AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > Anime Discussion > Older Series > Retired > Umineko

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2009-06-30, 13:46   Link #2141
lovelysan
Umineko and Mabinogi fan~
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Florida
Age: 33
Originally in my above theory, I had Jessica listed as 2nd, George as 3rd and so on. But then I remembered the siblings, and then I just wasn't sure about the specifics (concerning sucession) anymore...

So uh, I dunno.
lovelysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-30, 14:11   Link #2142
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
This is how I'd put things:

"is dead": The person is dead at least as of the time of the red announcement. Thus "Kinzo is dead" is equivalent to "Kanon is dead" even if Kanon died just now and Kinzo's been dead a year. This doesn't preclude any reason for death, like accidents or natural causes, unless Beatrice adds more to it.

"killed": A human being (or possibly an animal) caused the death of the person by some affirmative act. The important thing here is they didn't necessarily have to intend to do it, and they didn't necessarily have to mean for the person to die. Of course, it also encompasses intentional killings.

"murder": A human being killed the person intentionally and with the desire that the person die. There are other legalese definitions of murder but I think this is the one Beatrice means. If a person was murdered, note, their death cannot be an accident or unintended. If Kumasawa tripped and fell down the stairs, she cannot have been murdered; if Kumasawa was pushed down the stairs, it may not be murder (if it was a bump or something); if someone decided to kill Kumasawa by pushing her down the stairs, THAT is murder.

Note that a consequence of this is that "x did not commit murder!" does not mean "x did not kill anyone!" It just means they didn't kill anybody intentionally.

Oh, and I wouldn't personally define a self-defense killing as "murder." However, Beatrice might. I'm not sure.
I'm not sure about your definition of "killed". I think natural events should be included. It is perfectly okay to say that a person has been killed by a thunder or by a landslide. If we accept your definition the last Beatrice's riddle cannot be explained with anything but humans and animals.


Quote:
Originally Posted by lovelysan View Post
I notice that in regards to motives, a lot of you are being too "easy" on the kids. This is mostly due to us knowing their personalities more, but still.....

POTENTIAL motives: (by "potential" I mean, if we didn't know this kids personally, but more as possibilites if we just know "situations.")

George: 6th in line to be the head. He would benifit the most (probably)from the death of both Krauss and Jessica. Deaths of Eva, Rudolph and Rosa would also be benificial towards succession. May hold a grudge against his mother for opposing his relationship with Shannon.***

Jessica: Resents her parents (in a sort of normal teenage way though.) 5th in line to be head. She would directly benefit if Krauss, Eva, Rudolph and Rosa died.
HOWEVER- She also doesn't have much interest in becoming head of the family in all. In that case, she would sort of benifit for a dissolution of the "Ushiromia family" in general.

Battler: Holds a grudge against his father for Asumu's death. Kyrie is the woman his father was having an affair with while still married to his mother (probably.) So "revenge" is a motive.
Is the seventh in line to be family head. So he would benifit from the deaths of George, Jessica and all of the parents. (but at that point, if only those people died, he would be suspicious as all get out XD....)

Maria: (the only one who is really "too young" to be a mastermind ^^; .) Holds grudge against mother. All the other parents tend laugh at her.
Oh, but if someone else wanted her to be heir, that person would need to kill the parents, and the other cousins (Including Ange? Technically, Ange is higher ranked than Maria.....)



**** A note about George.
.... okay, more like a crazy ass theory....


Spoiler for Crazy theory for epi I fun fun time 8D .:
Even crazier theory about George:
-George gives the ring to Shannon
-Eva sees him and goes berserk
-George kills Eva, but there are witness so George needs to kill them all
-However at this point George knows that the police would find him so he needs to create an "unfortunate incident" to cover everything up.
-Of course everyone must die for that".
-So George kills everyone but then he says: where's Kanon?!
-and so Shannon says: "It's me I'm actually Kanon, I like to dress in drag!"
-George kills Kanon and then he kills himself
-When the seagulls cry no one is left alive

Jokes apart I think there is a possibility that Jessica and Maria are the masterminds of this tragedy at least partially, but the fully explain I'd have to think they got the servants in it as accomplices. Jessica being Beatrice can explain a lot of things about the mariage sorciere.

On semantics. I agree with everyone that if we start using semantic as way to destroy the red truth then we are back to square one without any ground to create our theory from. However

-I am the Golden Witch Beatrice. And I opened this game in order to fight with Ushiromiya Kinzo's grandson, Ushiromiya Battler.
-This is my Golden Land. A world where any magic other than my own definitely cannot exist.
-With my magic, Sakutarou could not be revived.


If we don't start talking about semantics we can give up to the witch already.
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-30, 15:21   Link #2143
Ttak
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Brazil
Maybe there's a difference between a red truth for the normal world and one for the meta-world. Those you pointed would only apply to the meta-world, because of all the "magic" and stuff there (a guy supposed to be dead is playing chess with a thousand year-old witch and eating cakes prepared by a demon butler).
Ttak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-30, 15:23   Link #2144
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
from the anti-fantasy perspective the meta-world doesn't exist. Acknowledging its existence is like acknowledging the existence of witches. Therefore you can't accept a red "truth" that is valid for a world that doesn't exist.
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-30, 15:25   Link #2145
Nih
Member
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Age: 29
True enough, Ryukishi did say semantics were a focus, however, it's probably safe to assume that if Beato says something like there are no more than three culprits responsible then it's true. I mean let's not get ideas here

Last edited by Nih; 2010-04-07 at 18:11. Reason: less vague
Nih is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-30, 15:27   Link #2146
Kitsu
The unlucky one
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hiding
Know I could ask: What is a culprit? xDD
__________________
Thanks for the Signature, Vandakiara
Kitsu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-30, 15:28   Link #2147
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
yeah probably but you know what. If in Ep3 we would have been shoved in our face:

Battler Ushiromiya is born from Asumu Ushiromiya

Pretty much everyone would say that this is 100% proof of the fact that Battler is Asumu's son.

If someone then would say that maybe there is another Battler Ushiromiya, everyone would tell him to shut up and not state ridiculous sthings.
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-30, 15:29   Link #2148
Nih
Member
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Age: 29
Um... well... Not that I checked, but some definition from an online dictionary would probably work

P.S. I guess so, but then that depends on your interpretation of the words.

Edit: got confused myself here, misunderstood Jan-poo's post. Well maybe I didn't, either way I deserved it.
I'm afraid to admit it, but I may have flamed him a bit here >_> Apologies, was just tired. Does this break my red truth? You decide.

Last edited by Nih; 2009-07-20 at 16:23. Reason: correcting mistakes
Nih is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-30, 15:41   Link #2149
maximilianjenus
[E]
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
We are not supossed to break the red truth, but rather use it as a tool to find out the truth.
maximilianjenus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-30, 16:28   Link #2150
Cola91
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalAura View Post
If you put together all of the absolutely confirmed deaths and alibis in Episode 1, I think the only female character who could have shot Natsuhi and posed as the witch at the end is Shannon. I've been kicking around an idea that the red text guaranteeing the identity of all unidentifiable corpses was meant to distract from the possibility that one or both of the identifiable corpses might be fake. If that's the case, then the same fake corpse could be used to explain the Episode 3 locked room.

Spoiler for Alibis for Episode 1 9th Twilight:

All survivors have alibis for Natsuhi's murder, but Shannon may not count as a survivor since everyone thinks she's dead. Technically Eva could also have faked her death somehow and died later to satisfy the red text, but that would mean she had stakes, which seems difficult to support relative to the other episodes.
to support your theory "having an alibi" is VERY different from being innocent
Cola91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-30, 16:29   Link #2151
Akuryou
*cackle* *cackle*
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Porto Alegre, Brazil
Send a message via MSN to Akuryou Send a message via Skype™ to Akuryou
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
from the anti-fantasy perspective the meta-world doesn't exist. Acknowledging its existence is like acknowledging the existence of witches. Therefore you can't accept a red "truth" that is valid for a world that doesn't exist.
Wrong. The anti-fantasy doesn't have to deny witches- we just have to deny that any magic was used in the murders of any Rokkenjima (and not accept Beatrice as a witch, but that's another matter).
Akuryou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-30, 16:35   Link #2152
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
I'm not sure about your definition of "killed". I think natural events should be included. It is perfectly okay to say that a person has been killed by a thunder or by a landslide. If we accept your definition the last Beatrice's riddle cannot be explained with anything but humans and animals.
You're right, I just forgot about that. Basically if an act happens that affirmatively kills someone, they were "killed." Although note that "killed by other people" obviously disallows non-human causes. Though no such requirement existed in the end of ep4.
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-30, 16:41   Link #2153
Cola91
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
from the anti-fantasy perspective the meta-world doesn't exist. Acknowledging its existence is like acknowledging the existence of witches. Therefore you can't accept a red "truth" that is valid for a world that doesn't exist.
are you gonna deny metaphors??????? I didn't think anyone could hate literature this much _

ok jokes aside I think denying the meta-world in umineko is like denying the existence of any kind of comparison like Light and L standing on top of skyscrapers in Death Note.... True anti-fantasy should just think of meta-world as a METAphor (lol same root).

Quote:
Wrong. The anti-fantasy doesn't have to deny witches- we just have to deny that any magic was used in the murders of any Rokkenjima (and not accept Beatrice as a witch, but that's another matter).
I also think Battler is wrong here... The only surefire way to deny witches is unveiling the truth... all of it.
Cola91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-30, 17:06   Link #2154
maximilianjenus
[E]
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cola91 View Post
to support your theory "having an alibi" is VERY different from being innocent
Yeah, that pissed me off. alibi is one thing, but why mention that, since an alibi can be false, like eva's in the third twilight.
maximilianjenus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-30, 17:07   Link #2155
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cola91 View Post
are you gonna deny metaphors??????? I didn't think anyone could hate literature this much _

ok jokes aside I think denying the meta-world in umineko is like denying the existence of any kind of comparison like Light and L standing on top of skyscrapers in Death Note.... True anti-fantasy should just think of meta-world as a METAphor (lol same root).



I also think Battler is wrong here... The only surefire way to deny witches is unveiling the truth... all of it.
I'm not going to deny metaphor but isn't a metaphor by definition something different than the truth?
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-30, 17:23   Link #2156
Cola91
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Sorry that wasn't meant to be rude or anything...
Anyway a metaphor is truth, just put in another way to give it a literary value so we can't deny Battler is having an intellectual fight with Beatrice (trying to solve the case or maybe just trying to deny witches...). This is maybe happens in his head (his mind is denying the existence of magic maybe) but that doesn't mean the metaworld is a utter lie at all... it exists but on a different level than material reality.

PS: no, no magic involved. it's just philosophy XD
Cola91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-30, 17:27   Link #2157
maximilianjenus
[E]
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
As put by bern and lambda, beatrice can't win, the only reason she could not win (at least for me) is because witches do not exist in rokkenjima. so the only thing a person could win by having the fight with battler is discovering the real culprit.
maximilianjenus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-30, 17:40   Link #2158
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cola91 View Post
Sorry that wasn't meant to be rude or anything...
Anyway a metaphor is truth, just put in another way to give it a literary value so we can't deny Battler is having an intellectual fight with Beatrice (trying to solve the case or maybe just trying to deny witches...). This is maybe happens in his head (his mind is denying the existence of magic maybe) but that doesn't mean the metaworld is a utter lie at all... it exists but on a different level than material reality.

PS: no, no magic involved. it's just philosophy XD
Uh I didn't mean to sound irritated, no prob ;

Anyway we could start a debate about metaphors. What's the limit of acceptable metaphors in the red truth?

For example:

this pain is killing me

Is it acceptable? Isn't acceptable? If it's acceptable does that mean I can use "Kill" as metaphor? Then what if Beatrice says

Kanon killed Jessica

meaning that Kanon by refusing her caused her to die inside?
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-30, 18:01   Link #2159
Christen
Endless Nine
*Artist
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In a certain tropical island
Age: 29
We need to apply Japanese metaphors on this one if it is accepted.
Christen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-30, 18:02   Link #2160
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
What about:

I'm dead serious
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 18:46.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.