[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[Arachanox]

Originally Posted by Renall

I've not yet seen anything that hasn't been posted before, and my objection remains as before: What does Shkanon answer, other than Kanon's missing corpse and possibly part of ep6? The snippets of theories advanced do not shed any further light on the reason why Shkanon is necessary, nor on what it accomplishes, only on ways in which it is possible/. I know the evidence for why it is possible. I have seen it many times in the ep4/5/6/Spoilers threads. Now I would like the next step: Accepting it as true whether or not I believe it to be so, what answers does it provide me?

Hasn't he talked about truths (gold in particular) in such a way that it leads you to think that gold truth (or the mechanisms behind it), the reality of the island, and the Shannon/Kanon situation are somehow linked? Or if you reject this idea, that they are unlinked to the extent where maybe he's saying "Shkannon looks nice but it's a red herring"? I haven't had the time (or the brain power) to read behind the lines, but I trust that he didn't just post all of that information for the heck of it. There is a meaning behind it. We, including you, have just not figured it out yet.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Arachanox

Hasn't he talked about truths (gold in particular) in such a way that it leads you to think that gold truth (or the mechanisms behind it), the reality of the island, and the Shannon/Kanon situation are somehow linked? Or if you reject this idea, that they are unlinked to the extent where maybe he's saying "Shkannon looks nice but it's a red herring"? I haven't had the time (or the brain power) to read behind the lines, but I trust that he didn't just post all of that information for the heck of it. There is a meaning behind it. We, including you, have just not figured it out yet.

Or, there is no relation (as you said, it could be a red herring). I am aware of the significance of Shannon and Kanon scenes. I am aware of the evidence in favor of Shkanon. I am not aware of how some deep understanding of gold text identifying a body and a cup trick explains to me who killed the victims in the ep3 First Twilight, why those victims were chosen, and how the culprit avoided the notice of the adults in the conference room. These are the questions which a unified theory should be able to answer. Saying "this evidence will lead you to the truth" alone is only sufficient if the evidence does indeed lead to the truth. I am dubious, but he claims to have solved many things, so I must have missed them and I'm eager to re-hear them.

[Arachanox]

Originally Posted by Renall

Saying "this evidence will lead you to the truth" alone is only sufficient if the evidence does indeed lead to the truth. I am dubious, but he claims to have solved many things, so I must have missed them and I'm eager to re-hear them.

"This evidence will lead you to the truth" if you are bright enough to figure it out. Note that I'm not insulting you or anyone in particular, nor am I glorifying chrono (he could have stumbled on it by accident). He -may- have given us a fragment or a series of fragments of the truth; it's up to the individual to put them together in the right way.

Or, he's given us a bunch of nonsense; but the process of piecing together that nonsense should stimulate thought nonetheless which may lead to victory.

Regardless, he's been trying to disguise his clues so he doesn't have to outright state solutions, so naturally they'd be difficult to find. Isn't that somehow Umineko related? "Hidden passages [clues] may exist, but naturally you wouldn't find them..."

edit: I call Knox's Third on you chrono; please give us unhidden hints

[Aeriven]

Chrono, I just wanted to say thank you for what you have posted out there for us. In my opinion, you have not been elitist or trolling at all. Part of the point of Umineko is to have people talking and thinking about the story, Ryukishi doesn't want us to just stop thinking. If chrono just posted a huge wall of text explaining his theory, whether it was true or not, (or if Ryukishi just laid the answer out like in Higurashi, despite saying he wouldn't) people would stop thinking. Those of us who know Higurashi's answer, how much thinking are you doing now? The way chrono's laying his theory out, it allows me to continue thinking on my own.

As Arachanox said, you have me thinking in a way that I hadn't before, and I appreciate that.

Plus, I have been working on learning to read Japanese and done some basic translating...As long as it takes me to get through just basic Kanji, I can't even begin to fathom how much you've looked at Umineko's text.

[chronotrig]

Originally Posted by Renall

Or, there is no relation (as you said, it could be a red herring). I am aware of the significance of Shannon and Kanon scenes. I am aware of the evidence in favor of Shkanon. I am not aware of how some deep understanding of gold text identifying a body and a cup trick explains to me who killed the victims in the ep3 First Twilight, why those victims were chosen, and how the culprit avoided the notice of the adults in the conference room. These are the questions which a unified theory should be able to answer. Saying "this evidence will lead you to the truth" alone is only sufficient if the evidence does indeed lead to the truth. I am dubious, but he claims to have solved many things, so I must have missed them and I'm eager to re-hear them.

There's no need to retell all of it, I think. Everything I've said is right here on this board. As you've probably noticed, arguments here tend to get circular and I've personally had enough with repeating myself. I already said that I would stop here, so I'll stick to that. Let me just assure you that I believe there is a connection.

Well, I can at least comment of the first twilight of EP3. Remember when Shannon, Kanon, and Genji are all running towards Kinzo's study? We're then told that "Kanon ran so quietly that he made less sound than the rain when he stepped in puddles". In my experience, that's impossible. Again, not a proof, but a hint.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by chronotrig

There's no need to retell all of it, I think. Everything I've said is right here on this board. As you've probably noticed, arguments here tend to get circular and I've personally had enough with repeating myself. I already said that I would stop here, so I'll stick to that. Let me just assure you that I believe there is a connection.

So then you will not give me a summary of each individual element answered by Shkanon, in a digestible format that simply states the instances it can address. Correct?

Well, I can at least comment of the first twilight of EP3. Remember when Shannon, Kanon, and Genji are all running towards Kinzo's study? We're then told that "Kanon ran so quietly that he made less sound than the rain when he stepped in puddles". In my experience, that's impossible.

How does a metaphor finger a culprit? Alternately, how does a person who is impossibly quiet - perhaps because he doesn't exist - perform any physical acts, such as murder?

[Arachanox]

Originally Posted by Renall

So then you will not give me a summary of each individual element answered by Shkanon, in a digestible format that simply states the instances it can address. Correct?

How does a metaphor finger a culprit? Alternately, how does a person who is impossibly quiet - perhaps because he doesn't exist - perform any physical acts, such as murder?

Because any scene he appears in is a misrepresentation given to the reader. Even in scenes where Battler is there, there exists an "effective truth" that Kanon does exist since everyone believes he does.

In reality this isn't possible except through mass delusion, but us (the readers) may have an imperfect viewpoint causing us to see Battler as if he recognized the existence of Kanon. Perhaps in reality Battler doesn't see him since he doesn't exist. But we are shown Battler seeing Kanon for some ulterior purpose.

edit: I say Featherine/Ryukishi author shenanigans are somehow at work.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Arachanox

Because any scene he appears in is a misrepresentation given to the reader. Even in scenes where Battler is there, there exists an "effective truth" that Kanon does exist since everyone believes he does.

In reality this isn't possible except through mass delusion, but us (the readers) may have an imperfect viewpoint causing us to see Battler as if he recognized the existence of Kanon. Perhaps in reality Battler doesn't see him since he doesn't exist. But we are shown Battler seeing Kanon for some ulterior purpose.

Yes, but that doesn't finger a culprit. Kanon, Shannon, and Genji all wind up victims, at least allegedly. Why? Why them when in previous episodes it's often not the servants killed or "killed?" Their actions may give some hint as to why they died, or what other scenario was being planned, but what? Who burned Kinzo? Why'd they decide to do it when they did it? If Kanon is a misrepresentation that conceals something relevant to these questions, what is he covering up?

[Arachanox]

Originally Posted by Renall

Yes, but that doesn't finger a culprit. Kanon, Shannon, and Genji all wind up victims, at least allegedly. Why? Why them when in previous episodes it's often not the servants killed or "killed?" Their actions may give some hint as to why they died, or what other scenario was being planned, but what? Who burned Kinzo? Why'd they decide to do it when they did it? If Kanon is a misrepresentation that conceals something relevant to these questions, what is he covering up?

Well isn't that the mystery? I'm sorry, but I don't know. Chrono might. He has experience and has been intimately reading (and translating) the story for a while, so he deserves to be listened to. He tried to present a few ideas in his own way, got yelled at, and now is backing off.

[Kylon99]

Hmmm.. in an effort to get back onto topic... I've posted on this before and got no response but maybe our current discussion has been heading towards this anyways.

I was saying, what are the chances that all furniture are constructed entities, as some of you have been saying? This includes Shannon, Kanon and Genji. EP5 showed us that the author is justified in bringing in Erika so long as in the 'real world' there was a chance that she could've been on Rokkenjima on that day.


I was thinking that instead of Shkannon, we could have that Kanon was written in... or perhaps, he wrote himself in to the story, on the assumption that he *should* have been there that day. It's possible for someone like Shannon or Kanon to be declared dead if after the incident he went into hiding; like living under an assumed name.

(This is also what I suspect Ange of doing in 1998, going off with Amakusa and being someone else. Otherwise we have a very sad, sad ending. 8) )

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Arachanox

Well isn't that the mystery? I'm sorry, but I don't know. Chrono might. He has experience and has been intimately reading (and translating) the story for a while, so he deserves to be listened to. He tried to present a few ideas in his own way, got yelled at, and now is backing off.

He is not a victim and he can take care of himself. People have yelled at each other over theories before and that hasn't stopped them from trying again. If he knows, he should tell us. That's why I asked the question, so someone with better insight can tinker with it, as people often do.

[Arachanox]

Originally Posted by Kylon99

Hmmm.. in an effort to get back onto topic... I've posted on this before and got no response but maybe our current discussion has been heading towards this anyways.

I was saying, what are the chances that all furniture are constructed entities, as some of you have been saying? This includes Shannon, Kanon and Genji. EP5 showed us that the author is justified in bringing in Erika so long as in the 'real world' there was a chance that she could've been on Rokkenjima on that day.


I was thinking that instead of Shkannon, we could have that Kanon was written in... or perhaps, he wrote himself in to the story, on the assumption that he *should* have been there that day. It's possible for someone like Shannon or Kanon to be declared dead if after the incident he went into hiding; like living under an assumed name.

(This is also what I suspect Ange of doing in 1998, going off with Amakusa and being someone else. Otherwise we have a very sad, sad ending. 8) )

If Kanon were the writer, does that make him Featherine? Or at least, Featherine-like? I'm not so sure about that, but that's because I wish the solution was elegantly contained within the world without the assumption that we have author-shenanigans at work. Although I'm sad to say that they probably are at work.

Also, do we have Battler ever directly taking note of the Jessica-Kanon relationship? If we do, then how is it possible for Battler to objectively view Jessica's feelings for Kanon if in reality Kanon was not there on those fateful days? If you argue that Kanon wrote that in there as well, then you're breaking Battler's PoV law and we die a horrible, logic death.

[Arachanox]

Problem with a small part:

Originally Posted by Renall

If he knows, he should tell us.

No. If he knows and wants to tell us all, he should tell us all. If he knows and wants to tell us a little, he should tell us little. If he knows and wants to tell us nothing, he should tell us nothing.

He has told us little, and that is obviously his intent. Small clues and hints.

You are anti-vagueness. I am pro-subtleness. Or have I misinterpreted your intent?

[Renall]

There is a part when they're coming back from the beach in one episode where it's suggested Jessica has a crush on Kanon, causing her to blush. That said, I don't recall Kanon actually being present in the scene, or at least relevantly present. And nothing stops people from talking about someone who isn't around.

[Arachanox]

Originally Posted by Renall

There is a part when they're coming back from the beach in one episode where it's suggested Jessica has a crush on Kanon, causing her to blush. That said, I don't recall Kanon actually being present in the scene, or at least relevantly present. And nothing stops people from talking about someone who isn't around.

Kanon wasn't there as far as I can remember, but this is legal as long as we are talking about relationship stuff that doesn't directly involve Kanon on the days of the tragedy. Kanon may be the writer for those days, but he was still a servant at other times. So he can write himself in with relationship stuff as long as it was previously hinted about through someone other than Kanon. Otherwise, Battler's PoV problems would arise.

[SeagullCrazy]

Originally Posted by Arachanox

Also, do we have Battler ever directly taking note of the Jessica-Kanon relationship? If we do, then how is it possible for Battler to objectively view Jessica's feelings for Kanon if in reality Kanon was not there on those fateful days? If you argue that Kanon wrote that in there as well, then you're breaking Battler's PoV law and we die a horrible, logic death.

Well, I just thought of something.

In EP1, I think the first time it is revealed to Battler that Jessica loved Kanon was after his death. And before his death, he was never doing anything that showed he loved her back.

In the later EPs he has grown to love her a lot more. I wonder if that's what you were asking about.

[Kylon99]

Originally Posted by Arachanox

If Kanon were the writer, does that make him Featherine? Or at least, Featherine-like? I'm not so sure about that, but that's because I wish the solution was elegantly contained within the world without the assumption that we have author-shenanigans at work. Although I'm sad to say that they probably are at work.

Also, do we have Battler ever directly taking note of the Jessica-Kanon relationship? If we do, then how is it possible for Battler to objectively view Jessica's feelings for Kanon if in reality Kanon was not there on those fateful days? If you argue that Kanon wrote that in there as well, then you're breaking Battler's PoV law and we die a horrible, logic death.

This goes to an earlier post I had regarding how the authoring works. So in essence, I'm not talking about the story on the gameboard/Rokkenjima themselves nor the meta-world. There's nothing wrong with a Kanon in the story taking action or being viewed, in the same way that Erika took action and even has some red text concerning her. The episodes must work according to their own internal logic. And they must conform to Knox rules.

However, outside these episodes we know there are two authors, Hachijou and Unknown EP1+2 writer. Featherine is not an author, she is a character in the meta world of EP6. Sort of like Hachijou's self-insertion character.

I've been trying to work on the identity of this writer; it must be someone with intimate knowledge of the truth Hachijou spoke of and I bet it's someone most likely connected to the events.

This author would leave clues about what really happened, so I thought the clues about Shkannon are clues pointing to one of them not being on the island.

[Renall]

For argument's sake, let's say Kanon really is writing in his relationship with Jessica. It's possible he actually had one, so even if he were the one spinning in his POV, it would still not be a lie.

And an author - if you're going for that angle, which is always an interesting but perilous theoretical ground despite ep6's support - can say whatever he or she wants, of course, regardless of truth. It's true in a literary fashion even if none of it really happened.

[Arachanox]

Originally Posted by SeagullCrazy

Well, I just thought of something.

In EP1, I think the first time it is revealed to Battler that Jessica loved Kanon was after his death. And before his death, he was never doing anything that showed he loved her back.

In the later EPs he has grown to love her a lot more. I wonder if that's what you were asking about.

Well, he learned about the relationship through someone other than Kanon, so it's legal then. My problem was that since Kanon 'doesn't really exist on the island', Battler 'would not have learned about the relationship by directly seeing Kanon and Jessica.' This is because Kanon is rewriting the story and can put himself there, but in reality he still isn't there. Since Battler's non-authorial PoV is god, he could not have learned about the Kanon-Jessica relationship through Kanon. Seeing Jessica cry and whatnot because of their past relationship is legal.

So yes, thanks.

[Arachanox]

Originally Posted by Renall

For argument's sake, let's say Kanon really is writing in his relationship with Jessica. It's possible he actually had one, so even if he were the one spinning in his POV, it would still not be a lie.

And an author - if you're going for that angle, which is always an interesting but perilous theoretical ground despite ep6's support - can say whatever he or she wants, of course, regardless of truth. It's true in a literary fashion even if none of it really happened.

Forewarning: have not read EP6, but have read spoilers. This automatically denies me any authority on what I'm about to say.

I've heard that Kanon's relationships with everyone on the island seem to change dramatically. Genji and Kumasawa as father/mother figures, friendly Kinzo, nice Krauss, stern Natushi (for his own good), etc. Where did all of this come from? *Could* Kanon be writing the island-life he truly wanted to have? Or were we deceived up until now? I don't like this theory. What is DIFFERENT this EP for Kanon-X relationships to be shown differently?

Is the whole "without love..." being taken to a new level? Did these relationships not exist before Kanon realized his 'love' for Jessica, or did Kanon simply not notice them?