[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[Jan-Poo]

There's been a very famous mystery novel where nobody gets punished even after the detective solved all the mysteries.

I won't mentioned it because it would be a spoiler, but it's very very very famous, one of the most famous novels of a certain author. Those who have read it should understand what I'm talking about.

Anyway my point is that "not having the rightful punishment coming to the culprit" is by no mean something that cannot work from a literary standpoint. Considering the huge success that novel had, I'd say we have proof of the contrary.

[ErenselTheJester]

Originally Posted by Renall

In this sort of story, the best possible ending I can think of is that the culprit is indistinguishable amongst the "window dressing" of the rest of the story. In other words, if the culprit were Hideyoshi (this is just an example!), he wouldn't be:

• Doing the theatrical "murders."
• Dressing up in any disguises.
• Relying on any strange people except as manipulated pawns.
• An inherently good but misguided person.

The true mastermind is either the bomber or a skillful killer who is exploiting the confusion on the island (who may or may not be aware of the endgame event). When you think about it, it's very difficult to imagine that most people know who the killer really is. Even if we assume an epitaph fakery group, I think it's likely that they don't know who specifically is doing real killings. Consider for a moment how difficult it would be to pull that off without ever getting caught. Sure, you have the fakery to hide behind, but you're also restricted in your victim selection. If the true killer is nevertheless managing, he or she is quite good at it. Figuring out how it was done when there's so many other swirling conspiracies would be quite satisfying. If we're lucky, it will be simple timing tricks that convinced us somebody who always appeared to have an alibi in fact never did at the proper times. Bonus points if they sneer at Battler and mock him over it, but not strictly necessary.

I'm not saying I demand blood, but the true mastermind really should not be a person who is pitiable and can easily be redeemed (which is why I don't think "Beatrice" is the mastermind). If you want to save the killer's life, fine. Battler might do that sort of thing. If you want to forgive him or her, fine. If you want them to try to turn it around, fine. But if nobody suffers any consequences, screw that.

Exactly, which is why I'm saying that there are (as said before) two people/groups using the name Beatrice. Considering the motives, it looks like one group wants to kill while the other group wants to do something else (I'm guessing this group is the Kinzo group that is trying to hide his death). If Battler's sin comes into play, then the killer is doing this for his sake which would only mean that a much harsher fate would meet both him and the family as a whole. The other group just might want him to have the title of head or something like that. All in all, I'm guessing these groups have no idea of the other's intention or each other for that matter.

Still, Jan- Poo's right. I wouldn't put it past that fool of a Battler to just forgive Beatrice right on the spot for whatever intentions. "The end justifies the means" as is said.

[UsagiTenpura]

The thing is even after 6 I don't see anyone having anything to gain in murdering everyone. Actually nothing so far indicates the culprit intends to remain alive at the end.

We are given plenty of reasons why specific people would dislike other specific people, or could want to kill a few of the others, but something like a will for everyone to die... feels like it doesn't exists yet (outside the Sumaderas at least).

Since the motives seems so weird then it's hard to understand the murders themselves, and if it's hard to understand them it's really hard to judge the culprit. However I do not think Beato would insist so much about love if SHE hated the culprit. It's very likely that Beato, if not the culprit, understands the reasons why this is all happening.

It was after all said in red that everyone dies cause of Battler's sin six years ago. Telling a girl that you like blue eyed blonde haired big breast girls when you're 12 years old is in no way a reason to make anyone dies.

We also don't even know if any murders occurs on "Rokkenjima prime". We don't even know when the present is. Supposed the "truth" is Ange's future as seen in arc 4. Then the real culprit is most likely dead already, as well as Beato and Battler, seems hard to reach a satisfactory ending if this is the truth (tho I can't rule out her mastering ressurection magic and being allowed to summon them all as sorta furniture as the planned ending, but it feels very empty to me). So in the case Ange's future isn't true, then it implies the present is likely before or during the events of 1986. That means the tragedy is possible to completely prevent, and it's possible to prevent the murderer from killing anyone. That could lead to an ending where the killer is redeemed as misguided or something.

It's also possible all the murders are due to the atmosphere created during the game. In short the events we see in any arcs gradually leads people to be more and more paranoid, which could lead them to kill the others out of mistrust. An atmosphere perfect for a murder is in many ways what october 1986 is, even WITHOUT the murders.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

We also don't even know if any murders occurs on "Rokkenjima prime". We don't even know when the present is.

Which, incidentally, might mean that the present is in ...2005. Took 19 years to write the story.

[June 1983]

Originally Posted by Heatth

To sum up, here my take of the 3 Rules of Umineko:

Rule Z: People think it is Kinzo's fault, distracting them.

Rule X: Murders happen in the island, creating the illusion of the witch.

Rule Y: Someone plotted the death of Ushiromiya family.

I think this is a really good, neat breakdown of the structure of Umineko. It's a good idea to step back and try to think of the big picture, instead of getting lost in each new clue which is sent our way.

Another way I might put it:

Rule Z: A series of occult murders occur following the epitaph. The epitaph must be solved to stop the murders.

Rule X: The root of the murders is concerned with lost love and broken hearts.

Rule Y: Someone plotted the death of the family.

By the way, if I have to point a finger for the responsible of Rule Y I would say the Sumadera, naturally. Of the characters presented they are the only one who fit. I also thought about Okonogi, but I realized he actually won't win anything if no one of Hideyoshi's family survives. He was probably just lucky Eva was elsewhere.

I agree with this, definitely. Unless there is a closer connection between Okonogi and the Sumadera family than Ep 4 lets on, which is possible considering the conversation between Okonogi and Amakusa in Ep 6.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

There's been a very famous mystery novel where nobody gets punished even after the detective solved all the mysteries.

I won't mentioned it because it would be a spoiler, but it's very very very famous, one of the most famous novels of a certain author. Those who have read it should understand what I'm talking about.

Anyway my point is that "not having the rightful punishment coming to the culprit" is by no mean something that cannot work from a literary standpoint. Considering the huge success that novel had, I'd say we have proof of the contrary.

Yes, but that one was... a bit of an exception. It is actually entirely probable in Umineko, especially if you buy the whole "anyone could kill under certain circumstances, however no one person is a killer in every story" interpretation, in which case all characters are "guilty" and "innocent."

However, then you run into the explosion incident, and that sort of necessitates either thinking there was a mastermind or the incident was an accident.

[Jan-Poo]

Let's say for a moment that it wasn't an accident (which you know I'm not so sure about).

Who would want to kill everyone including the whole family? Even supposing that the real culprit survived, he'd still kill himself from a social standpoint.

We have seen from a previous discussion that Krauss might have a reasonable motive to kill all of his family. However in that case there wouldn't be anyone to punish. It would just be another sad story of a family head that kills off all of his relatives because of financial problems.

Then let's say that the culprit is Shannon which wanted to kill everyone because of her unrequited love (or loves). Yet again you don't have anyone to punish. It would be the story of a crazy girl who decided to resolve her disastrous romance life in the worst possible way.

Another hypothesis is that a servant wanted to kill everyone so to get all the gold for himself/herself. In the servant's case they don't have a social image they cherish, so they might just "disappear" in some far away place, taking the gold cautiously a few months or years after the "incident".
Well Van Dine would have to say something about this, but supposing this story doesn't comply with the Dine's rules (which is probable), what kind of connection we can make with Battler's sin?

The last hypothesis I can think of is that some external mastermind prepared a "bomb" in advance, a timer would do the trick. Okonogi would be a good candidate for this.
However that would break a few rules of a well written murder mystery novel. The culprit should always be someone among the closed circle. Even if Okonogi was indeed mentioned in EP1 he still wasn't around in the island I don't think that would work.

[Renall]

Motive is easier to find the fewer people to be killed. If the explosion is not an accident, then you accept either that:

• Everyone was intended to die.
• Certain people were expected to die, but the bomber miscalculates somehow (or the storm messes it up).
• It was intended to kill people, but not the family (the "booby-trapped military storage" variant).
• No one was supposed to die and everyone's deaths were faked in Rokkenjima-Prime (but then what of Ange?).
• No one was supposed to die, but the killer killed the person who was going to save everyone so they died anyway.

There may be others, but none of these are great for establishing motive.

[Jan-Poo]

the booby trapped military storage variant is not much different from the volcano theory. In the end it would be just an unfortunate accident. No culprit, just bad luck.
Unless the booby trap was set off on purpose but then we go back to the other points.

[Kylon99]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

What about the two TIPS of Kanon's death in EP2? It basically tells you that Kanon doesn't exist.

What about Kanon being "the zero in the roulette" said by Kanon in EP1?

What about the fact that in EP1 there's no reasonable way Kanon could have listened to the discussion of the parents and yet you see him reporting to Kinzo? Even so the only servant that went there was Shannon.

What about EP4 with Kanon and Shannon that actually link together and are said to be "furniture from the same set"

What about the scene in the kitchen in EP1 where Kumasawa tells Battler that "Beatrice is here right now". Even though there's only Kanon, Kumasawa and Genji in front of him.

What about EP2 where Kanon tries to give Maria her marshmallow back, and a few seconds later it's Beatrice that does it with "magic" (and we all know that what she did was simply switching the crushed marshmallow with another one while Maria was closing her eyes). Considering that Shannontrice is hinted so much any Kanontrice hint works automatically as a shkanontrice hint.


I think that there are plenty of shkanon hints in EP1-4. Of course they are far from being evidences, but they work as hints. They are by no way inferior to the various other hints you've found about other subjects.

Actually... if you read your whole list of hints here, it suggests Kanontrice much more than Shkannon. There is definitely something strange with Kanon, I think we can all admit to that.

Regarding the idea of furniture though... some friends and I were trying to explain what that means. The major problem is that we need an explanation for Genji as well. A lot of explanations use observations from Shannon and Kanon, but fail to include how Genji behaves as well.

There's the magical explanation that they are sub-human summoned servants of Kinzo. But what does this mean? I keep thinking that they are some kind of 'actors' or something. That they are really some other people pretending to be people they are not. Then I thought, what if they were trained to be 'spies?' Maybe Kinzo has a program for corporate espionage. 8) I wouldn't put it... uhh...

The idea of a long term sleeper spy is that they pretend to be people they are not, but for a reason a bit more serious than something like "they act for fun" or "Shannon is psycho/schizophrenic." It also explains why people aren't free to love or marry; because they're in alternate identities. There's just one problem... we may have a few hints that Kanon is doing some spying on the siblings.... but... where are the clues on how Kinzo trained Shannon and Kanon? And Genji's past?


So... anyone remember any hints or have any other ideas similar to this?

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by Kylon99

So... anyone remember any hints or have any other ideas similar to this?

Only the basic concept that Fukuin House is somehow an acting school.

The idea of espionage seems sort of promising. While it doesn't sound very plausible, (the only way you can reliably justify it is "I wouldn't put it past...", and that's not very justifiable) the consequences may turn out useful.

For example, what if Shannon was actually sent to spy on... George?

[DaBackpack]

Well about all this talk about "the quality of the novel" being evidence that Shkanon (and other theories) doesn't exist, I will point out that there are several inconsistencies throughout the novels. How about this:

*Ange's red text-a-thon in EP4: Come home! Defeat the witch! and blah blah blah. Last time I checked, imperative statements are not statements of fact. Of course, it could be argued that they are not "truthful statements" but rather "statements with truth behind them" but this stuck out with me. Maybe it's a translation thing, I dunno.

*EP4, once again, with the red text. If one becomes physically incapable of saying lies in the Red, then why is there any risk of a logic error at all? Now, this paradox can be avoided by saying The Game Master is the only one that has the capability of creating a logic error. If anyone else has the ability to speak the Red Truth (because they have been given permission by the Witch Side) then any fallacious statements cannot be completed in the Red. Still, that's a stretch.

*EP6, when Liberated Liberater plays (that's its own event for me, lol). If Erika is not the detective, how can she say what she says in the Red Text at the end? The game ended while I was inside the guest room, so I did not undo the chain lock that I had previously set and the wall of text after that.

*EP3, uses Schrodinger's Cat and Hempel's Raven as logical arguments. It's a nice comparison, but the phenomenon with Quantum Physics does not necessarily guarantee what EP3 says it does. I see he gradually fixed it over time so it makes sense now, though. The Raven Paradox is used completely out of context, not to mention it's wrong.

*EP6, battle of Beato vs. Erika. BATTLER is the Game Master and he has discovered the possibility of changing the answer as long as it still fits with the Red Text. What gives Beato the authority to make Reds about his game? This is a bit vague, but I feel that there are multiple solutions to the Battler's closed room problem before Beato came and restricted those options with her Reds about Kanon.

I'm not bashing Ryukishi here. He is an amazing author and I love Umineko and Higurashi. However, what I'm trying to say is that he is not perfect. He has created a wonderful story, but with more writing comes more possibility for error. I do not believe he has created egregious errors that will interfere with his own solution, but he is a human and therefore capable of error. We should not view him as a God of writing, so using that as evidence against certain theories is not legitimate.


EDIT: Or, rather, I should say the rules of Umineko are flexible.

[DgBarca]

Originally Posted by DaBackpack

EDIT: Or, rather, I should say the rules of Umineko are flexible.

According to Bern's letter, Rule Z is the only one which is flexible. And this Rule Z seems to block access to Rule X and Y

[DaBackpack]

Originally Posted by DgBarca

According to Bern's letter, Rule Z is the only one which is flexible. And this Rule Z seems to block access to Rule X and Y

That's not what I meant (this does not involve rules X, Y, and Z on the gameboard). I mean the rules of the Umineko universe (how the Red Text functions, how the detective's authority works). There are obvious stretches with these. If you can find a reasonable solution to each of the problems I've presented, I would like to know because I am curious whether Ryukishi is an absolute genious or whether he made a few, tiny errors throughout his work.

[Renall]

Red text has been used since its inception in ep2 to make statements with no inherent truth value. In such a case, it simply has no meaningful effect. When Beatrice is laughing in red, that doesn't mean anything since it has no associated truth or falsity to it.

[Kylon99]

Originally Posted by ErenselTheJester

Now about the Game Master, it is said that his/her age is nineteen and it is also said that it took nineteen years for this story to be written.
Any questions, comments, feedback?

You know... I keep thinking that maybe Beatrice-1967 was just like Van Dine. She was isolated in a mansion with no outside contact with the world just like Van Dine. So maybe she took to reading a whole bunch of murder mysteries and eventually began writing them herself? And so that's where these hints of Beatrice being a great mystery writer comes from?

The other thing about the fantasy scenes: the idea that Genji is a 'vessel' for Ronove is a magical one. If the episodes were written, then it's probably something closer to Ronove being the character that someone chose to represent Genji. It's possible they were written in this way, maybe by Beatrice-1967.

And this gets around the idea of Gaapjo being Nanjo in a very revealing dress. 8) People have speculated that Gaap could be Nanjo's daughter; maybe Nanjo's daughter was written into the story AS Gaap? EDIT: Sorry, that was his grand-daughter... heh. Not likely to have been known by Beatrice-1967.

If you look at it this way, it may make sense that some initial stories were written by Beatrice-1967 featuring Ronove, Virgilia. And that's *exactly* how they looked to her back then. Then this 'series' carried on to modern day by someone else, like a successor (like Shannon) and updated to incorporate the more modern characters of the family.

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

Anyway my point is that "not having the rightful punishment coming to the culprit" is by no mean something that cannot work from a literary standpoint. Considering the huge success that novel had, I'd say we have proof of the contrary.

What I fear is that since we've already been shown that the police consider it an accident or incident and not a mass murder plot means that whoever it was has gotten away with murder already. Whether he's dead or alive. All that remains is to posthumously declare him, if he or she is already dead.

[Raiza Sunozaki]

Originally Posted by Renall

Red text has been used since its inception in ep2 to make statements with no inherent truth value. In such a case, it simply has no meaningful effect. When Beatrice is laughing in red, that doesn't mean anything since it has no associated truth or falsity to it.

In a sense, you could think that it's just saying it's true that she's laughing.

[DaBackpack]

Originally Posted by Renall

Red text has been used since its inception in ep2 to make statements with no inherent truth value. In such a case, it simply has no meaningful effect. When Beatrice is laughing in red, that doesn't mean anything since it has no associated truth or falsity to it.

Yes, but saying the Red only tells the truth! is partly wrong, then. I've seen a way around this: If you look at each sentence individually, of course problems will arise. You have to treat each Red Text jumble as a giant group. Thus Please come home! and Kihihihihihi! make sense in context.

As for the EP4 problem, I propose this:

There are two kinds of Red Truth in Umineko: those which tell a fact, and those which are gameboard parameters. The Facts cannot be false in any way. These are not constructed by the Game Master but are fundamental truths and cannot be mistaken. No one can repeat these if they are false. Example of Fact:

Kinzo is dead at the start of all games!
Ushiromiya Battler is Asumu's son!

The second kind of Red Truth is the "gameboard parameters." These vary from each scenario and each game. They are totally in the Game Master's control for each game. They are used for the construction of the mysteries in Umineko. These Red Truths limit the possibilities on the Game Board, but do not necessarily have to be what actually happened. In short, the Game Master uses these to create the mystery he/she wants. Example:

In short, no one could have killed Kanon!
Rosa was in possession of all of the master keys!

If anyone tries to repeat a false Red Fact, then they cannot complete it. However, the Game Master is allowed to say as many Red Parameters as he wishes until a Logic Error happens. Once a Logic Error occurs, the gameboard immediately ends.

This level is reasoning is possible for DaBackpack. What do you think, everyone?

[Renall]

No. It's not remotely that complicated. You can say something in red that lacks truth value. That's it. You can say it. Context doesn't matter; there are statements in ep2 with no truth-value context. The only time you run into rules or problems is when a statement has truth value assigned to it. At that time, it must be true.

Speculation is also apparently permitted in red and need not actually come to pass. Present and future events must be spoken of as statements of fact, and in such cases the red does need to be actually true.

[cimbrog]

Originally Posted by Heatth

Rule Z: Something that distract people from the true answer of the other Rules.

Rule X: Some thing (bad) that always happen and appear to be the core of the mystery. But it is not really related to the main conspiracy.

Rule Y: The main conspiracy.

See, I was also inspired by Higurashi's rules but came up with a different application to Umineko.

Rule X: The Epitaph murders - Like L5 in Higurashi. They occur for various reasons, either power struggles in the family or the servants carrying out Kinzo's will. Or both. Important, but not the actual problem.

Rule Y: The illusion of the witch. Exemplified by the scene in EP1 where Maria tells Battler that the witch is present while she stands with the one winged servants. An illusion that the witch exists has gone on for a very long time, mainly from the one wing servants. Not deadly, but in the Meta world, this serves to distract Battler with fantasy.

Rule Z: The explosion... I think. If it is something inevitable with a 0% chance of stopping it, Bern would be powerless against it. It is the inevitable end.

These are the things that comprise Beatrice, or at least that's what I've been working with as I read it. And if I'm right about Rule Z, then the only way for there to be a happy ending is to take everyone to the golden land (ie, Kuwadorian).