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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2011-07-13, 21:36   Link #23181
AuraTwilight
The True Culprit
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Golden Land
Send a message via AIM to AuraTwilight Send a message via MSN to AuraTwilight
Quote:
However, heart would allow someone to deduce that it was clued that ''Lambdadelta was being very serious and completely literal with her reds''. This scene is probably the most ''Literal'' in every red battle ever spoken in Umineko, why would she magically choose to be vague on that one part? All I hear is ''faith'' and ''heart'', but where is the heart even violated here? Is there any counter-argument other than that?
Chill the hell out, I haven't even been talking about heart. Good Faith Ruling is simply etiquette where you give the benefit of the doubt that your opponent isn't being a douchebag and is trying to work with you as much as against you.

Can you show me where Lambdadelta has been consistently literal and by-the-word throughout the rest of Game Five, or the rest of Umineko, even? She doesn't even get involved in that many red battles, so where the hell are you getting this?

Quote:
Hell, maybe the Cheese Riddle in EP 6 that Battler solved was a clue to ''Use vague reds to your advantage'', I don't see how this violates some pre-determined definition of heart, it's virtually the same as me ''making up my own definitions and wordings to bypass reds''.
Er, that was foreshadowing the Logic Error. The entire Episode was, except for the Love Trial stuff (and even then sorta-kinda). It had nothing to do with 'using vague reds' in the way you're implying.

Quote:
Lets ignore the definition of heart for a minute, and put that aside. Lets say my reasoning is heartless, okay. Now, is there any counter-argument that can contradict this answer that doesn't involve morality in the rules of a mystery? This theory isn't COMPLETELY insane, after all, I am not using bullshit logic to make aliens appear from the sky and abduct everyone, this is pure and simple.
Mistranslated wording for ''letter and envelope'', a red that I've overlooked, anything like this, is what I want to hear.
Chill. The Hell. Out. You're being overly defensive and antagonistic, and if you don't take a chill pill I'm not going to continue this discussion with you.

I'm merely making the case that from what I've seen, I don't see how this argument is consistent with Lambdadelta's character, which is first and foremost the most important thing before we touch anything else.

Quote:
But you're approaching these reds just like last time again. You're approaching these as absolutely unfair riddles where common sense will result in the wrong answer and until ryukishi publishes an umineko dictionary, you would continue to question every single word possible.

The letters have always shown up inside one-winged eagle envelopes. Common sense says that people, including you and me, would refer to a letter and its envelope as 'a letter', not as 'an envelope+a letter inside the envelope'. It's kind of like calling a person as 'a person+the clothes s/he is wearing+any possessions that s/he has in her/his clothes'.
To expand on this, letters still sealed in the envelopes have been consistently called "letters" throughout Umineko, even in Episode 5. This would be more than Lambdadelta being overly literal, it'd also mean she's being contradictory in her syntax.
__________________
When the Silent Spirits Cry: An Umineko/Silent Hill crossover fanfiction
http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=4565173&postcount=531
AuraTwilight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-07-13, 21:49   Link #23182
cronnoponno
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
And I can understand how you guys want to give common sense credit for defining the rules for us in this. However, those ''extreme'' examples you provided are ''extreme'' for a reason, mine is not. It makes sense, and it is pure and simple. Like I said, I am not ''using bullshit logic to have aliens fly around and abduct everyone'', there was no red saying that isn't the truth, what you're basically implying is that, because this logic can be abused even further, it is evil.

The ''It was all a delusion'' answer is also possible, and I'm not denying it.

I am not suggesting to use reds to say bullshit like ''Battler can say he was born from Ushiromiya Asumu because he can actually mean his ''personality of Ushiromiya Battler, is born through the social interaction between Asumu and others, thus he can dodge the red'', and for this matter, they've pretty much done this with Beatrice, therefore I could probably honestly make an argument that Battler would be able to say those exact words and be able to pass it, this isn't like that.

All I have done was interpret the reds differently, in accordance with the characters doing it ALL THE TIME in Umineko. Lambdadelta knows Bernkastel, Bernkastel would have eventually came to my conclusion if she really wanted to, I highly doubt Erika(ERIKA) would overlook this wording, she even asks Beatrice if ''people'' refers to ''bodies'', Lambdadelta was trying to make Erika despair, there's no way she would have skipped out on this. I am amazed they didn't think of it right away, as it is in Erika's character to do that, meaning she must have been deceived by this.



Of course, this has a strong possibility of being wrong, but this supposedly CAN work, and it does NOT make the entire thing go into a clusterfuck of bullshit, there is no apparent problem with this answer, and I'd say it's a very effective way to keep a reader guessing. Yes, I can argue that Lambdadelta could basically word everything differently, but I'm not, because going THAT FAR would indeed be bullshit, I have shown many, many examples of the characters in-game doing this, even Battler himself. I have given scenario's that can work, and still overall lead us to the same conclusion EP 7 gave us, I have given slight possibilities that this may actually be slightly encouraged, isn't it unfair to just brush this all off as you guys are? But in any case, since I have apparently not been proved wrong, I can drop the subject again. Just felt like something I wanted to check.


Also, Aura, um, why are you saying I need to chill out? I understand tones are hard to read over the internet, but damn. Anyway, I'm reading your post now and will prepare a response to it.

Okay I'm gonna have to ask how the cheese riddle only foreshadowed the logic error(and how did it, by the way?).



EDIT: Alright, I just wasted everyone's time, after re-reading the scene, Dlanor instantly proves me wrong, you guys are right. ''YES. It's the letter with the mark of the one-winged eagle, which appeared at 24:00 last night along with a knock by a mysterious PERSON.''


My argument, in case you guys are wondering, was based on this and I quote form Lambdadelta: ''I guess I'll start with the letter. There was a knock when the bell of the large clock rang out at 24:00. And when the door was opened there lay a letter in an envelope bearing the One-Winged Eagle.

I figured, that if you guys were right, Lambdadelta wouldn't have even hesitated to use it to make Erika struggle, and Erika would eventually have found this out, as she twists definitions all the time. I thought that, Lambdadelta trying to make Erika struggle is obviously hiding this wording for a a reason, while it seems like she was in a superior ground like Beatrice, all it took was a simple rewording to have the meaning change completely. But I am not very convinced about this approach after I read what Dlanor said.

Last edited by cronnoponno; 2011-07-13 at 22:12.
cronnoponno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-07-13, 23:50   Link #23183
AuraTwilight
The True Culprit
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Golden Land
Send a message via AIM to AuraTwilight Send a message via MSN to AuraTwilight
Quote:
And I can understand how you guys want to give common sense credit for defining the rules for us in this. However, those ''extreme'' examples you provided are ''extreme'' for a reason, mine is not. It makes sense, and it is pure and simple. Like I said, I am not ''using bullshit logic to have aliens fly around and abduct everyone'', there was no red saying that isn't the truth, what you're basically implying is that, because this logic can be abused even further, it is evil.

The ''It was all a delusion'' answer is also possible, and I'm not denying it.

I am not suggesting to use reds to say bullshit like ''Battler can say he was born from Ushiromiya Asumu because he can actually mean his ''personality of Ushiromiya Battler, is born through the social interaction between Asumu and others, thus he can dodge the red'', and for this matter, they've pretty much done this with Beatrice, therefore I could probably honestly make an argument that Battler would be able to say those exact words and be able to pass it, this isn't like that.
I never claimed otherwise. Please actually respond to the words I am typing.

Quote:
All I have done was interpret the reds differently, in accordance with the characters doing it ALL THE TIME in Umineko. Lambdadelta knows Bernkastel, Bernkastel would have eventually came to my conclusion if she really wanted to, I highly doubt Erika(ERIKA) would overlook this wording, she even asks Beatrice if ''people'' refers to ''bodies'', Lambdadelta was trying to make Erika despair, there's no way she would have skipped out on this. I am amazed they didn't think of it right away, as it is in Erika's character to do that, meaning she must have been deceived by this.
If Erika didn't pick up on it, I propose that it's because she saw that the sealed envelopes have been consistently called letters even without being opened. It's just taken for granted, like how a corpse is still 'touched' even if you're only touching the clothes.

Quote:
Also, Aura, um, why are you saying I need to chill out? I understand tones are hard to read over the internet, but damn. Anyway, I'm reading your post now and will prepare a response to it.
Well, you're just going on a tirade defending yourself against things no one said, which in normal, everyday speech indicates of a nervous, anxious, stressed out speaker.

Quote:
Okay I'm gonna have to ask how the cheese riddle only foreshadowed the logic error(and how did it, by the way?).
It's the cheese riddle along with the coin in the cups thing that really does it. It was shown to us for a reason, and the point about interpreting reds has been demonstrated to the readers as early as the 6th game, so there's no point spending precious minutes going over it. Moreover, Battler, who wrote the game, took incredible care to show us, and Erika, this scene for his game, and he very obviously set up the Logic Error to begin with as part of his master plan for Beatrice. By this alone, my reasoning is pretty iron-clad.
__________________
When the Silent Spirits Cry: An Umineko/Silent Hill crossover fanfiction
http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=4565173&postcount=531
AuraTwilight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-07-14, 00:14   Link #23184
cronnoponno
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
I never claimed otherwise. Please actually respond to the words I am typing.

This was not directed at you, but Yopee, you posted ''before I posted this comment'', so I did not see your post, the part at the bottom was an edit after I read your post. Although the way I said it sounded like I was talking to you. Sorry.

If Erika didn't pick up on it, I propose that it's because she saw that the sealed envelopes have been consistently called letters even without being opened. It's just taken for granted, like how a corpse is still 'touched' even if you're only touching the clothes.

Well, that doesn't disprove my theory, which I'm not trying to have proved right, I was just trying to see if it was credible.

Well, you're just going on a tirade defending yourself against things no one said, which in normal, everyday speech indicates of a nervous, anxious, stressed out speaker.

I am not trying to defend myself, I do not know how many times I have to say that I am posting the theories I post with the intention of having them proved wrong, but the way you guys are ''proving them wrong'' is due to your own interpretations rather than anything that can actually be counted for evidence that proves something wrong. I had a simple goal, and that was ''How am I wrong with this theory'', it just felt really dishearting to have constant morality(this is in general, not with one post) shoved at me that might not even be true in this case. I am sorry if you thought I was barbarically trying to shove everyone else's words up their ass. If you could understand my tone as I was tying this, I doubt you would have thought this.


It's the cheese riddle along with the coin in the cups thing that really does it. It was shown to us for a reason, and the point about interpreting reds has been demonstrated to the readers as early as the 6th game, so there's no point spending precious minutes going over it. Moreover, Battler, who wrote the game, took incredible care to show us, and Erika, this scene for his game, and he very obviously set up the Logic Error to begin with as part of his master plan for Beatrice. By this alone, my reasoning is pretty iron-clad.

On your last part, Battler could have had multiple intentions for that, what's not to say that he wanted to show the riddle to show that there are more than one ways to solve a riddle, maybe he wanted to hint Erika at this to show her how to love. At first she totally sneered at everyone else for failing to solve it, but later, it helped her to realize the ''double truth'' about Kannon in the guest room. I do, however, like the ''Genius-Battler'' theory, I would rather that one be correct in this case.


Anyway, you are misunderstanding my intentions by your post it seems, I don't know how to explain them. Lets try this: This game has been likened to chess a lot, meaning you guys play chess by these rules, these rules are sacred, and there is nothing wrong with them. However, what if instead of using a chess board, you use a ''checkers board'', as your theory-making metaphor?

In checkers, there is a rule where ''A piece must not deny jumping another piece''. Lets say that my pieces are blue truths, the blue pieces, I move out these hopeless blue pieces because ''they must be jumped even if it's obvious they can be'', this can be useful, by throwing away a useless piece of mine, it causes the other player to jump it, exposing their formation more and slowly unraveling their defense. However, what you guys seem to be doing is assuming the rules of chess, therefore getting angry at my move and not even continuing, or trying to make me go back to chess. While you can learn a lot about this tale using chess as your metaphor, that does not mean you are required only to use chess, and sticking to it as if it's the only game-board that can apply really doesn't answer my questions. Of course there are multiple meanings and such to this, I do not know how to explain it another way, and I am sure this will be misunderstood, but that's fine.


Will said ''Don't neglect the heart'', but he never said ''Only follow the heart, because the truth can only be reached that way''.

I do not think my theory is right anymore, so this post is meaningless I suppose, but I'll try to make it clear again if my intentions come into question a third time.

Last edited by cronnoponno; 2011-07-14 at 00:27.
cronnoponno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-07-14, 01:26   Link #23185
AuraTwilight
The True Culprit
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Golden Land
Send a message via AIM to AuraTwilight Send a message via MSN to AuraTwilight
Quote:
On your last part, Battler could have had multiple intentions for that, what's not to say that he wanted to show the riddle to show that there are more than one ways to solve a riddle, maybe he wanted to hint Erika at this to show her how to love. At first she totally sneered at everyone else for failing to solve it, but later, it helped her to realize the ''double truth'' about Kannon in the guest room. I do, however, like the ''Genius-Battler'' theory, I would rather that one be correct in this case.
I don't see why it can't be both, though I'm sure the first idea is his main intention, since he needs Beatrice to solve the Logic Error much more than he needs Erika to know....anything, really. As far as his game with Erika is concerned it's just a formality; the winner is irrelevant.

Quote:
Anyway, you are misunderstanding my intentions by your post it seems, I don't know how to explain them. Lets try this: This game has been likened to chess a lot, meaning you guys play chess by these rules, these rules are sacred, and there is nothing wrong with them. However, what if instead of using a chess board, you use a ''checkers board'', as your theory-making metaphor?

In checkers, there is a rule where ''A piece must not deny jumping another piece''. Lets say that my pieces are blue truths, the blue pieces, I move out these hopeless blue pieces because ''they must be jumped even if it's obvious they can be'', this can be useful, by throwing away a useless piece of mine, it causes the other player to jump it, exposing their formation more and slowly unraveling their defense. However, what you guys seem to be doing is assuming the rules of chess, therefore getting angry at my move and not even continuing, or trying to make me go back to chess. While you can learn a lot about this tale using chess as your metaphor, that does not mean you are required only to use chess, and sticking to it as if it's the only game-board that can apply really doesn't answer my questions. Of course there are multiple meanings and such to this, I do not know how to explain it another way, and I am sure this will be misunderstood, but that's fine.
That....makes no sense. If you try and use checker rules in the middle of a chess game or vice versa, you don't pick up some new genius strategy to figure out the game. You're seen as a cheating asshole, the game can't go forward, and both people walk away pissed off.

This is, infact, the main point of EP5's lecture between Battler, Dlanor, and Virgilia. You're seeing the Red Truths as obstacles to be jumped over, not tools given to help you out.

Quote:

Will said ''Don't neglect the heart'', but he never said ''Only follow the heart, because the truth can only be reached that way''.
You're right. But no one, anywhere, has ever claimed such. You're arguing against a strawman.
__________________
When the Silent Spirits Cry: An Umineko/Silent Hill crossover fanfiction
http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=4565173&postcount=531
AuraTwilight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-07-14, 01:46   Link #23186
Xenon_gun
Junior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by MeltyRed
So what, you mean to say battler should have turned the chessboard this way?
Isn't that...
Cheating?
While my idea in the thread was wrong, I wouldn't say it would be cheating. I would say more for the sake of discussion, but don't want to break it or provide a hint. Keep looking for the true solution.
On that note, Umineko reminds me of one specific 'mate in half a move' problem. I'll post it later, if rogerpepitone has no objections.

Now then, onto the recent discussion. It's interesting, because I've talked about the reds with AuraTwilight before. I agreed they are guidelines... yet can't deny the fact that the solution itself is a way of dodging the red (which should not be necessary in that case, right?) through certain unclear definitions, or lack thereof. For that matter, what are they guiding us towards? Let's take a gander at some of the Question arcs:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Episode 3
There are no more than 18 people on this island.

Shannon is dead. Kanon is dead.

The 15 people mentioned are dead.

Absolutely no factors other than humans participate in this game board!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Episode 4
Kanon is dead. Among the five people in Kyrie's group, he was the first to die. In short, he was the 9th victim.

Before now, I have proclaimed that no more than 18 humans exist on this island. I will lower that by one for Kinzo!! No more than 17 humans exist on this island!!
To start off, note the exact wording when referring to the number of people on the island. It allows for its later reduction. The ugly part is that these reds basically hammer in the illusion that there is no such thing as Shkanon. I'll highlight:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Episode 4
Among the five people in Kyrie's group
And for good measure,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Episode 2
There are only five master keys.

The only way to lock this door is with Jessica's single key or the master keys, only one of which is held by each servant.
I treat this as a big problem because there is no feeling of 'fairness' when looking at the proposed solution. For the record, note that these also create a problem with at least one of Knox and Dine. I'm talking about Knox's 10th, referenced in the game as, "It is forbidden for a character to disguise themselves as another without any clues.", and Dine's 20th, if it was ever used.

So, in retrospect, I enjoyed Umineko, but wouldn't ever consider presenting it to a friend as a murder mystery. Instead, it would be a story with mystery elements.
Xenon_gun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-07-14, 02:58   Link #23187
AuraTwilight
The True Culprit
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Golden Land
Send a message via AIM to AuraTwilight Send a message via MSN to AuraTwilight
Quote:
To start off, note the exact wording when referring to the number of people on the island. It allows for its later reduction. The ugly part is that these reds basically hammer in the illusion that there is no such thing as Shkanon.
Apparently Ryukishi's official stance is that Yasu has split personalities, and are thus people.

The more elegant solution is that the two characters are her personas in Rokkenjima Prime, but she writes them as being two separate individuals in the actual Games. However, they cannot do anything that Yasu alone can't do, or else it'd be magic (Both of them talking to Battler at the same time, etc).

Quote:
I treat this as a big problem because there is no feeling of 'fairness' when looking at the proposed solution. For the record, note that these also create a problem with at least one of Knox and Dine. I'm talking about Knox's 10th, referenced in the game as, "It is forbidden for a character to disguise themselves as another without any clues.", and Dine's 20th, if it was ever used.
There's definitely clues for Shkanon. A large number of people reached the theory independently by the second and third episodes. Moreover, Knox's Tenth only applies to a character disguising themselves as extant characters, not having dual personas. Something like Krauss disguising himself as Kinzo.
__________________
When the Silent Spirits Cry: An Umineko/Silent Hill crossover fanfiction
http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=4565173&postcount=531
AuraTwilight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-07-14, 12:00   Link #23188
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
It's like Aura said. Genius Battler is the only thematic explanation that makes ep6 more than a series of happenstance bumblings and a giant waste of our time. Genius Battler thematically ties up the entire episode with a neat bow and considering literally everything Battler does the entire episode can be read between the lines as directed toward doing with Beatrice exactly what winds up happening, I can't see any other solution. I grant that it's one of my pet theories and being its originator (as far as I know) makes be biased towards it but damn if it don't make more sense than the alternatives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
The more elegant solution is that the two characters are her personas in Rokkenjima Prime, but she writes them as being two separate individuals in the actual Games. However, they cannot do anything that Yasu alone can't do, or else it'd be magic (Both of them talking to Battler at the same time, etc).
I always figured something like this. Fictional Shkanon or something to that effect. The problem is the apparent solutions would rely on some aspect of it being true, so it winds up being explained the way you explained it, as some weird fictionalized pseudo-realistic ruleset where Shannon and Kanon can fictionally coexist but must never provide Battler with the verifiable possibility of coexistence (i.e. he can't find both their corpses in ep4). That's a kludgy and not particularly desirable conclusion, but I think it makes more sense than a disguise-swapping ninja.
Quote:
There's definitely clues for Shkanon. A large number of people reached the theory independently by the second and third episodes. Moreover, Knox's Tenth only applies to a character disguising themselves as extant characters, not having dual personas. Something like Krauss disguising himself as Kinzo.
The problem is that while you are sort of technically correct, semantically it still feels like a cheat.

"Something like Krauss disguising himself as Kinzo" initially appears to be different from Shannon and Kanon, but in fact there's little or no reason to actually make this claim. We accept that Krauss and Kinzo are separate people and that, therefore, Krauss posing as him would be a Knox violation without hints to the contrary. Yet because, I think, people have long assumed Shkanon to be true, they just handwave the fact that Shannon and Kanon are likewise portrayed as entirely independent people in the first episode, and if the first episode can be solved through a self-contained Knox-respecting answer, Shkanon would be equally as unfair as Kraussinzo.

Imagine, for example, that Krauss disguising as Kinzo became a strong hint in ep5. Would that be a valid solution to ep4 now that we know Krauss can pose as Kinzo? I don't think so. I think we can probably demonstrate in ep2 that Shkanon is a possibility and a probable solution, but using that information to go back is a bit odd.

Bear in mind ep1 is still solvable with the Shannon conclusion based solely on the information in that episode. The Kanon connection just isn't there at that time. Does that mean the episode isn't cheating because Kanon isn't an essential part of the solution? Maybe... but Kanon is never an essential part of any solution in Umineko, with a tiny handful of exceptions. If nothing else, Kanon existing is literally irrelevant to the solutions of ep1-4. My point is less that you can't solve it without an un-hinted Shkanon, but rather that having it there at all seems to do nothing but cheat for cheating's sake and to no particular end whatsoever.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-07-14, 13:34   Link #23189
haguruma
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Germany
Age: 29
Send a message via ICQ to haguruma Send a message via MSN to haguruma
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Bear in mind ep1 is still solvable with the Shannon conclusion based solely on the information in that episode. The Kanon connection just isn't there at that time. Does that mean the episode isn't cheating because Kanon isn't an essential part of the solution? Maybe... but Kanon is never an essential part of any solution in Umineko, with a tiny handful of exceptions. If nothing else, Kanon existing is literally irrelevant to the solutions of ep1-4. My point is less that you can't solve it without an un-hinted Shkanon, but rather that having it there at all seems to do nothing but cheat for cheating's sake and to no particular end whatsoever.
Yes, that's actually one of the major critical points in Umineko. It's characterization to the point of "everybody is just a lying douchebag".

But it actually works quite well because there is never any need for that much disguising and stealth methods, as long as we accept that everybody kept shut about the fact that there was no Kanon...
It's quite possible that in the original world nobody even knew that Yasu was doing a seperate role thing...it's just something that worked in her fictions. And isn't the improbability of that not another big hint towards a possible actuall truth?!

But even if their was a disguise in front of Battler, it wouldn't even be that much of an intricate system.
In EP1 he meets Kanon in the garden and later when he picks them up for dinner (commenting that Maria is missing). The next time Battler meets Kanon there is no need for switching anymore because Shannon is "dead".
In EP2 he meets Kanon in the mansion when Maria is missing and in the chapel before Jessica runs out. After that Kanon vanishes and only the Shannon clothes are needed.
In EP3 he probably only has the meeting in the garden, I can't even find any specific scenes where they meet at all.
In EP4 I think he only meets him when Maria is brought in from the garden and he gets some towels.
It's not hard to create such small events...everything else is told by the same people who say they are meeting people who are already dead, lie about their past, hide their true agenda or have their own reason's for deception. Among all the lies told throughout the Episodes where Battler is the detective...is it so hard to believe in such an innocent lie like Kanon?!

And another problem is that Battler is a detective with limited credibility. People won't reveal themselves to him unless he can be used to their advantage because they don't trust him either.
Even after the murders people would have reasons to keep the identity of Kanon/Shannon a secret out of different reasons even if they actually knew.
The detective cannot lie to us, but people can lie to the detective...and actually that's what's happening the whole game...
haguruma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-07-14, 13:42   Link #23190
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
That's not exactly my point. My point is more that it serves no good narrative function. Indeed, based on the most recent information provided, the one point at which Shkanon is a supposedly necessary element of a solution, we aren't even expected to treat the existing narrative as though it needs to make any logical sense. It's a flat-out betrayal of Ryukishi's own themes.

I could expand on this and write up Yet Another Shkanon Diatribe based on post-ep8 interview information, but I think we're all probably sick of hearing about it.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-07-14, 14:06   Link #23191
Kylon99
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Meta-Meta-Meta-Space
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Genius Battler is the only thematic explanation that makes ep6 more than a series of happenstance bumblings and a giant waste of our time. Genius Battler thematically ties up the entire episode with a neat bow and considering literally everything Battler does the entire episode can be read between the lines as directed toward doing with Beatrice exactly what winds up happening, I can't see any other solution.
It's a good theory and I half abscribe to it, but I've been wondering something. Just to clarify, when you say 'Genius' you mean how everything worked out for Battler in the end, rather than if he more intelligent than Erika or not, in terms of IQ, right?

Could it be that this 'Genius Battler' is really the author... in other words, Tooya-Battler? Because the author has the ability to arrange everything in the story like that. If he wants Meta-Battler to win in the end, he does. Usually. 8)

I was suspicious of this when Meta-Battler stated that he was ok with stating the individual names of the people in the other room. But, I was thinking that this was a dodge by the author. Meta-Battler would've been okay, but the author required him not to. So the circumstances ended up fitting this neat scenario that only Tooya-Battler would care about. .... I think. I'm not 100% sure why Tooya-Battler didn't want to name Kanon by name and separate from Shannon, but beyond the simple Shkannon excuse, I'm guessing he also didn't want to reveal the mechanics of Shkannon at that time.

Anyways, this is the reason why I half believe your theory; it's just that it's not Meta-Battler who did planned everything perfectly, but Tooya-Battler.... This ends up encapsulating any weird things like accidents or coincidences that Meta-Battler would've needed to set up and have people fall into.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Fictional Shkanon or something to that effect. The problem is the apparent solutions would rely on some aspect of it being true, so it winds up being explained the way you explained it, as some weird fictionalized pseudo-realistic ruleset where Shannon and Kanon can fictionally coexist but must never provide Battler with the verifiable possibility of coexistence (i.e. he can't find both their corpses in ep4).
About Shkannon. I've also been thinking that both Beatrice and Tooya-Battler didn't want to reveal the existence of Shkannon, even if they were free to write them as if they were individual characters. They both had an outside-of-the-fiction motive to preserve their behavior even if they had no internal need. This goes to Yasu's feelings and why she had to have these personalities, I think. And this speaks to Battler talking about needing to preserve Beatrice's secrets, etc, etc. The main point is... I get the feeling Tooya-Battler feels the same, in needing to preserve Beatrice's secrets.

So maybe that's one explanation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
If nothing else, Kanon existing is literally irrelevant to the solutions of ep1-4. My point is less that you can't solve it without an un-hinted Shkanon, but rather that having it there at all seems to do nothing but cheat for cheating's sake and to no particular end whatsoever.
This is an aside, but it seems like we can solve each individual episode without the need for Shkannon, but to solve the over-arcing story of why Yasu did these things, we needed it. Or at least it was a major symptom of the problems she was facing.

I think after a certain point of going through Umineko, we needed to partition whether we're solving individual epsiodes or twilights... or whether we're trying to solve the 'why' behind everything.
Kylon99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-07-14, 14:06   Link #23192
AuraTwilight
The True Culprit
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Golden Land
Send a message via AIM to AuraTwilight Send a message via MSN to AuraTwilight
Quote:
Something like Krauss disguising himself as Kinzo" initially appears to be different from Shannon and Kanon, but in fact there's little or no reason to actually make this claim. We accept that Krauss and Kinzo are separate people and that, therefore, Krauss posing as him would be a Knox violation without hints to the contrary. Yet because, I think, people have long assumed Shkanon to be true, they just handwave the fact that Shannon and Kanon are likewise portrayed as entirely independent people in the first episode, and if the first episode can be solved through a self-contained Knox-respecting answer, Shkanon would be equally as unfair as Kraussinzo.
You're right, I'm just saying that this Knox rule doesn't extend to the plot twist of two characters having always been one person. That's not what it's for.

Quote:
That's not exactly my point. My point is more that it serves no good narrative function.
For the mystery. But Umineko is more than that, for better or worse.

Quote:
It's a good theory and I half abscribe to it, but I've been wondering something. Just to clarify, when you say 'Genius' you mean how everything worked out for Battler in the end, rather than if he more intelligent than Erika or not, in terms of IQ, right?

Could it be that this 'Genius Battler' is really the author... in other words, Tooya-Battler? Because the author has the ability to arrange everything in the story like that. If he wants Meta-Battler to win in the end, he does. Usually. 8)
1) Yes and 2) Author-Battler and Gamemaster-Battler are essentially the same character. "Existing on a higher plane" and all that.

Even if they weren't, it still has to be Gamemaster Battler who planned everything himself or else his EP8 characterization is a legitimate plothole. It can't merely be Toya making him win.
__________________
When the Silent Spirits Cry: An Umineko/Silent Hill crossover fanfiction
http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=4565173&postcount=531
AuraTwilight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-07-14, 14:48   Link #23193
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
You're right, I'm just saying that this Knox rule doesn't extend to the plot twist of two characters having always been one person. That's not what it's for.
Perhaps, but in that case the revelation that Krauss has always been Kinzo would be equivalent, apparently break no rules (not that Beatrice is necessarily bound by the rules, but it feels wrong to introduce things you're just ignoring), and yet still not feel at all right.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-07-14, 18:33   Link #23194
AuraTwilight
The True Culprit
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Golden Land
Send a message via AIM to AuraTwilight Send a message via MSN to AuraTwilight
Well the comparison I was trying to make was between Character A impersonating Character B that Detective C has already met. In hindsight Kinzo was a fucking terrible example.
__________________
When the Silent Spirits Cry: An Umineko/Silent Hill crossover fanfiction
http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=4565173&postcount=531
AuraTwilight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-07-14, 20:44   Link #23195
LyricalAura
Dea ex Kakera
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sea of Fragments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kylon99 View Post
I was suspicious of this when Meta-Battler stated that he was ok with stating the individual names of the people in the other room. But, I was thinking that this was a dodge by the author. Meta-Battler would've been okay, but the author required him not to. So the circumstances ended up fitting this neat scenario that only Tooya-Battler would care about. .... I think. I'm not 100% sure why Tooya-Battler didn't want to name Kanon by name and separate from Shannon, but beyond the simple Shkannon excuse, I'm guessing he also didn't want to reveal the mechanics of Shkannon at that time.
Well, don't forget that we have this extra middle layer of Ange narrating to Featherinne. The line in the meta-world narration about how Battler wouldn't have any problem listing the people in the other room might have been her error.
__________________
"Something has fallen on us that falls very seldom on men; perhaps the worst thing that can fall on them. We have found the truth; and the truth makes no sense."
LyricalAura is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-07-14, 22:28   Link #23196
Kylon99
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Meta-Meta-Meta-Space
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
1) Yes and 2) Author-Battler and Gamemaster-Battler are essentially the same character. "Existing on a higher plane" and all that.

Even if they weren't, it still has to be Gamemaster Battler who planned everything himself or else his EP8 characterization is a legitimate plothole. It can't merely be Toya making him win.
Well, I still try to separate the two as Meta-Battler (or Gamemaster Battler) seems to be limited in abilities. Like for example, he crafted the 'game' but he could still be locked away by Bernkastel, he could still be tricked by Erika not telling him things. He's portrayed as on equal footing with others of the meta-world.

An author though, is not. He knows what everyone is thinking and he can subtly (or not so subtly when he fails) guide people into traps, errors, mistakes, etc.


By the way, I just realized I'm thinking more about how Erika was manipulated into losing. This point I'm thinking it was more an author's doing.

However, I remember people talking about Genius Battler as in manipulating the events in order to cause the rebirth of Beatrice. Ok, this part, I'm thinking that Meta Battler may have been capable of setting up the situation to do so. Authorial powers aren't necessary. I mean, all he really had to do was throw the game and leave the last solution as Shkannon for Moetrice to 'remember'. 8)

Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalAura View Post
Well, don't forget that we have this extra middle layer of Ange narrating to Featherinne. The line in the meta-world narration about how Battler wouldn't have any problem listing the people in the other room might have been her error.
Featherine? Yes...

Hmm... now that we've finished EP8, it occurs to me that the author levels look like this:

Ryukishi
Tooya-Battler and Ikuko
Featherine

With descending power over the whole story as you go down. (i.e. Ryukishi can control nearly 100% of the story, except when it becomes illogical or absurd. Tooya can nearly 100% control the Meta-World but not his or Ange Prime's real story. And Featherine can nearly control any subordinate beings in the Meta-World, but cannot truly control her own, etc... etc.)
Kylon99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-07-14, 22:54   Link #23197
AuraTwilight
The True Culprit
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Golden Land
Send a message via AIM to AuraTwilight Send a message via MSN to AuraTwilight
Quote:
Well, I still try to separate the two as Meta-Battler (or Gamemaster Battler) seems to be limited in abilities. Like for example, he crafted the 'game' but he could still be locked away by Bernkastel, he could still be tricked by Erika not telling him things. He's portrayed as on equal footing with others of the meta-world.
Bernkastel didn't lock him away, he was locked by the existence of the Logic Error. He probably pretended to be tricked to set up his Genius Battler gambit.

If he didn't act like he were on equal footing, even if he wasn't, he'd be a God Mode Sue.
__________________
When the Silent Spirits Cry: An Umineko/Silent Hill crossover fanfiction
http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=4565173&postcount=531
AuraTwilight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-07-15, 10:12   Link #23198
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
It's not strictly necessary to Genius Battler that he knew for sure that Beatrice actually would get him out, but I'm almost certain that he knew full well what he was getting into and that there weren't any actual tricks from Erika he wasn't anticipating. He doesn't have to have known exactly how she would trick him, just that she was planning to retroactively screw up his game. The elements are everywhere in the structure of his game:
  • Genji-form Ronove tells Battler about what Logic Errors are as he's planning out the game. Prior to this, Logic Errors had never come up. If this scene didn't exist, one might argue Battler was surprised by Erika's call for one, but he has to have already known what Logic Errors are because somebody told him. Even if he isn't transcendent, he knew in advance what a Logic Error could do.
  • Erika was fooled by a faked First Twilight in her first game. Battler's game includes an obviously faked First Twilight. There's no way Erika wouldn't be expecting that again and Battler has to know that. Because she has no Detective Authority the faking can temporarily foil her effort to disprove the murders, but because she's well aware of the fakery Battler knows Erika will make a move against him.
  • Battler's game is dependent upon Erika not taking Detective Authority. If she does, her examination of the FT "corpses" is absolute and she knows they're faking. Battler loses on the first move if she does this, but despite offering it to her before and during the game, she doesn't take it. Battler isn't so stupid as to not even wonder what this means. I think it's obvious he expected Erika would do something she couldn't do if she were considered the detective. There aren't many things that could be, and he conveniently left a bunch of supposedly-dead-but-not-really people lying around for her...
  • ...and conveniently, one of those is Battler himself. Battler is a massive odd man out; his inclusion in the FT grouping makes little thematic sense. This draws Erika's attention to Battler for several reasons. First, it's obvious that he's the person to expect to be the culprit because he doesn't fit in with the victims. Second, it's Battler's own piece, and he has to know Erika is out to humiliate him because Bern is leaning on her hard. And third...
  • The letter provides a specific challenge, namely that Battler is missing. Again, a clear challenge to locate and dispose of Battler's piece. The letter itself also presupposes the setup for the Logic Error; if Battler must stay in his room, and no one else can escape, no one can set that letter (in Erika's mind; there are still ways it could appear without that scenario changing but the easiest ones involve someone leaving a room which Erika doesn't think is possible).
  • Battler intentionally gives Erika retroactive moves. There's no reason to do this short of baiting a Logic Error. If you let someone make changes to the past part of a story, the only thing of consequence they can do is screw up the narrative by retroactively making something impossible. Moreover, he gives Erika exactly the number of room sealings needed to accomplish his goals. The goals, remember, are: Ensure Shannon and Kanon are in separate rooms (it isn't enough that Shannon can escape e.g.; Kanon has to "escape" from a room which never breaks its seal), and ensure Erika seals Battler's own room. More sealings would not be very useful to Erika, and fewer sealings would not allow Battler to accomplish his goals. Conveniently, Battler gives Erika just what she needs to create the Logic Error. No more, no less. If he didn't plan it, what justification is there beyond "he chose an arbitrary number that happened to be what Erika needed?"
  • The structure of the Logic Error solution is such that Battler cannot escape on his own. This is self-evident before he's placed in the Logic Error room and Battler would know full well that the scenario he's described to Erika can only play out if someone else switched places with him and re-set the chain. Yet he makes a show of trying to escape solo, something he knows is not possible. Why bother? Well, either he's an idiot or waiting for Kanon to rescue him would tip off Bern and Erika that he knows it's a two-person solution. Battler believes that Beatrice can figure this out on her own, and he's right.
  • The Love Duel is really heavy-handed Shkanon pushing with a bunch of flashy distractions. Erika doesn't get it and doesn't consider it important because of how it was structured. However, Battler knows that Beatrice will pay attention to it and get something out of it.
  • Likewise with the riddles. Erika uses riddles as a way to show off how smart she is. I'd guess Battler set up the cheese and cups puzzles in the narrative to appear to be an intellectual duel between Erika and the family, but strangely enough those very same puzzles foreshadow the solution to the Logic Error. A solution non-Genius Battler isn't supposed to know about. Hmm.
  • Speaking of Beatrice, Battler trots her out, constantly suggests the real Beatrice could've solved the problem, introduces her to people and resources that will help her remember, etc. Saying Battler didn't plan for what happened means assuming he did all of this stuff out of what basically amounts to desperation. That's kind of a lame story arc: "I tried everything I could think of, screwed up a bunch, and just have to hope I get rescued" is not as exciting or interesting as "I know my opponent wants me to fail, and I know Beatrice always wanted me to reach the truth by putting me on the spot, so I'll intentionally fail in a way that will put Beatrice on the spot, which will bring her back to extract me from the situation."
  • Battler talks in ep6 and ep8 about intentionally taking crazy risks. Kinzo is said in just about every damn episode to be a man who took crazy risks and won. It is occasionally revealed that Kinzo had more on his side than luck when he took his risks, and knew what he was doing. Battler is constantly compared to Kinzo. Do the math.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-07-15, 11:47   Link #23199
Frisko
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Battler intentionally gives Erika retroactive moves. There's no reason to do this short of baiting a Logic Error. If you let someone make changes to the past part of a story, the only thing of consequence they can do is screw up the narrative by retroactively making something impossible. Moreover, he gives Erika exactly the number of room sealings needed to accomplish his goals. The goals, remember, are: Ensure Shannon and Kanon are in separate rooms (it isn't enough that Shannon can escape e.g.; Kanon has to "escape" from a room which never breaks its seal), and ensure Erika seals Battler's own room. More sealings would not be very useful to Erika, and fewer sealings would not allow Battler to accomplish his goals. Conveniently, Battler gives Erika just what she needs to create the Logic Error. No more, no less. If he didn't plan it, what justification is there beyond "he chose an arbitrary number that happened to be what Erika needed?"
Battler explicitly gave Erika one seal for each member of the Eiserne Jungfrau.
Frisko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-07-15, 12:24   Link #23200
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frisko View Post
Battler explicitly gave Erika one seal for each member of the Eiserne Jungfrau.
He could have given her one, for just Dlanor. He could have given her six, or nine, two/three per. Three is exactly the number that both he and Erika need to do what they're planning. There's no way he didn't plan that.

Indeed, no other number of seals would work for either of them.

Plus you sort of have to keep in mind every other part of his behavior that applies to the idea.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall 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 16:54.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
We use Silk.