[Game] Umineko no Naku Koro ni Chiru - Ep. 8 Twilight of the golden witch

[Chron]

Originally Posted by Renall

Actually it is unfair, that's why it's not actually legal (in America). Not that the trial wasn't clearly for show to begin with; that seems to have been the point of the first part. But Battler basically winning through equally unfair means sort of destroys his moral authority.

Hahaha.

Moral authority. In modern fiction of all things?

[rogerpepitone]

To win the trial, Battler only had to produce one explanation, consistent with the facts, that didn't involve her guilt. He did that without the golden truth. Even ignoring the "Battler is MF19YA" claim, the "They were killed after Battler screamed." possibility invalidates all the alibis.

(Also, there's either a translation error, or a hole in Erika's logic; she claims "It's only possible for the crime to have taken place between 24:00 and 1:00!! During that one hour, you were in the dining hall of the mansion!! Therefore, it was impossible for you to commit the crime!" since Rosa was definitely alive at 1:00 AM.)

[LyricalAura]

Originally Posted by Renall

So his finishing strike was "Cuz." Okay, well, that's certainly worthy of an epic finale!

I thought it was quite clear by EP6 that the finishing strike was "no evidence => (subjective == objective), so you'll take my testimony and like it." Which is pretty much how the entire catbox setup works, so it demonstrates his understanding perfectly.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by LyricalAura

I thought it was quite clear by EP6 that the finishing strike was "no evidence => (subjective == objective), so you'll take my testimony and like it." Which is pretty much how the entire catbox setup works, so it demonstrates his understanding perfectly.

I'm not saying it doesn't match the themes he's trying to convey, I'm saying those themes are pretty anticlimactic and stupid when put up in the "Let's have a LOGIC BATTLE!" format he'd been using the whole time.

[Kylon99]

Originally Posted by Renall

Actually it is unfair, that's why it's not actually legal (in America). Not that the trial wasn't clearly for show to begin with; that seems to have been the point of the first part. But Battler basically winning through equally unfair means sort of destroys his moral authority.

The scene opens up in a 'church' that's not a church, presided over by LD and Bern... and then that awesome evil sounding music kinda spoke to it all, didn't it?

I did an, "OH SHI-" moment there...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdSb6U-gN3U <-- 喰那 this music.


Actually, just because he used Gold doesn't mean that he lied or anything. After all it's shown now that Gold is consensus opinion. Consensus opinion can be correct or can be incorrect. It just happens that this consensus is correct...

By the way, the question seems to be, just whose consensus opinion is it that dictates the gold? It seems to be something like 'all observing parties, but no more' if EP6's gold is taken into account. But then, who are the observers for EP8?

[Judoh]

Funny how every individual episode thread brings us back to episode 5.

Originally Posted by Renall

I'm saying those themes are pretty anticlimactic and stupid when put up in the "Let's have a LOGIC BATTLE!" format he'd been using the whole time.

You only get this anticlimactic feeling if you mesh the story as a whole together I think. At the time episode 5 was written that shit was awesome. Not just because of "woah there's a new colored truth what's it do?" I knew about that before hand. On the first read I read episode 5 from beginning to end in one weekend. So for me every little thing built up to the tea party. And when I finally got there it felt like I had temporarily achieved spiritual enlightenment just watching Battler or something.

The catbox analogy was always stupid the way Ryukishi used it. Because he's not using it right.

Consensus opinion can be correct or can be incorrect. It just happens that this consensus is correct...

Exactly.

[Renall]

He didn't "lie" or "cheat" as such, but he basically extricated himself from a situation in which Erika and Bern were trying to push a solution through - regardless of its truth value - by issuing a "this is how it's gonna go" edict.

There's a certain hypocrisy in that. "I don't like you using misleading evidence to frame someone, but rather than bother using my conveniently newfound realizations to dazzle you at your own game without actually giving away Beatrice's heart, I'll beat you by declaring myself the winner."

Then next episode Erika tries to win by basically cheating again and Beatrice wins by cheating back. Okay, poetic justice, whatever, I kind of get that. But Will managed to play fair; why can't Battler in what is supposed to be his moment of apotheosis? Ryukishi couldn't think of anything as respectable as Will's solution battle?

Basically my problem is twofold:

• That he had to invent the gold in the first place to get Battler out of the corner he'd written him into. It makes me think he didn't really know where else to go to finish out ep5.
• That he intentionally strung us along with it for about a year, which makes me think he was hoping we'd forget about it by then.

Well I didn't forget, and it bothers the hell out of me in retrospect.

[Kylon99]

Well for one thing it's not that Battler slammed on some kind of "I Win" button, but he used the gold to put to rest something that we, the meta world and the game board were given clues about since EP1, specifically about the polydactyly. Saying it's "I'll beat you by declaring myself the winner," seems not more like a hyperbole.

And more importantly, I think we could've been expected to see three different colors of text since it corresponded to the three different witches' power and the three different 'colors' of them that are always mentioned. Since these colors were mentioned and shown since EP1, and the red/blue text started appearing in EP2 and 4, it's not likely he only thought gold up right at EP5. That wouldn't fit. It might be more likely that he didn't know when or how he would have to use the gold until that moment. But it seemed like, from Bernkastel's Letter TIPS at least he had an inkling of how Beatrice's power worked anyways, about her hiding herself where the truth isn't known.


By the way, I wonder if we keep going back to EP5 because that was when he started giving us answers. First Twilight Fakery, and this scene we're talking about. It was because Battler showed that red texts can extend throughout all games that I was able to (much later, unfortunately) finally make a coherent Author Theory...

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by Renall

There's a certain hypocrisy in that. "I don't like you using misleading evidence to frame someone, but rather than bother using my conveniently newfound realizations to dazzle you at your own game without actually giving away Beatrice's heart, I'll beat you by declaring myself the winner."

He didn't declare himself the winner though. He used the gold to deny a theory about moving the bodies that had no basis in fact anyway. Then he declared a stalemate, while introducing an entirely new theme into the story that basically says that 'multiple truths can exist at the same time'. He didn't really win. He just made it so that Erika didn't win.

That he had to invent the gold in the first place to get Battler out of the corner he'd written him into. It makes me think he didn't really know where else to go to finish out ep5.

What if he planned to use the golden truth to reveal that Kinzo was dead? He did say that he originally planned to reveal that in episode 5 instead of in episode 4.

[cmos]

Will managed to play fair

I wonder how Will would have played in Erika's place without this convenient Theatergoing authority, that makes those stubborn Ushiromiyas spill the beans without torturing them with false accusations first.

[AuraTwilight]

Probably exactly the same. He did perfectly fine getting Rosa to talk without any supernatural coercion because, well, HE'S NOT A DICK AND HE'S COMPETENT AT HIS JOB.

The Theatregoing Authority seems like it's supposed to get details without having to worry about narrative concerns, like getting people to talk about Beatrice even though he's in a world where she doesn't exist.

[Sherringford]

Originally Posted by cmos

I wonder how Will would have played in Erika's place without this convenient Theatergoing authority, that makes those stubborn Ushiromiyas spill the beans without torturing them with false accusations first.

The theatergoing doesn't make the Ushiromiyas spill anything. It just allows them to talk about other fragments as well.

Rosa spilled her story without him saying anything, Jessica spilled her story because he accidentally James Bonded her, Kinzo spilled his story because he wanted SOMEONE to listen and Will played the kind stranger part that Poirot did at times(and that Erika couldn't play if her life depended on it).

Also, if he wanted to cheat like Erika he could dismantle Beato's board with Van Dine quite easily. But he wasn't a dick, so he didn't use the rules that could have destroyed the board(which ended up costing him an arm).

[cmos]

Originally Posted by Sherringford

The theatergoing doesn't make the Ushiromiyas spill anything. It just allows them to talk about other fragments as well.

Except it does.
Will: I hate theatergoing just as much as I hate torture.
Why would he hate something such innocent, like you say?
Will: If you don't call him, I'm going to use my authority.
Shannon already has memory of her other world, there's no need to allow her anything. This authority clearly would have made her to obey.

Also, if he wanted to cheat like Erika he could dismantle Beato's board with Van Dine quite easily.

He can't use his rules where they don't apply. Rules must be stated in red, and you can't say false red in the context of a particular gameboard.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by cmos

Except it does.
Will: I hate theatergoing just as much as I hate torture.
Why would he hate something such innocent, like you say?
Will: If you don't call him, I'm going to use my authority.
Shannon already has memory of her other world, there's no need to allow her anything. This authority clearly would have made her to obey.

Will was losing his patience because he was being messed with. He was specifically instructed to question people and use the authority if he needed/wanted to. He didn't particularly like it, and even used it accidentally once, but there's no particular indication that its use is traumatic. I think it's more Will found it too convenient and potentially problematic.

Then Shannon starts BSODing on him when he engages in a perfectly reasonable line of inquiry. I don't really see the unfairness in making a threat to encourage fair play; it actually reminds me of something from Asimov's The Caves of Steel.

Spoiler for Asimov:

Elijah Bailey's android partner R. Daneel Olivaw at one point threatens a crowd with a gun in order to calm them down. Bailey notes to him after the fact that if it had come down to it, he wouldn't have been able to actually make good on the threat because the Laws of Robotics won't allow him to harm a human. Daneel admits this would be the case, but the crowd doesn't know that, and since he knows he can't harm anyone he's not concerned about threatening to if there's a chance of ensuring the crowd peacefully disperses.

I can see Will doing the same with the threat of the authority without necessarily forcefully using it. I mean if he wanted to use it he could have just jumped someone unawares. I got the sense it was more of a "Stop messing around, Bern or whoever is behind this, I'm just asking a question" thing from him.

[Sherringford]

Originally Posted by cmos

He can't use his rules where they don't apply. Rules must be stated in red, and you can't say false red in the context of a particular gameboard.

Even after rules were said in red, even Dlanor wasn't sure if Knox applied to Beato's gameboard. The rules can be stated in red.

Moreover, if a rule couldn't be used in a gameboard where they didn't apply, then executing witches for their "sins" wouldn't make any sense.

The only way they get to kill any witch at all is if they get to use their rules anywhere.

If they could only use their rules on a gameboard compatible with them, then it would be physically impossible for them to ever "kill those who break the commandments" as the commandments would never be broken.

Therefore, they HAVE to be able to use them. That's sort of their thing. "You don't fit within our definition of a mystery, you must die."

It's not they who have to only use their rules on mysteries that can support them. It's the gameboards that have to support them.

Will: I hate theatergoing just as much as I hate torture.
Why would he hate something such innocent, like you say?

Because it makes a show out of people, which is something he generally doesn't like. As for the Shkanon scene, the way I saw it is like this.

Will already understood Shkanon by that point and was going to use the authority to make Shannon become Kanon to interrogate him/her.
...Although really, that scene is still stupid no matter what interpretation you use. It could force them to speak if you really want it to, but that doesn't change much.

[Leafsnail]

Originally Posted by Renall

Battler had a stronger burden for the first foray.

Besides, in a real trial, you're not supposed to be hiding evidence. Battler and Erika should've had the same facts.

You could say it reflects the rather schizophrenic burden of proof in some mystery novels. I mean, how many mystery novels have you read where the evidence unearthed would actually stand in a court of law?

[Sherringford]

Originally Posted by Leafsnail

You could say it reflects the rather schizophrenic burden of proof in some mystery novels. I mean, how many mystery novels have you read where the evidence unearthed would actually stand in a court of law?

More often than not, mystery novels deal with evidence realistically. Benson Murder case even had the criminal getting away with second degree murder until the prosecution appealed.

They just settle with "criminal commits suicide/confesses" to make the legal loose ends meet.

[Renall]

This is a really interesting idea for a "mystery" series. Famous detective has cracked the case, but can a prosecutor convince a jury that this crazy scenario really happened, and convince the judge that his parlor room confession wasn't made under duress?

[Sherringford]

Originally Posted by Renall

This is a really interesting idea for a "mystery" series. Famous detective has cracked the case, but can a prosecutor convince a jury that this crazy scenario really happened, and convince the judge that his parlor room confession wasn't made under duress?

That happened at least once in Monk, I think.

[Chron]

Originally Posted by Sherringford

That happened at least once in Monk, I think.

Great show.