Quote:
Originally Posted by chounokoe
And I think that is a rather unreflected move to make. Japanese mysteries never had the trope of the 'mysterious foreigner' as often and blatantly as it was featured in English and American mystery and suspense writing. Even authors like A.C.Doyle sometimes used that trope (as for example in The Adventure of the Speckled Band), where something was just explained with 'It's one of the mysteries of the orient...deal with it!!'.
Well yes, you could argue that it was left out because it would make Beatrice#1's existence more difficult...but I think it as just what I said above.
Dine's rules are much more focused on actuall plot structure and methods, therefore it would be kinda cheap to use one and not the other.
|
Yes, yes, we get it, you're an
expert. I'm not really comfortable relying on fancy academical book-learnin' when the author is explicitly writing a genre-busting work. There's also a number mismatch, and all that.
So then what
was Will's answer to the actual question, anyway? Who killed Beatrice? Answering the question of who Beatrice may be is a hint, but does it actually demonstrate her "killer?"
Or was this a big ego trip for Bernkastel, with the answer "me?"