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 2010-12-14, 12:08   Link #19741
Uberzaki
Member
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: United Kingdom, in a world of my own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cao Ni Ma View Post
Problem is that we didn't even know the existence of the baby before EP5 and as stated you are able to solve the mystery before at the end of EP4. Even worse is that if Battler was really the baby then he would be the prime candidate for the actual culprit in EP5. Battler has time and time again been declared to not be the culprit in any of the games.

I do agree that Shkanon thing being a dead giveaway. A lot of the elements from the first 4 games felt to intentionally lead us in a direction so that we, using the internet, would elaborate and create possible truths with other readers. In essence we are the Witch Hunt, trying to find the truth and making crazy speculations in the process.
I don't really want to add any layers to this little tidbit (yet) because I just want to hear the criticisms. I would like for it to be a better (maybe weaker...) alternative to Shkanon. I also can't deny Battler being a prime suspect in this case. One cheap way around it is that 'Battler' is not his birth name but Asumu went with it because it would be suspicious to use the previous name when her and Rudolf might have agreed beforehand.
Uberzaki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-14, 12:23   Link #19742
Zekses
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Sorry, non-russian speakers but I just can't avoid posting this

The whole situation with uncertain Battler / shkannon birth reminds me of :
"Так сколько младенцев в титьку просило?" XD
Zekses is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-14, 12:36   Link #19743
Klashikari
Swords•Maidens Maniac
*Graphic Designer
*Moderator
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Europe, Belgium, Brussels
Age: 27
Send a message via Skype™ to Klashikari
... it isn't like you just can't translate what you have posted you know.
Klashikari is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-14, 12:56   Link #19744
Keriaku
Thought Being
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
The idea of meta-fiction isn't all that new. Untrustworthy narratives told by unreliable narrators stacked upon unreliable narrators. The question is, which of the famous works have influenced Ryukishi?
Spoiler for Obviously this would be spoiling lots of things...:
I'm sure I'm missing a meta-fictional mystery novel (and probably some Japanese meta-fiction, as it's by no means a localized idea in 20th century fiction), but hopefully he's read something preceding it. If not, at least he's pioneering some genre mixing.

The point is (for those not reading spoilers), he could definitely be doing this sort of thing. It wouldn't be taking meta-fiction too far at all. Some of the greatest authors of the 20th century (and also Stephen King) have done it, so it's certainly not niche either.
Even more so after your examples, I feel that Umineko (and Higurashi just barely) have done something special over those stories. Instead of just having meta elements, narrative or perspective, Umineko takes place on a meta realm. Something I find akin to a 4th dimension, with the story being based around characters manipulating this higher realm, in the Fragments and characters who appear. He has characters observing the events through the meta setting over with many years distance compared to the human setting, while the events on the meta realm are still going. The meta narratives and perspectives are all just small parts of the setting rather than the meta elements. It is for this reason that I love Umineko, and it has made me think about our own reality of many different levels.

Are there any other stories with the level of meta complexity? Because I would love to read them.
Keriaku is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-14, 13:06   Link #19745
Zekses
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klashikari View Post
... it isn't like you just can't translate what you have posted you know.
It'd be kind of useless since it is a quote from the movie that is funny (and related) if only you watched it
Zekses is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-14, 13:17   Link #19746
witchfan
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Spoiler for Text:
What a great, insightful post! This forum is lucky to have you.
witchfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-14, 14:13   Link #19747
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:
Originally Posted by Uberzaki View Post
I have a question since I haven't read episode 6 or 7 yet; is Battler explicitly mentioned or make an appearance on episode 7's gameboard?

I just feel that the Shannon = Yasu is just too obvious, there has to be something new twist that could happen. I personally believe that a member of O7th Expansion started the Shkanon rumour and mentioned it regularly to makes it rise in prominence.

I believe the actual reason our Battler didn't return to the Island was because he WAS Lion/Yasu. What I believe happened was that if Natsuhi didn't accept Baby battler, a deal would be struck with Asumu to make her 'give birth' to Battler when both Kyrie and Asumu miscarried (or perhaps Asumu had a ghost baby (if that's the correct term)).

I believe this might make more sense with Battler's being the person from 19 years ago epiphany in EP5 after knowing that he wasn't Asumu's son. If Rudolf was aware of this, it would explain why he went to high lengths to get Battler to come when he had Battler as his son. (hope that doesn't sound too confusing)

If there was a Battler in EP7 then I could guess that he is another of Kyrie's sons called Battler since Rudolf would not have the obligation to marry Asumu and could therefore have a new child without original battler being annoyed.

Did anyone else think of this?
I would really recommend actually reading EP6 and 7 before speculating about characters you haven't even seen yet. I can't begin to describe how this is totally wrong.
__________________
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 2010-12-14, 14:33   Link #19748
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
the "too obvious" argument didn't prove to be successful so far.

In my opinion it only works for what is actually apparent. If something is apparent (i.e. outright stated by some character) and yet not 100% confirmed then yeah it's most probably false. But if something is just hinted, no matter how heavily it is hinted, if it is just hinted then it's probably true.
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-14, 15:34   Link #19749
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Several things are outright stated by Eva (and possibly others) in ep1 which have turned out to be strongly suspected as true. Granted, their context is off, but you have things like "Shannon in a dress posing as Beatrice," "Father had a mistress," "a secret child of Father's mistress," etc. just blatantly sitting there in ep2. But that speculation is largely the only direct evidence of the thing itself. Is that a hint, or a "too obvious" throwaway? It'd be like if small bombs were confirmed true. Was that "hinted" just because Battler said it out of nowhere? It certainly wasn't backed up by much more than flimsy logic.
__________________
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 2010-12-14, 16:42   Link #19750
Uberzaki
Member
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: United Kingdom, in a world of my own.
Quote:
I would really recommend actually reading EP6 and 7 before speculating about characters you haven't even seen yet. I can't begin to describe how this is totally wrong.
Ouch! Message understood.
Uberzaki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-14, 19:31   Link #19751
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Several things are outright stated by Eva (and possibly others) in ep1 which have turned out to be strongly suspected as true. Granted, their context is off, but you have things like "Shannon in a dress posing as Beatrice," "Father had a mistress," "a secret child of Father's mistress," etc. just blatantly sitting there in ep2. But that speculation is largely the only direct evidence of the thing itself. Is that a hint, or a "too obvious" throwaway? It'd be like if small bombs were confirmed true. Was that "hinted" just because Battler said it out of nowhere? It certainly wasn't backed up by much more than flimsy logic.
Oh you are right on those. They were awkwardly on spot. Good thing I never payed too much attention on those in either way.

However this just counters my statement that outright stuff are false (I said "most" though), but it provides yet another argument for the non validity of the "too obvious" argument.

It's something that you can't really tell. Maybe Ryuukishi can completely twist a certain fact, but you shouldn't go with the assumption that he will definitely twist an obvious fact.
Actually so far... it seems that he's been going with the most obvious explanations for several parts of the mystery.
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-14, 23:13   Link #19752
Kylon99
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Meta-Meta-Meta-Space
It seems to me that he wrote them down as after-the-fact proof of his plan from the beginning. i.e. he dropped the foreshadowing as a way of showing that he had that plan since at least the time of the foreshadowing.

So it's not really meant to be clues for us to use.


By the way, I was thinking of the earlier discussion on Battler's birth circumstances. Exactly HOW did Beatrice get this tidbit of information? In fact, how did *anyone* get this information? Supposedly no one knows; not even Battler, right? The only one really in a position to know is Rudolf, and the one in a position to suspect is Kyrie.

How on earth did this information go from Rudolf to Beatrice? (or, Yasu.) I suppose Yasu could've just 'bought off' Rudolf and made him say it; but how did anyone even know to ask? Does anyone go around normally suspecting that someone, but not everyone in general were switched babies at birth?

So I'm thinking there must be something else mixed into this that will let another party be privy to the secret...
Kylon99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-14, 23:18   Link #19753
Kealym
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zekses View Post
Maybe, but we were constantly reminded that it's a detective genre which basically makes a servant being an illegitimate child a very logical and highly probable development.

P.S. I'm of the opinion that there are no unrelated remarks in the first episode as it is basically the real world. All the later setups deviated from reality as witch needed to change character personalities at least a bit to make the board work differently.
Wait, as far as we've been told, then Episode 1 is ALSO a deviation from reality. It's just not apparent at the time, and relatively subtle since the most "magic" we witness is Kanon waving a machete at some butterflies.

Considering the whole "roulette" theme, and the fact that we've been told that the pieces will only really be themselves in their actions, I dont think anybody's personality changed at all, and the various differences come down to coincidental changes (Maria gets slapped in front of the cousins vs. Marai gets slapped while alone), or outright whims (the First Twilight victims keeps changing, Jessie attacking Kyrie just because she saw her first).

I think if someone shows a sudden change in character, they havent really changed, youre just seeing another side of them. Like, "I want George to be happy!" Eva versus "My George-kun shall not be stolen by that lowbred hussy!!" Eva. <_<
Kealym is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-15, 01:07   Link #19754
Keriaku
Thought Being
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Canada
I've started reading through EP1, and I'd like to hear what other people's thoughts are on some of the situations.

First of all, based on my vague recollection of EP1, I had always thought we were being shown Natsuhi's thoughts directly. Then after the reveal in EP5 I just assumed we'd be able to go back and reread EP1 and have it all fit. But it seems a little off, like we're being given Natsuhi's thoughts through an interpretive filter. I find it amusing that this is almost exactly what Featherine and Ange's conversations were about, but I still find it strange. It's like instead of being shown exactly what she thought, it's how she would be thinking based on the illusion she's trying to present with Kinzo. I know Author Theory can handle this, but are there any other ideas about this?

This leads into my second observation, Kinzo. How do people interpret the scenes with him, such as when Kanon, Shannon and Genji are 'with Kinzo' in his study while the others are knocking on the door? Is it just Genji and Yasu talking there, for the sole purpose of perpetuating the illusion? How do people interpret the conversation between Nanjo and Kinzo that explicitly have to do with going down to dinner and such, just simply a scene from the past or something?

Something I did realize was that the illusion that people have created about Kinzo is very similar to the illusion of Beatrice. They are almost exactly the same actually.

Then finally, Kanon. I guess we can take him to be another side of Yasu, which I'm fine with. What I have trouble understanding is when Shannon will leave the room to do something, Kanon with stay behind and Genji will talk with him. How do people interpret these scenes? Is this Yasu sorting through him/herself emotionally? Then why get Genji involved?

I'd love to hear people's thoughts.
Keriaku is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-15, 01:44   Link #19755
Zekses
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Quote:
they havent really changed, youre just seeing another side of them.
They definitely change. Natsuhi's treatment of Shannon consistently improves during the course of the series and Kanon becomes more decisive. These at least are quite different in later novels.

Scene with Nanjo and Kinzo (the one at the very beginning) I believe to have happened earlier, when Kinzo was still alive. I haven't really reached the point when Kinzo appears again yet though. (I'm slow as I olny read on my break at work)

The one confusing scene was when Kanon and Shannon talked with Genji after Shannon served tea. The problem is - who is the observer there or at least the narrator? Unless Genji was OK with Yasu's multiple personalities the scene looks weird.


Btw, can anyone remind me : was it confirmed that Kinzo died exactly one year prior to 1986 or was it stated that he was dead for at least a year by the time?
Looking at a lot of things that happened it seems that he died not one but two years ago. The same time that redeveloping of Rokkenjima occured (would he EVER allow this to happen?), Gohda joined and portrait was hung in the hall.

Speaking of portrait btw : it is clearly stated that it was painted 2 years ago. And... you know, portraits are normally painted with the model present... but Kinzo obviously didn't know about Yasu at the time or he would've immediately announced succession changes (imho at least). So, is that possble that the whole epitaph ploy is not his doing?

P.S. Was Krauss born before Kinzo met Beato? I remember him saying that he got a family by this time (at least a wife). But if so - why foreign name? At this point he clearly could not be planning anything yet...
Zekses is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-15, 04:00   Link #19756
Zekses
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
As you asked, here are my notes. I've placed them into spoiler as they are rather long and inconsistent.

Spoiler:
Zekses is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-15, 04:54   Link #19757
Kevs
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
I've read as much of the manga EPs as I can and all the spoilers I found about the story, and I am still really confused with all the worlds and what really 'exists' and what doesn't. What stuff being shown even happens or if its all just created?

I have no idea what the direction of the story is, is it just a bunch of battles or is there really a truth to what happened during the incident?

Can someone spoiler tag me like, the general basis of the story and what's going on?
Spoiler:
Kevs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-15, 05:59   Link #19758
erneiz_hyde
Indifferent
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: InterWebs
Spoiler for just some rambling:


Also, even though it is now heavily hinted that yasu-shkanon is true, I kinda remembered that one of the reasons shkanon was hard to accept is that the person behind Shkanon must be a ninja as much as s/he is nuts...

After reading Zekses' notes...I need to replay the past eps... I'm forgetting too much already.
__________________
erneiz_hyde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-15, 06:28   Link #19759
zorahk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevs View Post
I've read as much of the manga EPs as I can and all the spoilers I found about the story, and I am still really confused with all the worlds and what really 'exists' and what doesn't. What stuff being shown even happens or if its all just created?

I have no idea what the direction of the story is, is it just a bunch of battles or is there really a truth to what happened during the incident?

Can someone spoiler tag me like, the general basis of the story and what's going on?
Spoiler:
You need to read the VNs. You're just going to get confused if we try and explain this to you.
zorahk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-15, 08:46   Link #19760
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zekses View Post
Btw, can anyone remind me : was it confirmed that Kinzo died exactly one year prior to 1986 or was it stated that he was dead for at least a year by the time?
According to EP7 Kinzo died the 29th day of November, 1984.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Zekses View Post
Speaking of portrait btw : it is clearly stated that it was painted 2 years ago. And... you know, portraits are normally painted with the model present... but Kinzo obviously didn't know about Yasu at the time or he would've immediately announced succession changes (imho at least). So, is that possble that the whole epitaph ploy is not his doing?
I think we can be pretty much sure at this point that the model of the painting is Beatrice2. Therefore it was either painted a lot earlier, or it was painted with a picture as a reference.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Zekses View Post
P.S. Was Krauss born before Kinzo met Beato? I remember him saying that he got a family by this time (at least a wife). But if so - why foreign name? At this point he clearly could not be planning anything yet...
Absolutely. Both Krauss and Eva were already born at the time Kinzo met Beatrice.
Rudolf is a little trickier to determine. But if he wasn't born already then he did shortly after.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevs View Post
Spoiler:
I think only Mousoka here actually believes that Bern's tea party is the truth. So the general consensus is that the real culprit is someone else, or perhaps just Kyrie.

As for Yasu I'm not sure if we can consider her a new character. It's a character that has always been there although masked as someone else. And it's also a character whose existence has been hinted since EP1. One can also say that Yasu is basically Beatrice.


Quote:
Originally Posted by erneiz_hyde View Post
it's probably nothing or have been mention in the past, but this has been on my mind for sometime already. if you add another "ri" between "do" and "ri" in "Kuwadorian" it became "Kuwadoririan", homophonic with Quadrillion. The same thing 'could' be applied to Toraian if the Japs pronounce "Trillion" as "Try-llion". This is kinda similar to the western naming using Kanji that is the Ushiromiya's forte.
The right transliteration of quadrillion is: KU-WA-DO-RI-RI-O-N
So it would still be off by one letter. Also the correct transliteration of Trillion is: TO-RI-RI-O-N

so it's even more different than TO-RA-I-A-N
__________________

Jan-Poo 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 13:31.


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