View Single Post
Old 2012-12-27, 04:19   Link #31523
haguruma
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Germany
Age: 39
Send a message via ICQ to haguruma Send a message via MSN to haguruma
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjblue1 View Post
It's not that she hadn't thought at the answer, it's that with her knowledge she could find the right answer only out of random luck and not out of reasoning.
I think that is one of the points that goes along with Umineko and is at least what I can draw from it as a creative resource. In terms of riddles you have to know the level of knowledge your opponent possesses in order to create a fair challenge, but reality does not provide fair challenges. That is why I also think that Umineko has a lot more to say about fictionality and literary fairness than commenting on the moral question of these.

In that sense it is largely different from 'An Offering to Nothingness', more on that later though. Ange even says that no matter how many countering truths people create in the end, she will create her own Golden Truth and keep her family with her, she does not condemn the witches in the end, she merely says that she will no longer commit to being their plaything. In the end, she creates as much a 'fantasy' or a fictionalized account of real events as the witches do, only her version is her's and her's alone.

Coming back to fairness. Fiction can be fair, that is correct, but reality will not care for playing fair, providing you with clues and hints. But where "AOtN" flat out denied mystery fiction as a form of entertainment, Umineko goes for the fictionality of everything by claiming that reality is always just a construction from the imperfect knowledge we have of the completeness of existence around us. That is why I enjoyed Chiru just as much as the first four arcs, because it played with that and even took it a step further.

Quote:
For example you've gotten me definitely curious about 'An Offering to Nothingness' but sadly this book hasn't been translated it so I can't really use it to improve my judgement of Umineko.
[...]
Any chance you can further semplificate things for people who can't get such a wide mystery knowledge or is it asking too much?
I wouldn't call my mystery knowledge wide, it's still lacking in several areas, even people who are far more advanced in their research than me still admit that they are merely attempting to built a larger understanding of a genre that might not even be one cohesive genre.
In that context I have to say, I like rules like those of Knox and Van Dine, but I love it even more to dismantle them and understand why exactly they were used, what they meant in their respective context and in the end turn them on their head. In the end the Eiserne Jungfrau does not control reality by forbidding certain elements, they can merely test if the real world allows their rules to exist.

I don't have to find a groundbreaking novelty in a work to find it fascinating. Merely the playing around with elements that are taken for granted might be enough to spark my interest.
In classic mystery fiction the angle of the legend-motive was used by the culprit to spread suspicion into every possible corner and push attention away from him or herself by using a well-known supernatural narrative. In Umineko it rather seems to be that one person (guilty or not) tried to gather all guilt into him/herself to give life to a supernatural tale that did not exist prior to this.

In that way I understand why it is often compared to 'AOtN'. You can read this plot synopsis (part of it was taken from a Japanese blog because I didn't remember all specifics) if you want.
Spoiler for An Offering to Nothingness:
haguruma is offline   Reply With Quote