2010-01-19, 22:14 | Link #981 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
|
Quote:
Also, she was looking at it from the perspective of Mystery, and while mystery covers part of anti-fantasy it's also possible for it anti-fantasy without it being mystery. |
|
2010-01-19, 22:43 | Link #982 | ||
Homo Ludens
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Canada
Age: 34
|
Quote:
Quote:
Anti-Fantasy is about denying magic at any cost. Mystery is about finding the truth. What Erika does in Ep5 is actually creating a NEW truth rather than finding the real one. That's not Mystery at all. |
||
2010-01-19, 22:56 | Link #983 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
|
Quote:
Why would Erika be Anti-Fantasy, when even Bern said that's the wrong approach?
__________________
|
|
2010-01-19, 23:43 | Link #984 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: HK, China
|
Quote:
4). Support? Well, we all knew that the portrait of Beatrice was not made for Beatrice but for Kinzo, you thought that six years ago because Battler said he loved woman with blonde hair and big breast so someone made the Beatrice portrait according to Battler's wish? of course not. The whole image of Beatrice was from Kinzo's lover and 1967 Beatrice (the one Rosa met), you can even see a sized-down version in Kinzo's study. 6,7) And my point is: don't equate the new Beatrice and initial Beatrice. They have different origin and different experience. 1) Please don't forget there is a TrollBeatrice, if you really believe Beatrice was born from Battler's wish, please articulate how this trollBeatrice was involved in the formation of the real Beatrice (EP1-4's).
__________________
|
|
2010-01-20, 00:06 | Link #985 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
|
The person in question ( Shannon I believe) shares their body and soul with Beatrice, thus Beatrice is also able to exist as a person. The essence of Beatrice is allowed to manifest itself in the world. This is similar to what Kinzo attempted to do with the Beatrice of 67: raising a child that would learn and engender in their personality everything that he believed was pertaining to Beatrice. A "homunculus" was thus given Beatrice's soul, even if the vessel had a large influence on how that spirit was manifested. Likewise, when the culprit decided to manifest the witch in themselves as a new person, this Piece-Beatrice received all the negative feelings, and love, from them.
I think it's clear however that this is not similar to where Maria made Sakutaro, as she is not making this Beatrice out of the sea of nothing/zero. While in regards to Featherine's commentary, Meta-Beatrice, the original one involved with Battler in games 1 to 5 can't necessarily be said to literally be a person she's an amalgamation of all things Golden-Witch-Beatrice: Kinzo's original love & gold giving Beatrice, Witch legend Beatrice, Island-Moe Beatrice, and the person who decides to embody Beatrice as Culprit/Piece-Beatrice. She is technically not a person, although there seems to be room where as she could become manifested in the real world through the person who decided to embody her. I don't particularly think it's insanity, as personalities and identity certainly can tenuous, and thus changed and altered over a life time. This would be especially true for a person who was originally taught not to be an individual, but furniture. This merely seems to be a more extreme negotiation of person than what most people experience. |
2010-01-20, 01:04 | Link #986 | ||
別にいいけど
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
|
Quote:
The problem is that you are just looking at it in a one sided manner. As well as there are red truths denying the shkannon theory, there are enough red truths in EP6 that you just can't explain with any theory that is better than the shkannon theory. So you have the same problem from one side and one other, and the only possible solution right now is to think about some lame loophole in either red, except no matter which side you choose they are both lame. So you could say well all evidences cancel each out so this is a cat box, but I beg to differ. Because red text not whitstanding you still need to explain what was the meaning of the love test trial, which is arguably one of the center point of EP6. The shkannon theorist have a perfect explanation for it from the beginning to the end. What is your explanation? Quote:
4) I was asking for support that Battler has already seen the portrait during that flashback, apparently no. Battler doesn't talk about witches in that scene as far as I remember. He just said he likes western women with blond hairs and blue eyes, now I don't think that the fact that the witch Beatrice happens to be portrayed that way can be considered an inexplicable coincidence... 6/7) Which one of my points refers to the second Beatrice? 1) I find difficult to understand your odd denominations. I suppose Troll Beatrice is big sister Beatrice? Why don't you just call them as they are called in the tips? If that's her I think I have already explained that she is the personification of the Witch of the legend, the night rulers of Rokkenjima's Mansion (hell she says that a lot herself). I also explained that Beato (the one through EP1-4 and 5 as dollbeato) is the result of a mix between the Beatrice persona created to love Battler (which is basically how the new Beato is) and the witch of the legend represented by big sis Beatrice. And I wonder how can this be questioned when it was repeated a dozen of times in the game that "big sis beato" + "young sis Beato" = Beato
__________________
|
||
2010-01-20, 01:14 | Link #987 | |
Purupurupiko-Man
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: My beloved hometown, the mackerel river running through it
|
Quote:
|
|
2010-01-20, 01:29 | Link #988 | ||
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
Quote:
Quote:
EDIT: My math is funny today. 16/17/18 tomfoolery abounds. |
||
2010-01-20, 01:49 | Link #989 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: HK, China
|
Quote:
"4) Battler's description happens to match perfectly with the Beato that has challenged Battler in the first 4 arcs 5) EP6 confirms that Beatrice (again the Beato we know etc etc) isn't a real person but a "furniture", and specifically a furniture that was constructed for Battler's sake 6) We know from Ep4 that Beatrice (see above) didn't exist 6 years before, which means she has been created after that, also Featherinne says that 6 years in the real world equals to 1000 years in the magic world, hinting that Beatrice has 6 years. 7) Beatrice existed before 1986 due to the fact Maria has been talking to her for a while." You tried to combine EP6's information on NewBeatrice from 4,5) and EP4' information of real Beatrice from 6,7) to state that the real Beatrice was a "furniture" and specially made for Battler. I was saying that the information of 4,5 and 6,7 were referring to two different Beatrices and jumping to the conclusion that the real Beatrice was formed 6 years ago when Battler talked to her about which type of girl he likes was too hasty. I use trollBeatrice because it was the first denomination used in the forum and I am too lazy to type quotation if Iwant to say "Big sister Beatrice" 4). No proof that Battler's dialogue was referring to the portrait he just saw. At least I cannot find it myself (well, my Japanese is poor) 1) Good, but who was the "mother"? And who was talking to Beatrice in the latter monologue? And which Beatrice? BTW, if Sayo cannot love Battler because she was loving George at that time, what was Battler's sin then? ----------------------------------------------------- I can't disprove your interpretation and Shkatrice theory. As you say, it seemed to fit EP6 perfectly and explained all the murders from EP1-4 (not EP5 though). Idon't know if Shkatrice had also been your thoughts or not, but to me I have established my own theory of all mysteries (who is Beatrice? Who is the mastermind? What is the motive?) after I read the Question Arc. I do not plan to change my mind until Ryu07 contradicted my thoughts directly. Right now, I have my own understanding of EP6's scenes, though it was less supported than Shkatrice theory, I don't see my own understanding is denied apparently yet. The Shkatrice theory can explain a lot of thing right now, despite a certain weird points like how can no one seemed to find out Shannon was imposing as Kanon all these years and the contradiction led to if persona counted as a real person. You can select Shkatrice as the ultimate truth of Umineko if you want. But just prepared for the EP7, as most detective novels usually incite a plausible alternative theory before the author's truth is presented. It may be the ultimate truth Ryu07 already presented to us, then I am wrong and I shall admit it. Still, if it is just an ultimate red herring prepared for people who did not yet see the real truth, then you have fell for it, completely. Good luck. Have a nice day. See you later!
__________________
Last edited by ijriims; 2010-01-20 at 02:08. |
|
2010-01-20, 03:59 | Link #990 | |
Homo Ludens
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Canada
Age: 34
|
Quote:
If someone doesn't exist, it's either that Shannon or Kanon is disguising as the other, or Battler's viewpoint was never reliable to begin with. ...Because she's not even really trying to solve the mystery? She's blaming whoever is convenient (and for her own sick amusement, too) which is exactly what Battler was doing in the first four games. That's not Mystery. |
|
2010-01-20, 04:41 | Link #991 | |
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
Quote:
And nothing specifically precludes Battler thinking he's seen someone he actually was deceived by. Granted, Shannon and Kanon are the only example of this that I'm immediately aware of, but I imagine with a little stupid dancing around the point you could make up a theory where someone else is being impersonated. The point is, you can doubt it. Blithely accepting Shkanon like it's the answer and resolves everything is a trap and I'm not going to fall for it. It's just too obviously being dangled out there in front of us. The episode is practically begging us to find it, which is very unusual and very questionable. He doesn't make it this easy under normal circumstances. Would he really make it this easy now? |
|
2010-01-20, 04:49 | Link #992 | |||
Homo Ludens
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Canada
Age: 34
|
Quote:
Quote:
If you're to accept that Battler's viewpoint is reliable and that someone doesn't exist, it has to be Kanon. There's no other answer that makes sense with what Battler sees. Quote:
And, well, it DOES answer a lot of stuff. Remember how Umineko is supposed to be solvable? There ought to be one elegant solution, and the fanbase just might have stumbled across a piece of it we weren't supposed to find for a long time. ...Just a question: Why are you so adamantly opposed to the theory? |
|||
2010-01-20, 05:35 | Link #993 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
|
Quote:
Quote:
[heck i hope there will be lots and lots of fanservice additional episodes like in Higurashi (for example Saikoroshi hen even though i hated it) =3 ] |
||
2010-01-20, 07:07 | Link #994 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Indonesia
|
About the 16 people exist thing... I think Battler is the suspicious one, for me at least...
See in chess, there are 16 pieces for each side, and the one who controls them is the player. Assuming Battler is the player, he doesn't get count. In his eyes, Erika is the 17th person, since he didn't count himself. For Erika, she is the 18th person, since she count everyone. |
2010-01-20, 10:18 | Link #995 | ||
別にいいけど
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
|
Quote:
-Maybe Erika? Let me get this straight, you use the reds from episode3 as a way to deny the shkannon theory but you think it is possible that the so much better worded reds about Erika existence might be bypassed? Is there really any logic hint or whatsoever to think that someone is more probable to not exist than Kanon or Shannon, other than the fact you don't want to believe it? -How is that better than the idea that either kanon or Shannon died before the game? Your claim is that you can find better explanations for the EP6 reds than the EP3 reds, so I expect a different logic, if they are equal I don't get your point. -So you are still thinking that there are 17 persons? You must believe that Ryukishi is a very poor writer to use a completely inane and false statement as the killer ending of this Episode. For what concerns me Erika's red was shattered, the same way past red sentences were. You don't see her chocking simply because it was theatrically better that way. Not to mention that there has to be a reason as to why the exact number wasn't said so far and now it is. -This doesn't account for a good point for you. in Episode3 Eva-Beatrice makes a list of 15 people dead and ends by saying that 15 people have died. Therfore you are either stuck with Battler Eva or Jessica not being persons or with the possibility that you can say "X persons have died" using loopholes. And if such a loophole exists then it can also be used for Kanon or Shannon in the previous red text that state that 6 persons have died. Quote:
__________________
Last edited by Jan-Poo; 2010-01-20 at 11:06. |
||
2010-01-20, 11:01 | Link #997 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Houston
|
Quote:
I will say I don't know a whole lot about Episode 6, but I am going to fight Shkanon until the very end. From my perspective, it's such an absurd and ridiculous theory. And I'll go ahead and ask how Shkanon gets around the Episode shed scene. Since there are no body doubles as by the red, the only way that Kanon/Shannon could still be alive and get around the red is if there was nothing there. That's completely and totally ridiculous, especially when one considers the presence of Hideyoshi. Even if you argue that Hideyoshi is in it, you have to accept the very large risk that someone, maybe Battler, maybe George might storm up to see it and would end up seeing nothing there. |
|
2010-01-20, 11:14 | Link #998 |
別にいいけど
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
|
To understand my answer to another user you need to understand the user's statement first.
Renall statement was that someone for some reasons is not a person. Now there are only two possibilities about the red you quoted 1) it definitely demonstrate that Kanon is a person (and therefore the not-person must be someone else) 2) it doesn't demonstrate that Kanon is a person (and therefore doesn't deny the Shkannon theory). In the first case Kinzo is dead Krauss is dead Natsuhi is dead Hideyoshi is dead George is dead Rudolf is dead Kyrie is dead Rosa is dead Maria is dead Genji is dead Shannon is dead Kanon is dead Gohda is dead Kumasawa is dead Nanjo is dead The 15 people mentioned are dead By the same logic all of these people are persons. And therefore Renall's thesis about someone being not a person is limited to Eva Battler and Jessica.
__________________
|
|
|