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 2013-06-11, 14:03   Link #32421
Dormin
Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreyZone View Post
I don't believe it... if R07 intended the line of Battler's "Higurashi is my favorite Novel" to be some kind of foreshadowing for the value of the meta-world (for example that Ikuko made Tohya remember his memories by telling him things that made some kind of impact, like his favorite music, his favorite movie AND his favorite novel), then I am speechless. actually it IS the only clue we actually have about the Higurashi look-alikes aside from the "fanservice" and "possibly same universe" excuses, but on the other hand people who don't know Higurashi would be in an unfair position.
Considering umineko as stand-alone (and I'd say it very much is, as the relation to higurashi is couple very subtle references), you are right when claiming that if higurashi references inside meta are meant as possible hints towards the "solution of meta" (I don't know if Ryu ever meant meta to be explained with being something, rather than leaving it completely up for the debate) it would be unfair towards people that have no knowledge in higurashi. Therefore the claim that battler/someone constructed meta and some of the characters as illusions mixing fictional works would mean that Ryu expected every reader to actually get the references.

But hell, even if it is not true and the truth of meta's existence is never meant to be perfectly solved, it would make perfect sense. I doubt, as you said, that any references are meant to be hints because that would be pretty bad story-telling, but still, it goddamn makes sense.

So I'd say I actually grew to like this theory of meta's existence very much, even though it is clearly just an interesting theory. If we want to believe in totally fictional meta, the entire aspect backs the delusion in a very psychological way. Aside obvious flaws in theory, I'd say it is at least worth thinking about.
Dormin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-06-15, 15:06   Link #32422
rogerpepitone
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Send a message via Yahoo to rogerpepitone
Quote:
Originally Posted by haguruma View Post
Rereading the EP7 Tea Party for some reason I actually got reminded why I found some of the criticism against the bomb story so weird, because it totally works in the confines of how Umineko is set up, even when proposing a real world of Prime.

The island was first planned as a submarine base connected to the Kaiten project, but the plan was quickly scrapped and these parts are often left out of discussions I feel.
  1. The new plan was for Rokkenjima to become one of the starting points of a pincer attack in case the Americans started landing in Tokyo bay (which could have happened). It was only then that the 900 tons of explosives were installed on Rokkenjima.
  2. As soon as the war appeared to be lost they panicked what would happen if the Americans would find the explosives, so they set up the self destruct system around the island.
  3. Kinzo knew about the system and left it in place (he did not install it himself)
  4. This whole plan was top secret and would be a plan that was never found out by the Americans. So this would actually be a threat to world safety, as Japan would have knowingly violated protocol of the postwar period.

I know it could be questioned why they didn't at least force Kinzo to deinstall the self-destruct mechanism, but on the other hand, his knowledge about those explosives was likely what got him in good favor with the Japanese part of the government so nobody opposed him.
Maybe nobody else knew. Maybe the original plans for the base got misfiled. Maybe Rokkenjima was one person's pet project, and he died at some point, or changed his mind. (I get the feeling that Rokkenjima had been mostly forgotten even back while the war was going on.)
rogerpepitone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-06-17, 23:09   Link #32423
Patchwork Chimera
Human
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Crime Scene
I re-read the novels recently, what with the Chiru voice/PS3 Pc patch going out, and I noticed something about that Trick or Magic ending.

Spoiler for Magic:


Spoiler for Trick:


So, the things that happen in both places are
Spoiler for ==:


I... really didn't like EP8 in relation with the rest of Umineko's premise. It was basically only an OMK spinoff with nothing for the thinkers but some insipid half-assed puzzles and thinly veiled insults.
PS3 only backgrounds on the battles are badass, though.
__________________
~º~º~º~
Sin importar cuanto busques la respuesta, ésta te aludirá con certeza hasta que estés listo para escucharla.

Last edited by Patchwork Chimera; 2013-06-18 at 09:25.
Patchwork Chimera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-06-18, 08:04   Link #32424
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
I would quite honestly have liked to have seen an entirely different Tea Party for the Trick ending. I mean, it's not really an ending given the vast differences in content between Trick and Magic. But ep8 does appear to have been pretty badly rushed, so that might be part of 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 2013-06-19, 06:04   Link #32425
ndqanh_vn
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
I am surprised at how active this box still is after Umineko ended. (Granted, there are just usual faces around here.) After it ends, sometimes I wonder and consider about what had happened, but cannot make a solution that satisfy me or save my image of Ryukishi as a good mystery writer. (He is very good with suspense and horror, but after Umineko I guess mystery is just not his strong point)


After all, I had thought of a theory about the person that Eva, Ange, Beatrice and Battler has been trying to cover for. It might be Geogre, maybe Battler and family, but those solution don’t really satisfy me for moral issue. As Christie wrote in “Ordeal by innocence”, the truth could be devastating, the truth could kill everyone’s future, but it must be exposed, the culprit must be judged, because if it is kept hidden, the innocent people would be suffered. Therefore, the answer that there is one mastermind could not satisfy me, because no ways in hell I could show sympathy to EP8 then.


Therefore I propose…or rather suggest, as what I propose lacks evidents to be the truth (I cannot find enough time to sit and play 8 games again – much as I like Umineko, some section is just dead boring): There are not a single culprit in Prime. Everybody is guilty. Everybody kills someone, and there’s no mastermind behind it.


1. I think, Yasu is always the culprit of the gameboard. It is not hard to propose how did she (the character) killed everyone in the story. But in Prime, I think all she did is an innocent murder game. She bribed some of the parents and told the servants into this. The part about the bomb, I think she did not flip it. It is just a challenge for the three cousins, so why does she have to consider to make the whole islands goes KABOOM?

2. The murder game happened, and something was wrong. The atmosphere is just too toxic: too stressful, too suspicious. People who did not know it was a game start to get paranoid, and people who knew started to suspect whether it was just a game. In the end somebody snapped (I put a bet on Rosa or Natsuhi, those poor women had always been on the verge of insanity) and people started to kill each other for real, some for greed, some for being paranoid and some only for self defence.

3. Yasu got scared that everything spiralled out of her control. Unable to save people or stop them from killing each other, she let the bomb go off to erase all evidence after releasing Legend and Turn in the ocean to put all the blame on “Beatrice”. Those messages are written quickly because they are based on notes of various scenario Yasu had thought of for her mystery game.

The reason for Angle to be so broken when she learned the truth is not his parents to be the murderers, but they and everybody had been killed for such a stupid envinronment, that there are no right and wrong, there are no “villian” for her to pour all her hatred into like Eva, because what was there is just a family that is broken beyong help.

Eva probably guessed that, so she kept silent. It is better to hate somebody than to know the truth, so she kept silent for Ange’s sake. Or she felt the whole things is uncomfortable too and wanted to tell Ange later. But then the relationship has gone to sour for it to work out between them.

It is just my thoughts, really.

Anyways, I love you guys, really. Your discussion is always interesting to read. One of my most interesting experiences while reading Umineko is to follow this thread. As a writer struggling to have her books out, I really learn a lot from your discussion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
I would quite honestly have liked to have seen an entirely different Tea Party for the Trick ending. I mean, it's not really an ending given the vast differences in content between Trick and Magic. But ep8 does appear to have been pretty badly rushed, so that might be part of it.

I understand this feeling, it's like he's trying to force us to choose "magic", since the trick ending is obviously a bad, bad, horribly bad ending ...The whole "multiple endings" there is just for decoration somehow...

Last edited by ndqanh_vn; 2013-06-19 at 06:28.
ndqanh_vn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-06-19, 10:46   Link #32426
GreyZone
"Senior" "Member"
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndqanh_vn View Post
I understand this feeling, it's like he's trying to force us to choose "magic", since the trick ending is obviously a bad, bad, horribly bad ending ...The whole "multiple endings" there is just for decoration somehow...
The funny thing is thought, if you look at it another way, the endings make sense.

It was our own assumption that "trick" and "magic" refer to our opinion on whether the events on Rokkenjima, were "magic" or "tricks".

However in the end the actual meaning was the ending itself. "Magic Ending" would be a "magical ending", as the name itself already says. It does not say "happy" or "bad" ending. It simply is a miracalous ending.
On the other hand the "Trick Ending" is just that: An ending that tricks you (and Ange).

Beatrice's show with the sweet (and her suddenly changing her presenting hand) that brought up this question can be also seen like that. The question wasn't if it was accomplished by magical powers or a sleight of hand, but the question was about the INTENTION of Beatrice.

Magic implies that it is supposed to bring out curiosity and excitment and leave the audience in awe. The presentation itself was the goal.
However Trick implies that actively fooling the audience for achieving a certain selfish goal is the motive. The presentation is just a means for another goal.


So my interpretation actually REVERSES the view on everything. "Trick" is actually the thing that hides more than "Magic".
And this also brings me back to Eva's diary: While it contains truth, it is also subjective. Also the personal view of Eva may have deteriorated the truth in it, resulting in false conclusions. It is a half truth or a "Trick".
__________________
GreyZone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-06-19, 11:19   Link #32427
haguruma
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Germany
Age: 30
Send a message via ICQ to haguruma Send a message via MSN to haguruma
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreyZone View Post
Magic implies that it is supposed to bring out curiosity and excitment and leave the audience in awe. The presentation itself was the goal.
However Trick implies that actively fooling the audience for achieving a certain selfish goal is the motive. The presentation is just a means for another goal.
Which leads me back to a question I asked ages ago, why was "hand" presented in Violet Truth? Doesn't it clearly hint that our own perception of doubting or believing this trick is intrinsically linked to our belief or disbelief into what Beatrice and therefore the message bottle narratives are trying to tell us?
Only the culprit is able to lie while using the Violet Truth, so what does this tell us about this riddle and what it poses towards the whole story?
haguruma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-06-19, 11:47   Link #32428
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by haguruma View Post
Which leads me back to a question I asked ages ago, why was "hand" presented in Violet Truth? Doesn't it clearly hint that our own perception of doubting or believing this trick is intrinsically linked to our belief or disbelief into what Beatrice and therefore the message bottle narratives are trying to tell us?
Only the culprit is able to lie while using the Violet Truth, so what does this tell us about this riddle and what it poses towards the whole story?
Well, here's the problem. There's a number of questions we'd have to ask there:
  • What does it mean when purple statements are used for a non-declaration? The scene in question is a third-person narrative, not a line of dialogue. If it is a declaratory statement of fact, then...
  • ...who is declaring it? Beatrice isn't declaring it; the scene is describing her doing it. If anyone is declaring her hand status to be fact, it's the person writing the scene. So...
  • ...who wrote this scene? It doesn't seem like it belongs in somebody's work of fiction, does it? I mean if it did, we could maybe say the writer was Beatrice, or Battler/Tohya, but in that case does it mean that if Trick is valid, that writer is the one who is the culprit (as only the culprit can lie)? Is the writer Ryukishi, as this is omniscient third-person narration? Is he incapable of lying since he's not even a character in the story and thus can't be a culprit? Is he capable of lying because he sort of is the culprit, as the author and thus the one who made all the deaths happen? It gets too meta-fictional-messy to provide valid and useful information.
Let's assume that he's just blatantly mucking about with his own notion of what purple text even is and that we're supposed to believe these statements are red truth unless we think Beatrice is the culprit. What does that even matter thematically? Ange doesn't even think Beatrice is the culprit. Is it strictly for our consumption as the audience? It'd have to be; nobody can see that text but us. In that case, is it asking us "do you think Beatrice is the culprit?" How does that comport with the notion of us believing, say, that Rudolf and Kyrie are the culprits? Surely that's also just as wrong as thinking Beatrice is, as it's based on essentially the same level of information (i.e. none, actually arguably even less). What is the point of those purple hand assignments in context, given that they don't agree with the rules established for them?

Also worth noting one of the rules of the whole purple game was "Outside of spoken statements, there are no lies in the narration," which would sorta directly contradict that whole "purple text in narrative description." You can argue that only applies to Bern's game specifically, but in that case why the hell is purple being used anywhere else? Why should some rules apply, but not others? If we take every single rule to apply then we must conclude that the statements are true, because the rules tell us they are... or I guess we could argue they're meaningless, as they're used in violation of the rules, but even if they're meaningless we could still believe them to be true.
__________________
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 2013-06-19, 11:47   Link #32429
GreyZone
"Senior" "Member"
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by haguruma View Post
Which leads me back to a question I asked ages ago, why was "hand" presented in Violet Truth? Doesn't it clearly hint that our own perception of doubting or believing this trick is intrinsically linked to our belief or disbelief into what Beatrice and therefore the message bottle narratives are trying to tell us?
Only the culprit is able to lie while using the Violet Truth, so what does this tell us about this riddle and what it poses towards the whole story?
"Left Hand" and "Right Hand" are in purple. And the rule you talked about can only be applied for the segments of the sentence that are in purple. Maybe it is supposed to show that Beatrice is not the culprit but just giving the front of one? Although she is tricking and lying all the time she did NOT lie with the purple truth. This may or may not involve a "devils proof", that, while a culprit can lie, the culprit doesn't have to. But can you imagine any significant lie there?

If she would indeed lie about the hands then it is either:

1. Using pockets on her dress
2. Simply switching right and left in both cases, which essentially doesn't change the sleight of hand in any way
3. "Hiding" the fact that she "really" used magic by showing a version that is more plausible as a sleight of hand, but this just seems ridiculous

So my bet is that that purple declaration is... true
__________________
GreyZone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-06-19, 11:51   Link #32430
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreyZone View Post
"Left Hand" and "Right Hand" are in purple. And the rule you talked about can only be applied for the segments of the sentence that are in purple. Maybe it is supposed to show that Beatrice is not the culprit but just giving the front of one? Although she is tricking and lying all the time she did NOT lie with the purple truth. This may or may not involve a "devils proof", that, while a culprit can lie, the culprit doesn't have to. But can you imagine any significant lie there?
Yeah but the problem is Beatrice isn't lying (or not). The descriptive narrative is lying (or not). What would be true/untrue about the specific purple statement is only whether the narrative is actually describing the left/right hand in describing Beatrice's actions.

What Beatrice does would not change in this scene were the hand status in purple, red, or no color at all. She is not making any statement of fact in those lines; the narrator is. So she... kinda can't lie in this scene as I see it, because she didn't say anything and the only person who can use those descriptors is the author, not Beatrice herself.
__________________
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 2013-06-19, 12:00   Link #32431
GreyZone
"Senior" "Member"
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Yeah but the problem is Beatrice isn't lying (or not). The descriptive narrative is lying (or not). What would be true/untrue about the specific purple statement is only whether the narrative is actually describing the left/right hand in describing Beatrice's actions.

What Beatrice does would not change in this scene were the hand status in purple, red, or no color at all. She is not making any statement of fact in those lines; the narrator is. So she... kinda can't lie in this scene as I see it, because she didn't say anything and the only person who can use those descriptors is the author, not Beatrice herself.
Regardless under whose authority these purple declarations were made, it is still unlikely that they were lies. It seems more like these purple declarations were intentionally (mis)used as either a hint or a misdirection/red herring for the trick or magic decision.
__________________
GreyZone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-06-19, 12:36   Link #32432
Drifloon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
I think you might be reading too much into this? I assumed the purple text was just used as a way to emphasise the fact that she switched hands, making the 'trick' blindingly obvious for anyone who would be inclined to expose it. The fact that it's purple doesn't really matter; any other means of emphasis would have served the same purpose.
Drifloon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-06-19, 12:43   Link #32433
haguruma
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Germany
Age: 30
Send a message via ICQ to haguruma Send a message via MSN to haguruma
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Let's assume that he's just blatantly mucking about with his own notion of what purple text even is and that we're supposed to believe these statements are red truth unless we think Beatrice is the culprit. What does that even matter thematically?
It is not necessarily going back to the question of guilt, I'd rather say it is about freeing people from guilt. In case we believe in magic everybody is free from guilt and even Beatrice is absolved from being the embodiment of murder. It is basically the magic of the cat box coming true in full circle and magic fulfilling itself.
What I find important (in my reading) is that it is a conscious act of ignoring an obvious lie. Ange in this moment is in front of making the decision whether to be satisfied with the truth she built for herself or to keep trying to destroy the truth that other people built for themselves in order to make her's the only truth.

But please let's not go into the whole schtick of whether this is morally right on a grander scale again.

Quote:
Also worth noting one of the rules of the whole purple game was "Outside of spoken statements, there are no lies in the narration," which would sorta directly contradict that whole "purple text in narrative description."
As far as I understood that rule and this might be my personal understanding this meant that there would be no descriptive tricks (a genre of it's own in Japanese mystery writing) in Bern's game. This was not a comment on the purple truth itself, it merely meant (to me) that, if there is a lie it is hidden in the purple statement of whoever is the culprit, not something like omission or perspective narration by the author (like it was often done in the main Episodes).
haguruma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-06-19, 13:07   Link #32434
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by haguruma View Post
As far as I understood that rule and this might be my personal understanding this meant that there would be no descriptive tricks (a genre of it's own in Japanese mystery writing) in Bern's game. This was not a comment on the purple truth itself, it merely meant (to me) that, if there is a lie it is hidden in the purple statement of whoever is the culprit, not something like omission or perspective narration by the author (like it was often done in the main Episodes).
Either way, it's not a "statement." Bern's game was clearly set up to be the sort of game where you have to find a contradiction in testimony, and the purple exists to provide context for the game through a series of testimonial statements. Transitioned into a narrative, it doesn't actually seem to serve any purpose. As Drifloon said, all it really does is call attention to the action Beatrice takes. Yet it uses a mechanic that was rather extensively developed through a series of rules earlier.

It's like laughing in red without the dramatic gravitas laughing in red provided when Beatrice actually did it in the first few episodes.
__________________
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 2013-06-19, 14:43   Link #32435
Dormin
Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Maybe the purple truth actually has no deeper meaning, and was introduced only as a gameplay element making bern's challenge possible? I know this is bit of a lame theory but I wouldn't put it past Ryu.

Also sorry to break the flow of the current discussion, but I was wondering something that I at least don't remember. I was replaying ep 5, and Natsuhi receives a phonecall, probably made by Yasu. Is the phone call considered a "fact" and a prime-world event, and is the caller actually Yasu?
Dormin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-06-19, 14:54   Link #32436
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dormin View Post
Maybe the purple truth actually has no deeper meaning, and was introduced only as a gameplay element making bern's challenge possible? I know this is bit of a lame theory but I wouldn't put it past Ryu.
The issue here isn't its use in Bern's game, where it's fairly clear what it is and what it does. The issue is at the end near the Trick/Magic choice where it's inexplicably used again. Or maybe that text just happens to be purple... or... something.
__________________
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 2013-06-19, 15:28   Link #32437
Dormin
Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
To be honest I don't even remember the part so my speculation might be a bit useless, but I'd say I pretty much agree with drifloon and his theory:

Quote:
I think you might be reading too much into this? I assumed the purple text was just used as a way to emphasise the fact that she switched hands, making the 'trick' blindingly obvious for anyone who would be inclined to expose it. The fact that it's purple doesn't really matter; any other means of emphasis would have served the same purpose.
It could be seen as a way to underline the entire concept of magic possible to explain with tricks and therefore give the reader possibility to make his own conclusion of the existence of magic
Dormin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-06-19, 19:26   Link #32438
Valkama
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Pretty much what Drifloon said. The purple is used to bring attention to important parts of the story as Bern said I believe.
Valkama is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-06-19, 19:41   Link #32439
DaBackpack
Blick Winkel
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Gobbled up by Promathia
I imagined the use of purple as "the story's final riddle" and a prelude to the decision Ange (the reader) makes with with Trick/Magic ending. So I didn't really look into precisely who the purple "belongs to" (the narrator or Beatrice) that much because the point is pretty much the same: do you believe Beatrice? Do you trust that it's magic or will you deny it?

I can see where you're coming from, but it's not worse than Beatrice's Ahahahahaha!s throughout EP2 (laughter is not a statement and cannot have a truth value).
DaBackpack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-06-19, 22:36   Link #32440
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaBackpack View Post
I can see where you're coming from, but it's not worse than Beatrice's Ahahahahaha!s throughout EP2 (laughter is not a statement and cannot have a truth value).
Actually it is worse, because of exactly what you said. There's no way to interpret red laughter as true or false, but it seems like there's some kind of fact statement being made there, it's just not really being made by anyone.

I'm pretty sure the intent is clear as people have said, it's just... probably an awkward implementation, is all.
__________________
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 12:39.


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