Quote:
Originally Posted by Megaolix
I'm tired of hearing about landslides and bombs just because of EP4. Here's my take on Battler being 'killed' while alone.
To kill someone does not automatically mean acting in a direct manner!
He was alone for day, knowing everyone else on the island was dead and not an idea as to who, how and why. At this point, he may have thought this was his fault. After all, he met someone that he saw as Beatrice, but failed to asnwer her question. 'Beatrice' is shocked that Battler does not remember his sin. She leaves, and then nothing else happens.
At this point, it is possible the culprit died (suicide), not even caring about anything else and thinking everything had been meaningless.
Battler is left alone. Find the corpses of everyone on the island. Probably wonders what the killer did after he failed to remember his sin. Who said he did not imagine then that the culprit simply stopped because he did not remember? That the killings happened because of him?
Thus, Battler was killed by Beatrice. Because Beatrice killed everyone else and Battler thought it was his fault, Beatrice 'killed' Battler.
Driving someone to suicide can be considered murder!
This is my opinion on it.
|
The only problem is
この島にあなたはたった一人。そしてもちろん、私はあなたではない。なのに私は今、ここにいて、これからあ なたを殺します (You are the only one on this island. And naturally, I am not you. despite this I am now here and will kill you now (implying from the moment this is said).).
If Battler commited suicide he would naturally be the one killing him(self), even if some outside force induced that self-killing.
The only weak point I see in that sentence right now is the differentiation between この島 (this island) and ここ (here). Of course implicative grammar rules would say that those two refer to the same place...yet it could be they don't have to, if Beatrice was able to point towards the island as being near her while she was not technically on it.