[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[chronotrig]

@Used Can:

Spoiler for size:

Originally Posted by Used Can

Spoiler:

I remember that. That was on Nanjo Masayuki's TIP. It said she had died from some illness. I'm sure, had she gone to Rokkenjima and died there, she'd be accounted as missing, no?

If you read the tips from the 1998 side of EP4, every one is from Ange's perspective. Of course, Nanjo's son wanted as little contact with that crime on Rokkenjima as possible. Why would he volunteer information that ties his daughter to the crime too? Maybe he even suspected. His daughter was 19 years old, so there's a good chance the he knew her personality and that she might have been involved.

Originally Posted by Used Can

Spoiler:

You mean Nanjo's granddaughter? I don't remember anything like that. When was it said she shared her name with one of the people in Rokkenjima?

Um, Nanjo? Nanjo's first name is never used in red, so you don't need any wordplay with definitions for her to take part in her grandfather's place.

Originally Posted by Used Can

Spoiler:

Nanjo has never died during a 1st Twilight. In fact, he always dies very late in the game. In EP5 and EP6 he didn't even die.

Even more evidence that he is somehow related to the crime.

Originally Posted by imaginari

Yeah, I thought that chronotrig was trying some sort of twisted logic experiment at first, but now I'm confused at how far he's been taking it. I'm sure that having an ill person do an impossible impersonation for no reason violates more Knox rules than it satisfies. And it's silly.

Try going back and reading my points. I've mentioned at least 3 possible motives for Nanjo's granddaughter. True, most of them could also apply to other people, but good luck making a theory where all three fit to someone else.

Almost all of this theory comes from deductive reasoning based on Shkanontrice. It's not just something I invented off the top of my head.

[Renall]

Isn't your theory sort of completely destroyed if Nanjo's granddaughter was, like, 10 in 1986?

I mean, let's be as generous as possible and say Nanjo is 70 in 1986. I doubt he's even that old. His son would be like 40ish, maybe? His kid could be 19 years old at the absolute limit here. And if either of them is any younger in '86 it becomes increasingly ridiculous.

Nanjo Jr. doesn't look that old in 1998. Mid-late 40s I'd say, maybe around 50 at the oldest. I think it's more likely Nanjo Sr. was 50-60 and Nanjo Jr. was in his mid-20s or early 30s in 1986. Nanjo's grandchild would be very, very young.

No offense, but the whole notion is patently absurd.

[LyricalAura]

I'm still reading through Episode 6, but some of the new info got me thinking about the magic circle artist.

Spoiler for Episode 6:

According to Episode 6, Kumasawa once fell victim to the same kitchen prank that Gohda did in the Notes from a Certain Chef extra tip, so I went back and looked at the two magic circle incidents described in that tip.

The first incident was reported to Gohda by Kanon. Kanon said that he accidentally went to bed one day with the garden shed key in his pocket. In the morning, he went to open the shed and found a magic circle painted on it, and the inside was in total disarray. Since the key in Kanon's pocket was the only one, the shed should have been a closed room all night. Furthermore, no one should have known where the key was during that period except Kanon.

The second incident was reported to Gohda by Genji, and he witnessed the scene directly. Genji called Gohda to the kitchen and showed him that various implements were arranged in a bizarre pattern inside of a magic circle. The Ushiromiya family was off-island for the day, and no servants were on duty except Gohda and Genji. Gohda also only cooked for two people that day. He asked if anything similar has occurred before, and Genji immediately cursed and said he told Kanon to keep quiet, presumably about the first incident.

But why did Genji immediately blame Kanon, and why did he do it out loud? The prank that happened to Kumasawa was a well-known subject of rumor among the servants, and there were apparently other large-scale incidents involving magic circles as well. Kumasawa in particular is known to be incapable of keeping her mouth shut about creepy stories, but all of the servants had heard about these kinds of incidents and gossiped about them, so how could Genji even think that it was a secret, let alone know that Gohda heard about them from Kanon?

All of this can be explained if Genji was responsible for the kitchen incident Gohda witnessed, and the shed incident was a total fabrication by both Genji and Kanon. Kanon told Gohda the story about the shed incident deliberately in order to set up Genji's prank. Kanon hates all of the other servants besides Shannon, so he would be willing to go along with a plan to scare them.

There's another oddity with the kitchen incident that Kumasawa witnessed. When it was first brought up in the story, a flashback was shown with Kumasawa discovering the circle. However, when Erika asked who actually witnessed the scene, Shannon got nervous and said it was the child of a servant who doesn't work at the mansion anymore. It's possible there were multiple incidents, but the way Shannon tried to shift Erika's suspicion onto someone she couldn't question is extremely suspicious.

EDIT:
Just to pile onto chrono's theory, which I also think is absurd: Nanjo was a key member of the conspiracy to hide Kinzo's death. How could his granddaughter possibly find out about that? And if she didn't know, how did she avoid blowing her cover around the other conspirators?

[CainSonozaki]

Originally Posted by LyricalAura

Spoiler for Episode 6:

However, when Erika asked who actually witnessed the scene, Shannon got nervous and said it was the child of a servant who doesn't work at the mansion anymore. It's possible there were multiple incidents, but the way Shannon tried to shift Erika's suspicion onto someone she couldn't question is extremely suspicious.

Spoiler for questions:

I cant remember but isnt Shanon a child of a servant who doesnt work at the mansion anymore?

[Used Can]

Originally Posted by CainSonozaki

Spoiler for questions:

I cant remember but isnt Shanon a child of a servant who doesnt work at the mansion anymore?

That was just the impression Battler got when he first met her.

[Kaiba]

However, unless there is another theory that's more reasonable, the sole theory that explains everything is the best option out there. Mine doesn't explain quite everything, but if you don't like it, I'm challenging you to find one that explains more. The worst that happens to me is I get proven wrong but find out the correct answer, or I can use any opposing theory to strengthen mine. That's how the game is played.

I don't buy this for a minute, as frankly under that logic the best theory from the beginning was that a witch did the murders with magic or that rampaging grizzly bears destroyed Rokkenjima. And of course your theory can only be improved with thought, as the same applies for my Shannon theory.
I'll personally admit I have a massive problem with your theory, as I absolutely hate hate hate playing word games with the red truth, as it just leads to ridiculous theories as what happens nearly all the time is people come up with crazy theories and scream out how since the red truth actually means this completely different thing than what you would think it does, it works. As far as I'm concerned, the whole concept of Nanjo being used to refer to his granddaughter or whatever is bunk and is a word game. How is it really that different from what Forsaken was spouting with his Battler culprit theories when he argued that when it was said Battler is not the culprit, that Virgillia meant the other Battler. Heck, there's evidence that there's a second Battler out there too along with evidence of Nanjo's granddaughter. When Beatrice says Nanjo, she means the Nanjo in Rokkenjima whom is Kinzo's doctor, not some Nanjo in Africa or Nanjo's granddaughter. And as long as I create my theories under that rule, I have no interest in some bizarre scheme where a 10 year old girl can disguise herself as a 60 year old man and kill 16 people.

[chronotrig]

Originally Posted by Renall

Nanjo Jr. doesn't look that old in 1998. Mid-late 40s I'd say, maybe around 50 at the oldest.

50-12=38 38-19=19
Add on a few years for the "around" part and it's possible even by your reckoning. Or are you really going to fight over a couple years using a Ryuukishi tachi-e?

And even if the ages didn't match up exactly, there's still the chance that Nanjo's granddaughter really did come from the Fukuin House. We know that the child from 19 years ago exists, and we know that it survived. The only people who could possibly have had anything to do with that are Nanjo, Kumasawa, and Genji. Unless someone took that child in, how did it survive? Of course, it's also very possible the child died and someone who knew the truth fooled Natsuhi. But if it did survive, there's only a very small number of people it could have grown up to be.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by chronotrig

50-12=38 38-19=19
Add on a few years for the "around" part and it's possible even by your reckoning. Or are you really going to fight over a couple years using a Ryuukishi tachi-e?

And even if the ages didn't match up, there's still the chance that Nanjo's granddaughter really did come from the Fukuin House. We know that child exists, and we know that it survived. The only people who could possibly have had anything to do with that are Nanjo, Kumasawa, and Genji.

It's just grasping at awfully obscure straws to come up with what amounts to a Person X theory. Surely the "true mastermind" is not going to be something that ridiculous.

To clarify: I think the persons behind everything, and I mean everything (whether they're a unified front or not) at the very least have been given a portrait by now.

[Used Can]

I'm still vouching for the Manon theory.

That "Ma/眞" kanji is suspicious, I tell you.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Used Can

I'm still vouching for the Manon theory.

Well, ep2 can be explained entirely as a series of hilarious accidents, so I guess anything is possible... even small bombs.

[chronotrig]

Originally Posted by Renall

It's just grasping at awfully obscure straws to come up with what amounts to a Person X theory. Surely the "true mastermind" is not going to be something that ridiculous.

To clarify: I think the persons behind everything, and I mean everything (whether they're a unified front or not) at the very least have been given a portrait by now.

As I've said, even Beatrice doesn't know who the true culprit is, so she couldn't hint towards it. That doesn't mean it's impossible to guess at the true culprit. Nanjo is suspicious enough even without all of this granddaughter stuff. As I've said, my EP1 theory doesn't rely on this part of the theory at all.

If you can't accept it, pretend I'm saying that Nanjo is the culprit and that his true motive is an added bonus that won't be announced until later. If my theory does by some wild chance happen to be right, this should still work to explain all of the murders.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by chronotrig

If you can't accept it, pretend I'm saying that Nanjo is the culprit and that his true motive is an added bonus that won't be announced until later. If my theory does by some wild chance happen to be right, it should still work.

I'm certainly willing to believe Nanjo himself may be up to something. I just don't see the point of any layers of abstraction beyond that. Nanjo has the added benefit of piles upon piles of obvious lies, provable concealment of the truth, and suspiciously absent alibis. The main thing he has going against him is "the doctor did it" is right up there with "the butler did it" in murder cliches.

[chronotrig]

Originally Posted by Renall

I'm certainly willing to believe Nanjo himself may be up to something. I just don't see the point of any layers of abstraction beyond that. Nanjo has the added benefit of piles upon piles of obvious lies, provable concealment of the truth, and suspiciously absent alibis. The main thing he has going against him is "the doctor did it" is right up there with "the butler did it" in murder cliches.

Well, that works out fine for now, I guess. The "layers of abstraction" just go to explain the meta-world, something not many people even try to do. They probably don't pertain directly to the mystery.

[ijriims]

Originally Posted by chronotrig

As I mentioned, I interpret this to mean "No one ever misidentifies a corpse." In my mind, a "body double trick" occurs when a person uses one corpse to confuse an observer into thinking it's a different corpse. I think this is a reasonable definition. And in my theory, this never happens.

If it is the case, I could also make Kyrie alive throughout EP1 since the "body" Battler saw was just a mannequin, which did not contradict the red texts since "body double trick" meant using corpse to pretend someone else's corpse.

I can then give out my Kyrie=mastermind=Beatrice theory to answer ALL questions (howdunit, whodunit, whydunit, metaworld, background, etc) from EP1 to 5 without incurring 18X or 17X, even EP6 if you ask me. I don't even need Nanjo to be an accomplice from the beginning.

A competing theory you want.

---------------

By the way, let me give out my understanding of chessboard and red & golden texts.

red texts=Chessboard's truth and golden texts=real world's truth theory:

None of the episodes we read, EP1-6, were telling the actual truth. In fact, all the episodes (EP1-4) were just Beatrice's tales about what happened in the catbox. EP5 was Lambda's, while EP6 was Battler's.

All of them were like letters-in-the-bottle, or novels written by Hachijou, a tale, a speculation. Still, they contained some clues and hints pointing at the "Answer". In EP1-4, Meta-Beatrice was the one who was inside the catbox, so she knew what actually happened on Rokkenjima on those two days. Meta-Battler, from the beginning, was just like everyone outside the island, having no ideas what happened on Rokkenjima. However, in the end of EP5, he finally grasped the "Answer" and got into the catbox.

Redtexts were "chessboard truth", like "Hamlet was a Denmark prince.". Even though it was not history, however, in the context of "Hamlet", it is the truth.

Before opening the catbox, all chessboard truth were truth. It was truth, premises set by the GM or story-teller.

Golden texts were real truth, the "Answer". It told us what really happened on Rokkenjima 4-5th Oct 1986. From EP5's golden texts, there was a burnt Kinzo corpse. So on the real Rokkenjima, Kinzo's corpse was burnt and found, like in EP1,3,4. So EP2,5 were not telling actually what happened, at least partially. Instead, all the episodes were telling what could happen on Rokkenjima, EP1,2 by Beatrice through the letters-in-the-bottles. EP3-6 through Hachichou to 1998 Ange (who did not know the content of EP3-6 initially). The only truth 1998 Ange knew was that Eva was the sole survivor from the incident, but was EP3 telling what actually happened on Rokkenjima, perhaps yes, perhaps no.

Did Erika actually ascend onto Rokkenjima? If she did not appear in EP7, then no. However, before the catbox was opened, GM could bring her onto the chessboard. And in fact, on the chessboard of EP5 and EP6, she did arrive at Rokkenjima alive and was welcomed as a guest. Just like anyone can say "Hamlet was a Denmark prince.". However, Furudo Erika, the teenage girl and as a detective, never came to Rokkenjima on 4-5th Oct 1986, either alive or dead. With this golden texts said, actually EP5 and EP6 would collapse (like opening the catbox, one of the possibility (alive or dead) would perish), like if I said There was no prince in Denmark's history called Hamlet who strived to revenge for his father's murder. Battler did not erase Erika's existence because he did not want to open the catbox yet, he was able to speak out this golden text though. Nonetheless, if he stated it out, then EP6 would collapse and that's why sometimes it was inferior to red texts and sometimes superior to it, depending on whether the GM wanted to disclose the real truth.

In EP7, with Bern as the GM, the real Rokkenjima was going to be revealed. The "Answer" was going to be exposed (lots of golden texts expected). With the new 1998 Ange getting onto Rokkenjima, she was going to tell us the real truth.

Readers, are you ready?

[Kit]

Sorry, returning quickly to ShKanonTrice...
NOTE: I have not yet read Episode 6.

For Length.

Spoiler:

If this is the case, then how would episode 3 work? Kanon and Shannon are both killed off in the first twilight, and it is Evatrice who continues the murders, not Beatrice.

Now suppose we argue that Shannon and Kanon's bodies weren't actually there (...right >_>), and that it was Sayo who utlimately tried to save Jessica, how would ShKanonTrice work in Episode 5? It is clearly shown that Natsuhi has many delusions with Beatrice, and yet Bernkastel "reveals" the scene's truth by showing her alone. If it is the case that Beatrice is also Sayo, Sayo would have also been having tea with Natsuhi.

Episode 2

Spoiler:

Moving on: Episode 2 - if Shkanontrice is also true, how can you explain Beatrice's continued survival on the gameboard even after Sayo is killed along with George and Gohda? If you argue Shkanontrice, then Kanon's body disappearing can be explained, and Shannon's closed room can also be explained, but the problem arises when "Beatrice" invites Battler to challenge her in Kinzo's study, where he promptly loses and is forced to become her slave. By this point, Beatrice should no longer exist on the game board.

Red Truths

Spoiler:

There is also the problem with the Master Key red truths, to which Beatrice confirms to Battler that the number of keys have not changed in Episode 1 with the red truth that "There are 5 master keys, one for each servant." Obviously, this puzzle is not the same as saying "There are 4 apples" when there are 5. You can't say "There are 5 master keys," if there are only 4.

Continuing on this track, it is said in Episode 3 that ONLY Jessica and Nanjo were in the guestroom. This is again, as stated previously, different from the "There are 4 apples" when there are 5 apples puzzle. It is absolutely NOT TRUE to say that you ONLY have 4 apples when you clearly have 5. If this is the case, then ShkanonTrice's Beatrice personality could not possibly have shown Jessica the way out of the room, nevermind resurrecting Kanon to do it. (It's been a while since I've read episode 3 and I'm going by memory - correct me if I have this scene wrong.)

Detective

Spoiler:

Returning to episode 1: the showdown in episode 4 clearly states that all the "unidentifiable corpses have their identities guaranteed, and that no body double tricks exist." Note that Shannon's body is one of the few with HALF of the face left untouched so that her identity could NOT be hidden.
Even if you use the "Corpses might not actually refer to corpses" theory proposed by Battler in episode 5, this trick only worked because Erika chose not to investigate the bodies by herself, whereas in episode 1-4, the corpses are thoroughly investigated (asides from episode 3) by Battler. Not to mention, in episode 5, it is stated in red that no Corpses of characters who are NOT in the story may be introduced. As such, episode 1 is either the furthest or closest to the "reality of things," and if it is the latter, a Corpse would generally mean what it is supposed to be - a DEAD BODY.

Khanontrice

Spoiler:

I will go as far as to even say that the only way ShKanontrice is possible is if we renamed it Khannontrice. It is acceptable that Kanon's body is not in Jessica's room but dies as Shannon in George's room in episode 2 because in episode 1, it is Shannon who is killed first (assuming that her body isn't really there DESPITE IT HAVING BEEN WITNESSED BY BATTLER), and "Kanon" by "Beatrice" in the boiler room, since he "did not die in an accident." Also, Kanon, not Shannon, is also the one to resurface in episode 3 to save Jessica. Continuing on, it is Kanon's body that is not discovered in episode 4 despite being the "first to be killed" in Kyrie's group. To sum up - it is more acceptable for Khannontrice, should he be the culprit, to exist because Kanon's body is often missing while Sayo's is always found before the game nears completion, hence (IMPORTANT) possibly allowing "Beatrice's" continued existence on the game board through Kanon's missing body.

But even the above is a moot point - while it may be that Battler never sees them together he definitely sees their bodies. In episode 5, the red truth is given, that the total number of people in the parlor (which was everyone) is equal to the number of people in the previous games, which means that, especially in episode 1, Kanon and Shannon must be separate entities, as there are two corpses, accounted for both of them. Regardless of whether or not Battler sees the bodies of the servants in episode 3, because by being the detective, the fact that he sees both Shannon and Kanon's bodies in episode 1 should show that they are in fact two different people.

Conditions for ShKanontrice

Spoiler:

Hence, to show that ShKanonTrice is possible, I find it a requirement to first show how it is possible for Kanon's bodies to show up in both episodes 1 and 3, particularly when red truths such as the following exist:

"There are 5 master keys, one for each servant."
"I am the 18th Person" - Erika
"Only Jessica and Nanjo existed in the servant's room."
"Afterall, Natsuhi is drinking tea by herself right there."
"The only person who can claim Kanon's name is Kanon himself!"
"No other person can claim Kanon's name!"

Furthermore, when Natsuhi challenges Beatrice at the end of episode 1, both Shannon and Kanon have already been proclaimed dead by the detective, and the storage shed locked up. This means even if Shannon was playing dead, she would not have been able to escape it, unless she doesn't exist to begin with. Nanjo, Battler and Natsuhi also confirms Kanon's death status - and yet Beatrice is alive, and well enough to shoot Natsuhi in the face.

Putting aside the cross dressing issue, these problems presented here are fundamental problems about ShKanon, and by extension, Shkanontrice, with the only solutions to both problems being the proof of Shkanon itself - a catch 22. In order to prove the Shkanon theory, you must prove Shkanon, and yet evidence stands in the very process of that. You can't show Shkanon unless one body disappears, after death, consistently. In addition to this, as Erika is the detective in episode 5, she gathers many times with everybody alive; thus, unless she too is "aware" of the ShKanon Split Personality (How would a stranger know this anyway?) it isn't "right," so to speak, to have her perceive Kanon and Shannon separately in the same room.

I just don't buy it...In a mystery like this, the identity of a person and their occupation often comes under scrutiny, but with the aid of the red truths, descriptions such as the status of a person, i.e. family member, or servant, cannot be mistaken. There are without doubt 5 keys, for 5 servants. There are two guests, and twelve family members, one deceased.

This makes 17 people. And since there is an "only" restriction on the masterkeys (Red text: "The only master keys are the ones that each servant holds, one per person," "There are 5 master keys, one for each servant," Shkanon would directly contradict them both. What kind of master would give two master keys to someone who thinks they're two people anyway, let alone any master keys at all?)

"Erika is the 18th person" and "With you welcomed, there are 17 people" do not contradict one another. Battler could have easily said "With you welcomed, there are 16 people." I have 4 apples, but there are 5. Shkanon is not the only solution!

In closing, it was K//eternal who offered the idea that Battler might not have crushed Erika's theory right away because that would mean sealing Beatrice away forever. Assuming this to be the case, there would be no reason for Battler to even come close to the truth when presenting his game. The character description in the TIPS also states that should Battler successfully demonstrate that he understands Beato's game correctly, Beato's game would come to a close - and yet we are onto episode 7, with Bernkastel as the game master, implying that in one way or another, Battler failed his task as game master. As with episode 4, perhaps it is better to take what we see with a grain of salt than to hop the Shkanon bandwagon and exclaim that "it's all useless!"

[Klashikari]

Originally Posted by ijriims

Readers, are you ready?

That doesn't make sense whatsoever to me regarding that differenciation of both truths.
Otherwise, truth like Battler's birth and kinzo's status shouldn't have an impact on all games and so forth.
The fact there is a truth only applied to the gameboard really make their value plummet for nothing.
Again, Beato clearly clarify that the red truth is the "absolute truth", providing the truth in its truest but also literal sense, which is why there are wordplay.

If a red truth can be invoked before the catbox is opened, that means any red truth "may" be false once the box is opened, which destroy the fundation of the system. Furthermore, it contradicts with stuff that are unrelated to the games and were discovered by the pieces themselves (again, Battler regarding his birth, and Beatrice regarding Sakutaro).

[ijriims]

Originally Posted by Klashikari

That doesn't make sense whatsoever to me regarding that differenciation of both truths.
Otherwise, truth like Battler's birth and kinzo's status shouldn't have an impact on all games and so forth.
The fact there is a truth only applied to the gameboard really make their value plummet for nothing.
Again, Beato clearly clarify that the red truth is the "absolute truth", providing the truth in its truest but also literal sense, which is why there are wordplay.

If a red truth can be invoked before the catbox is opened, that means any red truth "may" be false once the box is opened, which destroy the fundation of the system. Furthermore, it contradicts with stuff that are unrelated to the games and were discovered by the pieces themselves (again, Battler regarding his birth, and Beatrice regarding Sakutaro).

No. Within each chessboard, they were all literal truth. Some red texts could also apply to all chessboards. They were tales, telling some truth from the real Rokkenjima.

But were they telling what really happened on Rokkenjima on 4-5th Oct, 1986? Maybe, maybe not.

If there was only one truth on Rokkenjima, then when it was revealed, everything different from it would be eliminated. When Ryukishi07 told us what really happened on Rokkenjima, then some conflicting red texts would eliminate (like EP1 garden shed scece contradicts EP2's chapel scene. EP2 chapel scene contradicts with EP3 servants'death, which contradicts EP4's Kinzo's killing, which contradicts EP5's death inside cousins'room. They were all mutually contradictory to each other. All the red texts talking about these scenes could not be held inside on universe at the same time, which meant they could not hold at the same time on the real Rokkenjima.)

Can EP1-6 all be the real truth at the same time? Red texts told us the premises of these chessboards, these tales. They were truth inside the story "Hamlet is a Danmark Prince".

Not that red texts told us something completely fabricated, or directly contradictory to the real truth, Beatrice would not do so (Lamdba would do so, though). She wanted Battler to find out the real truth. So all the clues pointing to the "Answer" was already inside the first 4 chessboards.

It means that at least the red texts applicable to EP1-4 could also be said in gold since it was probably directly extracted from the real truth. So, Battler's sin is one of the causes of the massive death on Rokkenjima, as well as Kinzo was dead before the game started, which meant he died before 4th Oct, 1986.

Red truths' value did not diminish just because some of them were just talking about truth of chessboards, rather, red truths provided a means for Beatrice to give clues to Battler without directly telling him the real truth.

To a person (Battler) who had any source of information and no knowledge on Denmark (outside the catbox), if I (Beatrice) tell him the story of Hamlet and insist it was the history (Witch's tale). I could say in red that "Hamlet is a Danmark Prince", although I know that This Hamlet does not exist in the history. If I was particularly trolling and do not want the person to find out this real truth (like Bern, Lambda), then I could latter tell a tale of Hamlet being a president, being a street-sweeper, etc. But because I want this guy to find out the truth(said in EP5), I would leave clues to let him find out that actually this Hamlet did not exist. That's what Beatrice had been doing.

It's a matter of trust. If you don't trust Beatrice (Ryukishi07), then you would just give up. If you trust her (and him), even though you know that the red texts might not tell the real truth, you still believe they pointed you to the real truth and you would still go on.

Of course, golden texts could only be said by those who had figured out what really happened on Rokkenjima, from the clues in Beatrice's tales.

[Klashikari]

Originally Posted by ijriims

If there was only one truth on Rokkenjima, then when it was revealed, everything different from it would be eliminated. When Ryukishi07 told us what really happened on Rokkenjima, then some conflicting red texts would eliminate (like EP1 garden shed scece contradicts EP2's chapel scene. EP2 chapel scene contradicts with EP3 servants'death, which contradicts EP4's Kinzo's killing, which contradicts EP5's death inside cousins'room. They were all mutually contradictory to each other. All the red texts talking about these scenes could not be held inside on universe at the same time, which meant they could not hold at the same time on the real Rokkenjima.)

The "truth" regards what really happened and how it is carried out thorough the games. The concept is exactly the same as in Higurashi: that there is a fundamental set of rules, that from this very basis will lead to a result, which is sort of different depending of the setup, random factors etc.

All games ARE representation of "what could happened if X/Y did/didn't happen" from the very truth, the first situation we are given.
They do not contradict each other, because they are all based of the same very thing, but they obviously cannot be compared: they have to be complementary to understand the essential situation.

Not that red texts told us something completely fabricated, or directly contradictory to the real truth, Beatrice would not do so (Lamdba would do so, though). She wanted Battler to find out the real truth. So all the clues pointing to the "Answer" was already inside the first 4 chessboards.

You seem to totally consider the gameboards as fabricated, which is why I call that nonsense: if they were not representative of the real world truth, then their existence is useless and meaningless towards the "truth".
The concept of such story telling is to thread the actual truth with all instances and possibilities. That multi angle approach allow us to figure what really happened.
Otherwise, without Episode 4, there wasn't really a chance to figure that Kinzo couldn't be the culprit. Likewise, without Episode 2, there wasn't any possibility to figure wherever or not Rudolf was faking his death or whatnot.

It means that at least the red texts applicable to EP1-4 could also be said in gold since it was probably directly extracted from the real truth. So, Battler's sin is one of the causes of the massive death on Rokkenjima, as well as Kinzo was dead before the game started, which meant he died before 4th Oct, 1986.

The whole concept of the gold truth only appears to be the demonstration of the GM knowledge, that's all.
Dlanor already defined the gold truth as the same as the red truth, from the very same basis, except it happens to be stronger or weaker.
Both are absolute truth.

Red truths' value did not diminish just because some of them were just talking about truth of chessboards, rather, red truths provided a means for Beatrice to give clues to Battler without directly telling him the real truth.

If the red truth doesn't state what really happened in that kakera, then it isn't anything better than the witch side white text that thread witch battlers and whatever nonsense it is.
By nature, it "did" happen. Even if they are used as clues, it "did" happen.

To a person (Battler) who had any source of information and no knowledge on Denmark (outside the catbox), if I (Beatrice) tell him the story of Hamlet and insist it was the history (Witch's tale). I could say in red that "Hamlet is a Danmark Prince", although I know that This Hamlet does not exist in the history. If I was particularly trolling and do not want the person to find out this real truth (like Bern, Lambda), then I could latter tell a tale of Hamlet being a president, being a street-sweeper, etc. But because I want this guy to find out the truth(said in EP5), I would leave clues to let him find out that actually this Hamlet did not exist. That's what Beatrice had been doing.

I don't see the concept working for Umineko at all. That means, "it didn't happen" for everything we have seen so far. So what, why can we trust that Kinzo was dead for all games, if that is "real" for the gameboard, and not in history? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever: it takes down the whole idea of red truth, that a certain event did happen in that alternative story, that kakera that would have happened if it was like this.
Otherwise, Episode 3 is the "canon ending" (as Ange's investigation doesn't belong to Beato's board at all) and we are set for nothing in the end.

You are defining the red truth as a set of define fact in a meta fiction, despite their range of application is based on kakeras that are equally possible to happen.

It's a matter of trust. If you don't trust Beatrice (Ryukishi07), then you would just give up. If you trust her (and him), even though you know that the red texts might not tell the real truth, you still believe they pointed you to the real truth and you would still go on.

Actually, from what you are saying, it is the opposite: claiming the red truth works like this is absolutely not the trust, it is distrust.
If you think that "it didn't happen like this in real life", then we have no reference point, no truth to base everything, nothing.

[ijriims]

Originally Posted by Klashikari

Actually, from what you are saying, it is the opposite: claiming the red truth works like this is absolutely not the trust, it is distrust.
If you think that "it didn't happen like this in real life", then we have no reference point, no truth to base everything, nothing.

Then let me ask you a question: were the chessboards parallel world or kakeras? So different things happened in different worlds without contradiction to each other. Then how can you be sure that the red texts said for one world would apply to another world or another kakera by default?

If there was no parallel worlds, then there must only be one world, one truth. The end-result was Eva being the sole survivor, but was EP3 already telling the whole story? At least it did not tell us Battler's sin, but Eva being the sole survivor was the real truth. Or there was actually one truth on Rokkenjima? Different people said different things about it. Beatrice gave out two letters-in-the-bottle while Hachichou wrote down the additional fabricated letters-in-the-bottle? Although Beatrice must have put clues inside all her tales to give shed to the "Answer".

You thought that if the chessboard setting were not telling what really happened on Rokkenjima then you can't go on? No reference point so you are going to give up? Exactly like what Ryukishi07 described in his "anti-mystery vs anti-fantasy" article. Your trust in Beatrice was not that high, IMO. Your claim was just like saying fantasy scenes had no value at all because they did not happen in the real world. But you still draw inference and clues from it, don't you?

All chessboards from EP1-4 were designed well by Beatrice beforehand, there were no logic errors like what Battler made in EP6, they all reflected the "Answer" to some extent, from the four chessboards, even though they did not tell what actually happened on Rokkenjima 4-5th Oct, 1986, EP1-4 were tales telling what could have happened otherwise but did not actually happen. So from these games, one could still find out whodunit and whydunit. Howdunit was related to what cases had really happened on Rokkenjima, but one should be fine if they already knew whodunit and whydunit.

Have I made myself clear?

[Klashikari]

Originally Posted by ijriims

Then let me ask you a question: were the chessboards parallel world? So different things happened in different worlds without contradiction to each other. Then how can you be sure that the red texts said for one world would apply to another world by default?

Conclusion done after what happened in Episode 5: unless a red truth is specified or obvious (like a death declaration), it ought to be a general red truth. Otherwise, there is no reason for Battler to have raised up that the Ep4 red is applied to Episode 5 as well.
Likewise, Beato had to add "this is applied to all games!!" for her "no more than 17 persons", because at this point, Battler forced her to say that.
The context of a red truth is implicit.

The whole purpose of having different kakera and outcome is obviously to lead Battler (and readers) to the truth. But likewise, if these facts were "absolute facts" to these worlds that are a mirror image of the real world, but still couldn't be applied to the real world "if" with the same circumstances, it doesn't mean anything at all.

If there was no parallel worlds, then there must only be one world, one truth. The end-result was Eva being the sole survivor, but was EP3 already telling the whole story? At least it did not tell us Battler's sin, but Eva being the sole survivor was the real truth. Or there was actually one truth on Rokkenjima? Different people said different things about it. Beatrice gave out two letters-in-the-bottle while Hachichou wrote down the additional fabricated letters-in-the-bottle? Although Beatrice must have put clues inside all her tales to give shed to the "Answer".

Read again what I said: "if" the kakeras we were presented were only fabrication, "then" Episode 3 would be the only canon story, which is nonsense.
All kakeras are deviate storytelling of what really happened to Rokkenjima. However, I stated from the very beginning that all of them are equivalent true, because they are all shaped by beato's rules, who are the embodiement of the facts that occured on Rokkenjima.

Therefore, whenever X dies in Episode Y, it would have happened in the real world if in that real world, element Z from Episode Y did happen.

You thought that if the chessboard setting were not telling what really happened on Rokkenjima then you can't go on? No reference point so you are going to give up? Exactly like what Ryukishi07 described in his "anti-mystery vs anti-fantasy" article. Your trust in Beatrice was not that high, IMO.

You absolutely got it backwards: if the events that are happening "couldn't happen" in the real world with the same circumstances, it is breaking the concept of the red truth, that is.
This is the reason why, unlike what you just posted, I actually trust the whole thing regarding the red truth and how threading an alibi to X character in Episode Y can help for Episode Z.
Otherwise, why would you trust then Episode 5 "Natsuhi is not the culprit!"? By your definition, it should be "not happening in the real world because it isn't in gold".

From the very beginning, I've taken all facts we gathered from the episodes in order to have a cohesion between the kakeras for the "real truth".
If they were to be applicable to only their gameboard, that's actually what I call distrust: if they are contradictory and not applicable to the real world, you cannot then trust it more than any scene, even if they are mystery-look alike.

Your claim was just like saying fantasy scenes had no value at all because they did not happen in the real world. But you still draw inference and clues from it, don't you?

And since when I said it was the case? What I said from the very beginning is that you cannot suddenly say "red truth only apply to a world, but cannot in the real world unless in gold". The red truth, as I said, is a fact that would have occured if given the same circumstances. That means it would obviously not happen if it was totally different in events, but in essence it is (like rule X in Higurashi).
And no, the witch side scenes can be trusted if you read between the lines. I personally thought that the dark kanon stuff is actually a possible clue about a plot between the servants, thinking Rosa was the culprit (which was prolly their mistake).

All chessboards from EP1-4 were designed well by Beatrice beforehand, there were no logic errors like what Battler made in EP6, they all reflected the "Answer" to some extent, from the four chessboards, even though they did not tell what actually happened on Rokkenjima 4-5th Oct, 1986, EP1-4 were tales telling what could have happened otherwise. So from these games, one could still find out whodunit and whydunit. Howdunit was related to what cases had really happened on Rokkenjima, but one should be fine if they already knew whodunit and whydunit.

Have I made myself clear?

That was actually the same interpretation I had that I was posting already. I however cannot agree with your differenciation with gold and red truth, that's the point.