[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[jjblue1]

Tôya is not the moral agent of the story, BATTLER (that is the coherent developing character of Battler in all his forms but not the piece that is reverted to Zero each time...though as the games advance the borders start to weaken) and Ange are.

Well, I view Battler/BATTLER as parts of Toya. For me Toya is the final stage of Battler. Or Battler is the mask that Toya wears while facing all this because what Battler lives is what Toya goes through in his mind. It's not just like reading a book and identificating yourself with the main character. It's being the main character.

In short I don't really see the two as completely separate identities, more like parts of a whole, but that's just me.

Of course with Toya I don't intend Hachijo Toya/Featherine but the amnesiac Battler who took the name of Toya and then recovered his memories of having been Battler.

[Wanderer]

First off, since I have been in the position of arguing for Kakera Theory for some time now, I just want to say that it's not like I have discarded Author Theory. Author Theory is the usual way for me to think about Umineko, since I find it more intellectually stimulating.

Originally Posted by Renall

Because none of those occur in a story environment that is actually relevant to an alternate-reality theory. No matter the theory, the meta-world takes on a very different character and is capable of being self-contained even if it's made up. Lion's happiness as an entirely fictional character (if indeed that is all he is) still matters in the context of the fiction in which he exists.

Saying that the meta-world is capable of being self-contained only says that Author Theory is possible and in no way places Author Theory above Kakera Theory. And in any case, I'm not arguing to disprove Author Theory.

Kakera Theory explains the narrative value of the emotional focus that Umineko gives to the meta-world. Certain parts are easy to incorporate into Author Theory since they are emotionally relevant to "real" characters, but how is Lion's fate, for example, emotionally relevant to any "real" character?

Originally Posted by Renall

I'm talking about the nature of the moral agency. It's something that doesn't crop up anywhere but time travel and dimension-sliding stories, really. Normally, the protagonist is the moral agent we follow and whose moral development and choices we care about. There's generally little confusion about this.
-snip-
Basically, the question comes down to "Which character is learning and coming to a decision about the moral state of the narrative, and whether we agree with them or not, do we understand how they got there?" If we accept that any given Battler or Ange is equally likely to be this character, then we never actually arrive at a moral conclusion which the reader can comprehend and judge.

The issue you're describing only seems to apply to situations where the narrative focuses on an individual who somehow ends up in a situation where most of the people he or she interacts with become irrelevant to their ultimate fate because they belong to some other dimension etc. However, in Kakera Theory the moral viewpoints would be BATTLER and ANGE, who don't even change dimensions or travel through time to begin with; they both exist within the same plane of existence, the meta-world, which is separate from the individual Kakera.


A bit backlogged, but I want to clear up this misunderstanding:

Originally Posted by Wanderer

Kakera Theory in no way invalidates survivorship. In the context of their Kakera, they suffer and struggle just the same. Thematically, this was brought up in Higurashi Rei.

I wasn't saying that Umineko exists in the same universe as Higurashi (which is an argument that can be made, though I wasn't meaning to make it here). My point was that Higurashi Rei demonstrates that what happens in other Kakera does matter, because those tragic events really did happen.

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by Wanderer

Lion could be conceived by anyone alive who would know of Yasu's history which, based on episodes 5-7

Ah I forgot that technically EP5 was one of the published forgeries. If it is the same or similar to what we have seen, it surely contains all the necessary informations.
Supposing this is the case that would mean that Beatrice or one of the gensawajo explained the whole story to Battler in the real world, because there's no way that Battler or Ikuko would know that story.

Originally Posted by Wanderer

You don't count it; if the meta-world is just imagination then 2,578,917 can just be an arbitrary number that really just means "a lot".

Well that counts as "talking shit" in my book. I'm not saying that your interpretation is wrong, that's actually what I would pick, but it's not solid.

Someone who believes there are actual many worlds in Umineko just like in Higurashi would use that sentence to support his view. If we take that literally then he can speculate that there are infinite kakera and that Bern using her powers obtained an enormous sample in which the probability of finding a kakera where Lion is accepted is precisely what she said.

So basically the only options are

1) The kakera in Umineko are fictions and What Bern did in that scene was just talking shit.

2) The kakera in Umineko are many worlds (like in Higurashi) and what Bern said in that case was the literal truth.


I choose number one, personally. But I don't really like the idea of arbitrarily decide that the hints that don't fit well my theory are unimportant or must be interpreted. It's easy to fall victim of personal bias if you act that way. If you do that there are very little chances for you to realize when your theory is wrong.

[jjblue1]

I choose number one, personally. But I don't really like the idea of arbitrarily decide that the hints that don't fit well my theory are unimportant or must be interpreted. It's easy to fall victim of personal bias if you act that way. If you do that there are very little chances for you to realize when your theory is wrong.

I understand your feelings however most of the meta that's not red truth can't be taken litterally. Think at the scene in which Beato tells Battler her mother's story.
She talks about homunculus and her soul being transferred and such.
Even with red we've to be carefully about her exact wording and how it can be applied to the situation.
So I'm not sure I can discount the idea we've to interpret that sentence... -_-
Guessing the truth in Umineko is rather difficult...

[Jan-Poo]

I understand your feelings however most of the meta that's not red truth can't be taken litterally

Not even red truths can be taken literally apparently...

I resigned myself to the fact that in umineko some stuff shouldn't be overthinked or taken literally, I just don't like it because it makes every deduction rather aleatory. This is usually fine for the first part of a mystery but ideally in a good mystery there should be a point where you can understand everything with precision.
Considering this was a mystery that had to keep people thinking for 4 years it was inevitable, but that point where all the pieces are in position should have come in the end. Ryuukishi broke one of the most basic rules of mysteries when he decided to never write a clear solution, and this not because he doesn't want the readers to know the truth, but because he wants them to find it by themselves.

But if that's the case, shouldn't he have at least made it so it was possible through the hints to reach an inevitable solution that doesn't require assumptions and arbitrary interpretations?

Well it's not like the main bulk of this story wasn't understood, I think the major points indeed were found and established. But there are still thousands of minor questions such as this one that simply cannot be answered with the current data. And the fact there isn't a real key to determine which is an important hint and which is irrelevant doesn't help.

[Wanderer]

Well, Ryuukishi himself has described Umineko as both a mystery and a fantasy. He's even discussed it as "anti-mystery verses anti-fantasy".

[jjblue1]

I resigned myself to the fact that in umineko some stuff shouldn't be overthinked or taken literally, I just don't like it because it makes every deduction rather aleatory. This is usually fine for the first part of a mystery but ideally in a good mystery there should be a point where you can understand everything with precision.

I agree with you. If he didn't want to give us the solution he should have structured Umineko like a matematical work where 2+2=4 and all you had to do was to do all the calculations (=find all the hints) to find the solution.

Instead most is up to the interpretation.

When he talked with Keiya about the letter Battler might have sent to Shannon he said something along the line that it was up to the reader decide if Battler didn't send him or George hid it or other explanations according to which was the character for which the reader felt love.

Now, you might decide you don't like Battler or George or that you like more one instead than the other but is that reasoning?

Of course an answer might be 'who cares, the letter isn't important for the solution of the mystery so do your pick, nothing will change'... but we're allowed to do our pick for important things too.

I think if he wanted Umineko to be a mystery he should have worked more on that side. I'm annoyed at how Umineko is more of a logic puzzle dressed as a mystery where the solution isn't necessarily a realistic one but can be also one that merely 'fit' (see the scene in which Battler and Erika decided it was okay to cut 'magic cheese' to solve the logic quiz).

There's to say I'm going through Umineko trying to analyze it through a psychological perspective right now and I'm having fun at doing it but I know once I'll have drawn my conclusions I will have no way to check if my answer is correct and there's nothing that annoy me more.

Really, I truly hope the solution will be released sooner or later.

[jjblue1]

Well, Ryuukishi himself has described Umineko as both a mystery and a fantasy. He's even discussed it as "anti-mystery verses anti-fantasy".

But then he went and said that witches and magic could be explained with human tricks, making it anti fantasy, and that Umineko is solvable, making it a mystery.

Ergo I'd like a solution or the possibility to reach it for sure.

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by Wanderer

Well, Ryuukishi himself has described Umineko as both a mystery and a fantasy. He's even discussed it as "anti-mystery verses anti-fantasy".

I keep seeing people mentioning that but I think it's completely wrong.

The question of whether umineko is mystery or fantasy was just a game meant for the first part of the story it was challenge made by ryuukishi to make people discuss about it. But it died as soon as chiru started.

After that point the question of whether it's fantasy or mystery never resurfaced again, because it was already settled. The culprit is human, everything must have been done using human tricks.

I think you should rather pay attention to ryuukishi's latest inerview rather to read something that was written 4 years ago. It was just teasing, and it wasn't even that subtle.

see for example what he wrote here:

Umineko no Naku Koro ni is the worst kind of tale, created without any intention of letting all of you solve it.

But in the latest interview Ryuukishi clearly said that he thinks this story is definitely solvable and encouraged people to try and solve it. What do you believe then? What he wrote as a way to tease the readers at the beginning, or what he stated at the end when there was no longer any need to tease anyone?


Btw I'd like to take this chance to point out how ironic is the example he chose

it's as if a boxer is saying "I only want to fight with an opponent whom I can win"

There are weigh cathegories for a reason in boxe. You don't pit a lightweight against a heavywweight. Additionally... boxing is a kind of sport where there is actually no obligation to participate to a match, boxers and their managers decide who to fight against on a case by case basis. So yeah a boxer saying "I only want to fight with an opponent whom I can win" is absolutely normal!!!

I'm no boxe expert but even I know that much... would a boxer accept a match against someone he knows absolutely nothing about and whose weigh cathegory could be anything? No way in hell.

[jjblue1]

Umineko no Naku Koro ni is the worst kind of tale, created without any intention of letting all of you solve it.

My first reaction at seeing this was 'I hate him and I feel trolled'. But well, after reading the whole text I think this refers to the first part of Umineko, in short to the first 4 games.

My feeling is that Umineko must be solvable. A problem however might be that he might have not made solvable the part I want to solve.

For example. Is Yasu's sex 'solvable'?
Is 'what happened in Rokkenjima Prime' solvable?
Or are only solvable the tricks used to murder people in Ep 1-4?

[Jan-Poo]

Is Yasu's sex 'solvable'?

My guess is that this one is probably something he doesn't want to be solvable. I'm not against such things when they aren't necessary to understand the story or make sense out of it. This particular thing is acceptable if remains unresolved.

Is 'what happened in Rokkenjima Prime' solvable?

I think Ryukishi believes it is, but I'm not sure that it actually is, not with certainty at least.

Or are only solvable the tricks used to murder people in Ep 1-4?

Are they? The only confirmed murder case's solution is the one of EP2 inside Natsuhi's room.
However the solution given is something that no one, to my knowledge, ever suggested. I can't see anything that would lead with certainty to that solution and I believe there can be at least a dozen of equally valid explanations.

[jjblue1]

My guess is that this one is probably something he doesn't want to be solvable. I'm not against such things when they aren't necessary to understand the story or make sense out of it. This particular thing is acceptable if remains unresolved.

Yes, I know it's not fundamental for the story, still I find annoying it's kept hidden.

I think Ryukishi believes it is, but I'm not sure that it actually is, not with certainty at least.

Well, let's hope it is, though I also fear that, although Ryukishi might believe it's solvable his 'it's solvable' might not match with my expectations of 'it's solvable'. Meaning: we can get only who was the culprit? Or also the motive? And other details I'd like to know...

Are they? The only confirmed murder case's solution is the one of EP2 inside Natsuhi's room.
However the solution given is something that no one, to my knowledge, ever suggested. I can't see anything that would lead with certainty to that solution and I believe there can be at least a dozen of equally valid explanations.

I think Ryukishi thinks they are but I agree that as long as solutions aren't confirmed, again we can't know if they are right or wrong...

[Cao Ni Ma]

Well, most of us considered that Shannon could have committed suicide in that scenario. I also remember joking half heartedly that the lack of a weapon in the scene could be explained with a door knob, a handkerchief and a pair of glasses. Which apparently isn't that far off from the truth, at least in spirit. The problem is, what happened to the survivors? Did Maria, Rosa, Genji, and Battler die at the end? Is there any truth to the fantasy scene with Maria and Rosa running off to the beach? Did Genji decide to kill em even after Yasu was dead?

The problem with the story is that its so damn long and with so many details that we dont know what we are suppose to be looking for. The pieces that connect the puzzle to what actually happened in prime are all jumbled together with pieces of countless other mysteries and we just cant sort them out, at least not all of them.

Maybe RK07 actually believes nearly everything is solvable in the story with what he gave us, but thats only because he's made them and seen the final product of each one of those puzzles and can sort out the herrings from the actual clues.

[haguruma]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

But in the latest interview Ryuukishi clearly said that he thinks this story is definitely solvable and encouraged people to try and solve it. What do you believe then? What he wrote as a way to tease the readers at the beginning, or what he stated at the end when there was no longer any need to tease anyone?

I think you're missing something important about that sentence:
"Umineko no Naku Koro ni is the worst kind of tale, created without any intention of letting all of you solve it."
The stress is made not on the whole last sentence, but on the part that there was never any definite intention to make every reader equal. And I think that ties in perfectly with your boxing metaphor. Nobody would try to fight against an oponent that is too strong for us...and I think Ryûkishi made this oponent so strong that only people who not only get the hints but also get him, the author, can solve it. And as none of us actually know him or his ideas that well some parts remains blurry.

For example the murders. He admitted that he based every murder on a famous literary example...each way of murder is a quote from somewhere else, but slightly changed to fit Umineko. And that raises the first question, what was changed, what wasn't and to which story does it refer to? We can assume he read Christie, Carr and Higashino because he mentioned them, but who else?!

I think he didn't intend to do this...I think he was just simply very blue eyed and thought that many people would get his quotes, because so many people in Japan are into mystery fiction. I read a fair number of mysteries both western and Japanese and I still have often no idea where he is drawing his inspiration from, because there are just too many parts in a huge number of novels that are similar.
I think even his story beyond Yasu (Port Pia Murder Case), the setting (And then there were none/Ecole de Paris Murder Case) or the fantasy (Burning Court/different Shimada Souji novels) is solvable...it's just that he probably went to referential that nobody is able to get it without guessing.

He just overestimated us and himself in many areas.

[jjblue1]

The problem is, what happened to the survivors? Did Maria, Rosa, Genji, and Battler die at the end? Is there any truth to the fantasy scene with Maria and Rosa running off to the beach? Did Genji decide to kill em even after Yasu was dead?

I think the idea is that the island exploded so the survivors died.
Now I praise the loyalty of Genji if he knew of Shannon's plan but still... -_-
It can be that, before the island blew up Maria and Rosa tried to run off.

It's not yet midnight when Battler is left alone in the house ergo Rosa and Maria might have tried to run off but the explosion blew them up as well...

[jjblue1]

He just overestimated us and himself in many areas.

It can be. Also he built a mystery that's rather... unusual, to say the least. At least for me. No idea how are mysteryes in Japan apart from the ones included in 'Detective Conan'

[haguruma]

Originally Posted by jjblue1

It's not yet midnight when Battler is left alone in the house ergo Rosa and Maria might have tried to run off but the explosion blew them up as well...

Which is the generally accepted solution to what the scene, where they were fleeing from a horde of monster goats, meant.

I don't know if this has been brought up before, but a friend of mine pointed me towards something interesting...
If you take Wills solution again and only take the ones that are marked with "Soil to Soil" you don't get any double-deaths. While this does leave the question of what actually happens with the ones that are both "Soil" and "Illusion" it's quite remarkable.
The ones marked like this are:

• Gohda, George, Shannon (EP2)
• Rosa., Maria (EP3)
• Kyrie, Rudolph, Hideyoshi (EP3)
• Krauss, Natsuhi (EP3)

I'm not really saying that this has to mean something, but I think it's suspicious. Many people say that this only marks the crimes in which some kind of trickery or magical illusion was incorporated...but that isn't true. The EP2 deaths had only a magical solution and a trick with the dissapearing weapon. And the EP3 corpses might have not been tampered with by much...but at least Krauss and Natsuhi had to be moved.

EDIT:

It can be. Also he built a mystery that's rather... unusual, to say the least. At least for me. No idea how are mysteryes in Japan apart from the ones included in 'Detective Conan'

Conan is really tame as a mystery compared to what's usually around in Japan. The cases are rather easy and it's always pretty obvious what the solution is...well the target audience is younger teenagers. A little closer to actual mysteries might be the manga Kindaichi Case Files, as it actually copies many famous mystery novels just like Umineko does and puts them into some fantastic scenario around vampires, wizards, curses and so on, but it always has a human solution.
Many Japanese mysteries aren't even that different from Umineko, also considering the fact that there often is no clear solution. An Offering to Nothingness (also mentioned in the interview), Dogura Magura, The Murder Case in the Mansion of Black Death, Insane Walls - Insane Windows or The Locked Room Murder Case in the Black Bird Mansion and White Bird Mansion in Misaki are all examples of puzzle mysteries that play around with the classical mystery structure...sometimes even ridiculing it. Of course that doesn't mean they are any majority (most are still rather classical) but those are quite famous examples.

[Wanderer]

Originally Posted by jjblue1

Is Yasu's sex 'solvable'?

Yasu's sex is that of a sexually mutilated male, raised as a female. Ergo Yasu's gender confusion.

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

I keep seeing people mentioning that but I think it's completely wrong.

The question of whether umineko is mystery or fantasy was just a game meant for the first part of the story it was challenge made by ryuukishi to make people discuss about it. But it died as soon as chiru started.

After that point the question of whether it's fantasy or mystery never resurfaced again, because it was already settled. The culprit is human, everything must have been done using human tricks.

The main difference with the transition to Chiru was that BATTLER switched sides; instead of believing in fantasy meaning BATTLER's defeat, it became the story's primary moral message. And it's not as though fantasy disappeared from the fictions at that point, either.

The issue was not settled: Episode 5 was a demonstration of why approaching the problem with an entirely mystery-based approach was wrong. Ryuukishi's basically saying that the road to the truth is a proper combination of deduction (what the mystery elements tell us) and induction (what the fantasy elements tell us). Episode 6 used the magic/meta narrative to encourage us to induce the idea of personality death so that we can find the answer to Nanjo's death in episode 3.

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

I think you should rather pay attention to ryuukishi's latest inerview rather to read something that was written 4 years ago. It was just teasing, and it wasn't even that subtle.

see for example what he wrote here:

But in the latest interview Ryuukishi clearly said that he thinks this story is definitely solvable and encouraged people to try and solve it. What do you believe then? What he wrote as a way to tease the readers at the beginning, or what he stated at the end when there was no longer any need to tease anyone?

I read that interview. He said it was solvable, but all he talked about were the solutions to individual fictions, not the overarching story. He said next to nothing about the overall story and Rokkenjima Prime, which I think in it's present condition is not 2+2=4 solvable (Ryuukishi even said that the mystery part of Umineko was over after episode 7).

But even when talking about the individual fictions we have plenty of situations that are not 2+2=4 solvable. Like how the fuck are we supposed to figure out the actual sequence of events in Alliance? He basically told us that Shannon committed suicide in a way that looked like it wasn't a suicide (something pretty much anyone could have done), but we still have next to no clues as to who killed who, how they did it, and why they did it. There are countless reasonable answers.

Basically, when Ryuukishi says "solvable" I have to think he can only mean that it's possible to conceive an answer that follows what clues are provided, the relevant red texts, and Knox. Sometimes the list of reasonable possibilities is pretty small (in closed rooms, for example), but other times it requires arbitrary interpretations, which means that, while Umineko has quite a few mystery elements, it is not a pure mystery.

People complain about how Umineko doesn't live up to expectations as a mystery, but Ryuukishi never called it a pure mystery. It doesn't matter if he says it's solvable now because whatever he exactly means by that doesn't change what Umineko is, which we can say with the confidence of empirical experience is not a true pure mystery.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Wanderer

But even when talking about the individual fictions we have plenty of situations that are not 2+2=4 solvable. Like how the fuck are we supposed to figure out the actual sequence of events in Alliance? He basically told us that Shannon committed suicide in a way that looked like it wasn't a suicide (something pretty much anyone could have done), but we still have next to no clues as to who killed who, how they did it, and why they did it. There are countless reasonable answers.

Now hold on just a minute! We just have to work from the one solid piece of data we have and go from there. We know that Kanon was the ninth vic- oh. You know what, fuck it.

People complain about how Umineko doesn't live up to expectations as a mystery, but Ryuukishi never called it a pure mystery. It doesn't matter if he says it's solvable now because whatever he exactly means by that doesn't change what Umineko is, which we can say with the confidence of empirical experience is not a true pure mystery.

That doesn't really make him any less of a dick.

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by haguruma

I think you're missing something important about that sentence:
"Umineko no Naku Koro ni is the worst kind of tale, created without any intention of letting all of you solve it."
The stress is made not on the whole last sentence, but on the part that there was never any definite intention to make every reader equal.

Debatable interpretation. A grammar nazi would point out how "anyone" would be a better word to use if that was the case. But anyway how do you interpret this then?

The culprit is a witch. All alibis and tricks are magic.

This is not a mystery, but fantasy!

I read that interview. He said it was solvable, but all he talked about were the solutions to individual fictions

At the time he wrote those things you interpret as warnings instead of teasings that you quoted there were ONLY the fictions for us to reason about.
Are you implying that he was warning us about something we couldn't even think about and then suddenly stopped at the very time we had a glimpse of that?
I don't buy it.

The issue was not settled: Episode 5 was a demonstration of why approaching the problem with an entirely mystery-based approach was wrong.

It is "wrong" not because it is factually wrong but because it is morally "wrong". At least that's what you get from Ryuukishi's logic.
At the end of EP8 you must choose "Magic".
Do you choose "magic" because it's the correct answer? No it is cristal clear that that's the lie.
You must choose "Magic" because "it's the best way to live".

Paraphrasing that to the way to approach Umineko, it basically means that in order to enjoy and understand the reasons the feelings and the emotions you must appreciate "magic". But that doesn't help at all if you want to understand the crude and factual reconstruction of the events.

People complain about how Umineko doesn't live up to expectations as a mystery, but Ryuukishi never called it a pure mystery

I don't think that's the problem. I never expected it to be a pure mystery, I never thought it was a pure mystery. I said that the story as whole wasn't a mystery even before EP8. But you know... that's no excuse to leave everything in the mist after you made your readers reason about it. Higurashi isn't a pure mystery either, but you can reason about it and everything is explainable and explained in the end.

To explain what I mean further you can even have a Romance story with intrigues and various complex character developements. The readers still need to understand what the hell happened in that story in the end. This is not a mystery's prerogative, this is what you normally expect from a story of any kind.

Basically, when Ryuukishi says "solvable" I have to think he can only mean that it's possible to conceive an answer that follows what clues are provided, the relevant red texts, and Knox. Sometimes the list of reasonable possibilities is pretty small (in closed rooms, for example), but other times it requires arbitrary interpretations, which means that, while Umineko has quite a few mystery elements, it is not a pure mystery.

This is where I agree with you. Ryuukishi actually thinks so. But I think it is clear that I, Renall, Sherringford and others totally disagree with that kind of "logic".
If you need to make arbitrary interpretations and you have no way to check if they work then it's not solvable. You'll never know how the events unfolded according to the author.