger your progress. Without it Shkannontrice would have had become much more apparent and anti-shkannon faction would have had lost its hope for a better solution much sooner. Instead it just leads to an endless semantic discussion. All contradictions/dubious points won't ever be solved because "it's a game, don't stop thinking".
Even in ep8, Bern's mystery, among all possible tricks he uses misleading red. Again. Once you realize it, that mystery becomes obvious. |
2011-02-15, 03:14 | Link #874 |
別にいいけど
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
|
I wish I could say this isn't true cmos, because I'm pretty sure that Ryuukishi's intent was for the red to be a aid for the readers and their reasonings...
but in the end in some cases it turned out to be just a liability. The problem is that in a story where you can't be sure that what is described is the truth, a "red text" is necessary. If you lose it you lose the only reliable basis you have to build your theories upon. Nothing is "obvious" when everything can be "questioned".
__________________
|
2011-02-15, 05:09 | Link #875 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: On nameless island
|
Red truth - witch truth
Witch truth, or in other words, red text - words that we can interpretate in many values Red text since 4th episode lost immovability, say something like: "You fool", "All these truth", "Somebody died, therefore somebody killed him" and so on. For me was enought red truth from ep4 Tea party and information about Yasu life, Cat box was opened since Legend, trying to close it at Twilight nothing more than trying to count all numbers from zero to infinity and say that at the end Zero.
__________________
|
2011-02-15, 11:07 | Link #876 |
Artist
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Yesterday!
|
Haven't been here in forever, feeling there's very little point ever since arc 8 came out anyway...
The way red truth was used in umineko, I think might be a credibility suicide for Ryuukishi. Basically whatever he's going to make next we won't believe his "rules" anymore. Now that it's all over tho, I find it rather sad that the red was ... well desecrated that way. This is really a personal feeling, but ultimately I think that what "we" were doing in arc 2-3-4 (and 5 I guess), trying to "fight against the red" and find a solution that wonderfully didn't break them and made a lot of sense, was the biggest fun of Umineko to me. Red vs Blue was too cool of an idea imo, to be used in such an unfair way. Weird red appeared from arc 2 actually, Beato has a lot of laugh in red and calls Battler incompetant in red. |
2011-02-15, 12:40 | Link #877 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
|
Indeed. For all that talk about red text to guide the reader, it turned out to be just trickery. I still don't buy personality death. It's a ridiculous way to approach it.
In a normal mystery novel, your guide is the detective. What he says, you can take it as canon. "I declare that no woman could have possibly committed this crime," says Vance in The Benson Murder Case. What do you know? He was right! Because that's how detective novels work. You have the detective guiding you into the author's world, explaining how it works so that you can have a fair chance at the riddles yourself. "What about a secret passage?" "Nonsense, I would have noticed," says the detective. That's your cue to know that the word of god has been spoken. There are no secret passages in this story. I think Umineko could have been greatly more fun if Battler was a more competent detective. A detective doesn't just appear in mystery novels to be the deus ex machina, his function is like a tour guide. The reader can't be expected to guess how people think inside the world constructed by a random author, can he? That's where the detective comes in. "A man would never do X if a woman was in the room." Questionable statement if made about reality, and one the reader would never infer unless he had the same views that the author did. But once the detective declares such a thing, the reader is clued in on how the writer thinks, which is a vital component in making a work fair. For all that thing about red text being the supreme truth, it ended up being less true than the general proclamation made by the detective in a mystery novel. |
2011-02-15, 12:53 | Link #878 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Meta-Meta-Meta-Space
|
Quote:
Quote:
Spoiler for Benson Murder Case:
|
||
2011-02-15, 13:07 | Link #879 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
|
Quote:
Quote:
Spoiler for Benson Murder Case:
|
||
|
|