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 2010-07-20, 15:23   Link #14301
winter 923
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Actually there may be some resons why he would keep shkannon a secret.
First the ...sorry i do not know the english word. "herdenverhalten" "do as the other do" "do not question if the mass does not question" he just came back to his family after 6 years.
Second he knows about George/Shannon and maybe even about the engagement (dunno how much he knows in ep5) this could be a prickly subject.

is it hinted in the novel why he would keep the lie alive? that's up for everyone to decide for himself.

Ya Higurashi and Umineko are so different -_- Higurashi plays in 2 towns, only a handfull of persons and around 2 weeks. Umineko "kills" off 17 People in 2 days on a small island but then again, im glad when i buy a CD from a band i like and not every song sounds the same.
__________________
I do not use english in my everyday life. If i sound arrogant, offensive or inappropriate please point it out. I can asure you it was not intended and apologize in advance.
winter 923 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-20, 15:26   Link #14302
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judoh View Post
The way I can tell is this game has no difficulty level Episode 2 had a high difficulty level. And to go further he used actual human murderers for his fantasy scenes. Yes there is magic mixed in, but that's something you have to do on the witch's side.

Episode 2 and episode 6 are completely different in terms of fantasy scenes on difficulty. The scenes are actually more similar to episodes 3 and 4 than episode 2.
Difficulty level explains why one might be harder to solve than the other, but it doesn't mean that one is less true than the other. By EP6, we already know magic=lies, so it's guaranteed to be easier than EP2 just by that. I think the real hint from this should be that the magic scenes always count as clues that match the truth in some way, not just in EP6.
__________________
"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 2010-07-20, 15:26   Link #14303
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Again though, whatever Battler's reason, if we assume this is Piece-Battler doing the lying, he has to be lying to someone. The problem with accepting the parlor count as a subsequently-told lie - and under normal circumstances that's no problem to accept at all - is that there's nobody that we know of to whom this information is ever conveyed. If Battler doesn't lie to any other person on the board, he has to be lying to:
  • The Meta-World, which Piece-Battler does not know exists (though it could be a meta-narrative construction and Piece-Battler's actual perception was overwritten).
  • Nobody, which means he's fond of lying to himself about what he himself has perceived for no reason 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 2010-07-20, 15:30   Link #14304
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Again though, whatever Battler's reason, if we assume this is Piece-Battler doing the lying, he has to be lying to someone. The problem with accepting the parlor count as a subsequently-told lie - and under normal circumstances that's no problem to accept at all - is that there's nobody that we know of to whom this information is ever conveyed. If Battler doesn't lie to any other person on the board, he has to be lying to:
  • The Meta-World, which Piece-Battler does not know exists (though it could be a meta-narrative construction and Piece-Battler's actual perception was overwritten).
  • Nobody, which means he's fond of lying to himself about what he himself has perceived for no reason whatsoever.
Or, you have the possibility that I've suggested. The scenes we are shown represent how Battler would have written the story at the end. In other words, the 'truth' that he would claim is true. After all, we have been allowed to follow his perspective several times, and he is, practically speaking, the Watson, the Hastings, of Umineko.
__________________
"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 2010-07-20, 15:30   Link #14305
Judoh
Mystery buff
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Gone Fishin!
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronotrig View Post
I think the real hint from this should be that the magic scenes always count as clues that match the truth in some way, not just in EP6.
I didn't say just in episode 6 did I? I said Episode 6 is more true than the scenes were in episode 2.
Judoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-20, 15:32   Link #14306
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judoh View Post
I didn't say just in episode 6 did I? I said Episode 6 is more true than episode 2.
Right, and I don't see how you can conclude that. I'm not even entirely sure what you mean by it.
__________________
"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 2010-07-20, 15:37   Link #14307
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronotrig View Post
Or, you have the possibility that I've suggested. The scenes we are shown represent how Battler would have written the story at the end. In other words, the 'truth' that he would claim is true. After all, we have been allowed to follow his perspective several times, and he is, practically speaking, the Watson, the Hastings, of Umineko.
In which case, what stops him from doing that very thing in other episodes? He could've had Shannon and Kanon hanging out all the time around him if he wanted if he were just concluding the story after the fact... if Shkanon were true.

Of course this "theory" runs into the tiny problem of having no evidence whatsoever at any point, ever. Is it possible for Piece-Battler to lie? Yes. Is it possible for Piece-Battler to lie after the fact? Yes. Is there any evidence whatsoever that Piece-Battler did lie during or after the fact? Absolutely not. In fact, short of our violent rejection of Erika's existence or Shannon and Kanon existing as separate entities in the same place, we have no reason to doubt Battler's testimony in that scene at all. If Shkanon and Erika-Doesn't-Exist both turn out false, we'd all look very stupid for doubting Battler's earnest reporting of a simple fact about which he had no reason to lie... and didn't.
__________________
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 2010-07-20, 15:50   Link #14308
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
In which case, what stops him from doing that very thing in other episodes? He could've had Shannon and Kanon hanging out all the time around him if he wanted if he were just concluding the story after the fact... if Shkanon were true.
You imply a contradiction where there is none. The difference between the question and core arcs is that piece Battler finds out Sayo's secret in the core arcs only, I believe. That's why the first twilights are fake in those games, and that's why the killer in both is clearly not the "Beatrice" from EP1-4.

In the question arcs, Battler had no reason to lie. He was not keeping any secrets, but instead had secrets kept from him. In other words, if you want to include a magic scene in the game, you need to show that Battler would have a reason to believe it. The requirements of this theory are more strict than the commonly accepted one, not less.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Of course this "theory" runs into the tiny problem of having no evidence whatsoever at any point, ever. Is it possible for Piece-Battler to lie? Yes. Is it possible for Piece-Battler to lie after the fact? Yes. Is there any evidence whatsoever that Piece-Battler did lie during or after the fact? Absolutely not. In fact, short of our violent rejection of Erika's existence or Shannon and Kanon existing as separate entities in the same place, we have no reason to doubt Battler's testimony in that scene at all. If Shkanon and Erika-Doesn't-Exist both turn out false, we'd all look very stupid for doubting Battler's earnest reporting of a simple fact about which he had no reason to lie... and didn't.
Again, this is wrong. There is plenty of evidence supporting my conclusion. That is an incontestable fact. However, there is no evidence that proves my conclusion right, just as there is no evidence proving any other theory right.

Anyways, how do you explain that scene? There were 18 people in it, but only 17 people alive on the island. Battler's viewpoint could not have shown us the truth, right?
__________________
"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 2010-07-20, 15:56   Link #14309
Judoh
Mystery buff
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Gone Fishin!
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronotrig View Post
Right, and I don't see how you can conclude that. I'm not even entirely sure what you mean by it.
I think Battler's scenes add an extra layer on top of things. He tries make things look obvious, but there's actually something extra you need to look for. The earlier games don't have the same thing. They have character development in them and they have the same lies, but their purpose is different. Since the witch's side has no chance of winning at this point it's really just special affects.
Judoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-20, 15:56   Link #14310
DaBackpack
Blick Winkel
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Gobbled up by Promathia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
In which case, what stops him from doing that very thing in other episodes? He could've had Shannon and Kanon hanging out all the time around him if he wanted if he were just concluding the story after the fact... if Shkanon were true.

Of course this "theory" runs into the tiny problem of having no evidence whatsoever at any point, ever. Is it possible for Piece-Battler to lie? Yes. Is it possible for Piece-Battler to lie after the fact? Yes. Is there any evidence whatsoever that Piece-Battler did lie during or after the fact? Absolutely not. In fact, short of our violent rejection of Erika's existence or Shannon and Kanon existing as separate entities in the same place, we have no reason to doubt Battler's testimony in that scene at all. If Shkanon and Erika-Doesn't-Exist both turn out false, we'd all look very stupid for doubting Battler's earnest reporting of a simple fact about which he had no reason to lie... and didn't.
This is certainly true. However, don't forget it was stated in Red that Battler was the detective in EP1-4. So if Shkanon is true, he cannot have seen Shannon and Kanon together. If Shkanon is false, then it was just really, really bad luck for us because they never happened to be together at all. If Shkanon is false, then Ryukishi could have had Battler, Shannon, and Kanon together if he felt like it.

Starting from EP5, Erika is the detective and Battler is just a regular piece. Individual characters have lied before; Natsuhi, the servants, and Nanjo must have lied at some point. They are miscellaneous pieces so this is allowed. But, don't forget that Bernkastel created her own piece to take Battler's place as detective. This could have been because Battler refused to continue the game (because of Beato's absence) and she needed a detective, or because she just wanted to create a bitchy version of herself. If Bernkastel wanted to, she could have easily controlled Battler's piece and made him the detective again. But she didn't, so Battler "de-levels" in authority. While Bernkastel certainly does make Battler more intelligent in EP5, the instance of Battler "seeing Kinzo" is proof that Battler is capable of lying in EP5.

(And this isn't entirely about what you were saying Renall, but this is my general impression on Battler and your post was the newest )

As for the motive of Battler lying, perhaps he just misinterpreted the events in the room. I use "lie" as a general term for "provides misinformation to the reader."
DaBackpack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-20, 16:02   Link #14311
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronotrig View Post
Again, this is wrong. There is plenty of evidence supporting my conclusion. That is an incontestable fact.
Well here I am contesting it, because it's not there in the text.
Quote:
Anyways, how do you explain that scene? There were 18 people in it, but only 17 people alive on the island. Battler's viewpoint could not have shown us the truth, right?
Turn the chessboard around: Why are we so quick to doubt a scene in which Piece-Battler's present degree of honest narration - to himself, no less - is not clearly in question? He's not seeing anything that ought to appear unusual to us, unless we already believe that Shannon is Kanon and/or Erika doesn't exist. Why is it any more valid to assume Battler must be wrong or lying in this scene because it "contradicts the red" when the reds themselves are (apparently) contradicting and thus must somehow be properly reconciled among each other anyway?

Why is it somehow invalid to make as our foundation "Battler is telling the truth in this parlor scene" and then attempt to explain away the other details as tricks to make us doubt that? I fail to see how that is any less reasonable to assume.
__________________
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 2010-07-20, 16:07   Link #14312
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Why is it somehow invalid to make as our foundation "Battler is telling the truth in this parlor scene" and then attempt to explain away the other details as tricks to make us doubt that? I fail to see how that is any less reasonable to assume.
Because this scene was obviously a clue. The first time that Battler is given a viewpoint that is able to tell lies is also the first time that he sees all 18 people in a room. Then, later, we are told that there are only 17 people on the island.

Look, you're doing exactly what you've always accused me of doing with Shkanon, except you haven't proposed a theory to back it up. If you think you can find an internally consistent solution that explains this, be my guest. It's probably a worthwhile venture. But I don't think there will be a satisfying one.
__________________
"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 2010-07-20, 16:17   Link #14313
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
I don't owe you or anyone else a theory. Nobody owes anyone anything unless they're making a definitive claim to the true and correct answer, if one even exists.

You say it's a "clue." How can you be sure of that? Again, it's true that it's the first opportunity for Battler to lie, with or without any justification. But do we really want to say that Battler wasn't going to lie until he finally could? Don't we know him better than that? Isn't Battler's simple and often emotionally-charged honesty more trustworthy than ridiculous theories about two people being one or someone seemingly present not really being there? Why can we embrace the latter as viable explanations and dismiss the former as nothing more than a "clue" for more implausible-sounding theories?

Why must we distrust Battler? The only evidence he even presents for the unreliability of his own perspective is something which can easily be interpreted as not even precisely a lie. You say it's because he's seeing something impossible. So what I'm saying is: Are we really willing to call it impossible just yet?
__________________
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 2010-07-20, 16:19   Link #14314
Used Can
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronotrig View Post
Because this scene was obviously a clue. The first time that Battler is given a viewpoint that is able to tell lies is also the first time that he sees all 18 people in a room. Then, later, we are told that there are only 17 people on the island.
In my opinion, that could easily be a big trap, since up to that point we were used on relying on Battler's POV. So, what we read in that scene we took it for granted. That, and/or some people could have assume that everything in that scene was true, since the detective was around.

If R07 would have wanted to give us a real POV, he would have given us Erika's, I think. Which makes me wonder why Erika never questioned the existence of Shannon and Kanon when they weren't there (as separate people, that is).
__________________
"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 2010-07-20, 16:23   Link #14315
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Have we lost all trust for Battler now? He's going to start lying and misconstructing things because he can? If it's a trap about Battler's reliability, why does Battler challenge his own reliability in the same episode? Won't that immediately send us looking back at everything he said? Ryukishi would be expecting us to doubt that parlor scene. The phrasing of the red proves that. He wants us to doubt somebody was really there. But again I ask: Why do we not have any trust for Battler anymore?
__________________
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 2010-07-20, 16:26   Link #14316
Used Can
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Because he's no longer the detective. For all we know, all the pieces but the detective see what the fantasy side wants them to see.
__________________
"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 2010-07-20, 16:29   Link #14317
Judoh
Mystery buff
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Gone Fishin!
Watson sees all the same things Holmes does he just doesn't come to the same conclusions. Calling Battler a 'Watson character' is probably a bad example if your using the unreliable perspective idea. Watson isn't a bumbling idiot he's pretty cultured he just doesn't have an amazing memorization ability like Sherlock Holmes.

Watson reminds me a lot of Nanjo actually I think Ryukishi based Nanjo off the Watson character.
Judoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-20, 16:33   Link #14318
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
The doctor buddy of a detective is a pretty solid mystery genre trope. It traces at least as far back as Watson, though I think it's even detected in Poe (and the detective novel doesn't go much further back than Poe, at least in its modern form). Nanjo being the semi-suspicious and conveniently present doctor is a clear homage, the question is what spin ryukishi's putting on him... if he's not just playing the trope straight.
__________________
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 2010-07-20, 16:35   Link #14319
winter 923
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Why must we distrust Battler?
I do distrust Battler a little if it involves Erika. In EP5 he could just prove a fact or help his Aunt from the pesky Erika but he still lies in my eyes with the Kinzo escape. In EP6 he lies to Erika that he does not read books, again Erika was pretty arrogant before that but still.

Nothing is impossible. If we take Maria's riddlebook with the cheese. Umineko is basicly the same thing. "how many cuts do you need to get 8Pieces" You won't see the cheese till EP8 and little below the picture of the cheese is also the answer printed. That is imho why so many Theories exist, no one wants to see the "playground" but then not have time to think about it.

btw, anychance that the coin and glass trick is related to EP6 closed rooms?
__________________
I do not use english in my everyday life. If i sound arrogant, offensive or inappropriate please point it out. I can asure you it was not intended and apologize in advance.
winter 923 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-20, 16:36   Link #14320
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judoh View Post
Watson sees all the same things Holmes does he just doesn't come to the same conclusions. Calling Battler a 'Watson character' is probably a bad example if your using the unreliable perspective idea. Watson isn't a bumbling idiot he's pretty cultured he just doesn't have an amazing memorization ability like Sherlock Holmes.
I'm not suggesting that Battler is a bumbling idiot. Still, that doesn't mean he can't be tricked or come to the wrong conclusion about something. As Knox says:

Quote:
The stupid friend of the detective, the Watson, must not conceal any thoughts which pass through his mind; his intelligence must be slightly, but very slightly, below that of the average reader.
I'd say that matches Battler pretty closely most of the time.
__________________
"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
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 09:48.


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