[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by m0h

@Judoh

Forgot polydactilism?

Didn't forget. Not sure if Dlanor would accept that though since she said you can call his corpse anyone else's. That's why she said "no red would be effective"

Also Dlanor is a neutral party. I don't think she's on either side really.

[m0h]

Sorry for my english though, sometimes i find difficult to find word to properly explain my theory.

[m0h]

Let me try again.

Let's create 3 kakera.

Kakera 1: Shannon - Kanon - Battler
Battler saw everyone, not together
Red Truth: Kanon is death

Kakera 2: Shannon - Kannon - Battler - Erika
Battler saw everyone, not together
Erika saw everyone, not together
Red Truth: Kanon is death

Kakera 3: Shannon - Kanon - Battler - Erika - Kinzo.
Battler saw everyone, not together
Erika never saw Kanon but belived in Battler's point when he said he saw Kanon.
Red Truth: Kanon is death

At the forth Kakera i say in red:
Kanon and Shannon are the same person! Kanon is just a disguise! That applies at all kakera!

Would the previous reds became a lie or would still be functional? moreover, what would Erika think about that in the 3rd kakera? don't focus on the corpses, just accept the reds.

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by m0h

Simply because Dlanor , as human side, SEALED THE RED. So Battler was forced to use GOLD.

How can you seal the red if the human side has to accept it ?

I have no idea why Dlanor has the power to seal reds and blues, but you don't either.

There is no apparent connection between Dlanor's power to seal red and the theory that reds are dependent on belief rather than being simply the truth.

But to clarify, Dlanor only seals the use of reds and blues not their validity. Kinzo is dead is a perfectly valid red. Dlanor simply denied the possibility that that particular red could be used in that duel.

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by m0h

Let me try again.

Let's create 3 kakera.

Kakera 1: Shannon - Kanon - Battler
Battler saw everyone, not together
Red Truth: Kanon is death

Kakera 2: Shannon - Kannon - Battler - Erika
Battler saw everyone, not together
Erika saw everyone, not together
Red Truth: Kanon is death

Kakera 3: Shannon - Kanon - Battler - Erika - Kinzo.
Battler saw everyone, not together
Erika never saw Kanon but belived in Battler's point when he said he saw Kanon.
Red Truth: Kanon is death

At the forth Kakera i say in red:
Kanon and Shannon are the same person! Kanon is just a disguise! That applies at all kakera!

Would the previous reds became a lie or would still be functional? moreover, what would Erika think about that in the 3rd kakera? don't focus on the corpses, just accept the reds.

Uh I fear I don't understand. Why the last red denies the other reds?

[m0h]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

Uh I fear I don't understand. Why the last red denies the other reds?

Well. Since both are the same person, Kanon doesn't exist as an indivual. That would be a contraddiction to the fact that Kanon has dead, how can a person that doesn't exist die?

But in Kakera 1 we still don't know that, so it's truth because SOMEONE WITNESSED Kanon.

In Kakera 4 we learn that in reallity Kanon doesn't exist as a person, and there's someone else disguised as him. So we should not accept that truth anymore. But, since at that time we believed Kanon existed, the red truth was effective.

EDIT: it's getting late here, good night gentlemen Happy investigation!

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by m0h

Well. Since both are the same person, Kanon doesn't exist as an indivual. That would be a contraddiction to the fact that Kanon has dead, how can a person that doesn't exist die?

But in Kakera 1 we still don't know that, so it's truth because SOMEONE WITNESSED Kanon.

In Kakera 4 we learn that in reallity Kanon doesn't exist as a person, and there's someone else disguised as him. So we should not accept that truth anymore. But, since at that time we believed Kanon existed, the red truth was effective.

EDIT: it's getting late here, good night gentlemen Happy investigation!

Finally a shkanon theory that doesn't have that crummy personality death narrative!

(Well besides the duel theory)

[Jan-Poo]

The way I see it, if Shannon and Kanon are the same person then Kanon is only an alias of Shannon, and therefore "Kanon is dead" simply means "Shannon is dead". Alternatively "kanon died as a personality".

Anyway let's assume that "it's impossible to claim that someone who doesn't exist died". In that case using a red to claim what's impossible is the very definition of logic error.

The case you presented is a logic error.

Finally a shkanon theory that doesn't have that crummy personality death narrative!

Hey come on! Me and Ssol proposed a shkanon theory that doesn't involve "personality can die" a long time ago.

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

Hey come on! Me and Ssol proposed a shkanon theory that doesn't involve "personality can die" a long time ago.

I remembered Ssol's so I edited my post. I don't know about yours though.

[Jan-Poo]

it was basically the same thing. Just few minor changes which now I don't remember....
The basic is still Kanon existed, he died before the game, Shannon took his place.

[Kylon99]

Originally Posted by m0h

Would the previous reds became a lie or would still be functional? moreover, what would Erika think about that in the 3rd kakera? don't focus on the corpses, just accept the reds.

Ok, here's my theory for the Red Truth. I know not everyone agrees with me, but I felt like I need to re-iterate this, especially based on observations in EP5 and 6. I believe those episodes actually provided answers for us, not just hints.


First of all there are two types of Red.

- Red that applies to a certain game
- Red that applies to all games

Red can apply to only certain games because the surrounding text whether red, blue, white/black or gold, contextualizes them into certain games. The answer from EP6 shows us that red is dependent on context since many of the reds in EP6 are merely the word: "Acknowledged." Without the surrounding context of what was acknowledged, the red is useless. I believe this was a deliberate change in presentation of the red for EP6 to force us to face this issue.


As for Reds that apply to all games the question is, do they apply to all games now, but not new games? This appears to be heading down right now and I want to stop it with this reasoning.

EP5 showed us a red that was spoken in EP4 and applied in EP5. "No person would mistake Kinzo by sight." In fact this was the linchpin in Battler's battle so this wasn't just a minor scene but deliberate.

This shows us that there are some Reds (with a generalized context) that must apply to all future games. I would say at this point that all non-contexted reds must apply to the future, including things like, "There is not more than 17 people on this island."

But this conversation seems to be heading towards the idea that some of these reds could be broken in the future. The question is.. which reds? Because at least one was not able to be broken.

In order for us to be able to determine which reds can be broken, there must be some kind of clue or hint but I don't think one can be found. Can anyone find anything?


I propose that all non-contexted-into-certain-episode Reds must apply to all episodes, including future episodes.

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

The basic is still Kanon existed, he died before the game, Shannon took his place.

IIRC it was vice versa in EPs 1 and 4 for his theory. He had to get around in short Kanon was the 9th victim. And in EP 1 it's just better to assume Shannon lost since she's in the FT.

Or was it EP2 where Kanon died?

Anwyay I think with this kind of theory though it would be hard to claim one person dies in the duel in every episode. So there is a loophole. In EP3 the duel could be a draw. And in EP4 they could be imprisoned before the duel could even takes place kind of like how George didn't get a chance to propose to Shannon in EP 4

[Smeckledorf]

Originally Posted by Kylon99

Ok, here's my theory for the Red Truth. I know not everyone agrees with me, but I felt like I need to re-iterate this, especially based on observations in EP5 and 6. I believe those episodes actually provided answers for us, not just hints.


First of all there are two types of Red.

- Red that applies to a certain game
- Red that applies to all games

Red can apply to only certain games because the surrounding text whether red, blue, white/black or gold, contextualizes them into certain games. The answer from EP6 shows us that red is dependent on context since many of the reds in EP6 are merely the word: "Acknowledged." Without the surrounding context of what was acknowledged, the red is useless. I believe this was a deliberate change in presentation of the red for EP6 to force us to face this issue.


As for Reds that apply to all games the question is, do they apply to all games now, but not new games? This appears to be heading down right now and I want to stop it with this reasoning.

EP5 showed us a red that was spoken in EP4 and applied in EP5. "No person would mistake Kinzo by sight." In fact this was the linchpin in Battler's battle so this wasn't just a minor scene but deliberate.

This shows us that there are some Reds (with a generalized context) that must apply to all future games. I would say at this point that all non-contexted reds must apply to the future, including things like, "There is not more than 17 people on this island."

But this conversation seems to be heading towards the idea that some of these reds could be broken in the future. The question is.. which reds? Because at least one was not able to be broken.

In order for us to be able to determine which reds can be broken, there must be some kind of clue or hint but I don't think one can be found. Can anyone find anything?


I propose that all non-contexted-into-certain-episode Reds must apply to all episodes, including future episodes.

Your post seems to be my exact thoughts on red truth.

Originally Posted by Judoh

IIRC it was vice versa in EPs 1 and 4 for his theory. He had to get around in short Kanon was the 9th victim. And in EP 1 it's just better to assume Shannon lost since she's in the FT.

Or was it EP2 where Kanon died?

Anwyay I think with this kind of theory though it would be hard to claim one person dies in the duel in every episode. So there is a loophole. In EP3 the duel could be a draw. And in EP4 they could be imprisoned before the duel could even take place kind of like how George didn't get a chance to propose to Shannon in EP 4

It would be dastardly if true... but what if Kanon was the 9th victim before the game? Or what if victim is defined as when they are chosen to be a twilight sacrifice?

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by Smeckledorf

It would be dastardly if true... but what if Kanon was the 9th victim before the game?

Not possible. That means that 8 people are victims before the game starts. And that would be something that applies to all games not just one. This red is about the murders for the people in Kyrie's group specifically.

there is also the fact that no corpses exist except those of characters who have appeared in the story

[Renall]

Yeah, it's fine if you want to argue it, but now you have to explain 8 more victims. Have fun with that.

[DaBackpack]

Sorry for such an abrupt change, but I came across something interesting while watching a friend read EP2:

When Beatrice talks to Shannon in the beginning of EP2 (when she makes the bruise on her hand) and offers her the deal, Beatrice herself never mentions George's name. Instead, she uses vague terms such as "your loved one" or the "one you love." This is rather odd, reading that part a second time; Beatrice does not seem to mention the obvious choice for Shannon's loved one. Is this another hint for Shannon falling in love with Battler, that is brought up in EP3?

The thing that bothers me is the narration, though; while the witch doesn't use any names, the narration does. Is the narration to be trusted when it uses George's name? If Shannon is the narrator for that part, then she could possibly just be in denial.

[m0h]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

The way I see it, if Shannon and Kanon are the same person then Kanon is only an alias of Shannon, and therefore "Kanon is dead" simply means "Shannon is dead". Alternatively "kanon died as a personality".

Anyway let's assume that "it's impossible to claim that someone who doesn't exist died". In that case using a red to claim what's impossible is the very definition of logic error.

The case you presented is a logic error.

I see it as "Kanon is a character created by Shannon who manifested as a person in the real world" . When Kanon dies it basically means that his form cannot be manifested anymore ( let's say that Shannon destroys the disguise: Kanon "dies". )

When Gohda said "at first it was Kanon, but then it wasn't Kanon anymore.."
could mean that Shannon acted like Kanon without the disguise... Simply Godha aknowledged that Shannon was Kanon.. but not literally Kanon. And Kanon is still "dead" but "brought back to life with magic". After all , Gohda can be an accomplice and not lying.

Also, when Shannon dies, her "visual form" dies, but she still can exist disguised as Kanon.

[Smeckledorf]

Originally Posted by Judoh

Not possible. That means that 8 people are victims before the game starts. And that would be something that applies to all games not just one. This red is about the murders for the people in Kyrie's group specifically.

And?

Originally Posted by Judoh

there is also the fact that no corpses exist except those of characters who have appeared in the story

Corpse may not be defined as a dead body. Who said they have to be on the island?

[Oliver]

Random minor observation:

Ep3. Maria receives a sealed envelope from Beatrice. It contains the standard First Letter. In the very next scene Kinzo throws out the ring. Ronove recovers it and brings it to Beatrice, who is still hanging out in the garden.

I'd say that if it's not evidence of scenes being out of order, it's a clear hint that the First Letter was prewritten long ago.

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by Smeckledorf

And?

You have to explain 8 other victims to just to make your one theory work. When all it would take for the witch to deny it is to say that 9th victim died at the specified time in Kyrie's group. it doesn't work.