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 2010-01-07, 01:12   Link #5121
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
@Used Can:
Spoiler for size:


Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginari View Post
Yeah, I thought that chronotrig was trying some sort of twisted logic experiment at first, but now I'm confused at how far he's been taking it. I'm sure that having an ill person do an impossible impersonation for no reason violates more Knox rules than it satisfies. And it's silly.
Try going back and reading my points. I've mentioned at least 3 possible motives for Nanjo's granddaughter. True, most of them could also apply to other people, but good luck making a theory where all three fit to someone else.

Almost all of this theory comes from deductive reasoning based on Shkanontrice. It's not just something I invented off the top of my head.
__________________
"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers


www.witch-hunt.com Theory page
chronotrig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-07, 01:44   Link #5122
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Isn't your theory sort of completely destroyed if Nanjo's granddaughter was, like, 10 in 1986?

I mean, let's be as generous as possible and say Nanjo is 70 in 1986. I doubt he's even that old. His son would be like 40ish, maybe? His kid could be 19 years old at the absolute limit here. And if either of them is any younger in '86 it becomes increasingly ridiculous.

Nanjo Jr. doesn't look that old in 1998. Mid-late 40s I'd say, maybe around 50 at the oldest. I think it's more likely Nanjo Sr. was 50-60 and Nanjo Jr. was in his mid-20s or early 30s in 1986. Nanjo's grandchild would be very, very young.

No offense, but the whole notion is patently absurd.
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-07, 01:44   Link #5123
LyricalAura
Dea ex Kakera
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sea of Fragments
I'm still reading through Episode 6, but some of the new info got me thinking about the magic circle artist.

Spoiler for Episode 6:

EDIT:
Just to pile onto chrono's theory, which I also think is absurd: Nanjo was a key member of the conspiracy to hide Kinzo's death. How could his granddaughter possibly find out about that? And if she didn't know, how did she avoid blowing her cover around the other conspirators?
LyricalAura is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-07, 02:03   Link #5124
CainSonozaki
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalAura View Post
Spoiler for Episode 6:
Spoiler for questions:
CainSonozaki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-07, 02:11   Link #5125
Used Can
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by CainSonozaki View Post
Spoiler for questions:
That was just the impression Battler got when he first met her.
__________________
"The name is Tin; Used is just an alias. I'm everything Shoe Box would like to be." - Used Can of the Aluminium Kingdom
Used Can is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-07, 02:22   Link #5126
Kaiba
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Houston
Quote:
However, unless there is another theory that's more reasonable, the sole theory that explains everything is the best option out there. Mine doesn't explain quite everything, but if you don't like it, I'm challenging you to find one that explains more. The worst that happens to me is I get proven wrong but find out the correct answer, or I can use any opposing theory to strengthen mine. That's how the game is played.
I don't buy this for a minute, as frankly under that logic the best theory from the beginning was that a witch did the murders with magic or that rampaging grizzly bears destroyed Rokkenjima. And of course your theory can only be improved with thought, as the same applies for my Shannon theory.
I'll personally admit I have a massive problem with your theory, as I absolutely hate hate hate playing word games with the red truth, as it just leads to ridiculous theories as what happens nearly all the time is people come up with crazy theories and scream out how since the red truth actually means this completely different thing than what you would think it does, it works. As far as I'm concerned, the whole concept of Nanjo being used to refer to his granddaughter or whatever is bunk and is a word game. How is it really that different from what Forsaken was spouting with his Battler culprit theories when he argued that when it was said Battler is not the culprit, that Virgillia meant the other Battler. Heck, there's evidence that there's a second Battler out there too along with evidence of Nanjo's granddaughter. When Beatrice says Nanjo, she means the Nanjo in Rokkenjima whom is Kinzo's doctor, not some Nanjo in Africa or Nanjo's granddaughter. And as long as I create my theories under that rule, I have no interest in some bizarre scheme where a 10 year old girl can disguise herself as a 60 year old man and kill 16 people.
Kaiba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-07, 02:25   Link #5127
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Nanjo Jr. doesn't look that old in 1998. Mid-late 40s I'd say, maybe around 50 at the oldest.
50-12=38 38-19=19
Add on a few years for the "around" part and it's possible even by your reckoning. Or are you really going to fight over a couple years using a Ryuukishi tachi-e?

And even if the ages didn't match up exactly, there's still the chance that Nanjo's granddaughter really did come from the Fukuin House. We know that the child from 19 years ago exists, and we know that it survived. The only people who could possibly have had anything to do with that are Nanjo, Kumasawa, and Genji. Unless someone took that child in, how did it survive? Of course, it's also very possible the child died and someone who knew the truth fooled Natsuhi. But if it did survive, there's only a very small number of people it could have grown up to be.
__________________
"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers


www.witch-hunt.com Theory page
chronotrig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-07, 02:26   Link #5128
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronotrig View Post
50-12=38 38-19=19
Add on a few years for the "around" part and it's possible even by your reckoning. Or are you really going to fight over a couple years using a Ryuukishi tachi-e?

And even if the ages didn't match up, there's still the chance that Nanjo's granddaughter really did come from the Fukuin House. We know that child exists, and we know that it survived. The only people who could possibly have had anything to do with that are Nanjo, Kumasawa, and Genji.
It's just grasping at awfully obscure straws to come up with what amounts to a Person X theory. Surely the "true mastermind" is not going to be something that ridiculous.

To clarify: I think the persons behind everything, and I mean everything (whether they're a unified front or not) at the very least have been given a portrait by now.
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-07, 02:30   Link #5129
Used Can
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
I'm still vouching for the Manon theory.

That "Ma/眞" kanji is suspicious, I tell you.
__________________
"The name is Tin; Used is just an alias. I'm everything Shoe Box would like to be." - Used Can of the Aluminium Kingdom
Used Can is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-07, 02:32   Link #5130
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Used Can View Post
I'm still vouching for the Manon theory.
Well, ep2 can be explained entirely as a series of hilarious accidents, so I guess anything is possible... even small bombs.
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-07, 02:32   Link #5131
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
It's just grasping at awfully obscure straws to come up with what amounts to a Person X theory. Surely the "true mastermind" is not going to be something that ridiculous.

To clarify: I think the persons behind everything, and I mean everything (whether they're a unified front or not) at the very least have been given a portrait by now.
As I've said, even Beatrice doesn't know who the true culprit is, so she couldn't hint towards it. That doesn't mean it's impossible to guess at the true culprit. Nanjo is suspicious enough even without all of this granddaughter stuff. As I've said, my EP1 theory doesn't rely on this part of the theory at all.

If you can't accept it, pretend I'm saying that Nanjo is the culprit and that his true motive is an added bonus that won't be announced until later. If my theory does by some wild chance happen to be right, this should still work to explain all of the murders.
__________________
"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers


www.witch-hunt.com Theory page
chronotrig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-07, 02:34   Link #5132
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronotrig View Post
If you can't accept it, pretend I'm saying that Nanjo is the culprit and that his true motive is an added bonus that won't be announced until later. If my theory does by some wild chance happen to be right, it should still work.
I'm certainly willing to believe Nanjo himself may be up to something. I just don't see the point of any layers of abstraction beyond that. Nanjo has the added benefit of piles upon piles of obvious lies, provable concealment of the truth, and suspiciously absent alibis. The main thing he has going against him is "the doctor did it" is right up there with "the butler did it" in murder cliches.
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-07, 02:38   Link #5133
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
I'm certainly willing to believe Nanjo himself may be up to something. I just don't see the point of any layers of abstraction beyond that. Nanjo has the added benefit of piles upon piles of obvious lies, provable concealment of the truth, and suspiciously absent alibis. The main thing he has going against him is "the doctor did it" is right up there with "the butler did it" in murder cliches.
Well, that works out fine for now, I guess. The "layers of abstraction" just go to explain the meta-world, something not many people even try to do. They probably don't pertain directly to the mystery.
__________________
"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers


www.witch-hunt.com Theory page
chronotrig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-07, 04:40   Link #5134
ijriims
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: HK, China
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronotrig View Post
As I mentioned, I interpret this to mean "No one ever misidentifies a corpse." In my mind, a "body double trick" occurs when a person uses one corpse to confuse an observer into thinking it's a different corpse. I think this is a reasonable definition. And in my theory, this never happens.
If it is the case, I could also make Kyrie alive throughout EP1 since the "body" Battler saw was just a mannequin, which did not contradict the red texts since "body double trick" meant using corpse to pretend someone else's corpse.

I can then give out my Kyrie=mastermind=Beatrice theory to answer ALL questions (howdunit, whodunit, whydunit, metaworld, background, etc) from EP1 to 5 without incurring 18X or 17X, even EP6 if you ask me. I don't even need Nanjo to be an accomplice from the beginning.

A competing theory you want.

---------------

By the way, let me give out my understanding of chessboard and red & golden texts.

red texts=Chessboard's truth and golden texts=real world's truth theory:

None of the episodes we read, EP1-6, were telling the actual truth. In fact, all the episodes (EP1-4) were just Beatrice's tales about what happened in the catbox. EP5 was Lambda's, while EP6 was Battler's.

All of them were like letters-in-the-bottle, or novels written by Hachijou, a tale, a speculation. Still, they contained some clues and hints pointing at the "Answer". In EP1-4, Meta-Beatrice was the one who was inside the catbox, so she knew what actually happened on Rokkenjima on those two days. Meta-Battler, from the beginning, was just like everyone outside the island, having no ideas what happened on Rokkenjima. However, in the end of EP5, he finally grasped the "Answer" and got into the catbox.

Redtexts were "chessboard truth", like "Hamlet was a Denmark prince.". Even though it was not history, however, in the context of "Hamlet", it is the truth.

Before opening the catbox, all chessboard truth were truth. It was truth, premises set by the GM or story-teller.

Golden texts were real truth, the "Answer". It told us what really happened on Rokkenjima 4-5th Oct 1986. From EP5's golden texts, there was a burnt Kinzo corpse. So on the real Rokkenjima, Kinzo's corpse was burnt and found, like in EP1,3,4. So EP2,5 were not telling actually what happened, at least partially. Instead, all the episodes were telling what could happen on Rokkenjima, EP1,2 by Beatrice through the letters-in-the-bottles. EP3-6 through Hachichou to 1998 Ange (who did not know the content of EP3-6 initially). The only truth 1998 Ange knew was that Eva was the sole survivor from the incident, but was EP3 telling what actually happened on Rokkenjima, perhaps yes, perhaps no.

Did Erika actually ascend onto Rokkenjima? If she did not appear in EP7, then no. However, before the catbox was opened, GM could bring her onto the chessboard. And in fact, on the chessboard of EP5 and EP6, she did arrive at Rokkenjima alive and was welcomed as a guest. Just like anyone can say "Hamlet was a Denmark prince.". However, Furudo Erika, the teenage girl and as a detective, never came to Rokkenjima on 4-5th Oct 1986, either alive or dead. With this golden texts said, actually EP5 and EP6 would collapse (like opening the catbox, one of the possibility (alive or dead) would perish), like if I said There was no prince in Denmark's history called Hamlet who strived to revenge for his father's murder. Battler did not erase Erika's existence because he did not want to open the catbox yet, he was able to speak out this golden text though. Nonetheless, if he stated it out, then EP6 would collapse and that's why sometimes it was inferior to red texts and sometimes superior to it, depending on whether the GM wanted to disclose the real truth.

In EP7, with Bern as the GM, the real Rokkenjima was going to be revealed. The "Answer" was going to be exposed (lots of golden texts expected). With the new 1998 Ange getting onto Rokkenjima, she was going to tell us the real truth.

Readers, are you ready?

Last edited by ijriims; 2010-01-07 at 06:45.
ijriims is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-07, 07:07   Link #5135
Kit
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Canada
Sorry, returning quickly to ShKanonTrice...
NOTE: I have not yet read Episode 6.

For Length.

Spoiler:


Episode 2
Spoiler:


Red Truths
Spoiler:


Detective
Spoiler:


Khanontrice
Spoiler:


But even the above is a moot point - while it may be that Battler never sees them together he definitely sees their bodies. In episode 5, the red truth is given, that the total number of people in the parlor (which was everyone) is equal to the number of people in the previous games, which means that, especially in episode 1, Kanon and Shannon must be separate entities, as there are two corpses, accounted for both of them. Regardless of whether or not Battler sees the bodies of the servants in episode 3, because by being the detective, the fact that he sees both Shannon and Kanon's bodies in episode 1 should show that they are in fact two different people.

Conditions for ShKanontrice
Spoiler:


I just don't buy it...In a mystery like this, the identity of a person and their occupation often comes under scrutiny, but with the aid of the red truths, descriptions such as the status of a person, i.e. family member, or servant, cannot be mistaken. There are without doubt 5 keys, for 5 servants. There are two guests, and twelve family members, one deceased.

This makes 17 people. And since there is an "only" restriction on the masterkeys (Red text: "The only master keys are the ones that each servant holds, one per person," "There are 5 master keys, one for each servant," Shkanon would directly contradict them both. What kind of master would give two master keys to someone who thinks they're two people anyway, let alone any master keys at all?)

"Erika is the 18th person" and "With you welcomed, there are 17 people" do not contradict one another. Battler could have easily said "With you welcomed, there are 16 people." I have 4 apples, but there are 5. Shkanon is not the only solution!

In closing, it was K//eternal who offered the idea that Battler might not have crushed Erika's theory right away because that would mean sealing Beatrice away forever. Assuming this to be the case, there would be no reason for Battler to even come close to the truth when presenting his game. The character description in the TIPS also states that should Battler successfully demonstrate that he understands Beato's game correctly, Beato's game would come to a close - and yet we are onto episode 7, with Bernkastel as the game master, implying that in one way or another, Battler failed his task as game master. As with episode 4, perhaps it is better to take what we see with a grain of salt than to hop the Shkanon bandwagon and exclaim that "it's all useless!"
Kit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-07, 07:51   Link #5136
Klashikari
Swords•Maidens Maniac
*Graphic Designer
*Moderator
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Belgium, Brussels
Age: 28
Send a message via Skype™ to Klashikari
Quote:
Originally Posted by ijriims View Post
Readers, are you ready?
That doesn't make sense whatsoever to me regarding that differenciation of both truths.
Otherwise, truth like Battler's birth and kinzo's status shouldn't have an impact on all games and so forth.
The fact there is a truth only applied to the gameboard really make their value plummet for nothing.
Again, Beato clearly clarify that the red truth is the "absolute truth", providing the truth in its truest but also literal sense, which is why there are wordplay.

If a red truth can be invoked before the catbox is opened, that means any red truth "may" be false once the box is opened, which destroy the fundation of the system. Furthermore, it contradicts with stuff that are unrelated to the games and were discovered by the pieces themselves (again, Battler regarding his birth, and Beatrice regarding Sakutaro).
Klashikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-07, 08:19   Link #5137
ijriims
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: HK, China
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klashikari View Post
That doesn't make sense whatsoever to me regarding that differenciation of both truths.
Otherwise, truth like Battler's birth and kinzo's status shouldn't have an impact on all games and so forth.
The fact there is a truth only applied to the gameboard really make their value plummet for nothing.
Again, Beato clearly clarify that the red truth is the "absolute truth", providing the truth in its truest but also literal sense, which is why there are wordplay.

If a red truth can be invoked before the catbox is opened, that means any red truth "may" be false once the box is opened, which destroy the fundation of the system. Furthermore, it contradicts with stuff that are unrelated to the games and were discovered by the pieces themselves (again, Battler regarding his birth, and Beatrice regarding Sakutaro).
No. Within each chessboard, they were all literal truth. Some red texts could also apply to all chessboards. They were tales, telling some truth from the real Rokkenjima.

But were they telling what really happened on Rokkenjima on 4-5th Oct, 1986? Maybe, maybe not.

If there was only one truth on Rokkenjima, then when it was revealed, everything different from it would be eliminated. When Ryukishi07 told us what really happened on Rokkenjima, then some conflicting red texts would eliminate (like EP1 garden shed scece contradicts EP2's chapel scene. EP2 chapel scene contradicts with EP3 servants'death, which contradicts EP4's Kinzo's killing, which contradicts EP5's death inside cousins'room. They were all mutually contradictory to each other. All the red texts talking about these scenes could not be held inside on universe at the same time, which meant they could not hold at the same time on the real Rokkenjima.)

Can EP1-6 all be the real truth at the same time? Red texts told us the premises of these chessboards, these tales. They were truth inside the story "Hamlet is a Danmark Prince".

Not that red texts told us something completely fabricated, or directly contradictory to the real truth, Beatrice would not do so (Lamdba would do so, though). She wanted Battler to find out the real truth. So all the clues pointing to the "Answer" was already inside the first 4 chessboards.

It means that at least the red texts applicable to EP1-4 could also be said in gold since it was probably directly extracted from the real truth. So, Battler's sin is one of the causes of the massive death on Rokkenjima, as well as Kinzo was dead before the game started, which meant he died before 4th Oct, 1986.

Red truths' value did not diminish just because some of them were just talking about truth of chessboards, rather, red truths provided a means for Beatrice to give clues to Battler without directly telling him the real truth.

To a person (Battler) who had any source of information and no knowledge on Denmark (outside the catbox), if I (Beatrice) tell him the story of Hamlet and insist it was the history (Witch's tale). I could say in red that "Hamlet is a Danmark Prince", although I know that This Hamlet does not exist in the history. If I was particularly trolling and do not want the person to find out this real truth (like Bern, Lambda), then I could latter tell a tale of Hamlet being a president, being a street-sweeper, etc. But because I want this guy to find out the truth(said in EP5), I would leave clues to let him find out that actually this Hamlet did not exist. That's what Beatrice had been doing.

It's a matter of trust. If you don't trust Beatrice (Ryukishi07), then you would just give up. If you trust her (and him), even though you know that the red texts might not tell the real truth, you still believe they pointed you to the real truth and you would still go on.

Of course, golden texts could only be said by those who had figured out what really happened on Rokkenjima, from the clues in Beatrice's tales.

Last edited by ijriims; 2010-01-07 at 08:41.
ijriims is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-07, 09:57   Link #5138
Klashikari
Swords•Maidens Maniac
*Graphic Designer
*Moderator
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Belgium, Brussels
Age: 28
Send a message via Skype™ to Klashikari
Quote:
Originally Posted by ijriims View Post
If there was only one truth on Rokkenjima, then when it was revealed, everything different from it would be eliminated. When Ryukishi07 told us what really happened on Rokkenjima, then some conflicting red texts would eliminate (like EP1 garden shed scece contradicts EP2's chapel scene. EP2 chapel scene contradicts with EP3 servants'death, which contradicts EP4's Kinzo's killing, which contradicts EP5's death inside cousins'room. They were all mutually contradictory to each other. All the red texts talking about these scenes could not be held inside on universe at the same time, which meant they could not hold at the same time on the real Rokkenjima.)
The "truth" regards what really happened and how it is carried out thorough the games. The concept is exactly the same as in Higurashi: that there is a fundamental set of rules, that from this very basis will lead to a result, which is sort of different depending of the setup, random factors etc.

All games ARE representation of "what could happened if X/Y did/didn't happen" from the very truth, the first situation we are given.
They do not contradict each other, because they are all based of the same very thing, but they obviously cannot be compared: they have to be complementary to understand the essential situation.

Quote:
Not that red texts told us something completely fabricated, or directly contradictory to the real truth, Beatrice would not do so (Lamdba would do so, though). She wanted Battler to find out the real truth. So all the clues pointing to the "Answer" was already inside the first 4 chessboards.
You seem to totally consider the gameboards as fabricated, which is why I call that nonsense: if they were not representative of the real world truth, then their existence is useless and meaningless towards the "truth".
The concept of such story telling is to thread the actual truth with all instances and possibilities. That multi angle approach allow us to figure what really happened.
Otherwise, without Episode 4, there wasn't really a chance to figure that Kinzo couldn't be the culprit. Likewise, without Episode 2, there wasn't any possibility to figure wherever or not Rudolf was faking his death or whatnot.
Quote:
It means that at least the red texts applicable to EP1-4 could also be said in gold since it was probably directly extracted from the real truth. So, Battler's sin is one of the causes of the massive death on Rokkenjima, as well as Kinzo was dead before the game started, which meant he died before 4th Oct, 1986.
The whole concept of the gold truth only appears to be the demonstration of the GM knowledge, that's all.
Dlanor already defined the gold truth as the same as the red truth, from the very same basis, except it happens to be stronger or weaker.
Both are absolute truth.
Quote:
Red truths' value did not diminish just because some of them were just talking about truth of chessboards, rather, red truths provided a means for Beatrice to give clues to Battler without directly telling him the real truth.
If the red truth doesn't state what really happened in that kakera, then it isn't anything better than the witch side white text that thread witch battlers and whatever nonsense it is.
By nature, it "did" happen. Even if they are used as clues, it "did" happen.

Quote:
To a person (Battler) who had any source of information and no knowledge on Denmark (outside the catbox), if I (Beatrice) tell him the story of Hamlet and insist it was the history (Witch's tale). I could say in red that "Hamlet is a Danmark Prince", although I know that This Hamlet does not exist in the history. If I was particularly trolling and do not want the person to find out this real truth (like Bern, Lambda), then I could latter tell a tale of Hamlet being a president, being a street-sweeper, etc. But because I want this guy to find out the truth(said in EP5), I would leave clues to let him find out that actually this Hamlet did not exist. That's what Beatrice had been doing.
I don't see the concept working for Umineko at all. That means, "it didn't happen" for everything we have seen so far. So what, why can we trust that Kinzo was dead for all games, if that is "real" for the gameboard, and not in history? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever: it takes down the whole idea of red truth, that a certain event did happen in that alternative story, that kakera that would have happened if it was like this.
Otherwise, Episode 3 is the "canon ending" (as Ange's investigation doesn't belong to Beato's board at all) and we are set for nothing in the end.

You are defining the red truth as a set of define fact in a meta fiction, despite their range of application is based on kakeras that are equally possible to happen.

Quote:
It's a matter of trust. If you don't trust Beatrice (Ryukishi07), then you would just give up. If you trust her (and him), even though you know that the red texts might not tell the real truth, you still believe they pointed you to the real truth and you would still go on.
Actually, from what you are saying, it is the opposite: claiming the red truth works like this is absolutely not the trust, it is distrust.
If you think that "it didn't happen like this in real life", then we have no reference point, no truth to base everything, nothing.
Klashikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-07, 10:13   Link #5139
ijriims
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: HK, China
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klashikari View Post
Actually, from what you are saying, it is the opposite: claiming the red truth works like this is absolutely not the trust, it is distrust.
If you think that "it didn't happen like this in real life", then we have no reference point, no truth to base everything, nothing.
Then let me ask you a question: were the chessboards parallel world or kakeras? So different things happened in different worlds without contradiction to each other. Then how can you be sure that the red texts said for one world would apply to another world or another kakera by default?

If there was no parallel worlds, then there must only be one world, one truth. The end-result was Eva being the sole survivor, but was EP3 already telling the whole story? At least it did not tell us Battler's sin, but Eva being the sole survivor was the real truth. Or there was actually one truth on Rokkenjima? Different people said different things about it. Beatrice gave out two letters-in-the-bottle while Hachichou wrote down the additional fabricated letters-in-the-bottle? Although Beatrice must have put clues inside all her tales to give shed to the "Answer".

You thought that if the chessboard setting were not telling what really happened on Rokkenjima then you can't go on? No reference point so you are going to give up? Exactly like what Ryukishi07 described in his "anti-mystery vs anti-fantasy" article. Your trust in Beatrice was not that high, IMO. Your claim was just like saying fantasy scenes had no value at all because they did not happen in the real world. But you still draw inference and clues from it, don't you?

All chessboards from EP1-4 were designed well by Beatrice beforehand, there were no logic errors like what Battler made in EP6, they all reflected the "Answer" to some extent, from the four chessboards, even though they did not tell what actually happened on Rokkenjima 4-5th Oct, 1986, EP1-4 were tales telling what could have happened otherwise but did not actually happen. So from these games, one could still find out whodunit and whydunit. Howdunit was related to what cases had really happened on Rokkenjima, but one should be fine if they already knew whodunit and whydunit.

Have I made myself clear?

Last edited by ijriims; 2010-01-07 at 10:25.
ijriims is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-07, 10:24   Link #5140
Klashikari
Swords•Maidens Maniac
*Graphic Designer
*Moderator
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Belgium, Brussels
Age: 28
Send a message via Skype™ to Klashikari
Quote:
Originally Posted by ijriims View Post
Then let me ask you a question: were the chessboards parallel world? So different things happened in different worlds without contradiction to each other. Then how can you be sure that the red texts said for one world would apply to another world by default?
Conclusion done after what happened in Episode 5: unless a red truth is specified or obvious (like a death declaration), it ought to be a general red truth. Otherwise, there is no reason for Battler to have raised up that the Ep4 red is applied to Episode 5 as well.
Likewise, Beato had to add "this is applied to all games!!" for her "no more than 17 persons", because at this point, Battler forced her to say that.
The context of a red truth is implicit.

The whole purpose of having different kakera and outcome is obviously to lead Battler (and readers) to the truth. But likewise, if these facts were "absolute facts" to these worlds that are a mirror image of the real world, but still couldn't be applied to the real world "if" with the same circumstances, it doesn't mean anything at all.

Quote:
If there was no parallel worlds, then there must only be one world, one truth. The end-result was Eva being the sole survivor, but was EP3 already telling the whole story? At least it did not tell us Battler's sin, but Eva being the sole survivor was the real truth. Or there was actually one truth on Rokkenjima? Different people said different things about it. Beatrice gave out two letters-in-the-bottle while Hachichou wrote down the additional fabricated letters-in-the-bottle? Although Beatrice must have put clues inside all her tales to give shed to the "Answer".
Read again what I said: "if" the kakeras we were presented were only fabrication, "then" Episode 3 would be the only canon story, which is nonsense.
All kakeras are deviate storytelling of what really happened to Rokkenjima. However, I stated from the very beginning that all of them are equivalent true, because they are all shaped by beato's rules, who are the embodiement of the facts that occured on Rokkenjima.

Therefore, whenever X dies in Episode Y, it would have happened in the real world if in that real world, element Z from Episode Y did happen.

Quote:
You thought that if the chessboard setting were not telling what really happened on Rokkenjima then you can't go on? No reference point so you are going to give up? Exactly like what Ryukishi07 described in his "anti-mystery vs anti-fantasy" article. Your trust in Beatrice was not that high, IMO.
You absolutely got it backwards: if the events that are happening "couldn't happen" in the real world with the same circumstances, it is breaking the concept of the red truth, that is.
This is the reason why, unlike what you just posted, I actually trust the whole thing regarding the red truth and how threading an alibi to X character in Episode Y can help for Episode Z.
Otherwise, why would you trust then Episode 5 "Natsuhi is not the culprit!"? By your definition, it should be "not happening in the real world because it isn't in gold".

From the very beginning, I've taken all facts we gathered from the episodes in order to have a cohesion between the kakeras for the "real truth".
If they were to be applicable to only their gameboard, that's actually what I call distrust: if they are contradictory and not applicable to the real world, you cannot then trust it more than any scene, even if they are mystery-look alike.
Quote:
Your claim was just like saying fantasy scenes had no value at all because they did not happen in the real world. But you still draw inference and clues from it, don't you?
And since when I said it was the case? What I said from the very beginning is that you cannot suddenly say "red truth only apply to a world, but cannot in the real world unless in gold". The red truth, as I said, is a fact that would have occured if given the same circumstances. That means it would obviously not happen if it was totally different in events, but in essence it is (like rule X in Higurashi).
And no, the witch side scenes can be trusted if you read between the lines. I personally thought that the dark kanon stuff is actually a possible clue about a plot between the servants, thinking Rosa was the culprit (which was prolly their mistake).

Quote:
All chessboards from EP1-4 were designed well by Beatrice beforehand, there were no logic errors like what Battler made in EP6, they all reflected the "Answer" to some extent, from the four chessboards, even though they did not tell what actually happened on Rokkenjima 4-5th Oct, 1986, EP1-4 were tales telling what could have happened otherwise. So from these games, one could still find out whodunit and whydunit. Howdunit was related to what cases had really happened on Rokkenjima, but one should be fine if they already knew whodunit and whydunit.

Have I made myself clear?
That was actually the same interpretation I had that I was posting already. I however cannot agree with your differenciation with gold and red truth, that's the point.
Klashikari 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 13:59.


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