[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[chronotrig]

Originally Posted by MetalGearFlaccid

Oh, I forgot that you changed it. I'm in the middle of replaying Ep 2, so I just saw "kakera" and thought it was odd.
But if you re-translated the word later, my question is moot, lol.

You might want to pick up the newest version of the patch. We've added a ton of fixes since the Kakera change.

[Kylon99]

Originally Posted by ErenselTheJester

"Magic can only be done when it is possible to be done by normal means" is what your getting at?

Or rather 'Magic is done because there was some other means to set up the illusion of it being done.'

But... yes, in essence. EDIT: Maybe I should learn how to be more succinct. 8)


I aborted this post earlier because I couldn't explain it well, but essentially the Author Theory allows the Metaworld narrative to join the gameboard as part of the Umineko Episode. In essence this makes the Metaworld narrative part of the clues to the mystery that we're supposed to solve. It may not obey Knox rules though... but it still contributes...

[DaBackpack]

Originally Posted by Raiza Sunozaki

The meta-realm? I thought that was the only progressive part of the entire series. After all, we get Episode 1's incompetent Battler, who eventually becomes Episode 6's Sorceror Genius (potentially) Battler.
But yeah, his behaviour does reset each Episode on the gameboard, even if his opinions and abilities change regularily.

I personally don't think there's any progression in the gameboard characters' abilities for a few reasons.

Of course, there are instances where characters do change (think when Keiichi remembers his crimes from Onikakushi-hen, Shannon and Kanon mentioning the Golden Land in EP4) but I honestly cannot explain these.

Don't forget that the "players" in the Meta-World control the pieces for the most part. Bernkastel (or was it Lambdadelta? Don't remember who was responsible) intentionally made Battler more intelligent in EP5. But they also said that they cannot give pieces abilities that they already were not capable of using.

I think that any development shown (except the aforementioned exceptions) is basically something hidden from us from the beginning. As a bad example, I'll use Kyrie: few of us suspected in EP1 that she could use a gun, but a fantasy scene in EP3 (whether or not this part should be taken at face value, I don't know) shows Kyrie using a gun to defeat Leviathan.
Or with Rosa: it's not that Rosa gradually hates her daughter. No, we aren't shown too many scenes of child abuse in EP1, but by EP4 it becomes blatantly obvious that Rosa never truly loved her daughter.

So no, I'd have to disagree about the development of the characters. The players (or Authors, depending on your theory) decide which traits they want to portray to the audience.

As for Kylon's theory about fantasy scenes, I've noticed this too.

I feel that things such as characters' personalities should be taken seriously in the fantasy scenes. We should definitely not cast them aside as useless because there are probably very important hints in them as well!
I mean, I personally believe that the method of the deaths in the fantasy scenes are allegorical to the actual modus operandi of the crimes. Say, for instance, the goats and Siesta Sisters: they represent the bomb and the guns, as I see it. Do you think it's just a coincidence that in EP3, the Siestas shoot the victims in the mansion and then EVA-Beatrice asks the stakes to stake them? When the victims showed similar wounds? I think not.

Also things like "Genji=Ronove" or "Kumasawa=Virgilia" should be considered to some extent.

[UsagiTenpura]

Rosa never truly loved her daughter?
I'm not saying Rosa is a good mother, but if she didn't love her daughter she seriously wouldn't care about her going UUU and other things like that.
Claiming Rosa doesn't love Maria based on arc 4 is like claiming Beatrice doesn't love Battler cause of arc 2.
Rosa herself hates how she acts with her daughter. She feels terrible guilt at it, but can't help herself. She's very childish and trying to escape her ruined life's reality, but Maria is a constant reminder of it. On top of it Maria is half-insane daughter that in a few years will enter high school and still say Uuu-uuu and claims she wants to be a witch.
If she was able to handle it, it might turn out differently, but she's unable to. Because of that she makes Maria the target of all her own faillures and often lash out at her.

I think "Rosa is an incompetant mother" while we're first led to believe she's the most level headed of the sibblings is more true. However even Battler can't help himself but repeatedly smack Maria's head during arc 1 and 2.

It is because it's blatantly obvious that Battler never liked his cousins?

[Raiza Sunozaki]

Originally Posted by DaBackpack

...Shannon and Kanon mentioning the Golden Land in EP4) but I honestly cannot explain these.

Easy. This is fictionalized scene shown to Meta-Battler by Beato. He was nowhere near the cell when this conversation took place, so we have no evidence these were the correct words spoke.

Don't forget that the "players" in the Meta-World control the pieces for the most part. Bernkastel (or was it Lambdadelta? Don't remember who was responsible) intentionally made Battler more intelligent in EP5. But they also said that they cannot give pieces abilities that they already were not capable of using.

Of course. But think about it this way. A child who has yet to learn to ride a bike, can you say he can't ride a bike? I say no. He does not know how to, but that does not mean he can't. In my opinion, a human's abilities are their entire ensemble, even the ones they are not aware of or know how to use yet. So Battler's abilities can "evolve."

As for Kylon's theory about fantasy scenes, I've noticed this too.

I feel that things such as characters' personalities should be taken seriously in the fantasy scenes. We should definitely not cast them aside as useless because there are probably very important hints in them as well!
I mean, I personally believe that the method of the deaths in the fantasy scenes are allegorical to the actual modus operandi of the crimes. Say, for instance, the goats and Siesta Sisters: they represent the bomb and the guns, as I see it. Do you think it's just a coincidence that in EP3, the Siestas shoot the victims in the mansion and then EVA-Beatrice asks the stakes to stake them? When the victims showed similar wounds? I think not.

Also things like "Genji=Ronove" or "Kumasawa=Virgilia" should be considered to some extent.

This is something I picked up back in Episode 3. Fantasy scenes couldn't just exist to completely throw you off with things that couldn't have happened. Especially in Episode 3, where the game's supposed to be on equal footing. It happened that way because something happened to make it happen that way. What a fantasy scene does it make that line this: it happened that way because something that's being hidden using fantasy made it happen that way. Look through the fantasy to find the truth. In my opinion, it's right (or damn well close) when you can explain why the point hidden in the fantasy caused the event that happened. To use an extremely simple example, we never see Kinzo alive under reliable narration, even though plenty of hints are shown for his existence, including fantasy scenes showing him alive. Logic now dictates this potentially may be a fictionalized element. Theorize why it may be a fictionalized element... Kinzo may be dead from the beginning. See if it fits: Because Kinzo was dead from the beginning, it shows why we never see him alive under reliable narration.
That might've only worked because I already knew the answer, but I'd think if you apply it to other scenarios, you might be able to figure some of the hints hidden in the fantasy. I'll do it tomorrow, after I've gotten some sleep and providing we haven't moved onto something more interesting.

[Raiza Sunozaki]

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

It is because it's blatantly obvious that Battler never liked his cousins?

What are you talking about? Battler was madly in love with Jessi-
Well, maybe. But I don't think that he doesn't like them. Battler himself never narrates a dislike of his cousins, and no one's ever narrated him showing a dislike for them, unless Erika is really Jessica, then... oh boy. More so, in Episode 6, he does centre on them during the game, but he plays them more out to be noble fools than anything else.
I don't see anything wrong with Battler giving Maria a bop on the head when she gets out of control. I've got a little sister who acts in some ways similar to Maria (thankfully she's younger). Whenever she gets too annoying or I need to be alone to work on something, a light knock on the head works well.
Rosa however, has to be a little more careful with corporal punishment. Though I agree; her actions are far from those of a mother who honestly hates her daughter. She just can't stand what Maria reminds her of, and there's unfortunately nothing else around to relieve her anger on. How she always apologizes to Maria afterwards shows this more than anything. I personally think Maria's aware of this, but uses her kindness to separate her mother's kind, loving side from her "Black Witch" side.

[Raiza Sunozaki]

A random bit of speculation I had. Being up late tends to mess with my philisophical concepts, you see.
I'm just wondering, can we really call using magic a lie? A lie is when you are not telling the truth, obviously. However, if you say that you are going to use magic, and everyone understands using magic means pulling some dextrous trick to make it appear like you did the impossible, then are you lying? I don't see how.
However, it also work contrawise as well. Maria says that Beato performed magic for her several times in the past. To her, magic is doing the impossible. There's no other details in the definition. So as long as Beato performs the impossible, she's not lying to Maria either.
This way, to everyone who's watching, the magic is no longer a lie. It's the truth, unless you decide to personally take it as a lie, like Erika. It's similar to her moves at the end of Episode 5. While Battler's truth was as valid as her, and he accepted both of them, she refused to see his truth as the truth, and tried to make it a lie.
Or maybe my mind's just a little off from lack of sleep.

[Kylon99]

Originally Posted by Raiza Sunozaki

Fantasy scenes couldn't just exist to completely throw you off with things that couldn't have happened. Especially in Episode 3, where the game's supposed to be on equal footing. It happened that way because something happened to make it happen that way. What a fantasy scene does it make that line this: it happened that way because something that's being hidden using fantasy made it happen that way.

Wait, I'm saying a bit more than this. Not only is the fantasy covering up for the truth; I'm saying that the fantasy scenes, like most of EP4 were actually constructed on the gameboard by the people themselves. And that's why Beatrice could show it to you and not as if she pulled it out of her ass somehow. 8)

That is someone thought they needed to pretend that Kinzo summoned some bunny girls and shot golden arrows that blew people's heads apart. Or some of the magic stuff in EP2.

We can see this because of a few things:
- the message bottles; someone actually bothered to write up this stuff. Even if they aren't exactly like EP1-2, they were described as full of witches, magic and fantasy.
- Kyrie lying to Battler at the end of EP4. She told him the whole story with magic scenes included.

There's probably more, but essentially if there's a few scenes that were served up to 1998 people... or to Battler, doesn't it stand to think that maybe all the fantasy scenes were constructed lies by groups of people?

I think I need to re-read EP1-4 with this in mind...

Originally Posted by Raiza Sunozaki

I'm just wondering, can we really call using magic a lie?
...
This way, to everyone who's watching, the magic is no longer a lie. It's the truth, unless you decide to personally take it as a lie, like Erika. It's similar to her moves at the end of Episode 5. While Battler's truth was as valid as her, and he accepted both of them, she refused to see his truth as the truth, and tried to make it a lie.
Or maybe my mind's just a little off from lack of sleep.

No, you're hitting on the way magic works in Umineko. I'm thinking that if you have no love, you cannot see the lie for what it is; a white lie (white magic) and you end up denying it wholesale. And that's what Erika and a lot of the fanbase has done... 8) (Incidently, black magic would be a lie told to hurt someone; is that when the Black Witch makes an appearance in Rosa, Eva or Sumadera?)

For example, Ange ressurecting Sakutarou was an example of magic. It was when she learned how best to wield magic, I think, by using a Sakutarou copy to lie to Maria. We call it a lie, because we don't care about Maria, but to Maria it is magic. And Beatrice, because she also cares about Maria, decided not to argue about it anymore. (I think she didn't just choke on the red, I think she might have stopped arguing just to let Maria have her Sakutarou again.)
This was in a Meta scene, of course... but this parallels with EP5.

In EP5, Maria probably wasn't the one who put the candy under the cup. It was probably George, who we know has a source of magic knowledge. Maria might have really been thinking that she observed magic. But Erika knows it's a sleight of hand trick, but won't participate in the lie because she has no love for Maria or their situation.

[Raiza Sunozaki]

Originally Posted by Kylon99

Wait, I'm saying a bit more than this. Not only is the fantasy covering up for the truth; I'm saying that the fantasy scenes, like most of EP4 were actually constructed on the gameboard by the people themselves. And that's why Beatrice could show it to you and not as if she pulled it out of her ass somehow. 8)
*snip*

I like this idea quite a bit, but I'm not looking forwards to re-reading Episodes 1-4 to hunt through these fantasy scenes.

No, you're hitting on the way magic works in Umineko. I'm thinking that if you have no love, you cannot see the lie for what it is; a white lie (white magic) and you end up denying it wholesale. And that's what Erika and a lot of the fanbase has done... 8) (Incidently, black magic would be a lie told to hurt someone; is that when the Black Witch makes an appearance in Rosa, Eva or Sumadera?)
*snip*

Now it my turn to say that's not quite what I'm saying. What I'm trying to say is that regardless of whether you have love or not, magic is not a lie, as long as you realize what magic really is, dextrous and fanciful tricks. However it is also not a lie if you believe magical acts are magic. So while "without love, it cannot be seen," whether you see it or not, it's still the truth.
Come to think of it, am I the only one who feels that describes Erika's last moments?

[Marion]

Or with Rosa: it's not that Rosa gradually hates her daughter. No, we aren't shown too many scenes of child abuse in EP1, but by EP4 it becomes blatantly obvious that Rosa never truly loved her daughter.

This is debatable, since that entire sequence was Maria's dream. Of course Maria could do all those things in a dream and of course she make Rosa act the way she wants to subconsciously.

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by Kylon99

Actually, I think the strongest pieces of evidence against the Kakera theory are the progressive elements of the story; i.e. character development:

1. George and Shannon's relationship progresses between episodes
2. Shannon's character gains confidence
3. Kanon's character goes from negativity to a confession with Jessica
4. Shannon and Kanon 'remember' pre vious episodes

Basically the Kakeras aren't behaving like Kakeras from Higurashi. So it's some kind of alternate Kakera theory where the characters can develop... it's almost as if someone could modify, direct... or... perhaps 'write' these Kakeras.

And so came the Author Theory. This was what I was thinking back in EP2, that the metaworld needed to be 'pierced' because Shannon's personality developed.

I agree with Chronotrig on this one. A lot of these things would work with a Kakera theory in Umineko. The only difference would be whose choices are writing the story. In Higurashi it was Keiichi, Rika, and Shion's choices that wrote the story. In Umineko well I can tell you now it's not Erika and it's not Battler. If kakera theory is true Ryukishi is going to make you beleive in a cold blooded mass murderer and your going to think he's awesome. That's all I have to say about that.

[Kylon99]

Originally Posted by Raiza Sunozaki

I like this idea quite a bit, but I'm not looking forwards to re-reading Episodes 1-4 to hunt through these fantasy scenes.

I'm making a friend do it for me instead.

Actually, I'm hoping to crystallize these and a few more theories first before I go back and re-read. And I probably need to do it fast since EP7 is coming up.

Originally Posted by Raiza Sunozaki

Now it my turn to say that's not quite what I'm saying. What I'm trying to say is that regardless of whether you have love or not, magic is not a lie, as long as you realize what magic really is, dextrous and fanciful tricks. However it is also not a lie if you believe magical acts are magic. So while "without love, it cannot be seen," whether you see it or not, it's still the truth.
Come to think of it, am I the only one who feels that describes Erika's last moments?

As in the adage, some would prefer to die rather than admit their mistakes? Except in this case Erika would never admit to ... magic or something...

I'm thinking that magic requires something more though, an observer of that magic. And it's the operating on that observer by others which induces the magic. So for Beatrice, it's not that Maria has love and can 'see' the magic; it's that others have love for Maria and so they 'see' the magic. i.e. Keep their mouths shut.

Like at the Candy table, if George or Maria did the sleight of hand trick... then Jessica kept her mouth shut too.

Not that it's always the same person who keeps their mouth shut. I bet if you spread around the trickery then there's always some doubt created even if you did see one trick once.

[Kylon99]

Wait, I should respond to chronotrig's original message here:

Originally Posted by chronotrig

Actually, there were progressive elements in Higurashi too. After a while, people even started to remember previous worlds. Still, I don't think that's the case in Umineko.

Also, these things you've mentioned aren't actually evidence against the Kakera theory. As long as it was possible for Shannon's behavior to have been all of those things, then there's no problem. If the Game Master is choosing Kakera, then why shouldn't she choose them in a logical progression, perhaps one that gets slightly closer to the truth with each new game.

The thing is, if the Kakera theory is based on Higurashi, then the characters in there remembered alternate fragments only by a miracle, as the game said itself. Technically speaking if Shannon and Kanon either had a natural ability to tap into alternate fragments, or it was a miracle they 'remembered' their activites in alternate fragments... then... isn't this.. fantasy?

But of course, that was from a fantasy scene. Which is kind of the point...

As for progression; yes, I remember Shion appearing to progress since Hanyu and Rika would only select (or perhaps Ryukishi would only bother showing us) the subset of kakera where she doesn't... um.. do her thing. But that was explained as a choice that people made and the fragments were determined on these differences of outcomes. A difference of character right from the start of each episode isn't based on choices nor outcomes.

Originally Posted by Judoh

I agree with Chronotrig on this one. A lot of these things would work with a Kakera theory in Umineko. The only difference would be whose choices are writing the story. In Higurashi it was Keiichi, Rika, and Shion's choices that wrote the story. In Umineko well I can tell you now it's not Erika and it's not Battler.

Hmmm.. someone is making choices that we can see already: GENSAWAJO. (I gotta shorten their names somehow, like WALRONGAP. ) As the people who are probably directing the Epitaph Fakery, their choices seem to affect how the rest of the game goes.

[chronotrig]

Originally Posted by Kylon99

A difference of character right from the start of each episode isn't based on choices nor outcomes.

Well, I'd argue about the definition of "a difference in character". If Battler confesses his undying love for Shannon shortly after landing on the island, odds are that she'd behave in a very different manner than usual. Or, if Erika was about to walk away from the first twilight crime scene in EP5 and she happened to think "wait, what if these corpses are fake", she might have turned back and checked them more closely. It might be necessary to show the causes for most major changes in attitude, but not necessarily all of them. And just because we aren't shown the cause doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

[Kylon99]

Sorry for the triple post... but.. I need to bring up one more question/theory.

Was it ever confirmed that the person who signed the message bottle letters as Ushiromiya Maria was the same person/handwriting who actually wrote the stories? I mean if we haven't actually been told that, that's just our assumption right?

There's this question about why Beatrice would sign herself as Ushiromiya Maria. If you just think 'Beatrice' (i.e. probably Shannon) wrote the letters and then wanted people to find out the truth, then she should sign it as Beatrice, right? Just like in the letters delivered to the family?


So.. maybe the message bottles were never supposed to leave the island. 'Beatrice' found them, then chucked them into the sea. "I don't know what these things are because I'm a ba☆ka, but someone please figure it out! Shannon Ushiromiya Maria" It makes sense if we view Shannon as the 'suffering Beatrice' who is in the middle of all the conspiracies... maybe.


So the determining factor is when Ange checks the handwriting in EP4. Did she check the contents of the message bottles or just the last line? Or did she get to check it at all? Does anyone remember off-hand? Otherwise, I'll go and check.


I'm wondering about this because it seems to me the events of the night were somewhat predetermined; at least the fakery plan. So I'm just wondering if they were supposed to be released this way, by message bottle, or were they supposed to be never released at all. And then someone who didn't know the whole truth found them and chucked them out to sea. Someone who didn't have time to smuggle them off the island until very, very late?

[Used Can]

Originally Posted by June 1983

The thing is, Ep 6 made it clear that almost certainly every story we've seen so far has been a game board. And it also heavily implied that even the future "after" 1986, to 1998, might not be real, either. It may simply be a fictional construction by Hachijo/Featherinne. Whether this means that it's possible to stop Explosion X or whatever the disaster at Rokkenjima is, I don't know.

I actually took it the opposite way - i.e. every Gameboard is a story.
As for the 1998 events in EP6, they were mostly the same, with the exception of Ange visiting Featherine. But, I cannot deny something suspicious about it.

[Kylon99]

Originally Posted by chronotrig

Well, I'd argue about the definition of "a difference in character". If Battler confesses his undying love for Shannon shortly after landing on the island, odds are that she'd behave in a very different manner than usual. Or, if Erika was about to walk away from the first twilight crime scene in EP5 and she happened to think "wait, what if these corpses are fake", she might have turned back and checked them more closely.

Well, how about Kanon telling Jessica his real name and confessing his love for her as soon as she got off the boat on the morning of the first day? Whereas he even try until he's dying in some earlier episodes?

Originally Posted by chronotrig

It might be necessary to show the causes for most major changes in attitude, but not necessarily all of them. And just because we aren't shown the cause doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Actually, no. I'd argue that if we aren't shown the causes, especially with the love plot that it doesn't exist. This isn't because of the Kakera Theory, but because the Love plot is central to the mystery in Umineko. We need to have clues as to why things happen the way they happen and a lack of clues about different triggering events firing or not firing is evidence that that is not how they're changing.

We're not conducting a scientific investigation on Umineko, we're trying to solve a murder mystery. Ryukishi himself said that 'proof' isn't possible due to the "later Queen problem" in his Anti-Mystery vs. Anti-Fantasy article.

In short:
EDIT: Sorry, the paragraph after may be more relevant. But now it's long, so I'll put it in spoiler quotes.

Spoiler:

Originally Posted by Ryukishi

Putting it all together, what the story is trying to say, what kind of answer will one get from the story, or even the truth that the author (god) says isn't absolute. Even the truth dictated by the "author", this all powerful god, can be revised by the future self of the author, an even higher entity. That means whenever one runs into the "later Queen problem", the mystery novel would fall into an extreme predicament. The "mystery", this noble ideal in mystery novels, would in fact cause itself to be denied, which is rather ironic.

With a bit of sarcasm on my part, I call this phenomenon "Anti-Mystery".

As long as the "Devil's Proof" exists, neither we nor the detectives can disprove the existence of an "unknown evidence X". As long as the "Devil's Proof" hasn't been broken, we aren't even qualified to try inferring. Even when someone falls down dead right before our eyes, and a locked room is established, and there are suspicious evidence everywhere, we still can't begin our deduction. Be it crime scene investigation, or processing evidence, or witness testimony, what we need to clarify first and foremost is "that thing", i.e. "are we able to conduct our deduction with all the evidence we have so far".

Technically speaking, I can punch holes in any theory by declaring that "We may not have yet been shown evidence X that completely denies your theory." And if Ryukishi DOES do that, that makes Umineko not solvable. And then we're back to that EP5 parody about how Umineko was just a big troll on the fanbase, etc.

EDIT: Oops.. his article is here. http://community.livejournal.com/witchhunters/5724.html
We've had this since.. what.. EP1 or 2? But makes for a better read for me now... 8)

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by Kylon99

Hmmm.. someone is making choices that we can see already: GENSAWAJO. (I gotta shorten their names somehow, like WALRONGAP. ) As the people who are probably directing the Epitaph Fakery, their choices seem to affect how the rest of the game goes.

Sometimes I don't get you. What's the use of thinking the mastermind has outrageous influence and ability to manipulate people if your not going to use that to explain the outrageous things that people happen to do?

In short: YOU DARE doubt the magnificent charismatic awesomeness of UMINEKO's mastermind!? Face the wrath of a 1000 years of pecking seagulls, magical Gohda chefs, and flying stakes!! *ahaha.wav*

[goldenlove27]

With that Quote, it could also work along with Higurashi and its connections with Umineko. I'm sorry for bringing back the old topic but this goes to show how Higurashi is something that can be revised. I mean to say how "Bern" or shall I say Rika when through what Battler went through...

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by Kylon99

Was it ever confirmed that the person who signed the message bottle letters as Ushiromiya Maria was the same person/handwriting who actually wrote the stories? I mean if we haven't actually been told that, that's just our assumption right?

Depends on what you consider a "confirmation".

It went like that.

-Ootsuki read the original messages and supposedly studied them for a while.
-Ange shows to Ootsuki the part in Maria's diary that was written by Beatrice.
-Ootsuki's reaction is immediate, he wants to know where Ange got that diary, he says he needs time to study it to be sure and so one.
-Ange thought that the reaction alone was a confirmation. She probably thought that Ootsuki didn't want to give an answer he could already give because he wanted to study the diary a bit more for his personal reasons.

Considering that Ootsuki even said that he didn't want the money (and that was a big load of money) he just wanted to look a diary a bit more, this is quite probable.