[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[jjblue1]

I think the goat scene was merely making fun of the people in Rokkenjima Prime that were speculating on what had happened without even making some serious investigation/attempt.
Goats in fact were, for example, Ange's classmates or people who had fun making theories without a basis.

It can't be seen as a parallel with who tried to solve Umineko because we're trying to solve a story and we aren't hurting anyone or dirtying anyone's reputation in order to get some fun while those people are described as making accusations, sometimes completely baseless, according to the mood of the moment.

And hey, they might even guess who's the culprit but it's all a matter of luck more than a matter of investigation in fact when asked to explain their theories they didn't know how to defend them.

I don't think it's a fitting parallel with who read Umineko and tried to solve it.
It would be like comparing someone who's playing a videogame with someone who's doing what's depicted in the videogame for real...

[RandomAvatarFan]

I'm sure there were paralells between the goats and parts of the fanbase. I feel like you can't disregard the meta/fantasy scenes, because it's half the story. I guess it's as Renall says, I have too much love for Ryu which would make any theory regarding "You have to ignore what Ryukishi says," feel unsatisfying. The goats targeted "fantasy," their arguments were "X does not exist, it is just a fantasy," and therefore I feel like the people who say "Well, look, X is just a fantasy, just ignore it," are the same as EP8 Goats.

[Wanderer]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

In the case of Umineko it's a specific will of the author to let matters unanswered, and yet he tells us that a truth exists and we need to find it, except there's absolutely no way to check if a theory is true or not and it all depends on interpretations.

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

Frankly I think that the claim that "you need love to solve this" is a bit pretentious and it's been abused by speculators to support completely opposite theories.
In the end it doesn't seem that "having love" is helping understanding umineko any better, at best is helping in appreciating it, but I think there's the problem, never addressed in umineko, that maybe not everyone and everything is deserving of love.

Well, actually, I think this is the point, that love colors everyone's view individually. I just don't feel like we were expected to find the solution (although RK07 seems to attest one exists, there is no way to confirm it at present). I think what love is for in all this is to fill in the gaps so we can find a solution, even if it's not the solution, much like how the fantasy scenes exist to fill in the gaps in knowledge for the mystery narrative.

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

You see, for example now you say that Umineko is telling us that the kind of behavior of wanting to find a truth at all costs and push it into others is what the story is stelling us that is wrong.

The way you word your response tells me that you know exactly what I was talking about. KnownNoMore doesn't even see how Erika could be a parody.

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

Let's not forget that there are people that interpreted the goats scene of EP8 as Ryuukishi making fun of the whole readers. If you ask Knownomore he'd probably tell you that Ryuukishi is not making of him, or that it's just yet another of his dirty tactics to discourage us from finding the truth, or whatever...

Well, he was making fun of his readers, in a sense. I'm just not really offended by it, because contextually to the imaginary people of Rokkenjima we really are monsters.

I actually really enjoy these moral contradictions, like during Bern's game in EP8 when we would switch between reasoning and having fun along with Beatrice and BATTLER, to Ange's traumatic perspective on the game board itself where she would experience the aftermath of the slaughter firsthand.

[GuestSpeaker]

And while their tone was rather dick-ish, none of the goats arguments, that we got to SEE, were at all unreasonable based on the narratives they had been prodived

Ryu said in his mega-interview that most people missed the fact that the family and Will were accepting the goats as challengers, even with half-baked theories.


As for that Ange/Battler perspective, yeah that made me feel bad. I suppose Ryu really wanted us to understand Ep 3's Beato, where she was confused by how she angered Battler. It's all fun and games unless you are a piece on the board (there may have been some bullying parallel there, to tie in with the classmates)

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by Renall

This turns out to have been my problem exactly. I just couldn't believe that the solution would be stupid. Guess I got shown.

You aren't really alone on that. Even I fell for that, it was just for different reasons.
But you know in the end it isn't really wrong. I can say at least that I agree with Ryuukishi when he said that the relationship between a mystery author and a reader is based on trust. The reader must trust the author that his riddle makes sense and that it's solvable. If you don't assume that the field of possibilities becomes so wide that any theory would be nothing more than a shot in the dark, and there would be no real merit even if by sheer chance you got it right.

The problem is that it's not really clear what's ridiculous and what it's not, what's plausible and what it's not, what's good writing and what's bad writing. If there's something that discussions in this forum told me is that different people have different opinions on that. That of course means that even the author himself can do something that is ridiculous for you in "bona fide".
In the end the right approach is probably to start with the assumption that the author wouldn't do something ridiculous or lame (according to you), while being flexible about it, and being ready to adjust the boundary at the first sign that the author might have crossed it.


Regarding the goats, it's fun to see how many different people interpreted it differently. As for me I'm with those that think Ryuukishi was definitely making a parallel between them and the people posting theories on forums. Probably not all of them, though. He was probably chastizing those that according to him were "doing it wrong" showing bad examples in the story itself.
In the end I agree with Wanderer when he says it wasn't exactly meant to be offensive, but there's the point that even if Ryuukishi tells me "this is wrong" it doesn't mean that I have to agree with him. In fact I don't. Most of EP8 is filled with messages that I don't agree with. So even if he makes fun of "x" and "shows" me how wrong it is, I don't really buy it.

And that's where we return to the "Erika problem". Ryuukishi in EP8 is blatantly telling me that "the truth is wrong" and that "the lie is right". And then he goes on showing me why "the truth is wrong" with something that I don't really think is in any way a direct consequence on favoring the truth over a lie, even if it's a good lie. Kealym shares my exact view on that.

So Wanderer you say that Ryuukishi is telling us that Erika is wrong, and he mocks her, and he shows us why she's wrong... but that means absolutely nothing.

For example does it really make sense that Erika couldn't see Shkanon? I think it really doesn't. A character like her should have noticed what everyone else at that point could clearly see (whether they thought it was true or a blatant troll). And that's regardless of the infamous scene of the parlor in EP5 where it should have become blatantly obvious to her. But let's not even consider that.
The problem is that Ryuukishi is trying to tell us that Erika could not see Shkanon because she has no love. And yet, I personally do not see any connection between "having love" and "seeing shkanon". You can see it even from a completely analytical and heartless perspective. And if you have love... well... that really depends on what do you mean by "love" and where exactly your love lies.


Anyway regarding Knownomore again, there is the fact that Ryuukishi himself at the end of Higurashi encouraged readers to make up their own solution to the story, adding that if they could find a better solution that'd mean they defeated him. At the end of "our confession" there's something that seems to reiterate the concept to me, Dlanor says that according to Beatrice the story has been developed twice, once in her head (the truth behind the lies shown in our confession) and once written with all the magic scenes. But Dlanor adds that there is a third version that the reader should find.

What if this third version is a reader's personal version? In the end that would mirror exactly what he said at the end of Higurashi.

So my point is... while I personally don't really agree with all that, while in my own view the author should take the role of God of his own world and establish a canon, I cannot say that knownomore is doing something wrong because apparently the author is giving absolute free rein to that, or even encouraging that.

Knownomore found a solution that is "better" for himself and for all of his followers? Well, good for him, whatever floats his boat. The author decided not to declare a canon, he can pick whatever canon he likes.

The only thing that I can say is that if he thinks he has "proved" anything with his 9 hour video, he's just a fool.

[Wanderer]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

For example does it really make sense that Erika couldn't see Shkanon? I think it really doesn't. A character like her should have noticed what everyone else at that point could clearly see (whether they thought it was true or a blatant troll). And that's regardless of the infamous scene of the parlor in EP5 where it should have become blatantly obvious to her. But let's not even consider that.
The problem is that Ryuukishi is trying to tell us that Erika could not see Shkanon because she has no love. And yet, I personally do not see any connection between "having love" and "seeing shkanon". You can see it even from a completely analytical and heartless perspective. And if you have love... well... that really depends on what do you mean by "love" and where exactly your love lies.

Well, I don't think it's quite like that. I think Lambdadelta used "loveless" narrative tricks to make Bern/Erika think that Kanon and Shannon both appeared in the same room.

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

Knownomore found a solution that is "better" for himself and for all of his followers? Well, good for him, whatever floats his boat. The author decided not to declare a canon, he can pick whatever canon he likes.

The only thing that I can say is that if he thinks he has "proved" anything with his 9 hour video, he's just a fool.

Then he's a fool to the nth degree. Have you actually watched the video?

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by Wanderer

Then he's a fool to the nth degree. Have you actually watched the video?

I don't know about Jan, but a 9 hour video is much too long for me. And if it's that long you know he has to be over thinking a lot of things.

[Kealym]

Originally Posted by GuestSpeaker

Ryu said in his mega-interview that most people missed the fact that the family and Will were accepting the goats as challengers, even with half-baked theories.

Well it certainly seemed that way for the Inquisitors, who seemed literally offended by poorly formed theories. The humans were defending themselves from being demonized, and the demons were defending their right to even exist.

It was fairly interesting. For example, at the beginning of the fight, Beato, Virgilia and the Siesta's were said to defeat a huge amount of goats with magical blasts, which lines up kind of well to the initial wave of people who gave up "when Kanon took out his lightsaber and fought demon goats." Also noted that the Golden Land lost that battle,so...hm.

Originally Posted by Wanderer

Well, I don't think it's quite like that. I think Lambdadelta used "loveless" narrative tricks to make Bern/Erika think that Kanon and Shannon both appeared in the same room.

Or, y'know, Shannon and Kanon DID appear in the same room. Cause trololols.

Originally Posted by Wanderer

Then he's a fool to the nth degree. Have you actually watched the video?

I know this wasn't directed at me, but, while I've watched a few specific segments, I really don't have the stomach to make it through the entire video. It's interesting, but quite a bit to try and sit through, even in portions, and as far as I can tell, can be delivered waaaayyyy more concisely that he chooses to. Verbose as hell.

It'd be really helpful if maybe he'd had a written version of it somewhere, as it's way easier to read that amount of text than listen to it, but ... I dunno if he's done that anywhere.

[AuraTwilight]

Protip: If your solution to Umineko is longer than an entire episode of Umineko, it's wrong.

[GuestSpeaker]

You know, don't be so certain Bern didn't know, I wouldn't put it past her not to tell Erika just to troll her own piece. I mean, in the red v blue concerning the letter, it seems like Bern may have figured out the truth as early on as her "but you can't say none of them touched it" comment.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Wanderer

Well, I don't think it's quite like that. I think Lambdadelta used "loveless" narrative tricks to make Bern/Erika think that Kanon and Shannon both appeared in the same room.

I'm still really curious how you actually do this while granting Erika unprecedented exploratory and investigative power over the narrative. It basically boils down to "she didn't bother to ask," just like the Logic Error. It's stupid and out of character for her, but she always stops asking right before she might actually find something out.

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

Protip: If your solution to Umineko is longer than an entire episode of Umineko, it's wrong.

True story: While at a store a few months ago, I saw a copy of The Hunger Games and a book sitting on the shelf next to it that was some kind of unofficial companion guide that was longer than The Hunger Games itself. If I were a fan who wanted to know what was up with The Hunger Games, I'd actually save myself time just reading The Hunger Games again and thinking about it.

[Wanderer]

Originally Posted by GuestSpeaker

You know, don't be so certain Bern didn't know, I wouldn't put it past her not to tell Erika just to troll her own piece. I mean, in the red v blue concerning the letter, it seems like Bern may have figured out the truth as early on as her "but you can't say none of them touched it" comment.

Yeah a lot of things are possible with regards to what Bern knew or didn't know. Her motives are hard to judge, too.

Originally Posted by Renall

I'm still really curious how you actually do this while granting Erika unprecedented exploratory and investigative power over the narrative. It basically boils down to "she didn't bother to ask," just like the Logic Error. It's stupid and out of character for her, but she always stops asking right before she might actually find something out.

I think Erika has limits. She's basically super-detective incarnate, but nothing else. So what happens if she's not actually in a murder Mystery?

Erika never encountered any actual murder Mysteries. Not once. In EP5 she somehow managed to avoid looking at the corpses which would have shown that there was no murder, passively allowing the story to continue to be a murder Mystery; and in EP6 she's the one who actively injected murder into the story.

So yeah she didn't ask because understanding how ShKanon could work is beyond her Mystery "programming".

[jjblue1]

Personally to me Bern/Erika's situation looks like the one of a roleplay beginner who, out of sheer luck, had gotten an amazingly powerful character... but didn't have the singlest idea how to use it. So... he has it use ultra powerful fire spells when water ones where needed and vice versa.

[Drifloon]

True story: While at a store a few months ago, I saw a copy of The Hunger Games and a book sitting on the shelf next to it that was some kind of unofficial companion guide that was longer than The Hunger Games itself. If I were a fan who wanted to know what was up with The Hunger Games, I'd actually save myself time just reading The Hunger Games again and thinking about it.

This is pretty normal, actually. Bible commentaries are always MUCH bigger than the Bible.

[GuestSpeaker]

This is pretty normal, actually. Bible commentaries are always MUCH bigger than the Bible

It's interesting how well the bible or any religious text would actually suit a red vs. blue battle, all reds could be obtained from objective historical fact or personal accounts, and there is a lot of space to interpret.


That would make for one very interesting, but controversial forgery.

[RandomAvatarFan]

Not to derail the thread, but I'd be read that.

But yeah, it doesn't make a lot of sense though. I should do another reread of EP5...how was Shannon and Kanon introduced to her?

[Kealym]

Originally Posted by RandomAvatarFan

But yeah, it doesn't make a lot of sense though. I should do another reread of EP5...how was Shannon and Kanon introduced to her?

/sigh, oh well.

It wasn't an explicit introduction to her, for those guys. When we first see Erika, she's led into the parlor with Shannon and Kumasawa said to be by her side. Kanon is already said to be in the parlor, pouring tea with Godha. At that time, Bernkastel notes "Isn't that convenient." regarding all of the humans sans Kinzo gathering in the parlor to greet Erika. Lambda gives us the reds Furudo Erika only increases it by one person. Besides her, the number of people on this island is exactly the same as it was in the previous games. In other words, the number of people in this parlor now is equal to the total number of people on this island. Then Piece Battler does a count of people and lists off all of the humans except Kinzo.

After that, Shannon and Kanon are just kinda ... background noise among the survivors. Don't do or say much, I dunno if Erika ever even spoke to them directly, though it would be needlessly, ridulously silly if she "wasn't aware of them" or something like that. In the Metaworld, Erika has already read the previous gameboards and is familiar with the pieces that way.

[Thunder Book]

Originally Posted by GuestSpeaker

It's interesting how well the bible or any religious text would actually suit a red vs. blue battle, all reds could be obtained from objective historical fact or personal accounts, and there is a lot of space to interpret.

This is a thing in Christianity actually. It's called Apologetics.

[PsychoShion]

I know this is not umineko but is anyone gonna read it? Or is it like higabana where you guys wont read it and will wait for the next When they cry???

Just curious it looks interesting, you gotta give r07 credit no matter how u feel after the novel is over, he does create awesome universes that suck you in and get you so interested and entertained. mY god how many characters and quintillions of theories he gets people to create

I'd read all his stuff if i could, but of course i'm waiting for bern's return

[Drifloon]

You know it has its own topic, right?

Personally, I've yet to see anything about RGD that interests me. There doesn't seem to be any mystery to it, nor any of the interesting metaphysical elements that Umineko had. I'm going to remain skeptical unless it turns out to do a sudden 180 like Umineko did, but I doubt that's going to happen.