2010-10-28, 20:53 | Link #18221 | |||
The True Culprit
|
Beatrice's character has been described as whimsical, flippant, and at times contradictory. Bernkastel states in a letter that she has difficulty figuring out her three Rules because they, by their natural, keep changing shape. Beatrice has also been described as someone who becomes so engaged in her gambits that her methods become her objectives, and she loses sight of what she was originally trying to do.
The fact that Beatrice has two completely contradictory objectives shouldn't be a problem to you people. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
|||
2010-10-29, 00:17 | Link #18224 | |
Dea ex Kakera
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sea of Fragments
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2010-10-29, 02:02 | Link #18225 | |
Intellectual Rapist
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: 3 12151805142615
|
I am not going to say this is exactly 100%, but I am fairly certain Battler's sin is a broken promise. Just reread the first five episodes; Beatrice makes quips at Battler about promises a handful of times.
Quote:
__________________
Last edited by Smeckledorf; 2010-10-29 at 02:17. |
|
2010-10-29, 03:51 | Link #18226 |
Mystery buff
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Gone Fishin!
|
Or That person's a writer/occultist who wanted to profit from the incident. Hey, the occult became very popular after they were found, and bottling the stories is actually a clever sales strategy!
__________________
|
2010-10-29, 04:42 | Link #18228 | |
The True Culprit
|
There's no guarantee, though, that the culprit is the same in every arc. Infact, in some cases, like in Episode 3, it can't be. The identity of the culprit may be the "mutable, changing rule" that confuses Bernkastel so much.
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2010-10-29, 05:30 | Link #18229 | |
A mere observer
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Philippines
Age: 27
|
Quote:
And I thought Bernkastel cannot grasp this rule because she lacks of love. Anyway.. Is it possible that multiple culprit exists in each arc? Like for example, culprit X did this but unknown to him, culprit Y was doing this.
__________________
|
|
2010-10-29, 07:19 | Link #18230 | |
別にいいけど
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
|
Quote:
That very sentence in the end is a confession and a challenge: "This is not the truth, but neither is what you believed so far (or at least not entirely), find the real truth behind the Rokkenjima incident." Spoiler for Higurashi:
So in the end we are left with very few options in my opinion. Beatrice's real objective is to get someone to find the truth. Of course her greatest desire is that Battler will be that someone, but in case he fails she can still wish someone else will dispel all the illusions. If the metaworld is a metaphorical transposition of events that occur in the real world then it can't be denied that Clair outright stated that she wished Battler would "kill" her, and that that was her greatest desire, however Battler failed, he wasn't able to keep his promise. But that wasn't the end of that. Even if Battler failed the desire to be "killed" didn't vanish. That's why even if it isn't Battler Clair is still grateful and happy that someone else (in this case Will) managed to do something that Battler wasn't able to.
__________________
|
|
2010-10-29, 07:39 | Link #18231 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
|
Quote:
Then again, its been hinted that you cant solve all the games with just the mystery rule sets as proven with Battler's uncaring attitude toward Bern's truth in EP7. Also Battler didn't find the golden truth until he started applying the mystery genres rules to the game. Maybe the truth is somewhere in the middle (which is a fallacy in itself!) |
|
2010-10-29, 08:09 | Link #18232 | ||
A mere observer
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Philippines
Age: 27
|
Quote:
Quote:
I believe there is only one culprit in all games. But he/she must have managed to somehow create suspicions among the family members. In other words, she/he created another culprit. I don't know how could this be explained. There should be some consistency of the culprit's shadows. Something that directs to him or her. We may not see it but it's just there. Let's see.. Who could have the motive (at the same time, the brains) to do such thing..
__________________
|
||
2010-10-29, 08:57 | Link #18233 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
|
Clair is a character from EP7, lets leave it at that. I agree with you that the culprit might have made unwitting accomplices or maybe even willing accomplices in the games and this would explain some of the issues with the mysteries. Its the roll of the accomplice to get axed in the back at one point in the story by the culprit, or maybe staked in this case?
|
2010-10-29, 09:00 | Link #18234 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
|
Quote:
In chapter 1, 2 and 4, I think there is the same culprit. In chapter 3, I think that, at the beginning, culprit X was the same but then Eva went crazy and everything changed after that. It could be like Higurashi where there's one character that goes crazy by chapter but still the same culprit behind each case. A bomb ? |
|
2010-10-29, 10:01 | Link #18235 | |
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
Quote:
For instance, if we suggested Will was someone who came along later and "figured it all out," that would be sufficient to kill the mystery, but it wouldn't be the "genuine" Battler killing the "genuine" Beatrice (as Clair isn't the "true" Beatrice as such). In other words somebody solved it, but it wasn't Battler, which the writer had originally hoped for. If Battler were to be dead, then obviously he'd never be able to solve the message bottles. However, if the writer knew Battler was going to die, then it wouldn't make sense to hope he's the one to solve it (and if the writer is dead, how would he/she be satisfied anyway?). Of course, ep7 provides some heavy-handed suggestions that Battler is not, in fact, dead. So while Will or whoever/whatever he represents did "solve the mystery," it seems that "the truth" is still out of reach. Then in the epilogue we suddenly have Battler sweeping in promising a story. How else are we supposed to interpret that? ...But then again, it's certainly not like any of that is any less circumstantial than anything else he's teased so far.
__________________
|
|
2010-10-29, 12:03 | Link #18236 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
|
Quote:
Thats an odd inconsistency. |
|
2010-10-29, 15:11 | Link #18237 | ||||
The True Culprit
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
||||
2010-10-29, 15:11 | Link #18238 |
Intellectual Rapist
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: 3 12151805142615
|
Actually, it's less of a guarantee and more like probably true. Why else would Battler be kept alive in each episode? Blind luck? However, I will agree that the culprit(s) may not be the only person(s) committing murder.
__________________
|
2010-10-29, 15:25 | Link #18239 |
The True Culprit
|
Or someone who isn't the culprit is protecting Battler, such as the actual Beatrice, and not the killer taking the name of a witch who shares her name.
Or he's kept alive because he's the Detective and the story says he must, and since every Episode is actually a fiction written in-universe by someone related to the Rokkenjima incident, this is an entirely sufficient explanation.
__________________
|
2010-10-29, 20:34 | Link #18240 |
A mere observer
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Philippines
Age: 27
|
Is it confirmed Battler is a detective? I'm doubting that he is.. Instead of supporting his own theories, he denies them. He doesn't want to suspect his family members but as much as possible, he denies Beatrice.
The writer of the the second and third message bottles were Hachijou/Fetherine, right? She had discovered the truth through the first message bottle. Is Fetherine writing EP 6 while the events were taking place or did she wrote EP6?
__________________
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|