Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyper
I think 5 -> 6 is leap of logic. His three friends realized, after seeing the finished movie, that it is not Hougou's intended story. It is what Houtarou think is Hougou's. Why would that implied they know Irisu is lying? They know Houtarou has a wrong answer. They think Houtarou tried to reconstruct Hougou's script, but got it wrong. Of course, that automatically make his wrong answer his original. That, however, does not imply they know that it is exactly what Irisu wanted: his original.
|
Thank you for your input. You raised valid points that allowed me to refine my analysis. After thinking over what you said, here are my revised thoughts:
1. Satoshi, Mayaka and Eru know that Houtaro believes he merely reconstituted the lost ending of Hongou.
2. Satoshi, Mayaka and Eru also know that what Houtaro created is not Hongou's idea, but his own original work.
The question now for Satoshi, Mayaka and Eru is, why does Houtaro believe he acted as a detective, when all three of them know he was actually being an author?
Obviously, we the viewers know why. It's because Irisu told him so. But Satoshi, Mayaka and Eru were not there when Irisu told that lie to Houtaro. I think I failed to fully account for that, and I would not have seen this error if you had not proferred your constructive criticism, so I thank you once more. Let me now share with you the additional analysis you provoked.
1. When Houtaro presented his theory to Irisu, in his mind it was HIS theory .
2. Irisu liked his theory, so she told Houtaro his theory is exactly the "lost" ending Hongou had previously written - a LIE.
3. From that point on, in Houtaro's mind, it was no longer HIS theory; it had become Hongou's lost ending.
I now believe this lie was the pivotal deception in the entire story. Remember a few posts back I noted the highly unusual act by Irisu of shaking Houtaro's hand? I think I finally see its true significance. The traditional bow would not have cut it. Irisu probably determined that physically touching Houtaro would further impair his ability to think objectively and see through her deception.
With this new insight, let me propose the following adjustments to my earlier hypothesis:
1. Irisu told two lies (well, more than that, but only these are germane to this discussion). First, "we do not intend to make you write an original ending, but simply to reconstruct Hongou's lost ending." Second, "That's it Houtaro! That's Hongou's ending."
2. Satoshi, Mayaka and Eru were present to hear the first lie, but not the second.
Here is where I stumbled. Although they were aware of the first lie, Satoshi, Mayaka and Eru could not conclusively determine that Irisu misled Houtaro about the true nature of the ending because they were not around to see her do it.
3. But even if they did not have all the goods on Irisu, Satoshi Mayaka and Eru had enough to suspect she had done something wrong, because: a)they were aware of the first lie; b) they knew Irisu to be extremely manipulative; and c) they were aware that Irisu had managed to somehow motivate Hotarou to break character and go out of his way to work on the ending.
4. Reasonable people can disagree on how much Satoshi, Mayaka and Eru managed to figure out based on what they had. But if we assume average intelligence, they knew enough to be deeply suspicious that Irisu did something to Houtaro, although they did not know its specific details.
5. I conclude therefore, that Satoshi, Mayaka and Eru knew Irisu deceived Houtaro, but they did not know exactly how. Due to the incomplete evidence, and given the grave implications, they could not explicitly accuse Irisu of lying. So instead, they tried to point Houtaro in the right direction, and hoped he would connect the dots himself. And that's what he did.
Anent the "change of perspective": Scratch everything I wrote previously. This is what I now propose:
1. The mystery is Hongou's ending.
2. The initial, "flawed" perspective is that Houtaro's deduction and Hongou's ending are one and the same.
3. The new perspective is that of Satoshi, Mayaka and Eru, who see Houtaro's deduction and Hongou's ending as two very different things.
4. The result of the changed perspective is that Houtaro sees that the only reason he believes his solution and Hongou's ending are one and the same is because Irisu falsely told him so.
Although I was not initially looking for feedback, I'm now grateful you actually bothered to take the time to respond. Any further thoughts you may wish to share with me will be appreciated. The more I think about this story, the more impressed I am at how well constructed it is.
Edit: I forgot to address an important point you raised concerning Irisu's intent. You do not believe Satoshi, Mayaka and Eru could have perceived that tricking Houtaro into writing an original ending for the movie was Irisu's master plan from the start.
I think that's a fair objection. But that's not what I'm claiming. All I'm saying is that Satoshi, Mayaka and Eru figured out that Irisu ripped off Houtaro at least one day before Houtaro did. They did not need to know she meant to deceive Houtaro from the get-go. They just needed to understand that she was currently deceiving Houtaro, and he had not yet noticed.
I think the real problem people may have with my idea concerns whether Satoshi, Mayaka and Eru could realistically accept that Irisu sincerely believed Hotarou's ending was what Hongou originally intended. If that's what Irisu truly believed, then there was no malicious intent to deceive. In that case, Houtaro is being robbed of due credit, but at worst, it was an honest mistake.
Somehow, that doesn't feel quite right, but I will have to give it some more thought.