2011-03-20, 15:57 | Link #261 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
|
Quote:
Why should we give a damn? No, really. Why should we? Most of us hate Ange, who was supposed to be the vehicle for understanding "Ryuukishi's true point". Doesn't that indicate to you just how much Ryuukishi failed to deliver his own message? I've personally experienced a lot of loss in my life, I've had my share of tragedies, and they impacted my life rather negatively, and I know I'm not the only one who's read this story that has had such an experience. I look on Ange with contempt, because I see her for what she is: A badly written sob story that's clearly designed to provoke feelings of remorse/sadness/bullcrap/craving for McDonald's(a la Pizza Hut). Ryuukishi spent four years trying to set up his readers to "learn how to let things go"...No shit. That's his message. Something that shallow. Something so obvious, that he had to shoehorn in a completely unsympathetic character into an otherwise good story in order to preach his moral truth as if it were some amazing revelation. Well it's not. Those that don't it already will get it wrong, and those that do need it already know it, so it doesn't help them. And besides, Anno did it better back in the Nineties. Honestly, no matter what you hold Umineko up for, the fact is that someone else did it better already. You can say that's not fair to Ryuukishi, well...That's too damn bad. He lead people on a wild goose chase, so his work deserves it's time under the microscope. He doesn't get a free pass. Quote:
Brevity is king. And Ryuukishi spent four years saying nothing of any real worth in his story. That would be all fine and good if this were just a fantasy story, but Ryuukishi is using it as a soapbox, and frankly his message is deeply underwhelming. The author is dead is apt in this case, as we readers assign more worth in the characters and world Ryuukishi built than the man himself put into it. Quote:
|
|||
2011-03-20, 16:08 | Link #264 | ||
Slashy Slashy!
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: USA
Age: 34
|
Quote:
If there were a way to prevent what happened on Rokkenjima? Then simply moving on would be a terrible thing. Since there is nothing which can change what has already happened, and everyone involved is already long gone? Moving on (and forgiving) is the best thing to do. Quote:
You say "Evil won", I say "It was a tragic situation where good intentions went wrong." |
||
2011-03-20, 16:12 | Link #265 | ||
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
Quote:
And again: Ange is not the only person who exists. She's being selfish if she only cares about the impact the disaster had on her, and if you only care about her, then Ryukishi failed to properly morally educate you in the context of his own work. Quote:
I sincerely hope you do not actually hold the moral beliefs your statements appear to support. You have a depressingly cavalier attitude toward malfeasance and evil.
__________________
|
||
2011-03-20, 16:21 | Link #266 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
|
Quote:
If you want to get into armchair philosophizing and sophistry, you're about to enter an arena where you simply can not win. If you're going to argue moral ambiguity you will see the error of your ways put in front of you. It's all well and good that you're confident that you're right but you're not. We'll show you, Renall with an air of stating the obvious, and myself with a sadistic air of superiority. If you'd like to avoid the obvious conclusion and just step away from this absurd argument, then you'll save us all a lot of time. Quote:
Quote:
When Evil goes unpunished, it has won. Because that is what it means for Evil to win, to commit evil without consequence, to reap only the reward, and receive no punishment for the harm it has done to the innocent, for it would not be evil if there were no innocents harmed. Say what you like, but Maria was innocent. No matter who committed what on Rokkenjimma, killing someone as innocent as Maria was an act of evil, by definition. |
|||
2011-03-20, 16:24 | Link #267 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
|
Quote:
On the contrary, it's your desire to condemn long dead people, that did something bad in the past, is the evilest thing in the world, that causes mutual hatred and eternal wars. Please reconsider your own moral stance. |
|
2011-03-20, 16:26 | Link #268 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
|
Quote:
What wars have been fought in order to defend their honor? Bahahahaha. Really. There's nothing reprehensible for refusing to forgive long dead people for their unforgivable crimes. If they received no blame, no punishment for their crimes, then there is really no reason to forgive them, as there was no justice in it. Their victims simply became victims, tragic victims, and their murderers? They got away with it. It doesn't matter how many innocent lives you took. Be it the one murderer taking 15 lives on Rokkenjimma, or someone ordering a genocide. All lives are equally precious. Taking innocent lives is equally reprehensible, no matter how few or how many you extinguish. |
|
2011-03-20, 16:27 | Link #269 | |
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
Quote:
The goal is not to perpetuate hate, but to affect truth and in so doing assure justice. That you are incapable of even distinguishing the two is troubling, but I've noticed this seems to be a very popular stance among the internet. It's intensely selfish to think the sole purpose of blaming the culprit is to somehow make them feel bad.
__________________
|
|
2011-03-20, 16:28 | Link #270 | ||
Slashy Slashy!
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: USA
Age: 34
|
Quote:
Whom do you respect more: the man who forgives the person who killed his wife? Or the man who hunts the killer down and blows his brains out with a shotgun? I respect the former far more. Quote:
Evil had already won, evil wins at the beginning of every mystery novel. The purpose of the mystery is to deliver some justice to the culprits to prevent some future tragedy from occurring again at the hands of those same culprits, not to prevent evil from "winning". In Umineko, there are no culprits left, and hence, no reason to know the truth. Please explain to me: what good would knowing the truth do for anyone living? Protecting the reputations of the dead is not something I am concerned about; they are dead and do not care. |
||
2011-03-20, 16:36 | Link #271 | ||||
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
||||
2011-03-20, 16:38 | Link #272 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Meta-Meta-Meta-Space
|
Not that I agree with what is being said on either side here, but this borders on ad hominem. Why don't we just call each other 'Criminals Against Humanity' or 'Judge Dredd' and really make this board nasty again?
I don't mean to pick on you, Renall; you're just the last person to post. But ultimately, the devil himself can argue for good and a saint can argue for evil. It's irrelevant who makes the argument; only the argument itself. As for whether this is truly evil itself, I'd like to understand how the written Umineko episodes in Rokkenjima prime, not being solvable, represents evil. Perhaps you mean to say that the evil is in Battler and Ange not being forthcoming with what they know (if it is a murder) in Rokkenjima Prime itself? But couldn't it just have been an accident instead? Despite all of Beatrice's written machinations, could Rokkenjima Prime have just been 'oops, Gouda set off the bomb?' I can believe Ange would be destroyed for holding her hate in this year only in the end to find out no one really did anything... Rokkenjima Prime, that is. And I can believe that Beatrice played up the incident as a crime when it really wasn't. (Especially since the police declared that it was just an 'incident.') |
2011-03-20, 16:38 | Link #273 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
|
The dead do not care if their murderer is brought to justice?
But what of their loved ones? Those that mourn their passing? The living who want answers to a terrible tragedy that has befallen them as well? And that's not even taking into account the possibility of an afterlife. Quote:
Do you know why Lady Justice's eyes are blindfolded and she holds scales? Justice is not about "good and evil", it is about "Balance", a punishment to fit the crime that has been committed. Justice is not about forgiveness, Justice is an eye for an eye. A life for a life. Some people believe that death is the best way of balancing the scales in some cases, and others think that reforming and making the murderer live a hollow life with the guilt and shame causing them to suffer the rest of their lives balances the scales. But justice is about punishment. Penalization. Not forgiveness. Justice demands the scales be balanced, the criminal be punished, that is the entire point. Knowing the truth allows the scales to be balanced, it allows the murderer to be punished, if in life, and in death, by bringing resolution to who exactly was responsible. You're wrong about mystery novels by the way, and belie your own ignorance: In a mystery novel, evil never wins. Evil manifests when the murder is committed, but Evil is defeated the moment the detective outs them, and they receive their just punishment. Murder on the Orient express, and Then There Were None are exceptions, as they are stories of how evil is punished. Oh, as for the living? Catharsis is a wonderful thing. |
|
2011-03-20, 16:40 | Link #274 | |
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
Quote:
That makes him an apologist for evil, just as I said. I am not attacking his argument solely on the basis of his moral character; I am concluding that his argument demonstrates that he lacks moral character. And I stand by it, as I find his opinion to be incredibly offensive, but nobody sheds a tear for me over that.
__________________
|
|
2011-03-20, 16:43 | Link #275 | |||
Slashy Slashy!
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: USA
Age: 34
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Hypothetical: A man has just murdered the leader of a prominent gang, and died in the attempt. However, the gang members never discovered his identity. If they do, they will murder his wife and children. Should the truth be revealed? |
|||
2011-03-20, 16:46 | Link #276 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Meta-Meta-Meta-Space
|
Quote:
I'd have to partially agree here, but to clarify it as not doing anything to stand up to evil is evil in of itself... Incidently, I think this is what Beatrice may consider her sin to be; that she knew everything that was going on but couldn't stop it? In this case, she is not the true culprit as defined in usual detective fiction but bears some culpability... |
|
2011-03-20, 16:47 | Link #277 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
2011-03-20, 16:47 | Link #278 | |||
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
|||
2011-03-20, 16:57 | Link #279 | ||
Slashy Slashy!
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: USA
Age: 34
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
2011-03-20, 17:01 | Link #280 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
|
Quote:
You need better arguments. You havn't even answered mine, and frankly I think my points are much easier to rebut that Renall's common sense ones. As for why a villain's memory should be reviled after their death? Because it provides closure to the still living victims of the villains crime. Sometimes they need it in order to move on. Ange did read Eva's diary before deciding to move on with her life, after all. You're arguing against even that much, which is much worse than even what Ryuukishi put forth. That's funny, in a way. |
|
|
|