2013-07-29, 22:37 | Link #32581 | |
"Senior" "Member"
Join Date: Jan 2012
|
Quote:
This was not a joke. It was stated by Bernkastel herself in the trial of the 5th Episode. So what now? You want to ignore the red truth? If you do, then of course nothing can stop you from making ANY theory... but then you could also say that 1000 ponies fell from the sky that murdered everyone on Rokkenjima...
__________________
|
|
2013-07-30, 02:01 | Link #32582 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
|
Quote:
But I assure you, no matter what theories I bring up, they'll always follow the red truth and I'll never use pieces outside of the game board. As an example, I will never use the person who phoned Natsuhi as "Culprit X", because "he/she/it" only appeared in the 5th game and in no other games before or after. I'll accept this red truth and purpose a revision: Ushiromiya Krauss is not the culprit. But for the 5th game, he's an accomplice in the murders. After the adult conversation, Rosa secretly meets up with Krauss and tells him about her plan to kill all of the siblings to revive Beatrice as described in the epitath. She lies to Krauss, saying that himself, Jessica and Natsuhi would be 3 of the 5 people left alive to go to the Golden Land. Of course, Krauss could care less for Rosa's belief in Beatrice or black magic, but he does care for eliminating any potential witnesses to Kinzo's body, so he agrees on the condition that Jessica and Natsuhi are unharmed. From the start of the game, until Lady Bernkastel's proclamation, it's possible for Ushiromiya Krauss to either kill or help with the killings. Krauss discovered Rosa(or the culprit) killing Jessica and the other cousins. He confronted her, initially survived and then was brutally murdered after the phone call. |
|
2013-07-30, 11:08 | Link #32583 |
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
I'm trying to read your posts to determine whether I can* or should** argue with you about them but all the needless red and blue basically causes my eyes to glaze over and I have no interest in trying to untangle what you're actually trying to say. Any chance of presenting yourself in a somewhat more coherent and less colorful fashion?
* Obviously, I'm a Kanye West-level genius. ** Almost certainly not, but if I'd learned my lesson I'd have left here in 2011.
__________________
|
2013-07-30, 11:14 | Link #32584 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
|
Quote:
-Initial Thesis: I suggested a possibility of a Krauss-Culprit theory for specifically the 5th game. Because Battler had denied that Krauss had died with the red text, and denying everyone's alibi but Natsuhi's, I thought I could. The Chaos Sorcerer(Grey) reaffirmed that Lady Bernkastel made that declaration with the red truth and I've since confirmed. -Current Thesis: Even if he isn't the culprit, it's possible that Krauss was an accomplice of the culprit or that he could have killed people during the time Lady Bernkastel hadn't made the declaration(the same solution Battler had for Eva-Beatrice's riddle). If Genji is Rosa's accomplice, I also argued that just because Genji was "out of the mansion", doesn't necessarily negate any actions he could've done while walking out of the mansion or being in the mansion's vicinity. |
|
2013-07-30, 11:26 | Link #32585 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
|
I haven't been following this discussion at all, but I'm not sure what exactly the point of invoking Krauss as a culprit is for EP5? I'm kind of lost on how that helps to explain anything about the scenario.
If you're a Rosatrice believer, doesn't KNM already have an explanation of EP5 that covers everything reasonably well without invoking any extra culprits? Krauss culprit theory just seems like a pointless overcomplication really. And I don't know what the part about Genji has to do with anything. |
2013-07-30, 11:27 | Link #32586 |
Senior Member
|
Just to get this completely straight:
You are trying to construct a theory that does not rely on the more obvious solution for what reason? If it is just because it's interesting that's great, but I don't know if this is the right place to basically make fanfiction theories... |
2013-07-30, 11:34 | Link #32587 | |
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2013-07-30, 13:01 | Link #32588 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
|
Quote:
From Battler: In this closed off world, multiple truths can exist. So let's ponder those multiple truths . |
|
2013-07-30, 13:06 | Link #32589 |
"Senior" "Member"
Join Date: Jan 2012
|
I'd rather speculate about R-Prime, but then again we did that for quite a while and still didn't reach a consensus about the end results (e.g. amount of survivors). Since it is like that it is outright impossible to figure out what really happened on Rokkenjima these 2 days...
__________________
|
2013-07-30, 13:25 | Link #32590 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
The closed off world he was talking about was the entirety of the Rokkenjima incident. EP5 for example is one of these "fragments", a possible truth that has absolutely identical value as long as no definite authority, like a Word of God (in Umineko's case this is the Red Truth), fixes something to a given point. It is true that even if such a definite prove arises you can counter it with a strong believe and conviction that becomes Golden Truth. In the case of EP5 we have the truth that Ushiromiya Krauss is not the culprit. We know even more precisely that he was already dead a while, during the point of the trial. He was killed right after the phone call with Natsuhi. To be more precise it is very likely that Ushiromiya Krauss was the only one who was actually murdered in EP5. If you want to create a new version of the events, a new truth among the multiple possibilities, then you would have to create one yourself. Only due to the fact that there is the idea of Red Truth can we be limited to an actual state of wavefunction collapse, or in Umineko's case the actual event of Schrödinger's catbox being opened. But as we are living in a world of humans where we can doubt everything, we are allowed to even doubt things that could be trusted and thus exist in a state of the perfect many-worlds interpretation. |
|
2013-07-30, 14:22 | Link #32593 |
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
How would you interpret "殺さ?" That is, is there a particular agency associated with this verb?
Mostly what I'm wondering is, can it apply to suicide. That is, could it be said that a person "was killed [by themselves]," or does it by nature of its usage constitute homicide by another actor? The only reason I bring this up is that Krauss is the only person spoken of in ep5 as affirmatively killed, as in something caused him to directly die. Every mention of "murder" is in the negative (soandso did not/could not commit murder), and every other mention of corpses or death status is clinical (i.e. doesn't explain how or why someone is dead) and temporally-unanchored. Krauss is the only person reported to have had his life or death status actually altered at a particular specified time. EDIT: It's kind of annoying how little distinction Japanese seem to have culturally between killing, homicide, and murder. And it reflects poorly in the translation to use words that mean very different things to an English-reading audience than the original Japanese-reading audience (i.e. the use of two different words could just be for stylistic variety while completely changing the meaning if transliterated).
__________________
|
2013-07-30, 14:30 | Link #32594 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
|
Quote:
It was said to be Yasu, but according to Knox's theory we can't accept a character that wasn't brought to the forefront of the beginning of the story. In fact, this has absolutely nothing to do with whether the corpses were murdered or who is the culprit in the game. Let's treat the "man" as the non existence he is, shall we? He could've been a fragment of Natsuhi's imagination like Kinzo Not only could "he" have been a fragment of her imagination, but the entire conversation could have as well. 2)Krauss might have been an accomplice, but mainly due to his own ambitions. Does he care what Yasu/it/the culprit thinks? The culprit's targeting Natsuhi simply happens to be an unfortunate consequence, but the main objective for Krauss to eliminate his siblings still remains. 3)Not sure how the letter refutes a Krauss-Culprit theory, but using the 4th game as a template then whoever was near the table or wherever the note was placed is clearly the one who put it there. OR There could've been some indirect method of placing the letter there, allowing for a person to be at "Place X" to establish an alibi when in fact they were the ones who wrote/placed the note at the location. 4) The Culprit was wearing a disguise when he attacked Hideyoshi. That simple, no Yasu's needed. No Character X's. Knox's 10th can't be invoked here because The culprit isn't disguising himself as "another character", the culprit is masking his identity period. 5) Here I make the suggestion that Rosa has fallen for Battler. I can argue that if Rosa=Beatrice, then Rosa=Yasu. If Yasu's character is genderless, then it's possible for a female voice to fit him and vice versa. So even if it were a "softer voice", I'll make the argument that Rosa made that call. Obviously it can't be Krauss and Genji is so improbable as to be laughable. Of course, that's suggesting the call ever actually happened in the first place. Or that the baby itself ever actually existed . Back to point: If Rosa fell for Battler, she might have felt compassion towards Battler, as we know wanting Battler to understand her(Beatrice). Whereas the other cousins? Why does she care? 6) Furudo Erika is merely nothing more than Lady Bernkastel's piece. I'll argue in real life terms however, that she may have been representative of Eva's antagonism towards Natsuhi. Remember that it was Eva who also helped Erika with the seals. And if Erika is a personification of Eva's(not necessarily a split personality like Eva-Beatrice. But more a representative of Eva's stance towards Natsuhi in particular) then we know that whether a "detective" came or not is irrelevant. All Erika/Eva cared about was Natsuhi's implication, humiliation and suffering. 7) Battler's claim that the crime could've happened after 24:00 allows for anyone(Genji included) to be a possible accomplice. Even if Genji isn't an accomplice, he may have unwittingly helped the culprit. 8) We don't even know where the corpses were "moved" to. But here's a theory: George suggested that the cousins should eat a midnight snack or something and they went into the kitchen. 9) The implausibility that there was some "fake murder" game as Yasu calls it. Seriously? And that it was "hi-jacked" to be a murder? Sorry, this doesn't work out as fantasy or as mystery, it works out as stupid. Who would want to have a "fake murder" game to begin with? Some of the corpses there are paux corpses, but I wouldn't be surprised if a few are actually murdered. As for why, here's a theory: It could be that Rosa, feeling as though Beatrice was betrayed due to the epitath not being solved wanted to go out with a bang anyway. Even though Erika and Battler solved the epitath, in no way was Battler made aware of the bomb on Kuwadorian. |
|
2013-07-30, 14:44 | Link #32595 | ||||||||||
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Also why does Krauss need to eliminate his siblings? He just needs to make sure nobody finds out about Kinzo. Killing anyone would be a terrible way to avoid drawing attention to his situation. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
More implausible is the notion that the culprit convinced all of the cousins to play dead and traumatize Battler for no apparent reason, and only after everyone left (after apparently not checking very well) did they all get up, leave to go somewhere else, and then get murdered for real. While the culprit among them somehow also ended up dead for unspecified reasons. Which of these actually makes more sense? Remember, nearly everything we see speaks of an almost juvenile degree of fakery (the shoddy magic symbol, the fact that the FT victims can't have been dead, the incredibly theatrical and dubious Hideyoshi "death" and the treatment of his "corpse," the never-explained and never-investigated bloodstain in Krauss's bed), and ep6 more or less confirms the likelihood of faking death since it's Erika, not the "culprit," who kills the FT victims.
__________________
|
||||||||||
2013-07-30, 14:58 | Link #32596 |
"Senior" "Member"
Join Date: Jan 2012
|
@α-B.
If George and so on went to the kitchen, then why did Battler scream? After Battler entered the room, Erika was listening in. Why was everyone faking deaths, if not for some "murder mystery game"? Actually the reason doesn't even matter... how can you deny all of this being fake?
__________________
|
2013-07-30, 15:06 | Link #32597 | ||||||||||
The True Culprit
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Unless Natsuhi is psychic, she was talking to someone on the phone. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
For what it's worth, the PS3 version has the man on the phone voiced by Daisuke Ono, Battler's VA among others. Quote:
Quote:
YOU ARE INCOMPETENT. *CACKLE**CACKLE**COUGH**CACKLE**CACKLE*AHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA**CACKLE!*
__________________
|
||||||||||
2013-07-30, 15:50 | Link #32598 | |||
Senior Member
|
Quote:
It doesn't work with suicide (自殺) though, as at least the text confirms that a distinction is being made, as made clear in EP3 where Beato confirms that during the 1st twilight 6人は誰も自殺していない! (None of the 6 persons committed suicide!). It is clear that at least the narrative treats these two differently. Quote:
This is something that can even occur in the same language, as for example in some German speaking countries the concept of Totschlag is closer to homicide in others it is further removed. But I'd say, culturally acts of killing are always very indistinct within any culture, it is rather the answer to the question of justification, and the way language mirrors that, which differs from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Quote:
Yasu halted her murder game as promised when Battler solved the epitaph and filled him in during the family conference in the dining hall at night. Yet the parents considered it a great idea to force a confession out of Krauss and Natsuhi concerning the death of Kinzo and their own scheme due to that very charade. They used the guise of the witch to make it appear as if some unknown hidden party had delivered the ring to Battler, confined Krauss to one of the rooms in the mansion and made either Shkannon or possibly even Battler make the menacing calls to Natsuhi. Battler's involvement is highly likely due to (A) his carefree behavior shortly after the victims were discovered and (B) it being an explanation to his sudden change in character at the end when Natsuhi has her nervous breakdown. His 駄目だ。全然駄目だ would not be the usual "it's useless. it's all useless" but rather a "this is wrong. this is completely wrong," realizing what he had been drawn into. It would also explain his visible reluctance to follow the parents insistence of "putting on the ring" much more than just him not wanting to be the head, but up until Natsuhi's complete breakdown when everybody just went totally overboard on her did he realize that no matter what crimes she had committed this was too much. Regarding the question of "who killed Krauss", this could actually explain why even EP5 would end in the locked state of the tragedy, as it would serve as a trigger for further horrible events to transpire. Not only that, the existence of the "mysterious heir" is even sufficiently foreshadowed in EP1. From the questioning of a possible mistress and/or child, to the relationship between Beatrice and Kinzo, all the way to Natsuhi's reaction of "I would have never believed somebody like you might actually exist." |
|||
2013-07-30, 16:00 | Link #32599 | |
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
Quote:
The way I would interpret "Krauss has long since been killed" is that it at least leaves a possibility that the speaker is being vague as to the cause of his death. If he jumped off a cliff you could say he was "killed by the fall," yet it's obviously the case that he induced that fall and thus committed suicide. There's a big difference between "has since been killed" and "has since been murdered," is what I'm driving at. I should note that Krauss is outwardly suicidal in ep5, and even insinuates as much in a discussion with his wife. She rejects the notion, but that doesn't mean Krauss might not decide independently to kill himself in a way that makes it look like he's fallen afoul of something (this might also offer a convenient out for the Kinzo thing, maybe, it's never explored). And a suicide could still be an impetus for tragedy, especially if all the other deaths were intended to be fake. If someone then turns up actually dead, it could cause paranoia among people who aren't in on the plan or who just think someone has co-opted the murder game. Alternatively, the people who were pressuring Krauss and Natsuhi "realize" somebody has pushed it too far.
__________________
|
|
2013-07-30, 16:23 | Link #32600 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
If Krauss jumped of a cliff he would still "have jumped and died" 飛び降りて死んだ or "have committed suicide" 自殺した. The cause of death in 殺された is vague, but there is still the implication of a second party doing the killing. |
|
|
|