[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[SonozakiUshiromiya]

Well hold on, we can still use the text even if the author makes up stuff on the spot. Would you agree with everything Nasu's said about his works? Or the opinions of Jhonen Vasquez? AT can't be reasonably blamed if R07 took a solid theory which a lot of us used in our reasoning and tossed it for bull feces. Why reason at all if every hurdle could be solved with "LOLinsanity"?! We might as well just copy-paste the facts and leave only the surface interpretations. We'll be EP7 Tea Party!Kyrie. Intelligent, analytical looking morons tripping over ourselves since we can't even try to make an unfavorable situation work in our advantage in the long haul. I don't want that. So to hell with R07's after-the-fact crap sandwich. I'll take the possibly non-ridiculously interpretable text soup with a side of reasoning toast, thankyouverymuch.jpg.

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by SonozakiUshiromiya

Well hold on, we can still use the text even if the author makes up stuff on the spot. Would you agree with everything Nasu's said about his works? Or the opinions of Jhonen Vasquez? AT can't be reasonably blamed if R07 took a solid theory which a lot of us used in our reasoning and tossed it for bull feces. Why reason at all if every hurdle could be solved with "LOLinsanity"?! We might as well just copy-paste the facts and leave only the surface interpretations. We'll be EP7 Tea Party!Kyrie. Intelligent, analytical looking morons tripping over ourselves since we can't even try to make an unfavorable situation work in our advantage in the long haul. I don't want that. So to hell with R07's after-the-fact crap sandwich. I'll take the possibly non-ridiculously interpretable text soup with a side of reasoning toast, thankyouverymuch.jpg.

I don't think it's a matter of blaming someone. However I fear the goal of who wants to find the solution Ryukishi thought and the goal of who wants to solve Umineko with a solution that will fit his tastes might not match, which create problems in discussing things instead than smoothing the reasoning process because each of us will give his own suggestions.

[LyricalAura]

Ryuukishi did not say "When golden butterflies appear in the story, it means someone's going insane." He said "If someone were to really see golden butterflies, it would mean they're going insane." Since no one saw golden butterflies in reality there is no insanity, okay?

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by LyricalAura

Ryuukishi did not say "When golden butterflies appear in the story, it means someone's going insane." He said "If someone were to really see golden butterflies, it would mean they're going insane." Since no one saw golden butterflies in reality there is no insanity, okay?

This is an interesting and rather logical interpretation (or is it the exact translation? Sorry but I have to rely on other people's translations as I fail at Japanese... -_-).
So, back to Genji, it look it all due to Battler being drunk...

[Toku]

Originally Posted by SonozakiUshiromiya

Well hold on, we can still use the text even if the author makes up stuff on the spot. Would you agree with everything Nasu's said about his works? Or the opinions of Jhonen Vasquez? AT can't be reasonably blamed if R07 took a solid theory which a lot of us used in our reasoning and tossed it for bull feces. Why reason at all if every hurdle could be solved with "LOLinsanity"?! We might as well just copy-paste the facts and leave only the surface interpretations. We'll be EP7 Tea Party!Kyrie. Intelligent, analytical looking morons tripping over ourselves since we can't even try to make an unfavorable situation work in our advantage in the long haul. I don't want that. So to hell with R07's after-the-fact crap sandwich. I'll take the possibly non-ridiculously interpretable text soup with a side of reasoning toast, thankyouverymuch.jpg.

I don't know the details, but this sounds interesting, so could you elaborate? What exactly did Ryukishi say that tossed out a popular theory?

[Wanderer]

Originally Posted by Renall

even if able to misrepresent the very character of the story to an individual who has supernatural confirmation abilities and a perspective present in the actual story - please stop dodging that, it's getting aggravating, address it.

As for the supernatural confirmation abilities, it's not something I think I have a full burden to explain because not making full use of her confirmation abilities seems to have happened regardless of explanation. Still, I'll go as far to say that I think that Erika's mind simply doesn't work in a way that could suspect ShKanon being possible- kind of like how she only thinks in terms of mystery even though ShKanon is fantasy.

As for Erika having a perspective in the actual story, I have given some evidence that a Meta-Character (as a Reader-whatever that may mean) can affect a story, which establishes that what we see is somehow edited from it's original form in a way that is not made explicitly clear to us. What I can't provide much evidence for is the exact nature of the "Reader's" effect, but if I suppose that it can cause a Player to mistake what their Piece's observations are, which I don't think is all that big of a jump, then it can answer a very central and persistent problem to Umineko. That's why I like the idea that it can.

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

Well, if I wanted to be a jerk I could argue that "falsehoods" was never defined as fantasy scenes, and it could and should mean falsehoods from the characters too. It's just as flimsy as this currently proposed definition of a Reader's powers, which is based on next to nothing.

Or are people going to engage in Special Pleading again?

I have no dispute with these possible interpretations as to what "falsehoods" might mean or that there are falsehoods in Bern's game. However, and Toku already pointed this out, the quote said that "no Reader"=>"no falsehoods in the narrated text." Which straitly implies that a Reader can change the narrated text.

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

And Bern says she didn't get to do any Gamemastering, which implies she didn't get to write any narratives or anything. Clair is clearly channeling Yasu, who most definitely came up with these fantasy embellishments herself because....seriously, it's Yasu.

If Clair is just repeating what Yasu came up with, in what way is Clair embellishing it?

And how can a Reader embellish a story if they do not have a personality or soul? She's basically a Kindle.

I tend to think that Bern technically did some Gamemastering; she just wasn't satisfied with what little she was permitted to do, so to her she may as well not have done any. And if Claire is channeling Yasu then she's channeling a subjective person. Even if it's her story to begin with, the way she tells it still matters.

Basically, I don't think there is any of the insidious kind of embellishment that we are used to, but it's not like there was a complete surgical removal of it from the story altogether either.

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

This isn't a very compelling argument because this isn't nowhere near the first or even most significant thing Ryukishi's drawn attention to with big reactions from the characters that didn't lead anywhere or really mean anything.

I can't think of any such examples.

[AuraTwilight]

Well then. There's completely no point to you being in Umineko discussions if you no longer respect the author of the story.

I respect the work in of itself. But a lot of interview statements Ryukishi made have, in my opinion, contradicted the text he wrote in his novel. It's called Death of the Author, and it's a fully legitimate form of analyzing literature. I'd like if you could refrain from being an asshole about it.

[AuraTwilight]

I have no dispute with these possible interpretations as to what "falsehoods" might mean or that there are falsehoods in Bern's game. However, and Toku already pointed this out, the quote said that "no Reader"=>"no falsehoods in the narrated text." Which straitly implies that a Reader can change the narrated text.

Even if we conceded that a Reader can change the narrated text, for the sake of argument, this in no way logically connects to Erika seeing Kanon when Kanon isn't physically present (which was the original argument and this Reader thing is just kind of a meaningless tangent).

I tend to think that Bern technically did some Gamemastering; she just wasn't satisfied with what little she was permitted to do, so to her she may as well not have done any. And if Claire is channeling Yasu then she's channeling a subjective person. Even if it's her story to begin with, the way she tells it still matters.

Of course YASU is subjective, but Yasu isn't the Reader, Clair is, and Clair and Yasu aren't the same entity.

See? The whole concept of Readers changing the text is so damn nebulous, vague, self-contradictory, and convoluted that I honestly don't really see much merit in the EP8 interchange. If anything it seems like something Ryukishi made up at the last minute, to me.

I can't think of any such examples.

*inserts all the hints about Kumasawa being directly connected to Kinzo's Beatrice in some way.*

[Toku]

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

*inserts all the hints about Kumasawa being directly connected to Kinzo's Beatrice in some way.*

Oh? This sounds interesting. I don't remember much of this, though. The earliest thing we know of her past, as far as I remember, is that she helped raise Beatrice II. I don't think she comes into the story at all, at any point before that.

[Toku]

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

I respect the work in of itself. But a lot of interview statements Ryukishi made have, in my opinion, contradicted the text he wrote in his novel. It's called Death of the Author, and it's a fully legitimate form of analyzing literature. I'd like if you could refrain from being an asshole about it.

I apologize. It's simply that I've seen too many people bashing both Ryukishi and all of Umineko. And since I very much respect both, I just don't like to see it, so I sometimes overreact.

What are those statements though, that you feel contradict the text in the novels?

[AuraTwilight]

I'd have to dig around for them specifically, but one that sticks out in his memory is a particularly sexist statement where he said that women only cared about feelings and men only cared about status.

Even though this is contradicted by characters such as Kinzo, George, Natsuhi, Eva...

[AuraTwilight]

There's several hints in the early episodes that Kumasawa wasn't as she appeared to be, to say nothing of her Fantasy counterpart, Virgilia, being the Original Beatrice.

[Toku]

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

I'd have to dig around for them specifically, but one that sticks out in his memory is a particularly sexist statement where he said that women only cared about feelings and men only cared about status.

Even though this is contradicted by characters such as Kinzo, George, Natsuhi, Eva...

Well, that looks like it's taken out of context... I think it's clear from the story, as you said, that he doesn't actually believe it. Especially when I look at Kinzo.

[Toku]

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

There's several hints in the early episodes that Kumasawa wasn't as she appeared to be, to say nothing of her Fantasy counterpart, Virgilia, being the Original Beatrice.

My memory is too vague about a lot of the early stuff, so I can't really remember...

But certainly, both her age and the title of being the original Beatrice, as well as the fact that we don't know anything about her life before Beatrice II came into the picture, leaves plenty of room for her to be Beatrice I, or someone who had a significant connection to Beatrice I. And I don't know of anything that necessarily denies this, so.

[AuraTwilight]

Either way, it doesn't matter; this totally isn't the thread to discuss that sort of thing. :P

[AuraTwilight]

Well, EP7 denies it pretty hard.

[SonozakiUshiromiya]

Originally Posted by LyricalAura

Ryuukishi did not say "When golden butterflies appear in the story, it means someone's going insane." He said "If someone were to really see golden butterflies, it would mean they're going insane." Since no one saw golden butterflies in reality there is no insanity, okay?

....-_-....*derp*Well thanks for clearing things up, LA.
@Toku
I herped and got mad over miscommunication. It's like you're going to make a PB & J sandwich, but you didn't have any PB, so you couldn't have made a PB & J. Instead of trying to figure out the truth behind the illusions, we don't really have to try thinking about anything. Instead of going with bomb theory to explain the endings for the eps, let's say at the end of Ep 2, Rosa and Maria drowned trying to swim away from the island. Battler was drunk and fell off the Beatrice cliff. Genji sat there like a robot and starved...Yeah. But I suppose this avenue is closed.

About Genji, I think he did kinda disagree with Yasu's actions, and at the end, he tried to lead a drunk Battler to Kuwadorian to repent, but failed.

[Toku]

Originally Posted by SonozakiUshiromiya

....-_-....*derp*Well thanks for clearing things up, LA.
@Toku
I herped and got mad over miscommunication. It's like you're going to make a PB & J sandwich, but you didn't have any PB, so you couldn't have made a PB & J. Instead of trying to figure out the truth behind the illusions, we don't really have to try thinking about anything. Instead of going with bomb theory to explain the endings for the eps, let's say at the end of Ep 2, Rosa and Maria drowned trying to swim away from the island. Battler was drunk and fell off the Beatrice cliff. Genji sat there like a robot and starved...Yeah. But I suppose this avenue is closed.

About Genji, I think he did kinda disagree with Yasu's actions, and at the end, he tried to lead a drunk Battler to Kuwadorian to repent, but failed.

Oh, I get it now. I never really interpreted that quote in such a way as to say that everything is explained with insanity, but I can see how you could have thought that. And I can see how it would be frustrating.

[zibbazabba905]

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

Well, EP7 denies it pretty hard.

it was something about dieing during childbirth, wasn't it? aside from that it would make total sense with the Beatrice trail = money trail.

[Kylon99]

No, that was the original Beatrice Castigilloni who died giving birth to Beatrice 2. Genji, Kumasawa and Nanjo probably all helped to raise Beatrice 2, but we never had any clues about Kumasawa being Beatrice or having anything to do with inheriting a title herself. Virgilia can, of course, because that's the fantasy side of the story.

Kumasawa did inspire Yasu, however (who became the 3rd Beatrice later) with her tons of novels. She also passed on various rumors and superstitious beliefs, IIRC.

Virgilia was definitely shown to be Beatrice's teacher, but it was mentioned in early EP3 when she appeared before a young Beatrice who called Virgilia, "Beatrice." (Which Beatrice this is is debatable; it's probably an amalgamated version that Meta Beatrice showed to Battler.)

But, I imagine there are tons of things like this that Ryukishi would want to retcon. Especially that unlocked door in the boiler room, which he DID seem to retcon for EP3 of the anime and manga where they showed that it was blocked. 8)


Virgilia, Ronove and maybe Gaap was supposedly created by Ryukishi (he called them the Suspicios Trio or something in his recent interview, I think... ) to help the readers after people nearly gave up at the end of EP2. He realized that he needed to create some other characters who could give subtle clues to Battler, and by extension to us, so that we could understand some basic concepts like Unreliable Narrator, etc. I imagine when he first introduced her he started planning for her to have carried the title of Beatrice inbetween the two real Beatrices or something but that plan didn't really fit later on. (Otherwise we'd have Kinzo x Kumasawa shippers by now... 8) )