[Game] Umineko no Naku Koro ni Chiru - Ep. 6 Dawn of the golden witch

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by m0h

How do you see this scenario:

Jessica loved Battler.
Battler told Shannon that his perfect match would be a girl LIKE Jessica, but not her. Shannon tells that to Jessica.
*snip*

This is where the chain of events stops for me. Because telling someone who we suspect may have also had a mutual (admittedly unreturned) love for Battler would obviously make the maid upset. And then Jessica would have to comfort the dejected Shannon. So yeah Battler's an insensitive jerk.

If anything I think the Beatrice in the portrait was created after this image of Battler's ideal lover was created. Since there seems to be no physical description of Beatrice before the portrait appeared other than Rosa's flashback.

[Jan-Poo]

Ah m0h I'm totally against that. If Jessica was the one who loved Battler she wouldn't have to create a fake personality to love Battler. She was already perfect as she was.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

There you put that better. But I'd like to note that if you think that the writer is lying in an interview that's not something you can justify as a narrative expedient it simply means you do not trust the author himself.

Ever heard of Charlie Kaufman?

There are two obvious reasons to be evasive or misleading in interviews:

• It generates hype, and hype generates sales.
• It gets people invested thinking their theories are on track. Note that much of what ryukishi says about any theory he discusses in an interview is carefully independent of what he actually makes harder determinations on. He'll discuss the content of what people think Zepar and Furfur are about, then say "and what they say is important." But he doesn't actually go so far as to confirm that the thing he was just talking about is the "important" part of what they're saying.

Okay, I'll say it for the last time.

Beatrice's purpose was to create the perfect mystery novel story
In order to create the story she needed a very dirty trick
The trick she came up with is shkanon, or rather the use of fake personality to give the illusion that the number of people in the island is higher than what it actually is.

See, shkanon it's not the problem, it's the solution.

...that doesn't solve anything. You've given Shkanon a justification that only holds because Shkanon exists. She has no good reason to artificially inflate the number of people in a specific manner. She could simply present a wholly fictional character instead, which she does repeatedly. Why is Shkanon special? What does it solve? How does it make the murders and rooms easier to explain? How does it explain their on-board motive? Why is Meta-Beatrice protecting it from Battler? Why is he so sad when he figures it out? Why is Meta-Battler protecting it from Bernkastel? Why would Bernkastel care?

So no, it really isn't "the solution." All it does is raise more questions that can't be answered.

[m0h]

Originally Posted by Judoh

This is where the chain of events stops for me. Because telling someone who we suspect may have also had a mutual (admittedly unreturned) love for Battler would obviously make the maid upset. And then Jessica would have to comfort the dejected Shannon. So yeah Battler's an insensitive jerk.

Then how about if we doubt that Shannon had feelings for Battler in the first place? When Shannon said that it sounded like a fake hint. Something that would help Jessica to hide her feelings for Battler ( Since she was rejected, she doesn't want that Battler knows about her NOW as a human, but as a Witch, so she can be how Battler wanted. )

[m0h]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

Ah m0h I'm totally against that. If Jessica was the one who loved Battler she wouldn't have to create a fake personality to love Battler. She was already perfect as she was.

Uhm.. She wasn't perfect. Not enough at last.
Battler said it: "LIKE jessica, but not her". More than enough to want to became another person.

[Jan-Poo]

Why is Shkanon special? <- Silly point. Magical characters are dismissed as false by default, Beatrice needed to create credible characters to make it work.

What does it solve? <- It explains what is the dirty trick used by Beatrice.

How does it make the murders and rooms easier to explain? <- You are using a preposterous logic. By demonstrating that "X doesn't explain everything" you try to claim that "X doesn't explain anything". Who are you trying to fool with that apart yourself?

How does it explain their on-board motive? <- Beatrice's motive is quite clear! She exists for the sole purpose of loving Battler and being loved by him, but she's less than a human and she cannot be seen without love. Forcing Battler to understand what furnitures are how they come to existence and why is a way to make him acknowledge and understand her own existence.

Why is Meta-Beatrice protecting it from Battler? <- Protecting it?! Quite the contrary that's the very thing she wants him to understand!

Why is he so sad when he figures it out? <- What the hell are you talking about?

Why is Meta-Battler protecting it from Bernkastel? <- You kidding me right? By exposing the true nature of a furniture you kill them.

Why would Bernkastel care? <- See above

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

Why is Shkanon special? <- Silly point. Magical characters are dismissed as false by default, Beatrice needed to create credible characters to make it work.

Only because she manipulated Battler into such distrust. If she's trying to make him move toward the truth, backhandedly doing what she was trying to get him to not do makes no sense.

What does it solve? <- It explains what is the dirty trick used by Beatrice.

There is no mention, ever, of a dirty trick used by Beatrice. Ryukishi said he put a "dirty trick" in. Him, the author.

How does it make the murders and rooms easier to explain? <- You are using a preposterous logic. By demonstrating that "X doesn't explain everything" you try to claim that "X doesn't explain anything". Who are you trying to fool with that apart yourself?

And you are being disingenous and putting words in my mouth. I never suggested that Shkanon must explain everything to explain anything. But no one, ever, ever, has been able to point to one killing in ep1-4 that is made easier by Shkanon, or one logistical means Shkanon makes easier, rather than harder. I can and have pointed to a half-dozen contradictions which make it harder on Shkanon if anyone knows about her secret, and several people would almost have to.

How does it explain their on-board motive? <- Beatrice's motive is quite clear! She exists for the sole purpose of loving Battler and being loved by him, but she's less than a human and she cannot be seen without love. Forcing Battler to understand what furnitures are how they come to existence and why is a way to make him acknowledge and understand her own existence.

Beatrice does not exist on the board. There is a "Beatrice," but Meta-Beatrice != "Beatrice." You're dodging the issue. Again.

Why is Meta-Beatrice protecting it from Battler? <- Protecting it?! Quite the contrary that's the very thing she wants him to understand!

It's important and sensitive enough he has to figure it out rather than simply being told. Why?

Why is he so sad when he figures it out? <- What the hell are you talking about?

So Battler's morose realization in ep5 and strange behavior in ep6 are just a random thing, now? He's realized something of great importance. Why is Shkanon so important?

Why is Meta-Battler protecting it from Bernkastel? <- You kidding me right? By exposing the true nature of a furniture you kill them.

I... don't remember that coming up... ever? And Bern is perfectly content with trying to kill Beatrice directly. She doesn't need Shkanon to do it.

Why would Bernkastel care? <- See above

It doesn't work.

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

Why is he so sad when he figures it out? <- What the hell are you talking about?

I think he's talking about EP5 where Battler figures out her identity along with his answer and then says something along the lines of "why did you chose such a round about way to tell me that!?"

Why is Meta-Battler protecting it from Bernkastel? <- You kidding me right? By exposing the true nature of a furniture you kill them.

Why would Bernkastel care? <- See above

Your underestimating Bern's cruelty. I don't think she does care. If she could she'd expose something that doesn't exist in a second. Hence her red about Natsuhi being alone.

Oh wait that's what your saying... nvm

[Jan-Poo]

So you really didn't understand anything about Beatrice. She can't serve Battler the answer on a silver platter! Battler needs to find the answer by himself.
What is the purpose of a riddle? A purpose of a riddle is to be solved, but does that mean that a riddle must give you the answer straightforward? Quite the opposite.

If you think that making things difficult to understand when the purpose is to make someone understand is illogic, then you really haven't understood much.

There is no mention, ever, of a dirty trick used by Beatrice. Ryukishi said he put a "dirty trick" in. Him, the author. <- Not completely true. EP6 clearly claims that there is a trick that "will expose Beatrice's heart" and that's the very trick she used to save Battler.

But no one, ever, ever, has been able to point to one killing in ep1-4 that is made easier by Shkanon <- Wrong! The whole EP3 is joke if Shannon and Kanon only died as furniture. No red has ever been stated about the original person to have died.

It's important and sensitive enough he has to figure it out rather than simply being told. Why? <- Wow you really will have an hard time with women if you expect them to tell you everything right away and if you don't understand why they'll want you to understand stuff by yourself.

Beatrice does not exist on the board. There is a "Beatrice," but Meta-Beatrice != "Beatrice." You're dodging the issue. Again. <- Beatrice is different than Meta-Beatrice? I don't know what are you talking about. Beatrice exists. Of course she exists the same way Shannon and Kanon exist. That means she doesn't always exist, she shares the same soul and body with others.

So Battler's morose realization in ep5 and strange behavior in ep6 are just a random thing, now? He's realized something of great importance. Why is Shkanon so important? <- He realized his sin there, that's what made him sad. He realized how much he has hurt Beatrice or rather the original person. Plus Beatrice died just in front of his eyes. I think that was perfectly clear in EP5, why are you lost in such a thing?

I... don't remember that coming up... ever? And Bern is perfectly content with trying to kill Beatrice directly. She doesn't need Shkanon to do it. <- Now really? Exposing Beatrice's nature wouldn't kill her? That's what Bern clearly stated to pursue at the end of EP6. What about the metaphor of ripping of the entrails from a body? Wasn't that clear? Oh wait she said the same thing in EP5 she said she wanted to uncover all the truth about Beatrice.
I'm not sure how should I comment that "she doesn't need shkanon". If shkanontrice is the truth knowing shkanon would inevitably bring to the rest. That's a sufficient reason to no let her know.

[Renall]

You really need to stop personally insulting me and suggesting I don't know what I'm talking about. I haven't been attacking you personally and I agree with a lot of your conclusions on other issues, but this is one that never ceases to fluster me because no one who supports it can respond with anything but personal insults and "you clearly don't understand." If it's that clear, you should be able to explain it to me. I'm not dumb, and I've been listening. Honest. Just explain it. You can do that, right? If it's the answer, it should make sense when it's explained. It should "click." It should make people go "Ohhhhhh, right!"

So lay it on me. Stop dodging questions, saying "wow, you really don't get it," and give me a reason to want to believe in it.

I'm tired of having the ball thrown back in my court when I'm not the one convinced I "know the answer." I'm not the one who's failing to adequately convey something which is apparently so self-evident in its truth that it finally explains things, if only people who just don't get it would understand. I don't think this is an unreasonable request, but you wouldn't know it from all the answers I haven't ever been given.

Why does this have to be true? Why does it make the story better? If you are honest, you can convey it simply and effectively.

[Jan-Poo]

The fact that you keep on claiming that I... that no one ever explained what shkanon explains is way too irritating. Sorry if I couldn't help using sarcasm (and sarcasm it is, because I don't think you actually didn't understand all that), but it really pisses me off knowing that even after this discussion you'll keep on saying that.

If you just said that none of the explanations that were given to you satisfied you, that would be okay.

Anyway I'll excuse myself, I'll put the sarcasm aside and I do recognize that you are nowhere close to be stupid. I also recognize that doubting shkanon is perfectly reasonable. But you are not recognizing that believing in shkanon is, what you say is that it doesn't make sense and I can't take well that someone claims that one of my theory is devoid of logic. Especially if it's one of the few theories which I consider to be pretty solid. I'm not idiot either.

That being said, sarcasm apart I think the answers I given to you before are valid.

1) There's a core trick which is strictly tied to Beatrice's nature
2) the dirty trick of personalities can die can explain the whole EP3
3) people in love wish for the other to understand things about themselves without the need to tell them. This is also true for Battler since he clearly state that in EP6
4) I believe that Beatrice exists on the gameboard whenever she takes control of the host body and that she's one and the same with Meta-Beatrice.
5) Battler's sadness after realizing the truth came from his knowledge about his broken promise, as the song itself suggests. Evidently he's also angry at "Beatrice" for taking it so seriously since he called her "stupid". However he wouldn't reach to this conclusion without realizing first that Beatrice=someone else.
6) Bern's clear intent is to expose the truth about Beatrice which is stated in both EP5 and EP6 tea parties. At the same time Bern believes that by doing so she would kill Beatrice once and for all.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

The fact that you keep on claiming that I... that no one ever explained what shkanon explains is way too irritating. Sorry if I couldn't help using sarcasm (and sarcasm it is, because I don't think you actually didn't understand all that), but it really pisses me off knowing that even after this discussion you'll keep on saying that.

If someone would answer the questions that I ask, I wouldn't have a problem with it. But people try to provide answers to questions I didn't ask.

If you just said that none of the explanations that were given to you satisfied you, that would be okay.

If it would make you feel better, that is exactly how I feel.

However, I personally believe people are intentionally refusing to provide explanations because they have none which adequately answer questions asked. So they answer questions I didn't ask, and pretend like they've "explained" things. If they really had, I would understand why they believe it. As yet, I have not received an answer which satisfies me because, in my estimation, I have not received an answer at all.

Don't get me wrong, I have received answers to some things. But not the things that concern me, and not the things I asked about. Merely giving "an" answer is insufficient even if that answer is correct. If the answer given to "what is 2+2?" is "elephants are gray," it's not that the answer is wrong, it's just not addressing the question.

That's why I'm not satisfied.

Anyway I'll excuse myself, I'll put the sarcasm aside and I do recognize that you are nowhere close to be stupid. I also recognize that doubting shkanon is perfectly reasonable. But you are not recognizing that believing in shkanon is, what you say is that it doesn't make sense and I can't take well that someone claims that one of my theory is devoid of logic. Especially if it's one of the few theories which I consider to be pretty solid. I'm not idiot either.

I understand that. But I want to know, on a more fundamental level, why people believe it's true, specific things they think it explains that nothing else properly can, and why it carries such significant literary weight when I see it as completely inconsequential and, if true, gimmicky and stupid for a work of this purported weight.

That being said, sarcasm apart I think the answers I given to you before are valid.

1) There's a core trick which is strictly tied to Beatrice's nature

There is a core trick surrounding the revelation of her nature. Her nature need not be "a trick" in and of itself. Besides, there are many suppositions as to what the "dirty trick" could be. Multiple Beatrices, Erika-related theories, theories about Jessica or about Battler himself, theories about the killer co-opting an existing legend or drama, the "faked" deaths being noise, etc. There's lots of tricks, and it's possible more than one is true. What makes this one better than the others?

2) the dirty trick of personalities can die can explain the whole EP3

But so can many other things, none of which require such an absurd manipulation of the red as to declare that being dead doesn't mean being dead. There is also still no evidence that personalities can, in fact, die. Or that anyone has personalities at all. Two mentions in the entire game, and both were about Jessica.

3) people in love wish for the other to understand things about themselves without the need to tell them. This is also true for Battler since he clearly state that in EP6

So what? Even if this really is the thing that Battler must come to understand on his own, why is it so very, very important? What about all the other things he understands about her? Like, say... her reasons for faking her own death and what she's doing when she's sneaking around lying to Battler's perspective and making Piece-Battler believe she died. Aren't those much more important for him to understand? I can get over a person disguising as another person, but I have to know why.

In Battler's shoes, I want to believe it all made sense, that all the pain and suffering weren't in vain, that the lies told were told to make me understand something I could not have grasped without them, that everything that happened happened for a reason. And that reason is... "Because I'm actually not one servant, but at least two!" Seriously?

4) I believe that Beatrice exists on the gameboard whenever she takes control of the host body and that she's one and the same with Meta-Beatrice.

So then you concede to the existence of magic? Because a meta-character "taking control" of a piece on the board is magic, pure and simple. I just want to be sure: Your view of the board is that magic does, in fact, exist, and that pieces can act against their nature, and that there is no separability between Beatrice and "Beatrice" just like there is no separation between Piece and Meta-Battler? That appears to be what is being advanced here. I just want to be perfectly clear and let you correct any parts of that statement which you do not believe.

5) Battler's sadness after realizing the truth came from his knowledge about his broken promise, as the song itself suggests. Evidently he's also angry at "Beatrice" for taking it so seriously since he called her "stupid". However he wouldn't reach to this conclusion without realizing first that Beatrice=someone else.

How does Beatrice = Someone Else imply Shannon = Kanon? There is no connection here. Yes, you can argue "Shannon is Beatrice," but Shannontrice and Shkanon are not, and have never been, necessarily and essentially related. Either theory can exist without the other.

6) Bern's clear intent is to expose the truth about Beatrice which is stated in both EP5 and EP6 tea parties. At the same time Bern believes that by doing so she would kill Beatrice once and for all.

Do you acknowledge that Bern may be insincere about her motives, or do you believe everything that she says? Why does she have credibility? Especially after calling herself the worst kind of person? Why would you listen to a word out of the mouth of someone who pretty clearly seems to be the villain of the entire work?

Has it occurred to you, perhaps, that Bern doesn't care about "the truth?" That she cares about some construct she can weave that will be taken as "truth," no matter who she has to make suffer for it? Would it satisfy her to learn that everyone quietly played cards for 48 hours before the boiler accidentally exploded, and the message bottles were a hoax from some random person? That maybe, just maybe, she actually enjoys causing suffering and is willing to compromise her stated "values" to do that?

How many trollfaces does she have to put on before it becomes clear her motives are biased and her behavior is driven by something other than an actual desire to understand any information that doesn't hurt people when it's revealed?

[Jan-Poo]

I'm going to take this matter seriously but you need to take this seriously as well, some of your answers here don't leave me with the impression that you are trying to understand what I'm saying.


1) The trick she uses to save Battler is stated to be connected directly to Beatrice's heart. I won't reply to any claim that "x is not reliable". The only things I have to help me to understand this mystery are facts shown in the story, if you keep denying the reliability of everything no progress can be made. And no, red alone is not sufficient. Anyway this is beyond the purpose of what you ask. If I tell you that "x explain y" I have absolved my purpose. If you then say "but y is bullshit" I can't do nothing about that. But I have absolutely no obligation to agree with your personal interpretations which are by no means facts.

2) The matter of personalities is explained more in detail in EP6, there's quite a good block of text about it. I don't believe such a blatant explanation should have been necessary before this point.

3) I believe I explained this point. Understanding shkanon equals to understand furnitures and by extension "Beatrice". This is absolutely vital for Beatrice that Battler understands what she is. Battler can't simply understand that she's the same as the original persona because Beatrice does not consider herself to be the same person. I don't think I need to prove this point, you should remember her answer to Battler when he told her that the sin was against her.

4) I am absolutely antifantasy. the metaworld is generated by the real world. When I say that Beatrice takes control of the host body I mean that Beatrice as a personality takes control in a person with conflicting personalities. You don't even need to think about DID. A person who's torn apart between two loves could be said to have two different personalities in her each one loving someone else. Beatrice is the personality that loves Battler.

5) Because as I said before Beatrice doesn't consider herself to be exactly the same person. Such a thing is difficult to explain with words, which is why Beatrice needed Battler to understand it by himself. Even if she told him straight away he wouldn't understand. He was to understand that he sinned against a person which is Beatrice and at the same time isn't.

6) I do not intend to reply to a baseless claim that anything that Bern says is a lie. Actually... when did Bern lie? I don't remember any instance. She's deceiving, certainly, but a liar? I see absolutely no reason to question that her true motives are to expose Beatrice's true nature and kill her. I cannot accept that you refuse a theory on the base that it conflicts with your own theories. I want facts. Prove that Bern was lying there.


But I have the feeling that your own replies are making me straying from what is you really want me to answer. So why don't you think about a single question that can have perfectly straight answer?

[Kylon99]

By the way.. "Beatrice is the personality that loves Battler." <-- Maybe this would be better explained as, "In the fantasy explanation, Beatrice ends up being a full personality, representing in the real world a particular person's desire for Battler."


Also, I have a feeling the single question is:

What is the truth that Battler reached, regarding Beatrice that allowed him to unlock the entire mystery?


I think this is the truth that the message bottles hinted at and the 'key' that Ryukishi has said in a recent interview that some people have found but not used it to go back and unlock the whole story...

I think some people believe there's some funny stuff with Shannon, Kanon and Beatrice, but would like for the theory to be the Master Key before they'll believe.

[Jan-Poo]

I can't believe it's just a fantasy explanation.

We know that there's a person that claims herself to be Beatrice and acts as if she's the Beatrice of the legend. Considering this is extremely unlikely that the text Lyricalaura translated a while ago is to be interpreted as a metaworld event. It really did happen. That person really thought all that in the real world.

For what concerns her, Beatrice is a separate entity from herself. It doesn't matter if this is actually true, this is what she believes.

[Smeckledorf]

Originally Posted by Kylon99

By the way.. "Beatrice is the personality that loves Battler." <-- Maybe this would be better explained as, "In the fantasy explanation, Beatrice ends up being a full personality, representing in the real world a particular person's desire for Battler."


Also, I have a feeling the single question is:

What is the truth that Battler reached, regarding Beatrice that allowed him to unlock the entire mystery?


I think this is the truth that the message bottles hinted at and the 'key' that Ryukishi has said in a recent interview that some people have found but not used it to go back and unlock the whole story...

I think some people believe there's some funny stuff with Shannon, Kanon and Beatrice, but would like for the theory to be the Master Key before they'll believe.

I believe Beatrice is on par with Shanon and Kanon, personality-wise. As for the truth, we don't know or else we wouldn't watch episode 7 or 8 for that matter. I am thinking he 'remembered' his sin.

[Judoh]

In regards to Shkanon and Beatrice there really has been something I've been wondering about from this conversation. From the beginning we've beleived that Beatrice itself is a human dressed up in a disguise. This comes from a statement from Kyrie that "if anyone were dressing up as that the women would be the number one suspects". Shkanontrice Introduces an unnecessary layer on top of that. That is: a disguise on top of a disguise. The only evidence we have for a Beatrice disguise itself is that people are suspicious of one. Other than statements suggesting a disguise exists no more than two people at a time have ever seen it and even when Battler did he never saw it up close. A Kanon disguise on the other hand has no such statements and only exists to make the theory work, which is not entirely a problem if you suppose this original person is a "Chinaman" that has expertise in disguise (and you wouldn't put it past him), but then your looking for completely different kinds of hints.

That's my little rundown now where does it lead? Suppose that none of these disguises or personalities exists, what does it leave us with? If the Beatrice disguise does not exist that means people are lying about what they saw. So all we're left with is a murderer and no disguise. If the Kanon disguise does not exist all we have is Shannon (or whoever you associate Kanon with) with Kanon not being seen anywhere becuase he does not exist and therefore cannot be seen. So if that's the narrative that means there are less problems and not more.

[Smeckledorf]

Originally Posted by Judoh

In regards to Shkanon and Beatrice there really has been something I've been wondering about from this conversation. From the beginning we've beleived that Beatrice itself is a human dressed up in a disguise. This comes from a statement from Kyrie that "if anyone were dressing up as that the women would be the number one suspects". Shkanontrice Introduces an unnecessary layer on top of that. That is: a disguise on top of a disguise. The only evidence we have for a Beatrice disguise itself is that people are suspicious of one. Other than statements suggesting a disguise exists no more than two people at a time have ever seen it and even when Battler did he never saw it up close. A Kanon disguise on the other hand has no such statements and only exists to make the theory work, which is not entirely a problem if you suppose this original person is a "Chinaman" that has expertise in disguise (and you wouldn't put it past him), but then your looking for completely different kinds of hints.

That's my little rundown now where does it lead? Suppose that none of these disguises or personalities exists, what does it leave us with? If the Beatrice disguise does not exist that means people are lying about what they saw. So all we're left with is a murderer and no disguise. If the Kanon disguise does not exist all we have is Shannon (or whoever you associate Kanon with) with Kanon not being seen anywhere becuase he does not exist and therefore cannot be seen. So if that's the narrative that means there are less problems and not more.

A mystery novel is supposed to have problems, we are supposed to figure out the solution. That's just my take on the matter. Anyways, Battler has seen Beatrice so a disguise for Beatrice must exist.

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by Smeckledorf

Anyways, Battler has seen Beatrice so a disguise for Beatrice must exist.

Only once on the third floor Balcony. When he's trying to get out of the pouring rain. And your not getting what I mean.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

I'm going to take this matter seriously but you need to take this seriously as well, some of your answers here don't leave me with the impression that you are trying to understand what I'm saying.

Here we go again. I want to understand you. The fact that I do not agree with you does not mean I do not understand you.

1) The trick she uses to save Battler is stated to be connected directly to Beatrice's heart. I won't reply to any claim that "x is not reliable". The only things I have to help me to understand this mystery are facts shown in the story, if you keep denying the reliability of everything no progress can be made. And no, red alone is not sufficient. Anyway this is beyond the purpose of what you ask. If I tell you that "x explain y" I have absolved my purpose. If you then say "but y is bullshit" I can't do nothing about that. But I have absolutely no obligation to agree with your personal interpretations which are by no means facts.

Well, then it's pointless to have this discussion, because I am critical of what I read and I believe the author wants me to be critical of what he's written.

There's also a certain irony in claiming that dead doesn't mean dead but that you base your conjectures "facts shown in the story." You were shown a fact, but you don't agree with it because it isn't convenient to your point. How is that any different from my own doubts?

2) The matter of personalities is explained more in detail in EP6, there's quite a good block of text about it. I don't believe such a blatant explanation should have been necessary before this point.

I think it's very important and very poorly explained. People read DID and Shkanon into it and stop. They don't think. They don't assume their position is false and ask what other things it could mean.

What else could it mean? What about the authorship/stage metaphor that's been kicked around?

3) I believe I explained this point. Understanding shkanon equals to understand furnitures and by extension "Beatrice". This is absolutely vital for Beatrice that Battler understands what she is. Battler can't simply understand that she's the same as the original persona because Beatrice does not consider herself to be the same person. I don't think I need to prove this point, you should remember her answer to Battler when he told her that the sin was against her.

What the hell is this? You most certainly do need to prove all of this. It's the same thing cronotrig pitched to me, and it's based heavily on supposition and conjecture. By no means is your interpretation of the nature, importance, or relevance of "furniture" status fact. That is part of the Shkanon cult.

4) I am absolutely antifantasy. the metaworld is generated by the real world. When I say that Beatrice takes control of the host body I mean that Beatrice as a personality takes control in a person with conflicting personalities. You don't even need to think about DID. A person who's torn apart between two loves could be said to have two different personalities in her each one loving someone else. Beatrice is the personality that loves Battler.

I'm sorry, but "a personality takes control in a person" is DID. In some form or fashion. It might be magical literary DID, but that's what it is. You believe the answer is a crazy person.

The act of Beatrice's creation as narrated in ep6 is deliberate. It is not an accident. It is not a persona "arising." It is a persona created. Why, then, is it not simpler to believe that whoever "Beatrice" is considers the Beatrice persona a conscious facade? Why is a conflict of personalities necessary? How does it make the story better and more interesting?

I'll tell you: It does not. It is godawful. It is bad mystery, bad fantasy, bad literature. I believe ryukishi is too competent a writer, from the body of evidence of the work he's already created, to do any such thing. If there were a considerably comprehensible and valid literary reason behind it, perhaps, but I don't think he's that good an author.

Why not the literature/theater metaphor? Beatrice is a part she plays in a story which is clearly fiction (in literal on-the-board terms, a part that plays a love which couldn't be). How is that not equally valid and considerably more thematic?

5) Because as I said before Beatrice doesn't consider herself to be exactly the same person. Such a thing is difficult to explain with words, which is why Beatrice needed Battler to understand it by himself. Even if she told him straight away he wouldn't understand. He was to understand that he sinned against a person which is Beatrice and at the same time isn't.

"It's difficult to explain with words" sounds like a cop-out to me. If it can't be explained with words, why are we reading a text-based story about it? Words are all we have. And for the revelation to make any sense, we need the same level of investment in the story that Battler has. Battler automatically has more by virtue of being a character in it. The explanation has to also click for us, the readers. The rationale that Shkanon proposes for Battler's subsequent behavior makes no sense. Even if "Battler understands," if we don't, the work has failed to emotionally invest us.

6) I do not intend to reply to a baseless claim that anything that Bern says is a lie. Actually... when did Bern lie? I don't remember any instance. She's deceiving, certainly, but a liar? I see absolutely no reason to question that her true motives are to expose Beatrice's true nature and kill her. I cannot accept that you refuse a theory on the base that it conflicts with your own theories. I want facts. Prove that Bern was lying there.

Seriously? Seriously? Holy crap.

Okay so what about that part where she said she was Battler's (or the player's) ally? That she wanted the truth? Or that time she lied to Ange, you know, that thing Lambda came back and pointed out? That she had any objective in the fifth game but ruining everything for her own amusement? That she even wants this game to end in the first place outside of the natural consequence of destroying everyone involved in it?

She is deceptive, as you said. She tells half-truths. Half-truths are lies. They are intended to produce a deceptive reaction in the person hearing them. Ange listened to her to her own detriment. She was lied to, and Bern was the one who did it, and Bern took pleasure in her self-destruction and Battler's suffering as a consequence. And then she admitted she was doing it to motivate him. So even if she had "told her the truth," she'd still be lying to Ange about why she wanted her "help."

But I have the feeling that your own replies are making me straying from what is you really want me to answer. So why don't you think about a single question that can have perfectly straight answer?

I have, many times. I will make this easy on you too: I don't want an explanation based on facts. Don't reference events or points. Assume your entire theory is true. Don't defend it. Just act like ep7 has come out and every word of it has been declared in red, and there is no longer any dispute as to the facts of your position anymore. And tell me the answer to any or all of the following:

• What value does Umineko as a literary work have when this is what it is "all about?"
• When this work is finished, why was it important to you that this was the answer?
• Out of all the theories swirling around before this one was confirmed to be true, of all the evidence against your position or for other ones, why did this one matter more than any others? Before you seriously examined the evidence, why did this resonate with truth?
• Why did this one need to be true to make the work the highest possible quality piece of writing it could be? How would this story have suffered if this theory had not been true?
• Why do you like this idea? Why did enhance your understanding of the themes of the story and why did it make the experience more enjoyable?