[Oliver]

Originally Posted by Renall

I think it might help, Oliver, if you outlined your detailed argument about the gold metaphor from the Tea Party a bit the way you did for me. It might explain better what you're getting at with the nature of the episode.

Probably. Well, here it is.

Narration in Ep7 says that gold is the crystal of magical power manifested in the material world. This is given pretty much literally by Beatrice-3 herself as well. This could be taken many ways, after all, gold is a loaded symbol with many meanings. But later on, once we start going through the rampage story, it is said quite directly, that monetary value of gold is magic. That if you have enough money, you can convince anyone to behave in any fashion desired, and left uncontrolled it does nothing but cloud people's minds, bringing them to commit atrocities they could never even imagine otherwise.

At the very same time, the notion of the magic of "two people creating a world" is reiterated multiple times across the episode. And herein lies my point.

The very idea of "love" as it exists in all cultures I'm aware of that define it, is that some things cannot ever possibly be bought. Acceptance is given freely of own will or is of no value. It cannot be coaxed out, cannot be traded for, and is for this reason that it is treasured more than the entire resources of a civilization, throughout history and for the foreseeable history to come, while humans are still human. This is why mutual love and acceptance is a small everyday miracle -- it requires two one-sided loves to suddenly match, this is why it's so hard to do for everyone even if for most people it usually happens at least once in their lives.

That Beatrice's power is at one moment said to be being accepted by others with two people making up a world, bringing imagination up to the level of truth through feeling and connection, and in the next moment equated to metallic gold and greed is for this reason supremely offensive to anyone who holds "love" as an ideal. It tarnishes not just Beatrice, or, say, Maria who joins in on that world, but the entire cast. Let alone the author who produced this blasphemy.

Is there anything else you hold dear? Well, take a closer look at Episode 7, you'll probably find it tried to step on that as well. If you still didn't get it, here, have a character who is doing a heroic sacrifice fail, just for demonstration purposes.

Sure, that's how witches are supposed to behave. But authors who do that sort of thing cater only to a very narrow crowd of depressed nihilists.

Originally Posted by Renall

It's worth noting that Will himself rebels. Of all the characters in Chiru, Will has felt the closest to a "reader stand-in." I suppose Erika too, if we associate Erika with a certain kind of "undesirable" reader. Will could be seen as either another kind of "undesirable" reader (though nowhere near Erika's level), or as the "right" kind of reader. In either case, we have both of them being played with by Bernkastel out of deliberate cruelty and indecipherable motive.

Precisely.

Then Bernkastel leaves the board and just knocks both his piece and the piece of Leon he has been protecting over like they're nothing.

Originally Posted by chounokoe

I don't want a story that holds ideals, I want a story that presents me with hard facts about a tragedy which I can deduce. In the end they are all dead and it depends on them if I feel sad for them or not.
I'm on Bern's side for that one...I don't want an absolute happy end.

Tell me then, why are you reading a story, and not police reports? Mind you, the ideal you profess here is reason. Have fun trying to convince yourself that the Kyrie Rampage makes sense, unless you already did.