View Single Post
Old 2014-04-19, 21:41   Link #34358
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Originally Posted by haguruma View Post
Does she? So is Meta-Ange more real than the Piece Ange who becomes Kotobuki Yukari or the Piece-Ange who fell from the roof of that building? Wouldn't this also make, let's say, Bernkastel more real than Furude Rika?
I don't think it's a point of 'who's more real'. Meta Ange is real in the Meta layer. And Bern is abusing of Ange in the meta layer. She's deliberately causing pain to someone she knows can feel it because Ange has free will. Bern doesn't care if Ange suffers but know she's suffering, that she has feelings.
If however Bern were to Furude Rika merely a character in a book or something like that, this would strip Bern of being REAL in Rika's world same as it does in ours. Someone is writing Bern's actions and feelings. While we can sympathize with her or hate her we don't feel for her the same obligations we feel for a living being... and while we can judge her evil, in the end, we know she's as such because she was written like that.
Bern isn't real in our world.
In the same way we'll never know if we're real or we're characters of a tale. But from my perspective you and I are real and if I'm... let's say... a jerk to you and call you names it'll be out of my free will and with the knowledge I'll hurt you. I'm guilty of hurting your feelings and I should worry about it... but I won't feel guilty about hurting Bern's feelings if I call her names. In my layer she doesn't exist.

Originally Posted by haguruma View Post
But, if we were to believe that (going by Ange saying that she hears the "voice of that old hag, Eva" at the start of the play) the EP7 teaparty is based on Eva's impression of her siblings...isn't it equally unrealistically subjective? She was always described as hating Krauss' guts so it wouldn't be surprising if she only looked out for the worst in him and didn't even consider him having a well-meaning approach.
Yes, Battler can be said to "sugar-coat" things, but the other fictions are equally guilty of painting characters unrealistically ugly. Who are we "as outsiders" to say which of these was their true being? Why should Battler's image be wrong only because more people believe in their ugly sides?
Although it might be subjective, the facts should be more or less true. Rosa maybe didn't sound spiteful and a little crazy when she wanted Eva and Hideyoshi to go to the police but likely that's what asked them to do. This means an argument surely arise over splitting the gold which means that when Eva claimed they should split it equally instead that handling the lion's share to Krauss he didn't say okay, you're right, let's split equally, but tried to blackmail his siblings into submitting to him by claiming he was the only one who could convert the gold so either they obeyed him or they wouldn't have a cent.

Note also that Krauss was already trying to take complete control of Kinzo's fortune by claiming Kinzo wasn't dead yet and wasn't willing to help his siblings to deal with their problems.

I'm willing to concede that likely Krauss felt guilty toward how he acted in regards to his siblings... but he did it in a style similar to Rosa... who feels guilty about beating and neglecting Maria but this doesn't stop her from doing it... or like Kinzo... who knew he shouldn't have taken advantage of Kuwadorian Beatrice but this didn't stop him... or Rudolf... who feels guilty for switching the babies... but at best he told Kyrie and Battler the truth only after 18 years... if he managed/planned to tell it.

In short I'm not trying to paint them as remorseless mosters... but I think they were pretty ugly people at the moment or toward each others or both.

If they weren't they would have calmly sat on a table and supported each other right from when Kinzo died.

Originally Posted by haguruma View Post
The question is, was there really one person who killed everybody? Yes, mystery-rules demand that, but is this a mystery?

Btw. I read up on true crime fiction because I find it fascinating how that has not entered discussion here so far. How are for example theories, books and movies about the Zodiac murders any different than the Rokkenjima Witch Murder Case?
Well, if the tea party is close to the truth we know there wasn't as we can count 4 murderers. Krauss and Natsuhi were killed by Eva and Hideyoshi, George by Rudolf, Kyrie by Eva and everyone else by Kyrie and Rudolf.

If your question is: did Kyrie and Rudolf really be the culprits of the murders Eva didn't witness... well, unless Battler's point of view will be revealed and will tell us something we don't know, we'll never know. For all we know it can be the others were just pretending to be dead and Kyrie and Rudolf, who were upside down after what had happened in the golden room, finding everyone else dead, ended up saying something Eva misinterpreted as them being the culprits... and Eva didn't check the curpses and blasted everyone with the bomb.

Or Battler, Jessica and George could have started a love duel over Yasu after figuring that Kanon and Shannon were the same person and that George had stolen Shannon to Battler and Jessica and George died.

Or Genji went mad and killed everyone. Or Kyrie's Yakuza clan best assassin secretly reached the island and killed everyone aiming to make Ange the sole heir so that the Sumadera could take control of her but then incidentally ate a slice of Gohda's almond cake without realizing it contained almonds to which he was allergic and died. We'll never know.

Since the manga revealed some stuffs that weren't really supported by hints... it can be that part of the truth of Rokkenjima is impossible to figure out but just to guess if you're lucky. But we can know only if the manga will give us more to work with. Otherwise I think the implication is that Rudolf and Kyrie are the culprits of the murders we didn' see.
jjblue1 is offline   Reply With Quote