2012-02-07, 17:16 | Link #341 | |||||||||||
Detective, Witch, Pirate.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Ruins of the Golden Land
|
Quote:
Now, of course I would be operating with the same information as any reader, so since I say I have reached an answer to the MYSTERY and strictly to the MYSTERY aspect of Umineko, I have satisfied the Devil's Proof, or so to speak with the author's words, right? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I am not saying Beatrice was correct for committing all those crimes, neither can I say she is excusable, I plainly say that I can have a pretty good (not perfect) understanding of why she committed them. (Again, a motive like that would only work in a story of fiction, and cannot be applied to the real world). Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Um...What Umineko discusses is not that truth ought to be hidden. It argues that in some cases, just because humans can 'learn' but not 'unlearn', it is questionable whether they should value the truth more than their own happiness and do all possible just to achieve it when it may be something that would betray their expectations. Of course that just summarizes way too much, there are many other points of view one may find in it. Do you doubt that after going to the point of calling me and my arguments 'ludicrous', I wouldn't be in the mood of copy-pasting my answer? I do not refuse to tell my answer to anyone, it was you who asked, and anyway, since you feel like it doesn't even exist, why bother asking? You may doubt my having found the answer (to the MYSTERY and not Prime, I repeat) all you like, since you don't respect me, why should I respect you by answering? If what you attained from the story was that everyone is selfish, I think it's a pity it couldn't give you something more beautiful, since that's the purpose works of literature are written in the first place. Again, I have no right to butt into that opinion of yours, but I can just express my own opinion, that to me it did give something more than everyone being selfish. Quote:
P.S: Just saw she posted them, didn't notice while typing this wall of test. First of all, Aura, I absolutely love your sense of humour, though most of those can be justified, I think...I would really like to continue the discussion over them later, because I really have to go right now.
__________________
|
|||||||||||
2012-02-07, 17:16 | Link #342 |
"Senior" "Member"
Join Date: Jan 2012
|
Well... about hiding the truth: I really think that EP8 is only playing in Ange's head. Although i wouldn't exclude that "twilight of the golden witch" was really released, but which only consists of the "Ange going to rokkejima" part and/or the "pure mystery gameboard" part of Bern.
Ikuko actually DID plan to release the book of one truth, but at some point she decided to take it back. Why? Maybe because the book is subjective and it's content is partly different, than what Tohya remembered? In that case maybe Battler's and Eva's viewpoints contradicted eachother and Ikuko was afraid of telling the people a "half truth" which is known as the "most dangerous lie". Of course then you could say: Why didn't Battler reveal himself to the public? Well this one is easy to answer: 1. Tohya would have to deal with the media for a longer time and maybe people would say that he is a liar or not even believe that he really is Battler. 2. Too much interviews about "someone else's memories" + brain damage = Death. Only talking to one person about his memories, or even just thinking about it already forced him into a wheel chair, guess what happens if the stress of talking to thousands of people comes into play. So by going with witch-ending-Ange, where we could say quite sure, that she had no access to the book of one truth, the morality was not that "hiding the truth is the only good way", but more like "Even if you fail at finding the truth you must go on". However this is only my interpretation, which i admit is a bit optimistic. Of course i have no way of telling what Ryukishi's real "message" is, but it was said many times in Umineko, that a riddle/mystery only works, if the reader is able to understand, or..."love" the author, right? Last edited by GreyZone; 2012-02-07 at 17:32. |
2012-02-07, 17:29 | Link #343 | ||||
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
Quote:
Quote:
That aside, of course, this is a work of fiction, so any "divine justice" can exist only in the afterlife of the fiction. Incidentally, there is an afterlife in the fiction, and every single character apparently gets to be there happily. If one of them is a murderer, that's pretty messed up. Of course, that assumes any of them are... and if none are, doesn't their innocence deserve to be proclaimed? Truth with a capital "T" may not change based on what people believe, but a lie can become the truth of human memory if information about the Truth is lost or suppressed. If we don't learn the truth of Rokkenjima to the best we can before all parties involved die and their knowledge is lost, we have condemned the victims of the incident to an eternal Purgatory. Appeals to "Truth independent of human knowledge" are essentially appeals to the mercy of God. A God we do not know even exists - at least in the context of this fictional universe, anyway. Quote:
The rest is just moral relativism. "What is ethics really? Who can decide what's ethical?" Well... we can. By reasoning out what we believe to be important universal aspects of proper behavior. Certainly, we can disagree on what ethical approach is strongest, but the answer to the question "who can decide what is ethical?" can be answered by those who believe they possess a strong ethical framework. Moreover, almost all ethical approaches would agree with me, so I am curious which you advocate that says otherwise. Quote:
__________________
|
||||
2012-02-07, 18:07 | Link #344 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
|
Quote:
|
|
2012-02-07, 18:41 | Link #345 |
The True Culprit
|
Most of the things involving Shkanon. Regardless, the Red Truth HAS been demonstrated as saying things that are only SUBJECTIVELY true, so it still fails to be what it was advertised to be and with that sort of qualifier you can say anything in red with the right conditions and workarounds.
__________________
|
2012-02-08, 00:26 | Link #346 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
First, he married Asumu shortly after she learned she was pregnant, before he learned she was pregnant. Second, he did the baby switch because it was socially easier to do so than to divorce Asumu and marry Kyrie. Third, I was under the impression that he bribed the doctor to put the wrong mother's name on the birth certificate. "Remember back when you were depressed for months after your stillbirth? It was really Asumu who did that. I've stolen your baby for 12 years." Any mothers or obstetricians here? What sort of painkillers are used / how powerful are they? Do the new mothers remember the events, or do they regain consciousness half an hour afterwards? Specifically, is it feasible to simply lie to her after she wakes up? No clue about how he managed to get both to deliver on the same day. (But he's got nothing on Colonel Aureliano Buendia.)
__________________
|
|
2012-02-08, 01:24 | Link #347 |
The True Culprit
|
But WHY did he marry Asumu?
And everyone in the family knew about his cheating ways anyway. I mean who really gives a shit? Why the cover up in the first place? And my cousin is a nurse and a midwife. Painkillers don't work that way, so such a baby switch is very hard to pull off in that manner.
__________________
|
2012-02-08, 01:51 | Link #348 |
Dea ex Kakera
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sea of Fragments
|
Because he loved her and wanted to take responsibility for her pregnancy. He loved Kyrie too, but he didn't find out about her pregnancy until later.
As for the coverup, his options as he saw them were basically: 1) Divorce Asumu immediately after her child died and marry his mistress 2) Stay married to Asumu, but support a mistress who has a child (and probably face pressure from Kinzo to switch to option 1) 3) Stay married to Asumu with a child, have a mistress with no child Even though it's morally wrong, the social calculus behind his decision is pretty obvious.
__________________
|
2012-02-08, 09:07 | Link #349 | |
別にいいけど
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
|
Quote:
I was going to answer to some of your claims but then I remember what I realized many years ago. In the end it's really pointless to discuss about whether a certain work is good or bad. In the end if you loved a work you want to talk with other people that loved it, and if you hated it you want to talk with other people that hated it. Nothing "good" can come from person "A" realizing that the work he enjoyed so much is full of fail, and not matter how much person "A" arguments his reasons, it won't change the fact that person "B" didn't enjoy the work. You seem to be a person that really enjoyed Umineko, and that makes you the last person I'd want to explain in details all the flaws in Umineko. Not because I have fear of a confrontation, but because, seriously, we are not talking about politic or the future of humanity here. All that matter in a work of fiction is for people to enjoy it, if you did, good for you, even if I think it's for the wrong reasons. But you should weigh your words wisely if you don't want to start a flame war. Don't draw anyone who doesn't enjoy what you enjoy as an idiot. And even if you think it, don't say it, unless you are sure you are in a group where everyone agrees with you. Anyway, as I said, I'm not going to say anything against someone who claims something that I think is messed up is a masterpiece. However I cannot let it pass when someone reinterprets and manipulate a story to suit his tastes. Because, as my personal credo, I think nothing is more disrespectful to an author than ignoring what the author really wanted to convey. And no matter how much you hate an author that's no reason to disrespect him. I'm not saying that you are doing that, I'm justifying myself here, not attacking you. But Renall earlier made a good point. Are you absolutely sure that Beatrice killed everyone in Rokkenjima Prime? Because most people here concluded she did not.
__________________
|
|
2012-02-08, 10:21 | Link #350 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
What about a C-section? Is that done with general or local? My problem with the "Who's Battler's mother?" question is that it doesn't seem to matter.
__________________
|
|
2012-02-08, 10:46 | Link #351 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And her psychology does not...well...in a scope that I could feel anyways related to, in order to understand her. I think Ryukishi want me to understand her heart, but I just cannot. And truth to be told, I still enjoy Umineko very much, I just think...well, it could be better. Its potential is kinda wasted. |
||||
2012-02-08, 14:03 | Link #352 | |
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
Quote:
Seriously, what's the point? If it's supposed to be a motive for Kyrie, she never talks about it and her motive is apparently completely irrelevant (at least if the ep6 resolution of it is accurate). What about the whole Battler and Asumu being afraid of vehicles thing, why did that ever matter? It's like the whole thing exists to give Battler somewhere to go when he leaves the family that isn't (1) Kyrie's family, and (2) explains why he'd live somewhere not that close to the rest of his family. Except Battler could've easily gotten mad about something else and stomped off to live on his own or something with very minor adjustments. And even then, why wouldn't Rudolf just tell him and Kyrie right away? He just pissed off his son to the point that he swore off his entire family, and he wants to apologize to him, and he doesn't bother to actually explain that the whole thing is his fault in the end? I mean... seriously, why is any of this important? We don't even really know how this affected Battler as a person, and if we believe the presentation of Piece-Battler is accurate, it changed basically nothing about him. So... why? Why is Asumu part of the story if she's not even shown? Why does anything she ever did matter? What influence did she have on Battler growing up and how did he come around to coping with her loss? How would he feel about her and about Kyrie once he knows the truth? And, again, what is the point of any of it? You can say much the same about Genji's furniture complex. Why does he have one as well if we're never going to learn anything about him? Did he instill the complex in Yasu? Does he harbor some secret love for Kinzo he can never act on? Is he just really committed to his job? Does it mean something different to him than it means to Yasu? Why even bring it up if these questions will never be addressed, let alone answered? There's a lot of bits like this: Kumasawa's mysteriousness (why?), anything about Kinzo's unimportant dead wife (who cares?), Okonogi's "world peace" comment (what the hell does that even mean?), Nanjo's granddaughter (does he even need a specific motive beyond "get paid?"), the Mariage Sorcere (which exists as an organization only when the plot needs it to), Maria's father (what was the point if Rosa's going to mention it all of one time?), the Black Witch and different types of magic (was this supposed to come up again as a theme?), signing the message bottles "Ushiromiya Maria" (why did the author do this?), George's shady nature (if he wasn't involved, why do they keep bringing him up like he knows more than he should?), Shkanon (did this have any purpose but intentional controversy-stirring?), and Rokkenjima-Prime itself (was it supposed to matter? does it even exist?). Some of these things have answers of a sort, but most of them seem entirely unimportant as aspects of the plot. They either don't tell us anything, or they tell us something we anticipate later and then nothing seems to happen. I can understand introducing elements that are red herrings and the like, but some of these things were brought up as seemingly important motive elements, plot points, or even major themes, and completely ignored later. The big one for me is George. He does a ton of sinister stuff, he knows things he seemingly shouldn't, he's used as examples for very strange things, he flat-out states in fantasy scenes that he'd be willing to kill his whole family, and............. absolutely none of this is ever important later, ever. George usually has an alibi anyway (not to mention no depicted motive), so why even go to all of this effort to make him seem so kinda-sorta-evil? Are we supposed to view him as some kind of serious R-Prime candidate for culprit? If so... like, why? We have only a little more motive for him than we do for his father, who has none. Why was this written this way?
__________________
|
|
2012-02-08, 14:05 | Link #353 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
|
I just don't get it. Really, why can't we all just get along? There's no need for all this sarcasm and drama. This argument is bordering on becoming a flame war, and despite what any of you may think, nobody here is evil.
I am not evil. You are not evil. We're all just discussing a story. Stories exist for entertainment. They're made to be enjoyed. No humans were harmed in the making of Umineko. Speaking of which, Ryukishi07 is not evil either. All he's doing is writing down a bunch of words. That's what authors do. Nothing about that is evil. I like to write words too. It's what I'm doing right now. And sometimes, I write short stories. And I become incredibly ashamed of them afterwards because I'm not a good writer. In fact, I'm so bad at it that I can't bear to read a single word of those stories I wrote. But even so, they're just stories. When reading a story, everyone has the freedom of enjoying it (or not enjoying it) however they please. |
2012-02-08, 15:31 | Link #354 | ||
別にいいけど
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
|
Quote:
Anyway I didn't ready AT's list before, it's funny because if I had to make a list I would have mentioned other issues completely, anyway apart from Rudolf there is one of the question that I think I can answer, so I'll play the devil's advocate just for this one: Quote:
Bern and Lambda as "voyager witches" can roam freely through many different stories, sometimes as spectators and sometimes as characters. And exactly like "Cid" from Final Fantasy they can appear in different stories and not necessarily with the same "role". It is implied from EP8 Tea Party that Bern in the previous "when they cry" took the role of the "good witch" and Lambda the role of the "bad witch". In Umineko they did the opposite because, hell it's boring to always do the same things and we all know how much prone to boredom those two are. So basically Bern played the part of the "bad witch" because that was her role, and she had fun playing that role. Have you ever seen in anime the cute and usually gentle character that after getting the role of the "bad guy" in a theatrical play surprisingly shows to enjoy that role and acts in the part perfectly? Well I think that's exactly what was going on with Bern, except she never was gentle to begin with. So all of that unnecessary evil had no other reason but to absolve her duties as the "evil witch" of this story. Don't misunderstand this though. Bern didn't have any ultimate good in her mind, and neither did Lambda. They only did what they did because it was fun, nothing else, a "world" to them is just a playground. Now if you think the metacharacters are "real" or at least have "real" feelings and emotions, well they are still both pretty evil. Because toying around with the feelings of others end enjoying seeing them cry and despair isn't really nice. But if the metaworld isn't more real than fiction, well then, who cares? You wouldn't care either. Do you care about the stuff you kill in a videogame? Well this is how I see it.
__________________
|
||
2012-02-08, 15:46 | Link #355 | |||
The True Culprit
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The thing is...that doesn't really answer my question. So the two of them are solipsistic actresses. Alright, but then why do they get so much emotional investment over it? If Bern doesn't actually hate the shit out of Yasu then she's still a fucking sociopath. And if so, why is she? Even if she's playing the part of an evil villain, she still goes WAY over the top with it, and if she doesn't think the Pieces have emotions then why does she enjoy their suffering so much? This doesn't answer other questions, by the way, like what Bern came into the story knowing, or why Bernkastel doesn't have an aversion to supporting Certainty. I'd figure she'd have some weird Fair Folk allergy to it or some weird shit. The fact that she and Lambda keep making total 180's with no real reason still makes them pretty poorly written, along with the fact that neither of them are ever punished for their actions. Because Ryukishi is evil.
__________________
|
|||
2012-02-08, 15:56 | Link #356 | |
別にいいけど
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
|
Quote:
Are all those who play such games sociopaths? I don't think so. Bern was simply "playing" the role of the sociopath, as well as you can play the role of a sociapath in Postal. And if you ever played that kind of games, you'd know that going over the top and doing the most evil things is part of the gameplay, you do it because that's what the games require you to do, especially if you get bonus points for that (as it's often the case). Bern was in that kind of mindset. As for Bern having an aversion to supporting certainty? Why should she? She loves Lambda. All the scenes you've seen where those two fights are no different from the case of two kids playing cop and robber
__________________
|
|
2012-02-08, 16:29 | Link #357 | |||
The True Culprit
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
|||
2012-02-08, 16:57 | Link #358 |
Blick Winkel
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Gobbled up by Promathia
|
Maybe those things weren't important?
If you look at Umineko as one giant work, okay, I'd agree with you more. But really, considering the fans' feedback and the fact that the whole thing started years ago I think he handled it more than nicely. This is a MASSIVE universe and some things just aren't important anymore. Ryukishi either forgot about them because he is human or decided to drag the focus away from things he thought were once significant. Would you really CARE if Genji had more backstory? Is that relevant to the story in the Chiru arcs? Sure, it would mean a better developed character, but the story is long and filled with unnecessary things as it is. A few extras are covered in TIPS (like Gohda's story and more info for the atmosphere). I'm sure Ryukishi probably realized at some point that 'oh gee whiz, Genji pretty much is just there to BE THERE' but what GOOD what it do to talk about Genji's past in EP8? It would be irrelevant at that time. With this in mind, it is probably 'badly written'. However, if he were to go back and add scenes and rewrite things and resell it as one work, now that he knows everything, I am sure some of these would be addressed. Not trying to be argumentative, I respect your opinions and a large number of things on that list are very valid. |
2012-02-08, 16:58 | Link #359 | ||
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
Quote:
An example, other than Postal, is an old game called Rise of the Triad where some enemies would, when injured, attempt to surrender to you and start begging for their lives. You couldn't really do anything about this... other than shoot them to death anyway. That aside, I have trouble believing that, seeing characters like Shannon and Kanon develop a form of meta-awareness and existence, Bern could casually dismiss them as not having emotions or feelings. I'd suggest it's less the idea of playing a video game and more the idea of participating in a dinner theater where you can interact with all of the actors and in response to your actions and words they show anger, remorse, pain, etc. And you think it's all good fun, but what if you start to suspect that one actress you spoke to and "made her cry very convincingly" was actually driven to tears by something you said? Suddenly it isn't so much fun anymore. Quote:
__________________
|
||
2012-02-08, 17:16 | Link #360 | |
Blick Winkel
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Gobbled up by Promathia
|
Quote:
I personally am a little miffed that GOHDA'S FIST in the EP7 opening doesn't get much attention (maybe a little in the battle scenes in 8, but that's not enough). However, an important thing in fiction is to not include miscellaneous information. Ryukishi fails here, or maybe he doesn't because it's a mystery and is allowed to have red herrings. I feel that unless Genji had a moral dilemma with dealing with Natsuhi's baby that triggered a relevant flashback to his past or something, it might not be a good idea to add anything about it. In Chiru, Natsuhi gets a lot of attention in EP5 but that is important because the game-story pretty much revolves around her. Plus it's needed for Erika and Bern to pin a motive on her. George and Jessica, too, have some story in 6 but once again they are contenders in the meta-allegory for Yasu's internal conflict. The best time for characterization for Genji, I feel, would be in EP1 or 2. The thing is just that a lot of what we know about Genji comes out to be a mess of spoilers from EP7, so he couldn't really do much about it then. He probably just forgot to include more on it later on. |
|
|
|