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 2012-08-04, 10:05   Link #29921
GuestSpeaker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
That's because that game wasn't about solving the epitaph or the mystery, it was about Beatrice's motivations. The point of game 4 was "who do you love" and "remember your sin". As someone once said, it was supposed to be Battler throwing away everything for Yasu (at least in her mind) and running off with the money, just as Kinzo once did. In fact, you could say it foreshadows ep 7 rather nicely.
GuestSpeaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-04, 11:30   Link #29922
Drifloon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Yeah, they're never even asked to solve the epitaph in EP4.
Drifloon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-04, 15:19   Link #29923
jjblue1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuestSpeaker View Post
That's because that game wasn't about solving the epitaph or the mystery, it was about Beatrice's motivations. The point of game 4 was "who do you love" and "remember your sin". As someone once said, it was supposed to be Battler throwing away everything for Yasu (at least in her mind) and running off with the money, just as Kinzo once did. In fact, you could say it foreshadows ep 7 rather nicely.
It's sort of a scary point as the ones he should leave behind are the members of his family his wanna be girlfriend murdered.

At least Kinzo could claim they fired at each others and that he had no sympathy for the Italians or the other Japanese soldiers but Battler's situation... well it's VERY different...
jjblue1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-04, 18:23   Link #29924
Kiltias
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
I just got a question if I may.

Might sound silly but in terms of Umineko what does "people" mean again?

Just that I heard alot of different opinions and I'm a tad confused as to what is right and not.
Kiltias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-04, 19:10   Link #29925
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
Individuals who are alive and not magical. It's also completely arbitrary, so whether Shannon and Kanon count and whether or not their faking death counts as the real thing is completely inconsistent.
__________________
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 2012-08-04, 19:33   Link #29926
Kiltias
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
Individuals who are alive and not magical. It's also completely arbitrary, so whether Shannon and Kanon count and whether or not their faking death counts as the real thing is completely inconsistent.
I'm not talking about faking deaths.
Its about if People = Bodies or Personalities.

Cause I saw someone providing quite the lethal evidence that both won't work for Yasu claiming "Yasu has been disproven.Yasu = Author Deception" in a 12 Hours explanation explaining what "Yasu truly is", and being able to show how the Killer was someone else and how Yasu still fits into it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHMta4YbjSM&feature=plcp
This is the first part = 3 hours in which he disproves it.

I watched it through and well....the guy actually has a point with everything he said.No gaps or anything.
"I can prove beyond reasonable doubt that Ryukishi is deceiving the readersThe Official Explanaton = A Deception towards the readers."
"I can present a theory that is possible.Plausible.Coherent.Consistent with all Red Statements.Consistant with all circumstantial evidence.accounts for who why and how.Accounts for Yasu.Accounts for Battlers Sin.Is Elegant, meaning as few assumptions as possible,no accmplices without neccessity and evidence and no working around red statements."

Last edited by Kiltias; 2012-08-04 at 19:59.
Kiltias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-04, 21:07   Link #29927
Asuka0NK
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
OH GOD! Here we go. We talked about this already a few pages back. I don't know which though. Also his theory has as many holes in it as the ShKanon Theory does. I don't understand why people always have to have the most logical solutions for a mystery novel because from some I've read the solution is usually pretty far-fetched but it still makes sense and everything fits together but we aren't going against it.

Also on KnownNoMore he believes in Reds he want to believe in. I once asked him about a red and of course he worked around it and even about how there was no evidence for Erika ever having a gun when she went back to the mansion. I told him this and he responded to me pretty much how the ShKanon theory goes against Knox's 8th and he never defended his own point. So yes he is an idiot.
__________________

Last edited by Asuka0NK; 2012-08-04 at 22:52.
Asuka0NK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-04, 21:27   Link #29928
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:
I'm not talking about faking deaths.
Its about if People = Bodies or Personalities.
I know. And I'm saying it means both, depending on which is most beneficial for Ryukishi at the time. He's not consistent about how he defines certain terms in order to protect the Shkanon twist. It's one of the biggest complaints people tend to have with Umineko.

Also KnownNoMore is an idiot, don't listen to him.
__________________
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 2012-08-04, 22:40   Link #29929
Asuka0NK
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post

Also KnownNoMore is an idiot, don't listen to him.
You couldn't be anymore blunt or truthful if you tried.
__________________
Asuka0NK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-05, 00:09   Link #29930
Wanderer
Goat
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Gnawing away at Rokkenjima
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiltias View Post
I'm not talking about faking deaths.
Its about if People = Bodies or Personalities.
It's not "or", it's "and"; personhood requires both a personality and a living human body.

Shannon and Kanon switch ownership of Yasu's body, in which case the one switched out "does not exist". Thus, even though they are different people, they always count as one person. They can only count as two people when included in a count of dead people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiltias View Post
Cause I saw someone providing quite the lethal evidence that both won't work for Yasu claiming "Yasu has been disproven.Yasu = Author Deception" in a 12 Hours explanation explaining what "Yasu truly is", and being able to show how the Killer was someone else and how Yasu still fits into it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHMta4YbjSM&feature=plcp
This is the first part = 3 hours in which he disproves it.

I watched it through and well....the guy actually has a point with everything he said.No gaps or anything.
"I can prove beyond reasonable doubt that Ryukishi is deceiving the readersThe Official Explanaton = A Deception towards the readers."
"I can present a theory that is possible.Plausible.Coherent.Consistent with all Red Statements.Consistant with all circumstantial evidence.accounts for who why and how.Accounts for Yasu.Accounts for Battlers Sin.Is Elegant, meaning as few assumptions as possible,no accmplices without neccessity and evidence and no working around red statements."
I posted a rant about KnownNoMore recently on seacats. Here's it copy-pasted.

Spoiler:
Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-05, 02:52   Link #29931
Drifloon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
KnownNoMore is just hilarious. While the Shkanontrice solution is hinted all over the series, his explanation just takes a few small scenes out of context and blows them out of all proportion. Heck, his motive for Nanjo as an accomplice is based on a single line in EP3, a line that doesn't even remotely imply what he turns it into!

His solutions for the mysteries are also just based on poking gaps in the red and finding something that wasn't denied, not finding a solution that fits the themes of the story. So according to him, if Battler had just happened to suggest a particular trick in any of the twilights, Beatrice wouldn't have been able to answer? Please. Battler reached the answer by rereading the whole tale, fantasy scenes and 1998 scenes and all, not just looking at the words in red. That's Erika's approach, which was shown repeatedly to be wrong.
Drifloon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-05, 03:43   Link #29932
Asuka0NK
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Don't forget he disregards everything Ryukishi says.
Ryukishi "Shannon commited the murders of the 2nd Game 4-6 Twilights"

KnownNoMore "This is a lie said by Ryukishi to try and fool his readers into believing a false truth that he constructed just to lead the reader into being confused on the path to the truth. Through my skills I was able to look past his trick and find the truth the he had hidden between the lines"
__________________
Asuka0NK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-05, 06:15   Link #29933
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
You know, while I share your opinion on this guy and his theory, in the end if you are among the people who thinks it's not wrong to keep a story filled with mysteries like Umineko open to any kind of interpretation without writing a clear solution, you can't really complain that people like him pops up and give their own messed up interpretation.

Umineko might even become to be completely misinterpreted by the majority of its readers, supposing it isn't already, but Ryuukishi won't have any reason to complain about that, it's just what he himself created with his own hands. And if you think he did it right, you won't have any either.


People like Knownomore exist everywhere, you'll always find some guy who thinks he's smarter than everyone else and interprets a story in ways that completely defy the most simple and straightforward interpretation. And people like him are usually not just content with their finding, they need to proselityze, probably because replacing a truth with their own is their main objective and they seek consensus, which in turn create more proselityzing people looking for consensus. In my personal view, they are comparable to cancer, no offense. There's been a lot of them revolving around "Final Fantasy VII", "Final Fantasy VIII" and even more about "Evangelion". It's usually wherever the story isn't clear enough that these people flocks to. Just like bacteria multiply wherever the immunitary defenses are weak.
A story that is willingly leaving holes and wide margin of interpretations is inviting cancer and rot to fest upon itself. That's only to be expected.
__________________


Last edited by Jan-Poo; 2012-08-05 at 06:27.
Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-05, 06:34   Link #29934
Thunder Book
Endless Member
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
I really hope you're not trying to suggest ambiguity is always a bad thing for stories or art in general to use.

In the case of something like Umineko's mysteries that were clearly set up as a puzzle for us to solve though, I find myself in agreement that the lack of a clearly defined answer in the narrative itself is dissatisfying.
Thunder Book is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-05, 07:05   Link #29935
Wanderer
Goat
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Gnawing away at Rokkenjima
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
~~~
But unlike the other stories you mentioned, Umineko's metafictional format actively addresses this topic through the use of a certain character as a parody of this kind of behavior. The ironic part is that KnownNoMore is himself too busy being an "intellectual rapist" to even realize that Umineko is making fun of him right in front of his face.
Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-05, 10:29   Link #29936
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunder Book View Post
I really hope you're not trying to suggest ambiguity is always a bad thing for stories or art in general to use.

In the case of something like Umineko's mysteries that were clearly set up as a puzzle for us to solve though, I find myself in agreement that the lack of a clearly defined answer in the narrative itself is dissatisfying.
I didn't explain it clearly, but that's what I meant. It's a different case when there's a story where there isn't any claim of a right or wrong interpretation, for example: "2001 space odyssey" or "yume nikki".

But when there's a clear assumption that a right interpretation must exist, then the kind of people I mentioned before can make their claim of "knowing the truth" more substantial because a truth must necessarily exist (and they claim it's theirs), whereas in a situation of apparent ambiguity, that is when the author himself explicitly or implicitly tells us that you can see whatever you wants in his work or part of it, it'd just be anothet theory/interpretation and not a "truth" that simply doesn't exist.


Evangelion and the Final Fantasy I mentioned are stories that have a clear canon, they just happened to have a few not well addressed plot points that were promptly exploited. The first decidedly more than the others, and Final Fantasy VII fixed many of its own with the sequels.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wanderer View Post
But unlike the other stories you mentioned, Umineko's metafictional format actively addresses this topic through the use of a certain character as a parody of this kind of behavior. The ironic part is that KnownNoMore is himself too busy being an "intellectual rapist" to even realize that Umineko is making fun of him right in front of his face.
The aforementioned works did not willingly left some parts unaddressed, (well maybe evangelion did a bit...) they try to explain everything and some questions were answered later in sequels or in the "ultimania omega". In some cases I would even agree with the authors if they'd say "I didn't even think I needed to specify this point as it seems obvious enough", but never underestimate the "revisionists".

In the case of Umineko it's a specific will of the author to let matters unanswered, and yet he tells us that a truth exists and we need to find it, except there's absolutely no way to check if a theory is true or not and it all depends on interpretations.

You see, for example now you say that Umineko is telling us that the kind of behavior of wanting to find a truth at all costs and push it into others is what the story is stelling us that is wrong.
But alas that's yet again nothing but your own interpretation. In the end Ryuukishi si giving us mixed inputs about everything, even that.
Because if you really had to take the way of "love" and "magic" such as the "magic" choice at the end of Umineko, you're told that you shouldn't even bother looking for the truth, that the truth is meaningless, and that it's just better to think that everyone was a good person.

The only choice where you actually state the truth, and the obvious truth is that Beatrice used a trick and not magic, is the path of the witch of truth, that is Erika.
This would mean that if you want to find the truth no matter what, then Erika's path is the "right" path, and it's only "wrong" from the perspective of one who prefers to believe in magic and witches.

Let's not forget that there are people that interpreted the goats scene of EP8 as Ryuukishi making fun of the whole readers. If you ask Knownomore he'd probably tell you that Ryuukishi is not making of him, or that it's just yet another of his dirty tactics to discourage us from finding the truth, or whatever...
__________________


Last edited by Jan-Poo; 2012-08-05 at 10:48.
Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-05, 12:36   Link #29937
Asuka0NK
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
I don't get why people think the Goats scene in Ep 8 as making fun of the reader. I thought it was more of telling of how you must have love. Solving a mystery without love is meaningless. You can have love but still solve the mystery. This is how Willard solved the entire mystery. You can't solve the mystery with love alone or you will be blinded by the illusion of the witch. You also can't solve the mystery with logic alone or you will think it is ridiculous and will tear apart the meaning. A mystery like Umineko can only be solved with love and logic together because if not you can't solve it.
__________________
Asuka0NK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-05, 14:20   Link #29938
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Frankly I think that the claim that "you need love to solve this" is a bit pretentious and it's been abused by speculators to support completely opposite theories.
In the end it doesn't seem that "having love" is helping understanding umineko any better, at best is helping in appreciating it, but I think there's the problem, never addressed in umineko, that maybe not everyone and everything is deserving of love.

I can solve a riddle even if I think it's stupid, trivial and ridiculous. Actually if you have "love" and you start by the assumption that it can't be ridiculous, then that might just prevent you from accepting an obvious answer.

I know this was often the case with Umineko, especially with shkanon. How many times I've heard that shkanon can't be true because it would destroy their favorite couple worship? Or because shkanon doesn't make any sense, it's narratively bad, and therefore cannot be true? Or because shkanon requires to imagine a stupid trick in the red truths of EP3 therefore it can't be true?

You can interpret "love" however you want in the end. That doesn't really help.

And if you consider that Umineko is probably about stories where a whole family gets slaughtered because a girl couldn't find a better way to solve her love troubles, then rather than thinking that "ai ga nakereba mienai" it's probably wiser to say "ai ga nakereba yokatta".
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-05, 14:46   Link #29939
Kealym
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
The only choice where you actually state the truth, and the obvious truth is that Beatrice used a trick and not magic, is the path of the witch of truth, that is Erika.
This would mean that if you want to find the truth no matter what, then Erika's path is the "right" path, and it's only "wrong" from the perspective of one who prefers to believe in magic and witches.
Well, "Trick" was my personal choice, because I agree more with Erika than with BATTLER by the end of the story. But it's pretty hard to stomach, 'cause "I care about the truth and not being lied to" is somehow equated with "I have completely given up on regarding perspectives other than my own, and will start shooting people in the face at the slightest imagined provocation. Because other people ALWAYS lie about EVERYTHING in order to try to shoot ME in the face."

So, yknow, you pick the 'Magic' ending because it actually reaches some kind of believable resolution that doesn't involve ghosts cheering people into a life murderous misanthropy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asuka0NK View Post
I don't get why people think the Goats scene in Ep 8 as making fun of the reader. I thought it was more of telling of how you must have love.
I agree that Ryu probably wasn't openly mocking the readers. But you have to be able to see how it can be read that way, right? The goats ARE a readership approaching the story in one way or another, literally being told "this isn't FOR you!" and being described as a monstrous horde attempting to tear apart the cast we've come to (presumably) care about and send them to hell. And while their tone was rather dick-ish, none of the goats arguments, that we got to SEE, were at all unreasonable based on the narratives they had been prodived. And as has already been pointed discussed in the past, due to the information they'd have because for them, the Ushiromiya's were REAL people who had died, the goats are also pretty dumb.

You know a line I found really really interesting, in EP8? During the Golden Land battle, when it came to how the relatives were fighting the goats, too, it was something like "If a goat supports fantasy, they can use their guns to destroy them. If a goat supports mystery, they can use their guns in a much more obvious way." And it seemed to imply that (since all the fighting was with/about proposing and denying theories, of course), the human pieces were all willing to claim themselves a murderer to deny a theory, if necessary, or something.

Man, he should totally have edited Godha and Kumasawa with sprites for having guns, that would've been, just, keen.
Kealym is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-05, 14:51   Link #29940
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
I can solve a riddle even if I think it's stupid, trivial and ridiculous. Actually if you have "love" and you start by the assumption that it can't be ridiculous, then that might just prevent you from accepting an obvious answer.
This turns out to have been my problem exactly. I just couldn't believe that the solution would be stupid. Guess I got shown.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asuka0NK View Post
A mystery like Umineko can only be solved with love and logic together because if not you can't solve it.
Except you can't solve it even with love and logic. There has to be a solution for it to be solvable. You cannot solve Umineko. I cannot solve Umineko. Umineko, at present, is unsolvable and has no solution.

If "love and logic together" could solve the story, one could use them to reach a conclusion which must be true, something that logic alone cannot do at present. However, no amount or type of "love" is capable of doing this. We can guess, and we can speculate, but we can't solve, whether we have "love" or not.

If anything, all an excess of "love" does is make every culprit completely unsatisfying. Now, that might be the point, but we have no way of proving it. Likewise, the ultimate unknowability of any solution may also be the point, but if it is, there are other problems in that message.
__________________
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 22:09.


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