View Single Post
Old 2010-05-22, 21:38   Link #10487
Join Date: May 2009
If Erika doesn't exist, she's most likely not an object. I don't think a literal "Erika Ball" makes much sense, unless it's merely an object that transfers Erika-ness. And then you'd have to explain what that object is and why people would transfer it.

There's also the issue of explaining why exactly a person is referred to as "Erika." I do think the notion that she is the "illusion of the detective" in the same way Beatrice is the "illusion of the witch" is the way to look at her, though. Effectively, what Erika does is "magic" detective-work. Her efforts are equally implausible, but unlike magic, are theoretically possible. Realistically speaking, however, neither one is really all that likely.

But, if Erika doesn't exist, I think it's very important to ask all the questions that would arise from this. Does Meta-Erika know? Do Bern and Lambda know (one would think they'd have to, but...)? Why are they doing this? What benefit does Meta-Erika gain from believing she exists, and why have her there in the first place? How much of what she "sees" accurate? How is this "illusion of the detective" instructive to us with respect to Beato's games? Can we learn anything useful from them, or is this just a big red herring (which would either be a sign of bad writing, or a theory that is simply there to mislead).
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote