|
View Poll Results: Another - Episode 10 Rating | |||
Perfect 10 | 33 | 44.00% | |
9 out of 10 : Excellent | 22 | 29.33% | |
8 out of 10 : Very Good | 14 | 18.67% | |
7 out of 10 : Good | 5 | 6.67% | |
6 out of 10 : Average | 1 | 1.33% | |
5 out of 10 : Below Average | 0 | 0% | |
4 out of 10 : Poor | 0 | 0% | |
3 out of 10 : Bad | 0 | 0% | |
2 out of 10 : Very Bad | 0 | 0% | |
1 out of 10 : Painful | 0 | 0% | |
Voters: 75. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools |
2012-03-15, 13:34 | Link #181 | ||
The Voice of Reason
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Netherlands
Age: 47
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
||
2012-03-15, 15:57 | Link #182 | |
Kamen Rider Muppeteer
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Unknown
Age: 39
|
Quote:
By 'you', I mean anyone reading this. |
|
2012-03-15, 16:01 | Link #184 | ||
Moving in circles
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 49
|
As has already been pointed out, we're going in circles because we start from different assumptions. I have already pointed out as clearly as I can the mistaken assumptions that people are taking against Izumi, based on what to me is a biased perspective. If Izumi's accusers cannot accept that their perspectives can be skewed, then there is really nothing worth debating. We can only agree to disagree.
Quote:
I could, for example, begin with a query totoum brought up a few pages ago, about why I find the explanation about student numbers vis-a-vis the number of desks in the classroom unsatisfactory. It's because I find the set-up extremely arbitrary. My objection to it is similar to Kanon's initial objection to my theory about "29 students", that it seems retarded that it had to be 29, one less than 30. Why not make it a roster of, say, 26 students, for example, to make four times sure that even if one extra student turns up, it wouldn't trigger the phenomenon? Conversely, if we have such a thoughtful school, which instructs a janitor to conscientiously move furniture around to make sure that each class has just the right number of desks at the start of the year, then why can't the school simply tell the janitor to stuff 29+6 desks into Class 3-3 of 1998, just to make five times sure that even if an extra student were to turn up, there would be more than enough tables for him or her? Especially given the history of this particular class, which has a nasty habit of coming up short by just one every year, you'd think that a truly conscientious janitor would have more than learnt his lesson by now and move in more tables in advance to save himself the extra legwork at the start of every year. So you see, it's the same problem, but presented differently, that's all. If the first instance seems arbitrarily stupid, what makes the second instance any less so? In any case, that's no longer a point I wish to quibble over, because if the author decided to set up his story that way, who am I to gainsay him? If I do, I might as well give up on the plot altogether. What really matters is the extent to which we are willing to suspend disbelief, and I'm sure we would all agree that this is a matter of subjective opinion. And this is where all my explanations come in, that there is sufficient grounds for me to believe that, yes indeed, the students do make allowance for accidental acknowledgement. There are at least two instances in which students other than Kouichi have accidentally acknowledged a "non-existent" one. The first example is during a test, when we the viewers could clearly see that exam papers had been distributed to the "non-existent" Mei. Wouldn't that count as acknowledgement, and therefore break the counter-measure? Apparently not. The second example was during Kouichi's daydream of dancing with Mei. He had such a silly grin on his face that Mochizuki and Teshigawara couldn't help but notice him — at a time when Kouichi was supposed to be "non-existent". Wouldn't this count as acknowledgement? Again, apparently not. The thing about Chibiki's thoughts on the efficacy of the ostracism counter-measure is that even he does not know why it does or does not work. It may be because of all the little cases of accidental acknowledgement that went unnoticed. Then again, maybe not. The truth is, no one knows. The students are just trying their best to make it work. So, I ask again, if everyone were so deathly afraid that even the slightest eye contact with the "non-existent" one would break the counter-measure, then why would they take the extraodinary risk of letting the "non-existent" fellow stay in the classroom, well within everyone's sight? The simplest explanation to this apparent laxity is that enough of them apparently believe that accidental contact does not count as acknowledgement, that it would not jeopardise the plan. Therefore, is it really so "arbitrary" for me — along with an apparent majority of the students — to believe that "it's sometimes OK for the person to exist"? Bear in mind that I am not asking you, the viewer, to accept the plausibility of the explanation. What I am asking, on the other hand, is for you to accept that a good number of the students believe that to be the case. Because that is the crux of my entire case: That in blaming Izumi, we fail utterly to consider the matter from the perspective of the students, who had good reason, in their opinion, to believe that Mei had failed them and, worse, perhaps deliberately. When viewers completely rule out this possiblity on the simple basis of "arbitrariness" — even after I have presented all the evidence that suggests that it is not — it becomes hard for me to believe that we are being "fair" judges open to the entire range of possible explanations. It suggests to me only that we have been rendered biased by the way the story has been presented, primarily from Mei and Kouichi's points of view. Quote:
You also choose to interpret Izumi's confrontation as a self-serving accusation. May I ask how do you know it was self-serving? Are you privy to her thoughts? As far as I can tell, she wasn't telegraphing them to the audience, so how did you know? The truth is, you don't yet know. You're basing your judgment on subjective opinion, in which case I have presented another explanation, also based on subjective opinion, to counter yours. It's fine if you won't accept my explanation. What isn't fine is that you insist that only your opinion is correct while all other possibilities are not. Who, then, is being hypocritical here? Now, things may yet turn out differently in the remaining episodes, especially given the increasing signs that Izumi may in fact be the "Other". But until we have more definitive information to work with, I will categorically insist that none of us has any solid basis to accuse one side or the other for being "wrong". All we know for certainty, at the moment, is that Mei and Izumi can both be blamed for some things while being blameless on some other matters. We don't yet have conclusive evidence to say so either way. The only thing we can readily agree on is that the phenomenon is bringing out the worse in everyone — and that is what makes this a compelling show. |
||
2012-03-15, 16:37 | Link #185 |
Strangely dependable...
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: some random place out there...
|
No spoiler - at least, I don't think so. I don't read the manga or novel, so I couldn't spoil even if I wanted to. I don't really know if her brother died or whether he's in 199x class, I'm just guessing from what people already posted in the threads and she was obviously crying about her brother in her dream.
Though I see pieces of info in supposedly non-spoiler threads that I sometimes am not sure if it's already mentioned in the anime or not - I simply assume it'll be a non-spoiler detail since it's not under tag or deleted (...I don't remember every detail I watch =_=; ).
__________________
|
2012-03-15, 16:53 | Link #186 |
Zetsubou gunsou
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Switzerland
Age: 43
|
I think we assume her brother died due to episode 06. Kouichi looks at the class roster for 1996 and a boy with the same family name (Akazawa) and address as Izumi is noted as having died (it’s at about 18:00 in the episode). The rest is just various confirmations from the novel/manga readers. I didn’t read the novel myself, so I assume it’s not a spoiler at this point.
|
2012-03-15, 17:11 | Link #187 | |||||
Lost in my dreams...
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 37
|
Quote:
So indeed, I can understand emphasizing with Izumi and her position as head of countermeasures during a time when fecal matter is hitting the rotor, but I simply reject the notion that her accusation of Mei holds ground on detached logical basis. Understanding where someone is coming from and actually validating said position are two different things. Which is where I suppose our differences might be well be coming from - I am indeed looking at the situation from an outsider's "god's view" perspective, and judging based on that, while your position seems to be more of that her situation and actions are emotionally understandable. That I can agree with, and I certainly wouldn't want to find myself in her shoes, but at the same time I don't believe the relevant information available to her for an objective assessment of the situation is all that different from us. Which is why I see her actions as influenced by her emotion (her seemingly general dislike of Mei + overall stress of the situation + general human need to have a tangible outlet for their frustration) more than they should be, which is why can't see her actions as "correct", even if they are "understandable" Quote:
Technically Teshigawara already broke it when he apologized to Koichi, but then he has always been reluctant about keeping Koichi in the dark, even when it concerned only Mei, and Mochizki is largely in a similar boat. Coupled with the questionable usefulness of ignoring Koichi to start with, I don't find it too weird they couldn't help it at times. Especially Teshigawara was prone to making "accidents" in this regard from the start, even when their countermeasure was supposedly working, so he has established himself as someone who was lax about it from the start. And it's not like anyone actually saw him/them doing any of that, so there is no one to accuse them of anything in the first place. Besides that, I highly doubt simply looking at the person would do the trick - if that were the case, the countermeasure would have never worked at all, because it's literally impossible for all students to keep the person out of your sight for the whole school year as long as he actually attends the same class. That would essentially be the same as merely thinking about said person being enough to break the spell (It's brain that processes optical input after all), which can't be the case for obvious reasons. No, it can only work if it requires an actual interaction related to said person, something that acknowledges his existence to the outside world beyond the confines of your own mind. Interacting with said person directly is a given cause for failure ... I guess even mentioning him in a conversation is. But someone simply catching a glance of him being a cause for failure would have prevented the countermeasure from being discovered in the first place. Quote:
Quote:
What I believe the 50% unknown hint at, which I believe is the overriding purpose of this information piece, which is something I have been saying since episode 5, is the potential for "Another" to be someone outside the class, within the same two degrees of bloodline separation that the curse effects. In which case ignoring someone in class wouldn't be of much use, but Chibiki has been so focused on class 3 specifically that he may have missed the potential for that possibility, which is why he doesn't even mention it, and instead can only shrug in defeat at the unknown causes for failure. It can't be arbitrary, there has to be a method to the madness, and I very much doubt half the times it doesn't work solely because a failure to ignore wasn't found out. Quote:
For an added "temptation", there is also the fact you won't have to answer for, or explain your actions to anyone. Everyone will forget the "Another" existed. You won't be accused of anything, held responsible for anything. You can do it and get away scot-free. The only limiting factor is your conscience/morality, but it gets soothed by the fact you can tell yourselves you are actually saving lives by doing so. And it's not even a "real" sacrifice - the "Another" can't be saved, it's an existence that will cease to exist at the end of the year anyway, and won't be remembered by almost anyone. The "death" of Another is assured in either case. The lives hanging in the balance can still be saved. That said, for me personally, I think it would largely depend on the circumstances of who the Another is. If it turned out to be my lover ... no, I'd imagine I couldn't do it. I know I don't really care for "greater good" to the extent I would sacrifice something dear to me for it. Even if the "greater good" consists of lives of actual humans here. Though this again depends on whether I have close friends in the class - that could make the situation murky again. If the Another turned out to be a random classmate though, one which I have never really been all that close with - indeed, I imagine I could be able to do it. Not for the "greater good" (though it would turn out like that anyway, so I get the props for that either way!), but to secure my own life, that of my family and that of my friends. It wouldn't be pretty, but I would do it, and I imagine would be able to get over it reasonably well. Now the more interesting question is: could you do it if you had a way to know, for sure, that you and your family, along with your friends/potential lover in the class won't be struck by the calamity. Could you do it solely for the sake of classmates you sort-of know but never really interact with ? Especially if the Another turns out to be someone close to you? That I do not know.
__________________
Last edited by Skyfall; 2012-03-15 at 17:41. |
|||||
2012-03-15, 19:11 | Link #188 | |
Me at work
|
Quote:
2)If you start adding desks you have no way to tell if there's an extra student that appeared or not,so I really don't think it's a good idea.
__________________
|
|
2012-03-15, 19:33 | Link #189 | |
Detective
Join Date: Aug 2010
Age: 36
|
Quote:
A pretty good question. And a hard one too. I think the problem here is that even if you could say it with 100% accuracy, people would still be too selfish to kill their family or lovers, for the greater good. The closer you are the less likely it would be. Even if the extra person being here is a lie, the time you would spend with them and the memories you create would still be reality. Its like asking people what is more improtant to them: A chance to spend some time with deceased close to you or the lives of some strangers. And I doubt that I', wrong if I claim that most people would rather choose the convenient lie than the cold truth. The funny thing is: Even if memories would not be erased and the whole world would know about it - no one could actually condamn that person without being a hypocrite. Actually killing the another would be considered a crime. Justiefied self defense would not apply here either, as it requires immediate threats or present dangers to live, health, [...] You see it really is an interesting question no matter from what angle you look at it.
__________________
|
|
2012-03-15, 19:57 | Link #190 |
Me at work
|
Ok,I've had my share of frustrations about some things not being very clear but if there's one thing that's been made clear is that the trigger is an "extra" student showing up,not being a desk short,that's just a way to notice it,not the trigger itself,so making the roster 26 students doesn't prevent the Another showing up making the roster 27 and setting off the curse even if there's still two extra desks.
__________________
|
2012-03-16, 03:50 | Link #191 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
|
Quote:
1) Make it impossible to still murder the Another (you will be stopped from murdering other people); and 2) Make it impossible to convince someone to murder the Another (a 'carefully considered' suggestion to murder someone coming from someone who murdered an innocent isn't likely to be taken well). For added fun, consider that there's only one known instance of memories of the Another being directly erased after 'death'. It might've been a fluke, perhaps caused by something unrelated, and you'd still be considered a murderer for saving everybody. Or, perhaps, you might get the Another, but don't stop the phenomenon - again, that could've been just a fluke, mere coincidence. I don't know if I could take it morally, but I don't think I'd be confident enough to murder the Another considering the very limited and fragile evidence you have as support that everything will work out fine. No, not really. Your memories are erased at the end of the year. Events that nobody remembers might as well just not have happened. |
|
2012-03-16, 05:30 | Link #192 |
今宵の虎徹は血に飢えている
Join Date: Jan 2009
|
I wonder for the dead one what's it like being here though....is it like time away from some horrible fate or something...when you kill them or when they are banished back at graduation do they go back to some utter horror or something...
__________________
|
2012-03-16, 06:33 | Link #193 | |||
Awakened One
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Northern Italy
|
Quote:
Quote:
BTW there is no way to know how many students will enroll in your school in any given year. That depends on the natality and the parents' choice (since there are two middle schools in Yomiyama) Even if you start with exactly 150 students (5 classes of 30 each), there is always the possibility of getting repeating students or transfer students. Quote:
Even if she had suspicions, the method she used is plain wrong. She should have talked with Mei privately before accusing her in front of the whole class.
__________________
|
|||
2012-03-16, 08:28 | Link #194 | |
Kana Hanazawa ♥
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: France
Age: 37
|
Quote:
I'm only exposing my interpretation of the scene based on what I've observed in this episode and the previous ones and asking you what you think of it. I thought I had added enough "To me", "I find", "I believe", etc... to make it clear I wasn't pretending to possess the one and objective truth (who doesn't even exist at the moment). I'm not trying to force my view on anybody, I'm trying to understand yours and make you understand mine. Personally, I find it interesting to read other people's point of view, even more so when they are drastically different from mine since that could mean my interpretation is wrong. Of course, you're right, neither of us can know for sure who is correct at the moment. That doesn't mean we can't confront our point of views. Since it's getting heated, I'm just going to drop it though. There's no much more I can add anyway. I believe I understand where you're coming from, and I can only hope I've made you understand my reasoning just a little bit. We just can't agree, that tends to happen when there is no objective answer to a debate. I hope the answer will be given in the last two episodes, I'd like to know if I was totally wrong about Izumi. Edit: That said, even if it is revealed she had nothing but good intentions (I'm not dismissing the possibility at all), I will still find the method she used plain wrong (it's the method that irked me). She had no right to claim Mei was the primary person responsible for everything in front of everybody without even trying to discuss with her first. That was the first logical step for a reconciliation.
__________________
Last edited by Kanon; 2012-03-16 at 08:45. |
|
2012-03-16, 08:38 | Link #195 | |
Detective
Join Date: Aug 2010
Age: 36
|
Quote:
Plus, we have already seen that the memories are still there, just surpressed. We do also have a lot of evidence that the ones knowing who the another is will remember them afterwards too. I would even go far enough to say that the guy who made the tape does till know it at the point where we see him, his memories are just surpressed for the time being. (until this years calamity ends) him not remembering anything is essential for the phenomenon. while it shows its effects.
__________________
|
|
2012-03-16, 09:15 | Link #196 | |
Moving in circles
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 49
|
Quote:
I feel that we've had a great discussion, with both sides attacking the arguments instead of the people presenting them. Naturally, I'm passionate about what I believe and, if in making my arguments, I have offended people, I apologise. That was never my intent. And since we have met each other halfway, I'm more than glad to move on. Last edited by TinyRedLeaf; 2012-03-16 at 09:31. Reason: *Wrong pronoun. |
|
2012-03-16, 10:47 | Link #197 |
Lost in my dreams...
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 37
|
Putting everything else aside (for good this time! ), a thought struck me while I was enjoying the shameless fun of Higschool DxD in a state of deep meditation - was there really no way to explain the situation to Koichi at start of the school year, in a roundabout way of sorts ? Tell him to sit down and listen to a story they want to share.
"Once upon a time there was a class. After a classmate who was loved by all died, they kept acting as if he was still there, thus making the mistake of inviting the dead in the class. Each following year a formerly deceased person would "revive" and enter the class, causing death to befall upon students and their families. All forms of exorcism failed and bodies continued to pile up, until eventually they stumbled upon a solution - doing the opposite of what had invited the dead in the first place. They selected a classmate to be treated as non-existent, thus returning the number of exiting classmates to their original balance. And behold - when they did that, no one died from the "curse" that year. <Insert relevant details that I'm too lazy to type out>. Cool story bro, eh?" Voila. Wouldn't this essentially accomplish the "cluing Koichi in" part ? Mei's name wouldn't even come up in the story. Neither an explicit statement that they are talking about class 3-3. Neither the fact that they are actually doing the same. Nothing of that actually needs to be mentioned, and should be more than enough for Koichi to understand those parts himself. That should sate his desire to chase down Mei and figure whether she's real or he's having illusions, clue him in that he shouldn't try to interact with her, and should be largely enough to sate his desire to understand what the heck is going on. All without mentioning Mei's existence, or even the fact their class actually has such "non-existent" person. He would piece together that on his own easy enough. Sounds like a pretty safe roundabout way to explain the situation without actually invoking the sensitive information to me. Yeah, we now know that Koichi not talking to Mei probably wouldn't have had any effect, because the phenomenon had already started, but still - seems like a fairly obvious way to get the message across while routing around the "must not mention/acknowledge Mei" rule.
__________________
|
2012-03-16, 12:09 | Link #198 | |
Detective
Join Date: Aug 2010
Age: 36
|
Quote:
Let Chibaki do it, as he can aknowledge Mei as much as he likes.
__________________
|
|
2012-03-16, 12:41 | Link #199 | |||
Moving in circles
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 49
|
Quote:
The "balanced" solution has been my assumption since the beginning because it made perfect thematic sense. The Class of 72 started it all by believing so hard that their dead friend is not gone that they literally brought back the dead. Subsequently, all classes that followed would have do the exact opposite to make up for that "original sin". This, in turn, ties in very well with the revelation about Mei and Misaki, twins who looked the same but suffered opposite fates. But then... Quote:
Quote:
Meaning to say: I find that it is no longer clear if it's the presence of the extra itself that causes the deaths, or the fact that the students are "aware" of its presence that triggers the phenomenon. I've been working with the latter assumption all this time because, like I said above, it makes thematic sense: The original Misaki was brought back into existence by students who believed he did, without being aware of his ghost until the very last moment; so, to erase that "original sin", the students must believe into "non-existence" a person that they are fully aware of. It's the kind of diabolical cosmic joke that the Old Ones would be proud of. If the Other isn't even believed to be in the class — because they somehow got the numbers just right, for once — what's the problem? It doesn't "exist", as far as the students are concerned, and there is therefore no need for them to go through the stress of implementing the counter-measure. The arbitrariness of the phenomenon and its counter-measure is, to me, a source of great frustration. I thus hope the remaining episodes will clear these doubts, because they have been a definite weak point in the anime adaptation. |
|||
2012-03-16, 12:58 | Link #200 | |||
Lost in my dreams...
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 37
|
Quote:
My proposed method avoids mentioning Mei altogether (while stil being more than clear about what they are actually talking about), so one way or another - there were options indeed. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
|||
|
|