[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[Judoh]

And none of them misinterpreted a knocking sound. Krauss, Natsuhi, and Genji were not involved with the knock. No one else existed inside the mansion And that knock refers to the action of standing directly in front of a door and hitting it with a hand.

Hmm... I don't like this idea, but lets check if it works

The only requirement for the knock to be heard is that someone stand in front of the door and use their hand to make a knocking sound. Someone in the Dining hall, let's say it's Kyrie, stood in front of the door from inside the room and made a knocking sound that people heard. Kyrie then took a letter from her pocket and made it look like she picked up the letter from a crack in the door. With this the letter was never delivered to them from outside the room it was in someone's possession in the Dining hall the entire time.

[LyricalAura]

Originally Posted by Judoh

In other words in all but a few closed room cases the murders can happen in an unlocked room with a separate group creating closed rooms to provoke the murderer into exposing him/herself.

Finally someone agrees with me!

I wouldn't say it's all but a few cases, but the middle twilights of EP1 and EP2 at least are much easier to explain using a theory like this.

Originally Posted by Renall

Granted, "there was no letter and no knock" is equally valid, even probable. But I can't help but think there's some "key" in this semantic tapdance, and it's telling that it's enacted twice not by Battler or Beatrice, but by the witch side (once by Lambdadelta, once at Erika's suggestion). I would conclude that the semantic ambiguity benefits Bern/Lambda somehow. The trick here is that it's used by opposite sides in ep5 and ep6, though in ep6 Battler does ratify it. What's the angle?

Possibilities for EP5:

1. Someone we thought was in the family conference at midnight was actually somewhere else: Battler, Rudolf, Kyrie, Hideyoshi, Eva, Rosa, Shannon, or Kanon. However, because of the red enumerating everyone outside the dining room, the only way this is possible is if "Erika" refers to that missing person, placing them in the guesthouse.
2. Someone we don't know about was in the dining room, and Lambda would have needed to name them if she'd listed off everyone. This would probably only apply to Kinzotrice, so it can be discarded.
3. Lambda wanted to leave open the possibility that Kinzo was in the dining room to avoid denying his existence. This one sounds reasonable at first, but it invites a theory that everyone at the conference must have seen him, which renders the study battle nonsensical.
4. It was just a preemptive move to confine any "unobserved ninja X" to prevent them being used to explain the knock, similar to Erika's logic in EP6.

[SeagullCrazy]

Originally Posted by Judoh

The only requirement for the knock to be heard is that someone stand in front of the door and make a knocking sound. Someone in the Dining hall, let's say it's Kyrie, stood in front of the door from inside the room and made a knocking sound that people heard. Kyrie then took a letter from her pocket and made it look like she picked up the letter from a crack in the door. With this the letter was never delivered to them from outside the room it was in someone's possession in the Dining hall the entire time.

I actually thought that idea was clever, but In short, this means it was impossible for any character within the mansion to be the source of a knocking SOUND. ......And 'any character' refers even to unobserved people that no one has noticed.

Unless Kyrie was outside the mansion, it doesn't work.

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by SeagullCrazy

I actually thought that idea was clever, but In short, this means it was impossible for any character within the mansion to be the source of a knocking SOUND. ......And 'any character' refers even to unobserved people that no one has noticed.

Unless Kyrie was outside the mansion, it doesn't work.

Yeah and just before that...

Let it be known that in addition to Krauss, Natsuhi, and Genji, none of those in the dining hall made the knock. In this sense, 'knock' includes all direct, indirect, intentional, unintentional, and coincidental events that could create a knocking sound.

guess it really doesn't work

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by Renall

I find this highly suspicious. It happens twice, and it's subtle but noticeable. There is a distinct switch between discrete ("At 24:00, only Erika, George, Jessica, Maria, Nanjo, Gohda, and Kumasawa existed outside the mansion") and descriptive ("no one in the mansion placed the letter in the hallway"). An author would only do this if they are deliberately hoping the reader will misinterpret this.

Granted, "there was no letter and no knock" is equally valid, even probable. But I can't help but think there's some "key" in this semantic tapdance, and it's telling that it's enacted twice not by Battler or Beatrice, but by the witch side (once by Lambdadelta, once at Erika's suggestion). I would conclude that the semantic ambiguity benefits Bern/Lambda somehow. The trick here is that it's used by opposite sides in ep5 and ep6, though in ep6 Battler does ratify it. What's the angle?

There probably is a "key" in this, but it might be a key to a completely different lock that would otherwise be given away for free in passing. Don't both cases happen to keep up the ambiguity of Shannon+Kanon vs. Shkanon in particular? In Ep5 it clearly avoids enumerating the list of people in the dining hall, right when Kanon and Shannon are supposed to be in there. I don't have the reds for Ep6 at hand, but if my memory serves me right, in Ep6 case, something similar occurred in regard to those two again.

Mind you, I don't see that as confirmation of Shkanon, just further playing with us just like Lambdadelta promises in the beginning of Ep5.

[Judoh]

If I remember right didn't Shannon and Kanon come to the door to deliver tea and everyone was cheering after they entered? I think that was the reason for this red: Know that the letter never touched the serving cart. So shouldn't they have the ring before Shannon and Kanon entered the room?

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by Judoh

If I remember right didn't Shannon and Kanon come to the door to deliver tea and everyone was cheering after they entered? I think that was the reason for this red: Know that the letter never touched the serving cart. So shouldn't they have the ring before Shannon and Kanon entered the room?

My best guess at the moment is that Kanon, fed up with the Kinzo Phantom Conspiracy (he is not very approving of it from the beginning, for that matter) recovered the ring a few hours previously and kept it in his pocket. He has been waiting for an opportune moment to display it as the proof of the conspiracy which immediately removes all doubts that he is telling the truth. That's why he delivers tea together with Shannon, which we don't see him do very often. Hearing that Battler has discovered the gold, he immediately presents the ring, tells his story, and is readily believed and covered for.

Since Kanon is not 'the letter', and no letter existed in the first place, he can handle the serving cart all he wants and the red remains true. None of the red actually necessitates any letter to exist or knock to be heard -- all we hear about the letter in particular is 'never existed', 'never touched', 'never handled'... Well, it's easy to never handle a letter that was never there.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Oliver

There probably is a "key" in this, but it might be a key to a completely different lock that would otherwise be given away for free in passing. Don't both cases happen to keep up the ambiguity of Shannon+Kanon vs. Shkanon in particular? In Ep5 it clearly avoids enumerating the list of people in the dining hall, right when Kanon and Shannon are supposed to be in there. I don't have the reds for Ep6 at hand, but if my memory serves me right, in Ep6 case, something similar occurred in regard to those two again.

Not in the ep5 case, as Shannon and Kanon are said to be in the same location anyway. They're both supposed to be in the dining room, and if you believe in Shkanon, they'd "both" be there anyway (unless you believe Shannon and Kanon can be switched on or off or something). So it doesn't matter, I'd think.

In fact, it only benefits the opposite: If we assume Shannon and Kanon to have both been in the dining hall when in fact one of them wasn't. However, they'd have to be somewhere that nevertheless fits the reds or can somehow be otherwise excluded.

In the ep6 case, the failure to specifically define Shannon and Kanon in two different places does indeed keep Shkanon alive. However, the failure to specifically enumerate also benefits the opposite.

I can't help but think Erika has been suspecting Shkanon for a while... or perhaps Bern has.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by Renall

I can't help but think Erika has been suspecting Shkanon for a while... or perhaps Bern has.

I have a feeling that neither Bern nor Erika actually perceive the board directly. That is, I'm not sure about Erika, but I think Bern seriously doesn't, and that includes metaworld scenes she herself is part of. Unfortunately the hints I can cite for this are too vague to list seriously, so I may be completely wrong on that.

If that is so, suspecting the existence of Shkanon, but not being able to directly confirm it sounds quite likely.

[Raiza Sunozaki]

Originally Posted by Oliver

Since Kanon is not 'the letter', and no letter existed in the first place, he can handle the serving cart all he wants and the red remains true. None of the red actually necessitates any letter to exist or knock to be heard -- all we hear about the letter in particular is 'never existed', 'never touched', 'never handled'... Well, it's easy to never handle a letter that was never there.

This reminds me of an interesting thing I thought up a while ago.
I've stated before (maybe not here though) that I hate manipulation of the red. I think the whole point of giving us the absolute truth shown through the red is so that we can accept it as true. However, this does not neccessitate the belief that the all the red is needed.
Using this scene as an example, let me demonstrate. We're told in red that a letter could not have been placed infront of the dining hall by anyone available, so we're led to believe, by our trust in the red and by Ryuukishi leading us on by always saying that everything could be done by humans, that the letter was simply placed there by clever means.
If instead, like Oliver suggested, we say there was never any letter to begin with, then all the red about the letter is real, but moot.
The red is sort of like the boundaries of the games; it gives us the limits to what we can think up for solutions. But when the red is used like this, it expands the boundaries in the game in ways we don't need, and it only serves to confuse us.
Another example is the uncertainty of Kinzo in Episode 5. We all know that Kinzo is dead, but that fact is left unknown to Erika, by some sense of amusement on Bern and Lambda's part. And when Kinzo was used in the red, it created an incorrect area of possibilities for her to use.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by Raiza Sunozaki

If instead, like Oliver suggested, we say there was never any letter to begin with, then all the red about the letter is real, but moot.
The red is sort of like the boundaries of the games; it gives us the limits to what we can think up for solutions. But when the red is used like this, it expands the boundaries in the game in ways we don't need, and it only serves to confuse us.

I'm of the opinion that the trick is actually used to misdirect the reader rather often, and usually works on Battler himself splendidly -- Lambda just takes it to the absolute extremes to put it out in the open for all to see, by creating many pages of completely true red that denies various possibilities Erika offers over and over. This leads Erika further and further from the idea that the letter never existed, dangling a carrot on a stick with more and more useless red truth. Beatrice also used that trick multiple times, but never to the extremes Lambda does.

In particular, I'm pretty sure that it has been used to create the Zombie Kanon, the Second Kinzo, and the fake letter. In all those cases, red repeatedly states that mistakes are impossible, but avoids saying that recognition has in fact occurred. Battler always goes with the assumption that it did and tries to twist the red to squeeze his explanation in, but playing with the red is dangerous -- once you successfully twist it to mean something else to stick your theory in, you no longer really have axioms to play with.

It's actually structurally equivalent to the inverse of Battler's idea that 'if a murder has occurred, it is not actually a closed room'. If a room really is closed, then the murder did not actually occur, and someone is lying. Figuring out why they might be lying provides us with possible motives that can be used to unravel the rest.

Originally Posted by Raiza Sunozaki

Another example is the uncertainty of Kinzo in Episode 5. We all know that Kinzo is dead, but that fact is left unknown to Erika, by some sense of amusement on Bern and Lambda's part. And when Kinzo was used in the red, it created an incorrect area of possibilities for her to use.

Well, to be more specific, Erika suspected that Kinzo was dead from the beginning, as she says several times, but ignored the possibility because she clearly saw it was amusing Bern to torture Natsuhi. A living Kinzo was useful in this regard, so she deliberately misused the area of possibilities created by red regarding a non-existent Kinzo. A living Kinzo can't exist anywhere except Natsuhi's bed because a living Kinzo doesn't exist. We know that, and Erika knows that, but as long as Natsuhi is not willing to declare Kinzo dead, she will suffer. Erika is taking advantage of the witch's darkness to amuse Bern.

Notice that Erika had to search Natsuhi's room before that where-is-Kinzo scene to recover Natsuhi's diaries, and has to have ignored whatever Kinzo she found there.

P.S. I am also suspecting the Other Battler might have been created through some clever application of the same that I have yet to puzzle out. If you assume that the Zombie Kanon and the Ep4 Kinzo, instead of being cases of name trickery in red, are actually phantoms created through collective lying, the Other Battler remains the only certain case of possible name trickery in red. If we can figure out how it works without name trickery, red text becomes a far more reliable tool.

[Laserworm]

Is Erika stupid or something. In the end of ep6 she askes Beatrice to repeat. Among the people in the 'other room' not one of the people have more than one name.
There is no way Beatrice can say that in red. Shannon has two names.. Shannon and Sayo. Or maybe this is because of a horrible Atlas translation XD

Originally Posted by Rendall

I can't help but think Erika has been suspecting Shkanon for a while... or perhaps Bern has.

If she has isn't Erika stupid why doesn't she have Beatrice or Battler say "Repeat, Kanon and Shannon are two different people."

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by Laserworm

Is Erika stupid or something. In the end of ep6 she askes Beatrice to repeat. Among the people in the 'other room' not one of the people have more than one name.
There is no way Beatrice can say that in red. Shannon has two names.. Shannon and Sayo. Or maybe this is because of a horrible Atlas translation XD

I'm not sure about Ep6, but in Ep4 Battler did away with the Kinzo-Dragon in the exact same manner asking to repeat the same statement.

[Laserworm]

Originally Posted by Oliver

I'm not sure about Ep6, but in Ep4 Battler did away with the Kinzo-Dragon in the exact same manner asking to repeat the same statement.

That proves it. Battler and Erika are both incompetent and stupid.

[J the Drafter]

Well, I'm replaying the VN and I'm at a part where Battler decides the mystery needs to be attacked with imagination and reason. Erika has shown none of the former.

[Kylon99]

Originally Posted by Laserworm

Is Erika stupid or something. In the end of ep6 she askes Beatrice to repeat. Among the people in the 'other room' not one of the people have more than one name.
There is no way Beatrice can say that in red. Shannon has two names.. Shannon and Sayo. Or maybe this is because of a horrible Atlas translation XD

THIS! I thought I read this too, that none of the people have two names. I thought maybe I read this wrong so i discounted this, but if this is true, doesn't that mean that Shannon is NOT Sayo?

Maybe 'Sayo' is a lie?

Gotta go back and check this...

[Laserworm]

Originally Posted by Kylon99

THIS! I thought I read this too, that none of the people have two names. I thought maybe I read this wrong so i discounted this, but if this is true, doesn't that mean that Shannon is NOT Sayo?

Maybe 'Sayo' is a lie?

Gotta go back and check this...

No you got it a little wrong. Erika is asking Beatrice to say that no one in the 'other room' has more than one name. And Beatrice refuses. (Wait.. now I'm getting confused.. she did refuse didn't she?)

[Kylon99]

Originally Posted by Laserworm

No you got it a little wrong. Erika is asking Beatrice to say that no one in the 'other room' has more than one name. And Beatrice refuses. (Wait.. now I'm getting confused.. she did refuse didn't she?)

I think she did refuse. I couldn't find any red text pertaining to that at umineco.info before...

http://umineco.info/?%E8%B5%A4%E6%96...A9%B1%EF%BC%89

[LyricalAura]

Originally Posted by Laserworm

Looked at that list I realized she didn't refuse it, just changed it. Erika asked if anyone had more than one name.

Beatrice replied. Only 5 people, Hideyoshi, George, Kumasawa, Shannon, and Nanjo are in the 'other room'. No one exists expect the 5 people with these five names.

She just twists it so it denies that Kanon is in the other room.

Erika didn't ask Beato to repeat that no one had multiple names. She was theorizing that Kanon's real name was George instead of Yoshiya, which would allow him to be in the neighboring room without contradicting the red. Beato responded by shutting down both that theory and a bunch of others Erika might have continued with. Here's the full context:

Erika: The cousins’ room was confirmed to be a closed room right up to the very end. Therefore, if Kanon was really in that room, escaping would be impossible! In other words, at the time of the sealing, Kanon wasn’t in the cousins’ room!! Kanon’s name is a temporary thing. His real name is still unclear! If, for example, his name was the same as someone in the neighboring room, there would be no contradiction with the confirmation of people in the neighboring room! In short, rather than being in the cousins’ room, he could have been in the neighboring room!

Erika: The neighboring room was certainly sealed, but at the time of the logic error, only the seal on the door was confirmed to be intact. Therefore, there is a possibility that the seal on the window was broken. Kanon was in the neighboring room, and he escaped through that window…!!

Beato: The people who were in the neighboring room at the time it was sealed were Hideyoshi, George, Kumasawa, Shannon, and Nanjo. And, there were exactly five people in the neighboring room. No one other than the people corresponding to those five names existed! All names refer only to the actual people!!

[Klashikari]

Originally Posted by Laserworm

Or maybe this is because of a horrible Atlas translation XD

And this is why I asked people many times not to bring up things when they don't totally understand. For all intent and purpose, please do not bring up "facts" and "theories", unless they are verified.

let alone facts, the context is very important, and red text isn't any exception.