[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[GuestSpeaker]

Oh sorry, what I meant is that the "she" part is referenced in the manga translations. Rather than the ambiguous terms of the VN, Will in the manga scanlation just asks Lion if she is Krauss's daughter, to which she says yes. This may however be refuted in a later section of the manga not yet translated.

[GuestSpeaker]

The part about her death comes from the Beatrice is dead part, but I guess that is flawed logic from the personality death side of things. Also I meant 'red', not 'read' at the end (darn German guy in his 9 hour explanation putting me off)

However, there is still the issue of how Ep 2 can have red truths.

[GreyZone]

No problem for me, since i am in the camp of "Ikuko=Yasu"

But if I had to give an explanation of "Ikuko=RandomStranger", I don't really have one aside that Tohya maybe remembered "parts" of what happened and these parts are what he uses as "red truths". Or maybe he was just subconsciously applying knox? That is just spaculation though.

[GuestSpeaker]

A lot of the red truths given don't really relate to Knox, so it is a little supportive of Ikuko = Yasu. I guess it all depends on how much faith you have in Ryu7 and his ability to construct internal logic in his stories. Probably another big factor is that since without red truths game 2 would have been just as hard to reason as game 1, and if he decided to write that there was only 1 message bottle written by Yasu (so that all others could be forgeries and have red truths) it would really alter the dynamic of what we suspect regarding the message bottles.

[GuestSpeaker]

Furthermore, in the manga of the 4th game, it is stated that no-one in the chain of closed rooms from Twilight 1 of the 3rd game committed suicide. In this a definition game with beatrice killing shannon or something? Or did Shannon play dead twice like a boss?

[GreyZone]

Originally Posted by GuestSpeaker

Furthermore, in the manga of the 4th game, it is stated that no-one in the chain of closed rooms from Twilight 1 of the 3rd game committed suicide. In this a definition game with beatrice killing shannon or something? Or did Shannon play dead twice like a boss?

From EP3:

There are five, one for each servant. (Used by Beatrice in Chapter 9: Skirmish. It refers to the master keys in this game.)
Furthermore, all of the doors and windows in the 6 rooms are normal. (The six rooms in this statement refers to the parlor, the chapel, the boiler room, the honored guest room, the waiting room, and the guest room.)
No device exists which can lock them without a key, such as an auto-lock.
6 people: Kinzo, Genji, Shannon, Kanon, Gohda, and Kumasawa are dead!
There is no one hiding in the six rooms!
The six people died instantly!
Only the victims are inside the rooms, and no other people exist inside the rooms. (Used by Ronove.)
The six people were not killed by traps (Used by Beatrice.)
None of the six people committed suicide!


From EP4TP:

All five master keys were discovered, each in the pocket of one of the servants! (This is referring to the first twilight of Episode 3.)
The individual keys were found inside envelopes alongside the corpses!
In short, all keys related to the linked closed rooms were locked inside the linked closed rooms!!
The keys cannot be returned from outside the room using the crack of the door, the crack of the window, vents or any place of the sort!!
All of them had wounds resembling gunshot wounds which became fatal!
It is impossible for the murder to have taken place from outside the room!!
I shall say more with the red! When the five other than Kinzo were murdered, the murderer was definitely in the same room!
I already proclaimed in red at the time that there were no suicides!!

[GuestSpeaker]

...So Beatrice killed Shannon and Kanon I guess...

[GreyZone]

yes, however she also did her double play dead move too. Those 2 don't contradict each other after all.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by GreyZone

yes, however she also did her double play dead move too. Those 2 don't contradict each other after all.

How exactly does killing your own personalities not count as suicide? It renders the word completely meaningless, just like "dead" is meaningless.

It creates this notion that Beatrice is a separate and independent person, which even in the stories she isn't even if she is a separate personality. If you cause Shannon/Kanon to cease existing, Beatrice murdered them; they didn't kill themselves and presumably would not choose to die if they could help it. If Shannon/Kanon voluntarily ceased existing, it's suicide. If their existence can be restored at any time (which appears to be the case per Ryukishi's intended explanation), they're not dead.

For the red not to trip all over itself, we end up having to accept the following things as true:

• Personalities are persons to satisfy "six people ... are dead."
• Personality-Persons can die and "be dead" to satisfy "... are dead."
• Personality-Persons can be "murdered" to satisfy "were murdered."
• Personality-Persons can murder each other, even if they share the same host.
• Personality-Murder is instantaneous to satisfy "The six people died instantly!"
• Two personalities of the same host can coexist during a Personality-Murder to satisfy "When the five other than Kinzo were murdered, the murderer was definitely in the same room!"
• Murdering one of your own personalities is not suicide, to satisfy "there were no suicides!"
• A murdered personality may nor may not be able to return at whim.

Immediately I can observe one major contradiction here: Personality-Murder is instantaneous, yet the murderer was in the same room as the victim. Thus, when Shannon and Kanon were killed, "Beatrice" had to coexist with them. Note that this isn't a contradiction itself if they're the same body; obviously the same body will be in the same room. The contradiction is that at least two personalities are active at the same time for this to work, and one must somehow take an affirmative step to "murder" the other.

I don't believe this is actually possible.

First, coexisting personalities is shaky to begin with, but let's accept that it's possible and Beatrice/Shannon/Kanon could be active simultaneously if they wished. Let's also accept that, at least in the story context, they are separate personalities with their own desires and interests. This is necessary because, and this is key, Shannon and Kanon cannot desire death. Not only is it out of character for both of them, but Beatrice cannot "murder" them if they want or agree to "die" by going dormant.

"Murder" by any definition is a willful act against the interest of another person in living, so even if we apply magic personality rules to it, Beatrice cannot murder Shannon and Kanon by a process like "OK, please turn off now." "Alright." That's not murder. It's suicide, or generously... something else that can't even be described with respect to distinct biological entities. Consensual deactivation, if you want to call it that.

This means that Beatrice had to first become active in order to initiate the desire to murder Gohda/Kumasawa/Genji and destroy/deactivate Shannon/Kanon. Then she must both remain active and in control (more on this below) and do... something... to Kanon and Shannon to force them to become inactive in such a manner that it rises to the level of "murder." Shannon and Kanon presumably don't want this, so we're left with tons of unanswered questions:

• Do Shannon/Kanon know Beatrice is malevolent?
• Do Shannon/Kanon know when Beatrice is active or inactive?
• Can Shannon/Kanon do anything to resist Beatrice becoming dominant?
• Once suppressed by Beatrice, how can Shannon/Kanon return?
• How can Beatrice suppress Shannon/Kanon against their wills?
• Who is in control during a struggle of multiple active personalities? What happens to the body they share?
• How did Shannon/Kanon become active in time to be murdered by Beatrice to set up the First Twilight? If they were active or in control before, they wouldn't allow Beatrice to set up the crime. If they weren't active, it means Beatrice had to render them active solely to kill them for the purposes of the red.

As I said above, Beatrice must be "in control." We have no idea how control over the host body works in this scenario. Normally, we've just assumed only one personality exists at a time and that personality controls the body. But per the ep3 reds, this absolutely cannot be true. It must be possible for more than one personality to exist at a time and there must be some governing ability to determine who gains and maintains control and when personalities can or cannot become active or dormant. Philosophically, of course, this suggests the existence of a higher-order regulating agent, which means that all the personality red is irrelevant and essentially does all apply to the same person, making it totally contradictory.

This has further disastrous implications for the Logic Error as it makes no sense why Kanon is temporarily nonexistent if he's permitted to coexist with Shannon while she's "in control," and worse, it amounts to philosophical cheating because there is no distinction whatsoever between "Shannon in control with Kanon active" and "Shannon in control with Kanon dormant." It's the same body with the same governing will, therefore it behaves in exactly the same manner and there is no rational reason why Kanon would ever be either dormant or active at any time. It's FUBAR.

[Drifloon]

Furthermore, in regards to Shannon and Kannon appearing in front the objective Erika in game 5, while I can't remember if she explicitly stated that they were both there, there is a possible explanation for this even if it did occur. That is simply that Lamba was not aware this could not occur. There was no logic error, as she made a game where they both could exist, but the reason Battler was able to usurp her position as GM is because he FULLY understood the game, and realised that Lamba was not fully aware of all facets of Beato's game. It is clear she knew about it by episode 8 (when she basically hinted it to us in Bern's game), however, by then she had become the impartial judge.

Thoughts?

If Lambda didn't know the answer to Beatrice's games, how was she so sure that Battler was wrong in the EP4 ????, and how was she able to give red truths about Beatrice's games in that scenario?

As for Renall's questions, I'll give the answers that I believe are true. Whether these would apply to real-life DID isn't really an issue to me, honestly; it makes for an interesting story, and I think we should allow Ryukishi the artistic license to portray DID a little differently to the real thing.

Do Shannon/Kanon know Beatrice is malevolent?

You should be able to tell this just from reading EP2. Kanon is resentful at Beatrice for allowing them to exist even though they can never achieve true love as long as they are only personalities. Shannon, on the other hand, is grateful that Beatrice allowed her to exist and to love, even though she can't achieve true love...however, when Beatrice starts the ceremony, Shannon becomes less compliant, and rebels against Beatrice, being 'murdered' as a result.

Do Shannon/Kanon know when Beatrice is active or inactive?

I think so, yes. There are a lot of hints that Shannon is able to talk to Kanon inside her head while she is the dominant personality. And there are lots of scenes showing the personalities talking to each other. I would assume that the other two personalities are 'watching' when one is active, and the three can communicate inside Yasu's head at all times.

Can Shannon/Kanon do anything to resist Beatrice becoming dominant?

The scenes where Shannon and Kanon fight against Beatrice (presumably for control of the body) would suggest so.

Once suppressed by Beatrice, how can Shannon/Kanon return?

If something happens that revives the particular emotions inside Yasu that Shannon and Kanon represent, then those personalities can revive. We see that Shannon was momentarily able to revive when she saw George in EP3, though Beatrice quickly suppressed that part of her and killed both George and Shannon. The same with Kanon seeing Jessica in that episode.

How can Beatrice suppress Shannon/Kanon against their wills?

Because the emotions inside Yasu that Beatrice represents have grown stronger than those that Shannon and Kanon represent, 'defeating'/'killing' them. She's finally able to become the dominant personality and defeat Shannon and Kanon when Battler returns to Rokkenjima in 1986 - if he hadn't, she wouldn't have gained the push she needed to beat them.

Who is in control during a struggle of multiple active personalities? What happens to the body they share?

I assume that said struggles take place in seconds, if that. Thought processes are much faster than physical actions, after all. So there isn't really any prolonged period where the body is in a struggle of multiple personalities. This is also why the deaths can be said to be 'instantaneous'.

How did Shannon/Kanon become active in time to be murdered by Beatrice to set up the First Twilight? If they were active or in control before, they wouldn't allow Beatrice to set up the crime. If they weren't active, it means Beatrice had to render them active solely to kill them for the purposes of the red.

They don't need to be 'active' for Beatrice to kill them. She resolved herself to kill the emotions of love that she felt for George and Jessica - the emotions that are personified by Shannon and Kanon - so that she could perform the ceremony without any obstacles. Thus, she put those parts of her to rest - 'put them to sleep', as the fantasy scene puts it - before the ceremony began. That's why she can say at that point that Shannon and Kanon are dead.

[Renall]

Thinking about it, I've come up with pretty much the only possible way the fiction-Beatrice's personality juggling can work and still somewhat conform to the red. This will get a bit lengthy and philosophical, mind you.

FIRST, we must accept a few premises. We accept of course that personalities can work this way. We accept that they have separate personhood because the red tells us they do. We accept that they share a single body. We accept that they may or may not be "active" and that they count as alive while doing so and dead while not doing so. We accept further that they can be "in control" of the body.

SECOND, there can be no overall governing intellect or "true" personality. This is because the actions of a superior governing intellect would inherit the culpability of its subparts, which contradicts red all over the place. Therefore, in a theoretical situation where none of the personalities are active, the body is essentially inert. It has no personality whatsoever and no mind. Needless to say, this is not how brains work. However, as it is a fictional construct, the host body doesn't have a "brain," just a "mind," and that mind happens to be modular and wholly owned by its constituent personalities.

THEREFORE, we can immediately say the following things about Shannon, Kanon, and Beatrice in the fictions:

• They are separate people who can only inhabit a single physical body.
• Any one or more of them may be active at one time.
• None of them is the "True Yasu." The "True Yasu" does not and cannot exist.

THIRD, personalities can and must coexist. This is textually supported by Shannon talking to Kanon, Beatrice talking to Shannon and Kanon, and potentially by Beatrice-as-originally-created talking to Beatrice-the-murderer in ep4. When a personality becomes active, deactivation of other personalities is not instantaneous (although the act of deactivation can be). In other words, until one personality chooses to deactivate all the others, it can cohabitate the body with any or all other personalities as it wishes.

FOURTH, I will note that in Japanese "murder" can simply mean "homicide," something I overlooked in the prior post. Therefore I will detach everything but the actus rea from the act and presume that when Meta-Beatrice asserts that personalities can be "murdered" and cannot "commit suicide" that the following things are what she means:

• A personality can be deactivated by the will of another personality.
• A personality cannot willfully deactivate itself.

There are several reasons why I conclude #2. The above situation I described with a mindless body seems absurd on its face. Therefore, I'd argue that as long as the host body is alive, at least one personality is always active. I would also argue that in order to deactivate a personality, some mental capacity must exist to conduct the deactivation. Thus, a personality cannot deactivate itself once it's the only active personality by anything short of destroying the body (which is suicide, and also murder of the other personalities).

It follows from this then that whenever a personality goes inactive, the still-active personality deactivated them. Thus, Shkanontrice is constantly murdering itself, although that's just as a procedural matter and shouldn't be taken to suggest psychopathic disregard among the personalities for each other. After all, they can come back (more on this later).

Indeed, this raises an interesting conundrum: If one personality (at least) must always be active, how do other personalities become active? There are really only two options, and both could happen:

• A personality voluntarily activates another.
• A personality awakens entirely at random or due to unconscious factors the active personality does not control.

Both are supported in text, and the latter makes the most sense as a means of avoiding the "body with no mind" issue as well as answering the question "Who is the body when it wakes up in the morning?" But both could be true at the same time.

THEREFORE, the way I see it functioning is that when multiple personalities are active at once, they either remain that way indefinitely or they may attempt to deactivate each other. Only one can be successful at this, obviously. The mechanics of how this actually happens, who wins, and who is in control of the body during periods of coexistence are unknown. If a personality wishes to go dormant, it either awakens another personality and has that personality deactivate it or waits for another personality to arise at random and then allows that personality to deactivate it. Why a personality wishes to become inactive is unknown, but clearly it happens, and it doesn't generally bother any of the others (Shannon and Kanon do not resent turning over occasional control of the body to each other, for example).

HOWEVER, if a personality can come back at random after being rendered inactive - and I believe it must be possible to do so to meet Ryukishi's expectations and to explain why Beatrice is able to commit evil even though Shannon and Kanon would prefer it if she didn't - I would certainly question why it is that we'd even consider them "dead." It seems more apt to call them "asleep." They cannot permanently die; you might argue that the personality "dies forever" when its purpose no longer exists but that isn't actually supported anywhere and is contradicted by Beatrice's shifting purpose. Yes, you can argue Shannon or Kanon will cease existing when one of them leaves the island, but this ignores two important distinctions:

• Even if one wanted to remain active, the body will have relocated itself, giving them nothing to do.
• The mere fact a personality is dormant and has been dormant for decades or even an entire lifetime does not mean that it could not come back to full existence, merely that it did not.

There is no textual evidence that a personality can actually permanently die as long as the body remains alive.

IN CONCLUSION, this excessively convoluted and nitpicky mental scheme is the only way I can see any of these reds being coherently reconciled while still remaining true. Shkanontrice in the stories is an empty shell of a human body with no past and no core which is cohabitated by binary and distinct existences which are capable of deactivating each other yet are also capable of arising at random and wresting control from whoever may have deactivated them by means never explained to the reader and, I would submit, probably never contemplated by the writer. Beatrice commits her murders by wresting control from Shannon and Kanon. However, there is a possibility of Shannon or Kanon returning (end of ep2, end of ep3) and apparently suppressing Beatrice herself.

Having said all that we still run into a huge problem: Only so many people can exist on the island at once. Either the red is referring exclusively to bodies and there is no problem (except that it's intellectually weaselly and dishonest), or it refers to personalities and only one personality can be active at a time, which contradicts the red. So it probably only refers to bodies... which means the number of "people" on Rokkenjima is, technically, unlimited for so long as those people can be invented to exist and designated as inhabitants of an existing body.

Originally Posted by Drifloon

You should be able to tell this just from reading EP2. Kanon is resentful at Beatrice for allowing them to exist even though they can never achieve true love as long as they are only personalities. Shannon, on the other hand, is grateful that Beatrice allowed her to exist and to love, even though she can't achieve true love...however, when Beatrice starts the ceremony, Shannon becomes less compliant, and rebels against Beatrice, being 'murdered' as a result.

This posits that Beatrice is the "master personality" and that she somehow always exists. Otherwise, she could be deactivated just as easily as Shannon and Kanon. If you want to elevate her to that position, just bear in mind it essentially creates a broken red scenario in which any actions ascribed to Shkanon are effectively the actions of Beatrice.

And if Beatrice is just some malevolent squatter who sits around in the mindscape of the mindless host body deactivating and reactivating Shannon and Kanon at will, we're given no explanation as to why she has this primacy of power and why she permits Shannon and Kanon to exist at all. Remember, they don't like her and they actively resist her at several points. There is no reason they would be kept in existence if Beatrice was able to get rid of them, which suggests to me that she cannot permanently get rid of them and thus, is not a dominant personality, just a very strong one who usually wins when two personalities fight over who is in control of the body.

I think so, yes. There are a lot of hints that Shannon is able to talk to Kanon inside her head while she is the dominant personality. And there are lots of scenes showing the personalities talking to each other. I would assume that the other two personalities are 'watching' when one is active, and the three can communicate inside Yasu's head at all times.

This is flatly contradicted by the Logic Error. Kanon must "cease existing" in some capacity. Thus, personalities can "cease existing" for some period of time, even if they can come back. If they are all active at all times, the red cannot work.

Same deal with ep3. At specific points, Shannon and Kanon do not exist in order for the red to say that they do not. Yet Kanon at least is shown to exist after that point, so at the very least he was nonexistent for some period of time and returned to existence later.

If something happens that revives the particular emotions inside Yasu that Shannon and Kanon represent, then those personalities can revive. We see that Shannon was momentarily able to revive when she saw George in EP3, though Beatrice quickly suppressed that part of her and killed both George and Shannon. The same with Kanon seeing Jessica in that episode.

Then Beatrice isn't fully in control, and it's plausible to believe she could be suppressed by Shannon and Kanon. Is that not so? Indeed, it at least appears that this sometimes happens. Beatrice probably didn't intend to kill herself in ep2 without killing Rosa, Maria, Beatrice, and possibly Genji; however, if Shannon took control she might very well choose to destroy the body to prevent Beatrice from killing anyone else with it. Similarly, Beatrice has no reason to show Jessica any kindness at the end of ep3, but Kanon does, which suggests Kanon is in control and Beatrice has been defeated somehow.

Because the emotions inside Yasu that Beatrice represents have grown stronger than those that Shannon and Kanon represent, 'defeating'/'killing' them. She's finally able to become the dominant personality and defeat Shannon and Kanon when Battler returns to Rokkenjima in 1986 - if he hadn't, she wouldn't have gained the push she needed to beat them.

...

They don't need to be 'active' for Beatrice to kill them. She resolved herself to kill the emotions of love that she felt for George and Jessica - the emotions that are personified by Shannon and Kanon - so that she could perform the ceremony without any obstacles. Thus, she put those parts of her to rest - 'put them to sleep', as the fantasy scene puts it - before the ceremony began. That's why she can say at that point that Shannon and Kanon are dead.

And here you've accidentally walked into one of the bigger problems with the whole scenario. Namely, why did Beatrice bother to kill Shannon and Kanon in a manner conforming to the ep3 red text, which she shouldn't even be aware exists (or will exist)? If Beatrice resolves to her actions to the point of gaining dominance as a personality and control over the body, she has effectively deactivated Shannon and Kanon and may as well actually deactivate them, as their existence is nothing more than a distraction. Yet the red implies that they were "killed" (deactivated) in the linked rooms. It doesn't specifically say that, but it's not a clean case where you can read it and find no awkwardness if you argue that, say, she killed both of them in the Servant's Room on the morning of the 4th.

In other words, Beatrice had control of the body and had the power or conviction necessary to suppress Shannon and Kanon. To substitute for them as a body double trick to fool the parents does not require the personalities of Shannon or Kanon be active. Why then would she even bother keeping them active, let alone killing them in a manner which would allow Meta-Beatrice's red text construct to be functional?

The whole thing is nonsense on a fundamental level. You can only sort of reconcile by introducing the notion that Beatrice can't get rid of Shannon and Kanon.

[Drifloon]

This posits that Beatrice is the "master personality" and that she somehow always exists. Otherwise, she could be deactivated just as easily as Shannon and Kanon. If you want to elevate her to that position, just bear in mind it essentially creates a broken red scenario in which any actions ascribed to Shkanon are effectively the actions of Beatrice.

I think that all three personalities 'always exist', inside Yasu's head. But only one exists at a time as far as any outside observers are concerned, since the other two personalities can't influence anything while they're inactive.

I only see her as the 'master personality' in the sense that she created the other two personalities as a way of displacing emotions that she herself didn't want (in Shannon's case, the desire to be a servant; in Kanon's case, her love for Jessica). She can't DESTROY those emotions - or not until October 1986 when Battler's return gives her the power to more or less completely suppress them - she can only displace them. So even though she created Shannon and Kanon, she can't destroy them. Or if she did, it wouldn't accomplish anything, since the emotions would just go to her single personality and she'd still be torn between three conflicting desires...which would inevitably jut lead to her soul splitting again anyway.

What Kanon is angry at is that Beatrice is allowing him (a representation of her love for Jessica) to exist, yet won't decide firmly one way or the other - to either allow him to gain total control of the body and be with Jessica as he desires, or to get rid of him so that he doesn't have to live as 'furniture' (an incomplete soul). He even said he was actually looking forward to the day Beatrice would have the strength to completely reject him!

If you still think this idea contradicts some red somewhere, please explain the specifics.

This is flatly contradicted by the Logic Error. Kanon must "cease existing" in some capacity. Thus, personalities can "cease existing" for some period of time, even if they can come back. If they are all active at all times, the red cannot work.

In the particular scenario of the logic error, the love duel heavily implies that Shannon has beaten the other two personalities and become completely dominant. So I would argue that Kanon does not exist any more, and nor does Beatrice. Maybe, as with the EP3 scenario, Shannon hasn't completely erased them as much as she thinks she has - in other words, perhaps they will revive unexpectedly when Shannon catches sight of Jessica or Battler - but at that point in time, they certainly are dead.

Same deal with ep3. At specific points, Shannon and Kanon do not exist in order for the red to say that they do not. Yet Kanon at least is shown to exist after that point, so at the very least he was nonexistent for some period of time and returned to existence later.

Yes, they do not exist after Beatrice resolves herself to carry out the ceremony without regard to those emotions. But then they revive themselves after she sees George and Jessica, as those emotions that she had 'killed' are suddenly revived.

Then Beatrice isn't fully in control, and it's plausible to believe she could be suppressed by Shannon and Kanon. Is that not so? Indeed, it at least appears that this sometimes happens. Beatrice probably didn't intend to kill herself in ep2 without killing Rosa, Maria, Beatrice, and possibly Genji; however, if Shannon took control she might very well choose to destroy the body to prevent Beatrice from killing anyone else with it. Similarly, Beatrice has no reason to show Jessica any kindness at the end of ep3, but Kanon does, which suggests Kanon is in control and Beatrice has been defeated somehow.

Quite so. I don't think I ever said otherwise. (Of course, it's not like Kanon won against Beatrice permanently - he managed to regain control for a while, but Beatrice won out in the end. Otherwise Kanon would have disarmed the bomb and stopped Jessica from dying.)

And here you've accidentally walked into one of the bigger problems with the whole scenario. Namely, why did Beatrice bother to kill Shannon and Kanon in a manner conforming to the ep3 red text, which she shouldn't even be aware exists (or will exist)? If Beatrice resolves to her actions to the point of gaining dominance as a personality and control over the body, she has effectively deactivated Shannon and Kanon and may as well actually deactivate them, as their existence is nothing more than a distraction.

Yes, and she HAS done that. Where did I suggest that she hadn't? That it allows Beatrice to say that they are dead in red is just a side effect, it's not intentional.

Yet the red implies that they were "killed" (deactivated) in the linked rooms. It doesn't specifically say that, but it's not a clean case where you can read it and find no awkwardness if you argue that, say, she killed both of them in the Servant's Room on the morning of the 4th.

I'm really not seeing this. Could you point out which reds imply that they were killed in the linked rooms? It would become absurd if you claimed that they were.

In other words, Beatrice had control of the body and had the power or conviction necessary to suppress Shannon and Kanon. To substitute for them as a body double trick to fool the parents does not require the personalities of Shannon or Kanon be active. Why then would she even bother keeping them active

I really don't know what you're even talking about any more. Is this about the specific EP3 scenario - which I believe I've already explained - or just in general? She DIDN'T "keep them active" after their deaths in EP3 - they revived later of their own will, but they had been dead/asleep until that time. And in general, before their deaths, of course Shannon and Kanon were kept alive - I've already explained why it was necessary for Beatrice to do that.

let alone killing them in a manner which would allow Meta-Beatrice's red text construct to be functional?

Again, I don't see how the fact that they were killed in a way that lets Beatrice proclaim their deaths in red somehow implies that they were killed SO THAT Beatrice could proclaim their deaths in red.

The whole thing is nonsense on a fundamental level. You can only sort of reconcile by introducing the notion that Beatrice can't get rid of Shannon and Kanon.

Yes. She probably can never PERMANENTLY get rid of them, or at least it's very difficult for her. Perhaps if she defeated both of them in the love duel and then left the island forever, never seeing George or Jessica again. But you're right, the potential for them to revive would still be there, though I still don't see why that means they're not dead. Their death was never specified as permanent.

[UsagiTenpura]

Originally Posted by ndqanh_vn

Well, the problem I have with it is not "people having it harder", because different people deals with the same stuff in different ways. Some took it harder than the others. So I am fine with that. The problem is, the logic of the whydunnit is something very hard to follow.

It is not like Higurashi characters are more acceptable because even their life are more messy, they did not do something so messed up as anyone in Umineko. The thing is, their logic is somewhat believable. For example, Keichi in Curse-Killing Arc. His action is a bit over the top, but we could see the logic in his mind. However twisted it is, it is believable that under that circumstances, certain people would behave similarly. And he did not jump down the well straight away, but the story presents us that he gradually lost his sanity. Even if you will not agree with him (you are not supposed to do anyways), you understand his reason, and find it sympathetic at some degree.

Umineko repeated the theme of "love" a lot of time, but the thing is...well, it is too hard to follow the jump in character's inner logic. There're none of them, even Yasu, would make a believable transition to a mass murderer. So even now I tend to think the whole Rockenjima incident is a big tragic accident. It is easier to swallow for me, but it will also raise a lot of question for other readers.

Well you said this much better then I could. I fully agree.
The most important part remains that the "jump" from "inner drama" to "outer mass-murdering with crazy witch decorations" is not something I buy for any of the Umineko cast. It doesn't help that so far the majority of theories I read concerning why dunnits posit character X as "truly evil" which to me means rejecting the why dunnit. They're evil, why bother to look further?

I don't consider "prime" and "Ange's world" to be the same thing at all, but yeah I think in Ange's world that's right, it was an accident. I made a long post at one point as of why it was the only conclusion for Ange's world that was supported by anything at all. To resume the most major points : It's what the official investigation said, and the only ones who think/claim it's murder are the Witchhunters which I compared to the conspiracy theorists of our own world.

P.S.
Well, by the ways, I just finished 1q84 by Haruki Murakami. The characters did some thing similar to Keichi's action in Curse Killing Arc. But by now I have to say I prefer Ryukishi's execution of Keichi's mental state than Haruki Murakami, a Nobel finalists. It's not related at all to the discussion. Just saying.

Interesting comparison. Yeah, that makes a large point still, as Ryuukishi clearly proved he can do interesting backstory/descent into mass-murdering. It's not that he couldn't or failed, but on purpose chose not to.
At least to me it can't make any other sense then this.


Edit: Concerning Shannon, Kanon, etcs.... Even Beatrices

Something I was thinking about... Well I've been considering for quite a long time now that "witches are the incarnation of your passion for x thing" (from what Battler said about witches and Maria in arc 1). Well I moved this a bit further to "witches are the incarnation of our relation with x thing" (and not necessarily a passion). This seems to work even better. I'm not going to deal with Featherine as I think she represents something more "complete" then the rest of the witches...

But LD would be the incarnation of Ryuukishi's relation with his own works.
Bernkastel the incarnation of our relation with Ryuukishi's works.
Beatrice and Battler are probably similar, but on a lower level (writer of the gameboard/meant reader of the gameboard).
... And well Kanon and Shannon are a bit obvious to be the incarnations of the relation between Yasu with George/Jessica.

So if I follow this... having Beatrice killing both Shannon and Kanon during the arcs makes perfect meta-sense.
She's breaking up with Jessica and Kanon in order to be with Battler. So she takes the innitiative and action of breaking a said relationship, which takes the shape of Shannon/Kanon dying. No suicide there, nor any other personalities, and yet they aren't simply roles either. It also explains very easily how can they be revived. A relationship can die.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Drifloon

I think that all three personalities 'always exist', inside Yasu's head. But only one exists at a time as far as any outside observers are concerned, since the other two personalities can't influence anything while they're inactive.

I only see her as the 'master personality' in the sense that she created the other two personalities as a way of displacing emotions that she herself didn't want (in Shannon's case, the desire to be a servant; in Kanon's case, her love for Jessica). She can't DESTROY those emotions - or not until October 1986 when Battler's return gives her the power to more or less completely suppress them - she can only displace them. So even though she created Shannon and Kanon, she can't destroy them. Or if she did, it wouldn't accomplish anything, since the emotions would just go to her single personality and she'd still be torn between three conflicting desires...which would inevitably jut lead to her soul splitting again anyway.

Yasu does not exist in the stories she or others wrote.

In the particular scenario of the logic error, the love duel heavily implies that Shannon has beaten the other two personalities and become completely dominant. So I would argue that Kanon does not exist any more, and nor does Beatrice. Maybe, as with the EP3 scenario, Shannon hasn't completely erased them as much as she thinks she has - in other words, perhaps they will revive unexpectedly when Shannon catches sight of Jessica or Battler - but at that point in time, they certainly are dead.

Then what possible reason does Shannon have for allowing Kanon to come back, and where does Kanon thereafter go?

Quite so. I don't think I ever said otherwise. (Of course, it's not like Kanon won against Beatrice permanently - he managed to regain control for a while, but Beatrice won out in the end. Otherwise Kanon would have disarmed the bomb and stopped Jessica from dying.)

We can't prove that. It's possible that Kanon never intended to disarm it, or didn't know, or couldn't (due to lack of time or any number of other factors).

Yes, and she HAS done that. Where did I suggest that she hadn't? That it allows Beatrice to say that they are dead in red is just a side effect, it's not intentional.

Completely missing the point of the objection. What difference is it to Beatrice if Shannon and Kanon are merely not in control, but "active," or forced into becoming "inactive?" Especially since she must know she cannot render them both permanently inactive. No reason is ever given to explain her internal thought processes as culprit.

I'm really not seeing this. Could you point out which reds imply that they were killed in the linked rooms? It would become absurd if you claimed that they were.

The EP4 information makes the implication through a series of statements that the red is talking about "the rooms in which the bodies and keys were discovered." It's clear that the claim is being advanced that statements like "It is impossible for the murder to have taken place from outside the room!" are referring to specific rooms and not just to "any old room." The "murderer was in the same room" statement isn't specific in that fashion, but the ones leading up to it are. You can make the argument that Ryukishi never intended it to specifically mean "the rooms where the bodies were located," but it's very obvious that he did not cleanly create that interpretation, at least per English wording. Even if he did, there's no particularly clear reason why it was necessary for Shannon and Kanon to be dead at that particular moment, other than to satisfy the red. Beatrice doesn't have to suppress them if she doesn't feel like it, and we don't have any good reason why or when she feels the need to do stuff like that and how she determines it's time.

If you were to posit that Shannon and Kanon didn't die, the red about the victims wouldn't even apply to them and it wouldn't matter. However, they are explicitly referred to as persons and explicitly stated to have died. Ryukishi dug his own grave on this one.

I really don't know what you're even talking about any more. Is this about the specific EP3 scenario - which I believe I've already explained - or just in general? She DIDN'T "keep them active" after their deaths in EP3 - they revived later of their own will, but they had been dead/asleep until that time. And in general, before their deaths, of course Shannon and Kanon were kept alive - I've already explained why it was necessary for Beatrice to do that.

They don't help her in any way. If she thinks suppressing them will be useful to her, we don't get any explanation as to why she thinks that. If she thinks that it's pointless to put them to sleep because she can't actually get rid of them, she wouldn't bother. She clearly does suppress them, but we have no idea how or why. The only apparent explanation in ep3 is so that they can be declared dead in red - a completely meaningless statement, philosophically - which is little more than cheating misdirection.

Yes. She probably can never PERMANENTLY get rid of them, or at least it's very difficult for her. Perhaps if she defeated both of them in the love duel and then left the island forever, never seeing George or Jessica again. But you're right, the potential for them to revive would still be there, though I still don't see why that means they're not dead. Their death was never specified as permanent.

How do you murder something that potentially isn't actually dead? How do you even get away with calling it dead?

Ryukishi is linguistically cheating. Something that can come back at any time isn't "dead" and it doesn't cease existing just because it's "inactive." And it certainly cannot be "murdered."

Originally Posted by Drifloon

Again, I don't see how the fact that they were killed in a way that lets Beatrice proclaim their deaths in red somehow implies that they were killed SO THAT Beatrice could proclaim their deaths in red.

Because people do not do incredibly specific and completely meaningless things for no apparent reason just to satisfy some character they don't even know's logic puzzles.

Beatrice need only create the impression of Shannon and Kanon dying, as no observer (story character or reader) can apprehend the mental state of the host body to ascertain whether Kanon and Shannon still exist in it. And she has no reason either to suppress them at all (if she's dominant, she can leave them as voices in her head powerless to do anything about her actions) or no reason to believe there is any value in suppressing them at the particular time and place they're supposed to "die" (because it isn't of any use to her or to the people she wants to find the setup, and she isn't aware the Meta-World exists).

I get the sense you do not understand what I'm driving at. I'm showing perhaps the only workable model by which Magical DID can work for the Shkanontrice Construct and remain compliant with red text, and also demonstrating that it's a crock of shit even when it's functional because it doesn't define itself in accordance with its own internal logic.

[UsagiTenpura]

Something else Ive been wondering about, but no idea where it really leads...

We're shown that in the "world of 1998+", only two people survived from Rokkenjima: Battler and Eva.
It turns out that both solved the epitaph during one arc. So I've been just wondering if there isn't some sort of weird relationship between the two. It does feel like it was their rewards for solving it, a reward that ruined them...
... which would remain sorta along the themes of Yasu, who seems just like Kinzo to have been ruined (mentally/emotionally) over becoming the head.

[GreyZone]

If you say it like that, then as you said Yasuda also solved the Epitaph (excluding Erika, as she probably just died after falling out of her ship). Perhaps that can make Ikuko=Yasu argument even stronger.
But yes, everyone who wore that ring, be it physically or in Meta, really doesn't have an easy life.

Anyway, back to topic:
Why can't we just see Shanon and Kanon as... "Personas"? They are non-existent to Yasuda herself. They are just "masks" and these "masks" themselves have no real meaning, however of course they also are symbols for the love to Jessica and to George. Yasuda also sees all her actions as caused by herself, and not "by Kanon" or "by Shanon" as they are just the medium. That way there are no "personalities that take over" or anything like that. She just plays her role and if she thinks it is necessary, she just changes the role.
She is an actor.

[Renall]

We can't do that because the red text doesn't allow us to do that. It'd be nice to just ignore them or say they're just roles being acted by an actor, but we're told that Shannon and Kanon are "persons" and that they have distinct and separate properties from each other and from their host.

If we didn't have that, we could very easily just argue that it's a single actor putting forth his/her various roles. I'd much prefer that. But it doesn't seem to be what Ryukishi was driving at.

[GreyZone]

Then we have a problem. We still didn't figure out Shkanontrice correctly. I remember when most of us dismissed, that she really had MPD, however with what you said there, we also cannot claim that she has full control at every given time... then what now?

We are stuck between those two possibilities at the moment... so only something "inbetween" is possible...

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by RandomAvatarFan

It still doesn't make sense though, because if it was a show being put on for Battler, wouldn't Rosa had tried to make sure that he was watching. I haven't read it in a while, but I didn't quite get the feeling that it was all an act from that scene. Why didn't she check to make sure there were more witness's and that Battler was actually focused and awake when she was getting the key out?

I think we've to draw a line.

The games are actually tales so everything is controlled by the gamemaster.
To make the tale logic the pieces were informed by other pieces that they had to do certain things but this is just to make the logic of the tale work. In the game the fact that Battler saw Rosa is coincidental, the same as the fact George didn't try to enter and see Shannon's body in EP 1.

However what in the game is coincidental was purposely controlled by the Gamemaster.

Very likely the games are unsolvable for PieceBattler who has no access to the red but they're solvable for MetaBattler and the fact that he saw Rosa is supposed to be a hint for him, not for PieceBattler, something the gamemaster had to put in the tale.

In the tale however this fact is just a coincidence. PieceRosa couldn't be sure if Battler was awake and actually saw her and his brain registred the info (he could have been so sleepy even if he had his eyes open he didn't really realize what was going on). Though her actions might have been guided by orders that she received from PieceBeatrice she might not know which consequences they're supposed to have so to her the fact that Battler saw her it's completely random.

MetaBeatrice however purposely moved her piece so that she had to be viewed.

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

Well I'm actually just going by what people have been saying on this very board.
Nearly everytime anyone came up/comes up with a theory of a culprit and/or their why dunnit, what didn't pass was exactly that.
"Seen before, seen people having it harder" etc. It remains true.

I'm starting to think that the motive between PieceBeato's actions and MetaBeato's actions are different and we're called to guess both.

PieceBeato kills out of revenge, though she'd like Battler (or someone else) to stop her.
MetaBeato writes a PieceBeato killing out of revenge because she'd like for Battler to figure out why she's showing him such tale.

It seems in Our confession the characters are depicted in an unsympathetic manner and accepting things way too easily. It's possible the same applied to PieceBeato. The gamemaster wrote her like a vengeful person and she went for the ride.

The game however more than between PieceBattler and PieceBeato is between MetaBattler and MetaBeato. So I think we've 2 motives, one for the meta and one for the game.

Originally Posted by ndqanh_vn

Well, the problem I have with it is not "people having it harder", because different people deals with the same stuff in different ways. Some took it harder than the others. So I am fine with that. The problem is, the logic of the whydunnit is something very hard to follow.

It is not like Higurashi characters are more acceptable because even their life are more messy, they did not do something so messed up as anyone in Umineko. The thing is, their logic is somewhat believable.

...

Umineko repeated the theme of "love" a lot of time, but the thing is...well, it is too hard to follow the jump in character's inner logic. There're none of them, even Yasu, would make a believable transition to a mass murderer. So even now I tend to think the whole Rockenjima incident is a big tragic accident. It is easier to swallow for me, but it will also raise a lot of question for other readers.

*nods* I thought the same though more than with Keiichi I compare Beato with Shion. In Higurashi it's clearly explained what she went through without sugarcoating it or hiding it so even if you can even think she's nut, her actions can be understood. What Umineko lacked was a careful explanation of Beato's thoughts that would let us understand why she did it.
I was particularly annoyed, for example, that info about her 'body unable to love' where given solely in EP 7 Teaparty.
It likely had a HUGE part in explaining her mindset but to guess it is nearly impossible.

So she fell from a cliff. But hey, even though as a child she was sickly, she looks perfectly fine now. The best one would think is bone damage or head damage (which would give her a chance to be insane for reasons beyond her control), not organ damage, not that specific organ damage.

Originally Posted by GuestSpeaker

2. The crimes still being committed even if Lion exists reek of non-Yasu culprit theory, however since Shannon and Kanon couldn't exist at the same time but Shannon and Lion could, episode 7 is basically crock in that regards anyway.

Well, I always thought of that as being a hint that PrimeYasu didn't kill anyone though the episode crammed together the world with Lion and the world without Lion. In fact, although everyone aknowledge Lion's existence apart from Shannon and Kanon, when the cousins talk to Will the stories they tell imply that Lion didn't exist in their world. At all.

Originally Posted by GuestSpeaker

3. How can Ep 2 contain red truths? If it were truly written by Yasu and she (according to the currently translated manga sections) was dead, there would be no way the truth could be read. Someone knew the answers to all later forgeries, but no-one should have known the answers to the second one for sure.....

There are 2 theories.
The first is that Ikuko=Yasu
The second is that Ep 2 is a forgery of a forgery. In short something like this: Toya read the second message in the bottle and rielaborated it in his mind as a game presented to Battler by Beatrice. This would make Battler and Beatrice two fantasy creatures in his mind where Beato is the representation of who proposed the challenge/mystery and Battler of the part of him who hadn't solved it yet. So while Beato has all the info Battler doesn't.
Beato having all the info might be explained with either the original message containing what will later become the red truth or his own rielaboration being made to be solvable.
However there's no info about the messages being solvable and for Toya to create a YasuCulprit rielaboration without aid would be necessary for him to remember/know more than what he likely could remember/know. So I tend to think that for the games to be a rielaboration it's still needed that Ikuko=Yasu so she could give Toya some tips that would influence his rielaboration.

Originally Posted by GuestSpeaker

Furthermore, in regards to Shannon and Kannon appearing in front the objective Erika in game 5, while I can't remember if she explicitly stated that they were both there, there is a possible explanation for this even if it did occur. That is simply that Lamba was not aware this could not occur. There was no logic error, as she made a game where they both could exist, but the reason Battler was able to usurp her position as GM is because he FULLY understood the game, and realised that Lamba was not fully aware of all facets of Beato's game. It is clear she knew about it by episode 8 (when she basically hinted it to us in Bern's game), however, by then she had become the impartial judge.

Thoughts?

It was implied somewhere that Lambda knew the truth behind Beato's game and that's also pretty logic otherwise she couldn't give Battler hints about it, just build up another game who might have pointed to a completely different culprit (for example she could have created a Genji culprit theory in which Genji was the true father of Beato 2's child and wanted revenge against Natsuhi and the Ushiromiya for what was done to his daughter. He waited Kinzo's death because Kinzo actually never had sex with Beato 2 and was his friend. As he saw how Natsuhi hid Kinzo's death and how the siblings were all caring only to put their hands on Kinzo's gold he lost it and went for revenge).

Originally Posted by Renall

How exactly does killing your own personalities not count as suicide? It renders the word completely meaningless, just like "dead" is meaningless.

I've always found it a pretty weak point in Umineko though there's something that dawned on me reading Our Confession and it's Shannon being willing to comply with Beato's requests. So I wonder if the scenes in which she actually fought this were lying about this as well. So Shannon actually let Beato kill her or turn her off in a sort of 'I'm never again going to pretend to be Shannon' way.
This, more than a personality's death though would be a character's death.
Yasu wouldn't play anymore the role of Shannon so Shannon is dead... at least that's what Yasu thinks. However, should she change her mind, she could play it again and resurrect her.

It becomes similar to how truth from the future can overwrite truths of the past.

Yasu is sure/determinated she won't play Shannon ever again so Shannon is dead.
She changes her mind and voilà, Shannon is alive again.

I bet she would have been able to say in red that in EP 3 Shannon was alive when George went to her... though she could have also merely said that she wasn't. The happy reunion was fantasy, when George reached who he believed was Shannon found Yasu who shoot him.

Though I doubt Beato will ever give a red that will say Shannon didn't resurrect because this would deny her witch version of the story.

[Renall]

Problem is that letting somebody who shares your body temporarily deactivate you (but not to the point that you couldn't potentially reawaken later) just doesn't obey the same linguistic constructs as would apply to independent biological entities engaging in murder or suicide or whatever you want to call it.

Using biological terms to describe disembodied minds of varying degrees of mental activation who are effectively immortal so long as their host construct is biologically alive is cheating, in that it's trying to use terms commonly understood to apply to biological agents and then extrapolating them to refer to things which are not structured that way. You can't have it both ways like that.

A good example of the cheapness of saying something is "dead" or "nonexistent" would be an electrical circuit. When a circuit is off, the circuit is left incomplete or "broken" by means of the switch, such that the circuit isn't intact and current isn't flowing. When the circuit is switched on, it's complete and current flows.

Yet we wouldn't say an electrical circuit is "dead" when it's off. It's an "incomplete" or "broken" circuit, but in this context "broken" doesn't mean the same thing we might use in other cases. A broken circuit isn't non-functional; in fact, if it's broken because it's supposed to be off most of the time, it's working entirely correctly. We also wouldn't say the circuit "doesn't exist" just because it's off, incomplete, and not presently operating to run current. The lightbulb in your room doesn't cease to exist just because it's switched off. We don't say a bulb is "dead" until the entire apparatus stops working as it should. A "switched off" light is not "dead." A burned-out bulb is.

And that's kind of the problem I see with Shkanontrice as it's apparently supposed to be viewed according to Ryukishi. Really, Beatrice is not "burning out" Shannon and Kanon's bulbs. She's just switching them off. They didn't go anywhere, they're just not active. This requires a whole new vocabulary to explain, as it isn't the normal context in which words like "dead" and "murdered" would be used. If you're going to co-opt those terms, you have to explain them. Ryukishi didn't do this because explaining new terms would draw attention to the fact that Shannon and Kanon are not being spoken of in the same context as biological entities. That's rather the point: It's cheating because to be honest would not allow the reader to be deceived properly.