[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[GravityZero]

Originally Posted by Renall

Well, thus far there is only one piece of evidence of two people possibly being able to use the same name: Battler. Although Battler does theorize on the "Kinzo title," even if true there should probably only be a single "Kinzo." Since the other Kinzo is dead, as long as you're focusing on the affirmative actions of a single person, no problem.

The issue of course is the following:

• "Acknowledged the existence of Kinzo."
• "A living Kinzo."
• "Since [Kinzo] is confirmed not to exist, please exclude him."

If there were a passed-on Kinzo title, how many of these would refer to that person, and how many would refer to the dead one? "A living Kinzo" is especially bad for ep5, as if you believe that there is a Kinzo-title floating around, you either have to believe in switching off personalities or that whoever became "Kinzo" was in Natsuhi's bed all night.

...Unless, by solving the epitaph and becoming family head Battler eradicated the need for the second "Kinzo." If "Kinzo" is meant as a fallback position in case the epitaph goes unsolved, Battler solving it means no "Kinzo" exists well before midnight, as Battler solves it on the 4th.

"Since Kinzo is confirmed not to exist, please exclude him" isn't Red. That is, Battler could have been working off of Erika's assumption from last game that Kinzo isn't on the board, when in fact, his gold truth applied to Ushiromiya Kinzo, and not a titled Kinzo. Any Kinzo who is not Ushiromiya Kinzo can still exist at all times during the game, it does not violate any Red or Gold and has been supported by Battler's Blue for 3 games straight.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by GravityZero

"Since Kinzo is confirmed not to exist, please exclude him" isn't Red. That is, Battler could have been working off of Erika's assumption from last game that Kinzo isn't on the board, when in fact, his gold truth applied to Ushiromiya Kinzo, and not a titled Kinzo. Any Kinzo who is not Ushiromiya Kinzo can still exist at all times during the game, it does not violate any Red or Gold and has been supported by Battler's Blue for 3 games straight.

But then Battler would clearly know which Kinzo she means, and should - if he's being honest - place the "other Kinzo" in the All Other People room.

[GravityZero]

Originally Posted by Renall

But then Battler would clearly know which Kinzo she means, and should - if he's being honest - place the "other Kinzo" in the All Other People room.

He's the game master. He excluded Kinzo from the Red, without confirming that Kinzo doesn't exist in the red. Result: Kinzo can exist anywhere.

Erika screwed up by not asking Battler to exclude Ushiromiya Kinzo, who is the person she assumed he was talking about... that, or she didn't see the end of EP4 to remember that particular Blue went undefeated. Excluding just "Kinzo" means excluding a possible person X/split personality from being within a closed room. Everything that occurred in EP6 becomes possible.

My guess for "Kinzo" is Kanon, since he saved Battler, but, as another forumer pointed out, I'd have to explain exactly HOW Kanon got that personality or WHY Ushiromiya Kinzo would pass it on to a servant (here come the x child from 19 years ago theories!).

[UsagiTenpura]

Logics that are based on the gamemaster's dishonesty and unfairness is equivalent, to me, to claiming that Ryukishi is trolling us. The red truths are ultimately told by him. If he's telling us basically lies (in the sense that it breaks the trust in the supposed truth) then I'm seriously disappointed in him. It feels like a credibility suicide on his part.

That's probably why I hope this is not true.

But then as Renall said perhaps I try to see things with too much "love".

[Smeckledorf]

Originally Posted by GravityZero

"Since Kinzo is confirmed not to exist, please exclude him" isn't Red. That is, Battler could have been working off of Erika's assumption from last game that Kinzo isn't on the board, when in fact, his gold truth applied to Ushiromiya Kinzo, and not a titled Kinzo. Any Kinzo who is not Ushiromiya Kinzo can still exist at all times during the game, it does not violate any Red or Gold and has been supported by Battler's Blue for 3 games straight.

Ushiromiya Kinzo can die and still be on the gameboard as a different piece. So, Ushiromiya Kinzo can die but he can still be alive as Goldsmith. Then again, knowing what Gold Truth actually is could disprove this claim.

[winter 923]

Battler said Kinzo's corpse so Erika followed and said Kinzo and not Ushiromiya Kinzo or Grandfather.
Also couldn't Battler just say "everyone else is in the cousins room with the exception of Kinzo's corpse."
If we go with Genuie (sp?) Battler, he just played Erika.
Also if we think japanese (oh boy) did it say 'remove him from everyone' or 'remove kinzo from everyone' now i have to look for that line...great.

[GravityZero]

Originally Posted by winter 923

Battler said Kinzo's corpse so Erika followed and said Kinzo and not Ushiromiya Kinzo or Grandfather.
Also couldn't Battler just say "everyone else is in the cousins room with the exception of Kinzo's corpse."
If we go with Genuie (sp?) Battler, he just played Erika.
Also if we think japanese (oh boy) did it say 'remove him from everyone' or 'remove kinzo from everyone' now i have to look for that line...great.

The gold truth, word for word in the WH trans, is "I guarantee that this corpse is Ushiromiya Kinzo's corpse...!!" Ushiromiyo Kinzo. Any other Kinzo can easily exist, so long as they aren't Ushiromiya Kinzo.

EDIT TO ADD QUOTE:

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

Logics that are based on the gamemaster's dishonesty and unfairness is equivalent, to me, to claiming that Ryukishi is trolling us. The red truths are ultimately told by him. If he's telling us basically lies (in the sense that it breaks the trust in the supposed truth) then I'm seriously disappointed in him. It feels like a credibility suicide on his part.

That's probably why I hope this is not true.

But then as Renall said perhaps I try to see things with too much "love".

But the trick is, the author wrote that piece (concerning Kinzo) in ink. The piece directly after it was in red.

The author, through Auau, tells us that Beatrice often narrowly brushed against logic errors. I believe that the author himself must struggle to keep the tricks possible, this is the 6th game already, though that's just my opinion.

Anything in ink can be a lie. Anything in red cannot. That's the way it's been since EP2. Believing that the GM shouldn't lie in ink isn't possible. 30 minutes after that scene, he's insisting his mother saved him when it was really Kanon.

The only character who's claimed that their normal words are Red Truth is LambdaDelta. Anyone else... nah.

[CainSonozaki]

I had started thinking about ep6??? and was wondering about Featherine.

-If this board is really Beatos gameboard, what is preventing Featherine herself from getting the answers she wants?
It's possible Bern may get something wrong. recently she doesnt seem to care about anything except denying Beato, and shes already fabricated Natsuhi as a culprit (and now that i think about she knew kinzo was dead so she completely made something up to achieve that end of denying Beato).

-How exactly was Featherine able to take Beatos board?
I mean the ending and tea party insinuates Beato got the end she wanted (didnt Ange say shes sleeping now or something to that effect) But BATTLER was the territory lord and unless they both "went to sleep" (together), I dont really see how she got it.

-Which leads me to think about what someone posted here a while back about the gameboard being another forgery. I mean if it is Beatos gameboard, then i wonder about the first two things, if not then how will this one benefit her?

sorry for random, rambly post. just some things i thought and i needed to post it or else id just keep thinking about it haha

[UsagiTenpura]

Originally Posted by GravityZero

Anything in ink can be a lie. Anything in red cannot.

The very idea that there is two Kinzo and that red can arbitrarily decides which one it refers to is being dishonest. If Erika is thinking about ruling out Ushiromya Kinzo, and Battler agrees to, but he meant another Kinzo, then he is dishonest, and also is Ryukishi. It's not like that trick is even necessarily for Kanon to escape the cousin's room anyway, so why bother? Put it that way, preferably Red should be true under any interpretation. Red that can be both the truth and a lie at the same time shouldn't have the right to be spoken in red.

Originally Posted by CainSonozaki

-How exactly was Featherine able to take Beatos board?
I mean the ending and tea party insinuates Beato got the end she wanted (didnt Ange say shes sleeping now or something to that effect) But BATTLER was the territory lord and unless they both "went to sleep" (together), I dont really see how she got it.

I might be wrong but as far as I remember Featherine doesn't have Beato's board. Rather from her understanding of everything she made for herself a copy of Beato's board.

[Renall]

Going by Author Theory, my thought would be:

Previous message bottle stories (ep1-2) and "forgery" message bottle stories (ep3-6) have focused on revealing the truth of Beatrice's games through a very similar means to Beatrice herself. That's why there have been so few answers; the writers have found "the truth," but they've expressed it in the same hidden way Beato did. Perhaps this is out of respect for her as a writer.

Ep7's writer (who isn't Bern, but whose perspective Bern would represent) may not subscribe to the same notions. This person, if the previews are accurate, is more of a facts-oriented person. Like the other forgers, he/she has reached the truth of Beatrice's game. Unlike them, this writer has no compulsion to hide anything in the same way. Thus, he or she is planning to reveal a large number of factual conclusions about the Rokkenjima Incident that he/she has discovered, however damning they may be.

Of course, that could all be a ruse, and the author either hasn't truly found the truth, doesn't truly understand the truth, or is being exactly as misleading as everyone else while pretending not to be.

[confused_kitsune]

Stupid pointless form of Shkanon that doesn't explain anything, but what if Sayo and Yoshiya were indeed two different people playing the roles of Shannon and Kanon, only that either can play both (well, not simultaneously)? Would that violate the All people can only use their own names!! truth?

[GravityZero]

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

The very idea that there is two Kinzo and that red can arbitrarily decides which one it refers to is being dishonest. If Erika is thinking about ruling out Ushiromya Kinzo, and Battler agrees to, but he meant another Kinzo, then he is dishonest, and also is Ryukishi. It's not like that trick is even necessarily for Kanon to escape the cousin's room anyway, so why bother? Put it that way, preferably Red should be true under any interpretation. Red that can be both the truth and a lie at the same time shouldn't have the right to be spoken in red.

But the Red is NOT a lie, under any circumstance.
[Excluding Kinzo] Everyone else is in the cousins' room. That's a fact of the game board. Whether or not Kinzo exists has nothing to do with the truthfulness of the red.

Kinzo's is excluded, which is mentioned. Battler did not lie with the red truth. He mislead with the ink beforehand, by saying "it's been confirmed that Kinzo doesn't exist". Ushiromiya Kinzo doesn't exist (as a living person), sure. Any other Kinzo, not so. Battler's Blue allows Kinzo to exist as a title. Kinzo was not in the cousin's room during the count for everyone, but he didn't have to be. He could have already been killing people by that time.

That's how Battler, in my opinion, found his way out of the closed rooms. Of course, there's Shkanon(trice), but that's a little TOO obvious for me to bite on.

[UsagiTenpura]

I acknowledge that everyone else (except Kinzo) is in the cousins' room.

Now assuming you're right about Kanon = Kinzo and that's how he was excluded from the the "everyone else".

Meaning 1 : I acknowledge that everyone else (except Kanon Kinzo the living one) is in the cousins' room. This way it is true.

Meaning 2 : I acknowledge that everyone else (except Ushiromiya Kinzo the corpse) is in the cousins' room. This way it is a lie.

So that way it is a truth and a lie at the same time. I'm not saying that's impossible to be what they meant I'm saying this is dishonest.

Again, you don't need to rely on Shkanon nor Kinzo to escape the cousin's room.

@ Confused Kitsune
I would believe so yes, but there's probably arguments that could lead out of it.

[winter 923]

But 'Ushiromiya Kinzo' was removed from the gameboard. Even Erika said his existence is no more. Therefore there should not be a second meaning to it. So this was a trick played from genuie Battler. Battler mentions a corpse that could possibly be identified as Ushiromiya Kinzo's but In this closed-off Rokkenjima, there is no objective way to show that this corpse is Grandfather's. With this trick he allowed 'Kinzo' to move free.


In short: Battler mentions a corpse that everyone thinks is Kinzo's but is not or can't be proven, allowing Kinzo to move free.

How could someone escape from that room? Isn't this room completly sealed by the time of the logic error? I tried it with "Erika can't seal everything at the same time" but it was countered with "It was a retroactive move"

[confused_kitsune]

I do suppose it does, too. To get into details a bit, what I was trying to suggest was that 'Shannon' and 'Kanon' are by default roles/titles/pseudonyms themselves, therefore both the person Sayo and the person Yoshiya can play either. However, the same role cannot be played at the same time by both. That would lead to contradictory multiple Kanons/Shannons. So that was why I was wondering if a possibility as such would be in accordance to the red mentioned above or not. Maybe the whole duel in Ep 6 was actually Sayo and Yoshiya (Geez, I don't like these names) stumbling upon each other playing the same role (which isn't logically possible, as the others would notice it sooner or later).

Just to be clear, I don't quite believe in this myself. It would raise more problems than it solves. For example, would Kanon was killed in this room refer to the Kanon role or to the person currently playing the Kanon role (whose death causes the death of the impersonation as well)?

[GravityZero]

Originally Posted by confused_kitsune

I do suppose it does, too. To get into details a bit, what I was trying to suggest was that 'Shannon' and 'Kanon' are by default roles/titles/pseudonyms themselves, therefore both the person Sayo and the person Yoshiya can play either. However, the same role cannot be played at the same time by both. That would lead to contradictory multiple Kanons/Shannons. So that was why I was wondering if a possibility as such would be in accordance to the red mentioned above or not. Maybe the whole duel in Ep 6 was actually Sayo and Yoshiya (Geez, I don't like these names) stumbling upon each other playing the same role (which isn't logically possible, as the others would notice it sooner or later).

Just to be clear, I don't quite believe in this myself. It would raise more problems than it solves. For example, would Kanon was killed in this room refer to the Kanon role or to the person currently playing the Kanon role (whose death causes the death of the impersonation as well)?

If "Kanon was killed in this room", then Kanon was killed in this room. Kanon has to exist in order to be killed, no? So he was probably the actual person playing Kanon, unless a fight between personalities broke out and Shannon/Kinzo killed Kanon. If that happened... my brain would snap from the strain of wrapping my head around such a concept. Firstly, one personality killing another is such a meta concept that I don't think that's what Ryu wanted us to get from that Red. In either case, Kanon would no longer be alive, but it creates an interesting problem, and another possible loophole for a person X.

[UsagiTenpura]

The thing is that there is no red that excludes Kinzo, it was a general understanding that Kinzo doesn't exist so he doesn't count in "everyone else". Meaning that even if a Kinzo exists he still wasn't free from "everyone else". The condition for being excluded from being everyone else wasn't being Kinzo but "not existing". So even if Kanon = Kinzo, if he doesn't exist he couldn't do anything more then the real Kinzo, and if he does exists he is still trapped with everyone else.

Erika didn't seal the rooms retroactively, only Battler's room. Otherwise her own seals would've been destroyed when everyone entered the rooms. As I mentioned there's a reason why there's a red that guarantee who was in the "next room over" when it was created and there is no such thing for the cousin's room.

[GravityZero]

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

The thing is that there is no red that excludes Kinzo, it was a general understanding that Kinzo doesn't exist so he doesn't count in "everyone else". Meaning that even if a Kinzo exists he still wasn't free from "everyone else". The condition for being excluded from being everyone else wasn't being Kinzo but "not existing". So even if Kanon = Kinzo, if he doesn't exist he couldn't do anything more then the real Kinzo, and if he does exists he is still trapped with everyone else.

Erika didn't seal the rooms retroactively, only Battler's room. Otherwise her own seals would've been destroyed when everyone entered the rooms. As I mentioned there's a reason why there's a red that guarantee who was in the "next room over" when it was created and there is no such thing for the cousin's room.

Nuh-uh. There was no condition under which Kinzo was excluded. Battler tricked Erika by omitting Kinzo "since it's been confirmed he doesn't exist", which was his way to say "we've already been here, don't question my motives for excluding kinzo", not "only if kinzo doesn't exist does this apply". Honestly, the non red sentence should have sent numerous red flags up for Erika.

If things were the way you suspect, then Battler would have said that sentence in red instead of ink. In red, it would have prevented any Kinzo from existing (at least at that moment), so whoever was playing Kinzo would have been locked into a closed room.

[confused_kitsune]

Okay, I thought about it a bit more.

We already know that 'Kanon' and 'Shannon' are false names.
When Sayo was hired, she was required to play the role of Shannon the maid.
When Yoshiya was hired, he was required to play the role of Kanon the butler.

Say one morning Shannon had an early shift and was required to go outside where it was raining. Her clothes got wet and funny enough, despite the Ushiromiyas being a rich family and whatnot, Shannon didn't have an extra spare of her maid uniform. So she did whatever was practical at that point: she took the clothes of Kanon who was sleeping.
Kanon then woke up only to discover his only change of clothes missing. Having nothing else to do, he took Shannon's now dry clothes and put them on, while nagging the real Shannon to return his own uniform. Then Natsuhi or someone else saw them so they had to keep the appearance for the rest of the day.
This happened a few more times over a short period of time (either Kanon was trying to get even, or maybe they both decided to play a prank, nevermind). Nobody except the servants themselves look closely at other servants, so it is possible that the farce went unnoticed. Maybe Kanon and Shannon were even the only servants present at that time on the island. Besides, they have Japanese faces, they look alike.
Meanwhile, because they were keeping the secret of Kinzo's death, Natsuhi decided to reward the servants by buying them another set of uniforms.
Anyway, point being:

Sayo has the ability to play the roles of both 'Kanon' and 'Shannon'. Same goes for Yoshiya.
and
It is usually Sayo that plays the role of 'Shannon', and Yoshiya that plays the role of 'Kanon'.

This may be that mentioned fickle rule. In some episodes, the exchange happens. In some, it doesn't.

Ep 2 was a case in which it didn't. Ep 6 was a case in which it did. It may sound funny, but both Sayo and Yoshiya ended up playing the role of 'Shannon' for whatever reason. That's why Battler didn't want to mention the people in the other room: there would have been a second Shannon. That was the Sayo 'Shannon', or the true one. (And yes, George was with 'Yoshiya' at that time. Hmmm...) The duel between 'Kanon' and 'Shannon' in this episode was a metaphor that both cannot have the same role at the same time. Therefore,

Sayo 'Shannon' (which is actually referred to as 'Kanon' in this Ep) escaped out of the other room, methodically changed their clothes into the 'Kanon' role in order not to create a contradiction, and went to save Battler. To an observer, that was indeed 'Kanon' at that time (therefore the red of Kanon entering the room is not contradicted). At the same time, that was NOT 'Kanon', because it was not the original person meant to play Kanon. That's why Kanon does not exist in this room.

I know this is highly unrealistic. But I wanted a Shkanon theory where there are actually two individual people and the disguise isn't maintained over a long period of time.

[chronotrig]

Originally Posted by confused_kitsune

I know this is highly unrealistic. But I wanted a Shkanon theory where there are actually two individual people and the disguise isn't maintained over a long period of time.

It's definitely a good idea to search for alternatives, but I'd argue that the disguise lasting a long time is actually a point in Shkanon's favor. If different people are Kanon or Shannon at different times, then you have to worry about the disguise rules. Can person X really pull off a disguise of person Y convincingly? The better persons X and Y are known by those around them, the harder it is to pull off this disguise.

However, if there is just one person and the disguise has been going on since the beginning, you never have to worry about someone realizing that person X is person Y in disguise. The witnesses all know person Y only as the disguise made by person X. Any resemblance will be put down to similarity between the two individuals, and will have been noticed and accepted long before the time of the crime. Also, in this case, the double disguise has been going on for three years. The better persons X and Y are known by those around them, the harder it is for these others to believe that X and Y have been the same person all along. It's one thing to spot weak points in detective novels; it's completely different to spot them when you think you've known both people for years.