[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[ndqanh_vn]

Originally Posted by Wanderer

Well, just basing my impressions off of the animes for Air, Kanon (2006), and Clannad, I would have to disagree on KEY's main male characters being boring. They are usually very witty and have interesting backstories. Nagisa's father from Clannad was pretty awesome too.
.

Well let me put it clearer, they're not as interesting as the girls surrounding them...And why are there so many girls with issues surrounding them... I think it is stated somewhere that Ryukishi learn his style from KEY. But while KEY's formula is normal life -> tragic story, Ryukishi replaced that tragic quality by gore and blood. It is still tragic anyway.

And overall, when you looks at the big picture of the visual novel culture, I think it is focused more on the female characters than the male. The female is normally the one got issue which drove the plot (heck, that's why he has "route" according to the heroine) Ryukishi could take more samples from that to learn how to build his female characters.

Looking back...One of the things I like about the question arcs of Umineko is that each of them seemed to focused on a female character of Ushiromiya family, and asides from Ange, with I'm not very interested in for many reason, they are good.

Eh...I hope you understand what I'm saying. Sorry for the crappy English.

[Wanderer]

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

Indeed and he does not, which is among the best reasons to think of this rather then needing a secret mansion + 2 secret Beatrices. He only needs a place to hide to some degree which can be pretty much anything, especially if Rokkenjima hidden has 10 tons of hidden gold + remnants of a military base.

She's completely isolated from the entire world, and on top of that you wouldn't even let her see the light of day?

The mansion makes the most sense if Kinzo wanted to let her have the best life he could without exposing her.

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

Being a teenager is not "I wouldn't put it past Kinzo", it does not excuse everything.
Anyway, it seems I'm partially wrong and some people like you accept her story as valid, it still seems the majority of people has a problem with Umineko (as the appreciation thread shows) and Yasu's backstory is usually at the center of it.

The thing is, even if the overly melodramatic backstory of ep7 isn't true, it doesn't really fix the problem of it being an overly melodramatic story in the first place. For example, say ep7 is just a fake backstory that Yasu came up with for herself to satisfy her own psychological needs (as I think you have suggested before), does that make her any less "overly melodramatic"?

Basically, I do find Yasu's 6-year love for Battler to be over the top, but I don't see how your reinterpretation of ep7 solves the problem.

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

Comparing a stuffed animal that plays very minor role in a few episodes with the star of the story? Really ?
Anyway, if I have...
Sakutarou was created to give us an insight of the ways fantasy beings were created, developped and their "logics" (such as red death dodging). It really isn't filler.

And why not compare them? Sakutarou gets a lot of development. Why can't the insight we gain in witnessing Sakutarou's creation also be applied to Kanon as well? Aren't they both very similar beings?

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

Kinzo tries to push Kanon to solves the epitaph and tells him the magic won't be realized until he also attempts it. Similar scene with Shannon in arc 2, he basically blows her off.

This cannot be just random, it's touching topics that are too sensitive to the story to just means nothing. If this is still how you feel, well allow me to disagree. I don't consider a single scene in the entire story to be just filler.

Overall this isn't the first time where I've felt people have forgotten all the details of early arcs in favor of the last few arcs... I wasn't even thinking about Chiru much when I compared Shannon and Kanon.

When was it that Kinzo pushed Kanon to solve the epitaph? That part is interesting.

It is easy to forget a lot of those details. I certainly don't mean to belittle them. I guess my problem with what you're saying usually lies in just how much you ignore episode 7.

You and Renall both make comments about how episode 7 tells us a story that is completely unsubstantiated by outside evidence. But the thing is, little in Umineko is substantiated. Why should episode 7 be more subject to this scrutiny than the other episodes?

[AuraTwilight]

You guys are assholes. If Beatrice had a good lawyer in End, she'd have walked.

And if Battler had a good lawyer in Dawn, he would've had Erika's Logic Error motion thrown out on the grounds that Battler owed her no particular duty of narrative coherency since Erika was a trespasser in his story, then sued her for tortuous interference in his plot, wrongful death of his murder victims, and nuisance vandalism for covering the island in duct tape and getting blood on the antique carpeting.

He'd take every penny she has and her swimsuit in restitution. Also, that dress belongs to Jessica, so the court would be seizing that as well. And seeing as how she's no longer welcome on the property, she can go for a naked typhoon swim. Into the Sea of Fragments. Get off my plane.

Make a screenshot comic out of this immediately.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

Make a screenshot comic out of this immediately.

I don't think a legal joke would be all that funny.

[AuraTwilight]

Corollary: Erika suffering is ALWAYS funny.

[UsagiTenpura]

Originally Posted by Wanderer

She's completely isolated from the entire world, and on top of that you wouldn't even let her see the light of day?

The mansion makes the most sense if Kinzo wanted to let her have the best life he could without exposing her.

Wait, I was saying that GenjixKinzo doesn't need a hidden mansion, how did it get to this?

The thing is, even if the overly melodramatic backstory of ep7 isn't true, it doesn't really fix the problem of it being an overly melodramatic story in the first place. For example, say ep7 is just a fake backstory that Yasu came up with for herself to satisfy her own psychological needs (as I think you have suggested before), does that make her any less "overly melodramatic"?

Basically, I do find Yasu's 6-year love for Battler to be over the top, but I don't see how your reinterpretation of ep7 solves the problem.

Well the thing is that arc 7 is not as clear as many people make it to be.
If we're to talk about details, I think a lot of people remember summaries they read before the translation more then the actual thing.
I am not contradicting arc 7 much, if at all actually. Many ideas such as Kinzo never raping Beato 2 nor having a child came to me after rereading arc 7 while clearing my head of the generally accepted ideas about how to interpret it. I honestly find it very hard to conclude that Kinzo raped Beato 2 from it. I even showed the passages that related to that to a bunch of people who aren't even into Umineko, and none of them thought it implied rape from it.

The genitals mangled part, for instance, is so unsupported that it overalls feels to me like what Erika did with Natsuhi at the end of arc 5.
Actually how does a body with mangled genitals make someone unable to love? Yasu never talked about a body unable to BE LOVED. She mentioned clearly unable to "love", which is much easier for me to related with the Kanon x Jessica relationship then the Shannon x George (or Battler x Beatrice) relationships.
I can easily understand that a person who does not feel attraction for the opposite gender might, while being confused about it, think they are unable to love others.
I guess we could go along the way that her brain was damaged or whatever and she has next to no emotions, but the story seems to suggest the very opposite.
Anyway there's probably other ways to work around this, but this is precisely what I want and try to push : Rethink things through, a lot of our current "understanding" is based on too many assumptions that aren't, contrary to the common idea, clearly said in any given arc.

Let's put it that way : Arc 7 brings a lot of information, but very little conclusions. The conclusions that people made from it, fails to make much sense nor to explain even the things that arc 7 brought up.

Still even before arc 7 came out, I thought Bern = us (as readers of the story) and so arc with Bern as gamemaster = fanfic weaved together by Ryuukishi from the theories that were popular on the internet.

I actually had fully discarded that by the time arc 7 came out, but the more time goes by, the more this comes back as something very hard to discard. Hell, Beatrice and Claire are basicaly the opposite of each other in term of personality and goal.

If you want I can probably dig back the posts I made that explains this better, or perhaps some msn logs.

Anyway, the thing is that melodramatic and dramatic doesn't mean the same thing. I agree being a teenage is a huge part of Yasu's definition, and that this does comes with some amount of melodrama, but Yasu's pushing it so far that it feels almost like she's running around naked while screaming "I WANT ATTENTION".
If anything, I wasn't convinced that she had it harder then let's say, any of the other women in the story actually. And the funniest thing is that the story mentioned over and over that Shannon doesn't even have to stay at the Ushiromiya if she doesn't want to.

And why not compare them? Sakutarou gets a lot of development. Why can't the insight we gain in witnessing Sakutarou's creation also be applied to Kanon as well? Aren't they both very similar beings?

Because Sakutarou's backstory involves an animal band and a bunch of other lion plushies. The process of creation, I think, might be similar, however we're currently wondering if Kanon or Shannon actually came first (which is fictional?). So the Sakutarou creation process might actually be applied to Shannon, not Kanon.
You can disregard or accept Sakutarou's backstory without it changing the rest of the story. You cannot do that for anything concerning Yasu.
That's why minor characters aren't comparable to major characters.

When was it that Kinzo pushed Kanon to solve the epitaph? That part is interesting.

It is easy to forget a lot of those details. I certainly don't mean to belittle them. I guess my problem with what you're saying usually lies in just how much you ignore episode 7.

I don't, from my view, as I explained above, people are mixing up what arc 7 made the internet think with what arc 7 actually said.
For instance, I forgot who posted this but not long ago a message said that Will was given "telepathy" (in the form of theatergoing authority).
I'd really love to see a passage that implies theatergoing authority necessarily shows the truth, cause I'm quiet certain it's basically the same thing as Yasu used to show scenes as fantasy in arc 1-2-3-4.
Ah yeah when ? I'd get the actual passages but I don't have access to my own comp for a few days... so that'll have to wait a bit, sorry.

You and Renall both make comments about how episode 7 tells us a story that is completely unsubstantiated by outside evidence. But the thing is, little in Umineko is substantiated. Why should episode 7 be more subject to this scrutiny than the other episodes?

Because arc 7 is the only one that readers took as literal truth. Beside that I don't think we disregard it, we consider it pretty much the same as any other arc - but without Beatrice as writer or gamemaster - which implies a lot.
Also I seem to remember reading Ryuukishi saying that someone had to solve the question arcs before being able to solve the chiru arcs, so I'm sorta depressed that people are mostly only using chiru to solve the question arcs and dont even try to solve chiru.

Originally Posted by Renall

You guys are assholes. If Beatrice had a good lawyer in End, she'd have walked.

And if Battler had a good lawyer in Dawn, he would've had Erika's Logic Error motion thrown out on the grounds that Battler owed her no particular duty of narrative coherency since Erika was a trespasser in his story, then sued her for tortuous interference in his plot, wrongful death of his murder victims, and nuisance vandalism for covering the island in duct tape and getting blood on the antique carpeting.

He'd take every penny she has and her swimsuit in restitution. Also, that dress belongs to Jessica, so the court would be seizing that as well. And seeing as how she's no longer welcome on the property, she can go for a naked typhoon swim. Into the Sea of Fragments. Get off my plane.

Well I deserve that lol...
Still thinking back it's sorta surprising that there's no lawyer themed character or member of the Ushiromiya family even.
I'm sure Kinzo would've made a hell of a lawyer.

The idea of sueing someone for killing the people you were about to kill is the best laugh I had in a while, thanks - I know I have a weird humor

[GreyZone]

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

Because Sakutarou's backstory involves an animal band and a bunch of other lion plushies. The process of creation, I think, might be similar, however we're currently wondering if Kanon or Shannon actually came first (which is fictional?). So the Sakutarou creation process might actually be applied to Shannon, not Kanon.

No. If we really assume that Kanon came before Shanon then it's the same as saying "Renall's nothing-ever-happened"-theory is right. Because "6 years ago" Battler definitly talked with Shanon about mysteries and he DEFINITLY told her that he likes blondes who he can interact with leisurely, most, because this scene came from a flashback in EP6 that, if it were just a "fake or fantasy", would become completly pointless.

The only thing that really can be suspected in the forgeries is Battler himself. But that is at least backed up in EP5 and EP6, while "Kanon was before Shanon" is not.

[UsagiTenpura]

Originally Posted by GreyZone

No. If we really assume that Kanon came before Shanon then it's the same as saying "Renall's nothing-ever-happened"-theory is right. Because "6 years ago" Battler definitly talked with Shanon about mysteries and he DEFINITLY told her that he likes blondes who he can interact with leisurely, most, because this scene came from a flashback in EP6 that, if it were just a "fake or fantasy", would become completly pointless.

1) You seem to be confusing things. It was chick-Beato's memories that included learning Battler loves blonde, not Shannon's. The rest of the points were mostly discussed in depth already on this forum, but Im aware starting to dig the whole thing is asking too much.

2) I very much disagree that fantasy = pointless. So you think 90% of Umineko is pointless?

3) You can't just compare a theory to another one as an example of why its bad without even explaining why your comparison example is bad. What's wrong with the idea of believing the official version of a story (accident is the official form) vs believing the conspiracy theory nonsense from a bunch of people who has 0 proof about anything and didn't ever once set foot on Rokkenjima nor met any member of the Ushiromiya?

[Renall]

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

The idea of sueing someone for killing the people you were about to kill is the best laugh I had in a while, thanks - I know I have a weird humor

There's actually a case akin to this that I read about in first-year Torts. Essentially, a trespasser burned down a building the owner of the property was planning to tear down anyway. The owner sued the trespasser and won.

Killing the victims of your murder mystery before you have the chance to properly kill them is a similar interference with enjoyment of your own property. "You were going to kill them anyway" is not a defense to a tort. It's a bit like committing arson on Burning Man before the festival; "it was gonna be set on fire at some point" isn't going to get you out of it.

[Wanderer]

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

Wait, I was saying that GenjixKinzo doesn't need a hidden mansion, how did it get to this?

Then what's the secret mansion there for? Or are you saying there was no Kuwadorian at all?

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

Well the thing is that arc 7 is not as clear as many people make it to be.
If we're to talk about details, I think a lot of people remember summaries they read before the translation more then the actual thing.
I am not contradicting arc 7 much, if at all actually. Many ideas such as Kinzo never raping Beato 2 nor having a child came to me after rereading arc 7 while clearing my head of the generally accepted ideas about how to interpret it. I honestly find it very hard to conclude that Kinzo raped Beato 2 from it. I even showed the passages that related to that to a bunch of people who aren't even into Umineko, and none of them thought it implied rape from it.

I've mentioned this before, but I personally came to the conclusions about rape and mutilated genitals without any outside influence. The first time I read episodes 1-7 it was in complete vacuum.

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

Still even before arc 7 came out, I thought Bern = us (as readers of the story) and so arc with Bern as gamemaster = fanfic weaved together by Ryuukishi from the theories that were popular on the internet.

Personally, I consider Bernkastel to represent something far less... tangible. "Inevitability" perhaps. The end result is quite similar, though: The Internet "goats" and their insatiable curiosity creates a situation where the uncovering/fabrication of the truth is "inevitable".

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

Because Sakutarou's backstory involves an animal band and a bunch of other lion plushies. The process of creation, I think, might be similar, however we're currently wondering if Kanon or Shannon actually came first (which is fictional?).
So the Sakutarou creation process might actually be applied to Shannon, not Kanon.

I can't agree with this idea at all. Shannon has, by every indication across most or all of the arcs, had a long history with numerous characters. Kanon has not; the most he's had is with Jessica, who seems to also have had longer history with Shannon.

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

You can disregard or accept Sakutarou's backstory without it changing the rest of the story. You cannot do that for anything concerning Yasu.
That's why minor characters aren't comparable to major characters.

Before we continue on this thread of thought, could you tell me what exactly you mean by Kanon's backstory? We learn practically nothing about him outside of EP6.

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

Because arc 7 is the only one that readers took as literal truth. Beside that I don't think we disregard it, we consider it pretty much the same as any other arc - but without Beatrice as writer or gamemaster - which implies a lot.
Also I seem to remember reading Ryuukishi saying that someone had to solve the question arcs before being able to solve the chiru arcs, so I'm sorta depressed that people are mostly only using chiru to solve the question arcs and dont even try to solve chiru.

About that...

Originally Posted by Requiem of the Golden Witch

Good morning. Today is the day of the funeral for the Golden Witch and her game.

The days of the game have now ended, and fond memories are all that remain. Here, the cold, hard truth will be revealed, and the game will meet its death...

There is a bit of difficulty.

So is even the introduction paragraph to Requiem a lie?

[UsagiTenpura]

Originally Posted by Wanderer

Before we continue on this thread of thought, could you tell me what exactly you mean by Kanon's backstory? We learn practically nothing about him outside of EP6.

Kinzo telling him to solve the epitah, Jessica making him discover the magic of show, and telling him about creating a second self for himself, if anything, are really major influences on Yasu, and they are portrayed under the alias Kanon.

Also, as I put earlier, we learn in arc 7 that Yasu at least thinks she cannot love.
Shannon thinks she can love and pursues a relationship with George.
Kanon thinks he cannot love and rejects his relationship with Jessica.
Which of the two seems to fit more with Yasu's line in arc 7?

You're probably going to disagree, but well many of the things said in arc 7 about Yasu were hinted in the question arcs under the alias Kanon. The way Kinzo acts with Lion in itself is similar to how he is with Kanon, the difference is that Lion accepts Kinzo while Kanon is the one who remains cold and rejects him.

If you're really rejecting 100% of Kanon I don't get how you can accept 100% of arc 7, because much of it is based on Kanon.

Originally Posted by Wanderer

So is even the introduction paragraph to Requiem a lie?

Aren't you forgetting that arc 7 has fantasy scenes in it and that it doesn't even answer everything? And you're also saying that Kyrie really murdered everyone for lolgold?

Also, another thing that most people seems to forget is that the later half of Requiem is a book - a fiction - how can you seriously think it applies to Rokkenjima Prime?

If that's the case I don't think there is much point in debating this further.
Also, I havent said anything was a lie. There's a difference between disagreeing with the conclusions people made based on arc 7 and disagreeing with arc 7 itself. A white/black approach to Umineko is a dangerous thing to do, and I have the overall feeling you're making a subjective selection of what that statement allows you to consider "true" in arc 7, like I think all of us. Disagreeing on these doesn't mean either of us rejects all of arc 7.

[LyricalAura]

Originally Posted by Wanderer

So is even the introduction paragraph to Requiem a lie?

The opening paragraphs have about as much credibility as the endrolls. EP5's might look kind of familiar:

Good Morning. Please enjoy this new game, with its new Game Master.

However, this game has already reached its climax. The culprit has been cornered, and it's only a matter of time before the end. You should be able to use this clearer perspective to spot something.

The difficulty is fairly easy. What could possibly fool you now...?

[Kealym]

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

Kinzo telling him to solve the epitah, Jessica making him discover the magic of show, and telling him about creating a second self for himself, if anything, are really major influences on Yasu, and they are portrayed under the alias Kanon.

Eh, Kanon didn't exist before 1984, by which point Yasu had already gone through several selves. And Kanon pretty swiftly rejected the idea of trying to solve the epitaph, IIRC. It's like saying Rosa and Kyrie were decent friends because they commented that one time on how they should hang out more. <__<

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

Also, as I put earlier, we learn in arc 7 that Yasu at least thinks she cannot love.
Shannon thinks she can love and pursues a relationship with George.
Kanon thinks he cannot love and rejects his relationship with Jessica.
Which of the two seems to fit more with Yasu's line in arc 7?

Shannon also thinks George only dated her because Magic™, and that it'd be totally keen if she never actually had to sleep with him. Also, if the physical disfigurement theory is correct, it'd be easier to explain a lack of babies, than a lack of a penis, which reflects how staunchly Kanon is against even considering that he likes Jessica, who is always considered the weakest romantic interest.

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

You're probably going to disagree, but well many of the things said in arc 7 about Yasu were hinted in the question arcs under the alias Kanon. The way Kinzo acts with Lion in itself is similar to how he is with Kanon, the difference is that Lion accepts Kinzo while Kanon is the one who remains cold and rejects him.

Acknowledged that my memory kinda sucks, but I'm almost certain Kanon and Kinzo's interactions were limited to, maybe, two scenes and a dialogue-free flashback.

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

If you're really rejecting 100% of Kanon I don't get how you can accept 100% of arc 7, because much of it is based on Kanon.

But Kanon is... like... literally absent for almost the entire arc. If anything, I'd say we were getting all the drama that Shannon ended up dropping into her litle brother. Also, I do feel a little gypped that we didn't get to hear how Kanon got hired. Bern, bitch though she is, seemed to genuinely expect Clair to keep reading into those parts of the story. Oh well.

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

Aren't you forgetting that arc 7 has fantasy scenes in it and that it doesn't even answer everything? And you're also saying that Kyrie really murdered everyone for lolgold?

Well, this was aimed at Wanderer, but ... I think Bern is kind of a bitch. And that a lot of people spoke in a very callous manner about Rokkenjima around Ange over the years.

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

Also, another thing that most people seems to forget is that the later half of Requiem is a book - a fiction - how can you seriously think it applies to Rokkenjima Prime?

Personally, it just seems unacceptable that R07 would spend an entire EP and a veritable crapton of xaki music tracks on information that we should disregard. Storytelling and theatrics are part of the overarching theme, it makes sense that Clair would read from a book and be compared to an actress. However, going on the red guts scene, her tale seems "a bit beautified", not pure fantasy. Like, a light mist, not a smoke bomb, y'know?

[UsagiTenpura]

This is sorta confusing cause Id basically have to reexplain things I put in the last few pages to properly reply to this, and to half of the new messages... sorry...

Still I did write this...

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

Also, I havent said anything was a lie. There's a difference between disagreeing with the conclusions people made based on arc 7 and disagreeing with arc 7 itself. A white/black approach to Umineko is a dangerous thing to do, and I have the overall feeling you're making a subjective selection of what that statement allows you to consider "true" in arc 7, like I think all of us. Disagreeing on these doesn't mean either of us rejects all of arc 7.

So Id appreciate it if people stopped saying I just discard arc 7. From my pov, I don't even see how anyone really accept it much more then I do, I just reached different conclusion from it. One that doesn't result in rejecting everything else about every other arc as filler or totally fantasy, such as disregarding every Kanon scene as unimportant simply because arc 7 wasn't about him, like about at all.

Different views on arc 7 are getting akin to when people kept using "without love it cannot be seen" as an argument to make pretty much anything goes. There is really a huge disagreement on what is real and not even for the people who think arc 7 is about prime.

Anyway, simply to bring back the core idea, is that between Kanon and Shannon, one represents "Yasu the character in his/her story" and the other would represent "Yasu from prime world".
Arc 7 goes basically along with that.
I am really uncertain if Shannon or Kanon is the real one, tho I think Kanon being the real one simplifies most issues as I resumed a few pages back... I think arc 7 is mostly about Yasu the character in her story, and not her real self... I believe this explains the discrepencies between the catbox content and the story we were told in it. It also makes sense out of theatergoing authority imo. It also explains why Yasu the writer is so objective while Yasu the character is so subjective.

... and much more, the moment you don't instantly reject it because it brings doubts about some elements that people concluded from arc 7 (very different from elements arc 7 directly revealed).

So I can understand someone not liking that theory, but telling me I should disregard everything else to accept a subjective interpretation of arc 7 without questions won't really work, I think for anyone.
If anything, it'd probably be a good idea to realize that there isn't any actual concensus about "the truth of arc 7".
Even tho it basically put it in our face, arc 7 didn't directly reveal even that Kanon = Shannon, allowing some people to still consider it not necesarily true. Obviously I can't prove it, but I'm about certain Ryuukishi did that very much on purpose - he wanted that possibility to still exists after reading arc 7.

And btw, I'm not actually raising doubts about Shkanon, just wanted to show that there's a major difference between conclusions reached from arc 7 and what arc 7 said.

[Renall]

Don't you find it a little bit, I don't know, suspicious how much of an afterthought Kanon is in that ep7 stuff? Just a thought there. Could mean something.

[ndqanh_vn]

Originally Posted by Renall

Don't you find it a little bit, I don't know, suspicious how much of an afterthought Kanon is in that ep7 stuff? Just a thought there. Could mean something.

Well, if you mean in term of characterization of Yasu and plot importance, then yes. He did not play a big role. Actually he almost did not exist. I have been always assumed that his existence is only to contribute to Yasu' gender confusion, if she has one. Actually I'm a bit suprised that mostly what Yasu mentioned about Kanon is just "and here I will have a little brother ect ect". Different from Shanon or Beatrice, his interaction with his supposed love interest is quite absent and insignificant in ep 7 at least, as far as I remember.

But it's hard to think that a character he has used since the beginning with implied importance is supposed to be an afterthough. Rather, I would say Yasu's situation is an afterthought. Though it is hard to buy as well.

[Drifloon]

Actually I'm a bit suprised that mostly what Yasu mentioned about Kanon is just "and here I will have a little brother ect ect". Different from Shanon or Beatrice, his interaction with his supposed love interest is quite absent and insignificant in ep 7 at least, as far as I remember.

To be fair, Shannon is never really shown interacting with George in E7 either. Obviously the central events involving Kanon happened in the two years that weren't shown - presumably because we'd already seen everything of importance in E2/6.

[goldendust]

After rereading umineko, I wonder about something.

It has been stated that the pieces cannot act out of character or at least cannot act beyond their capabilities(how they are able to act in a situation).

Given the phrase of "I wouldn't put it past Kinzo" every time someone suggests that Kinzo does something insane. So as far as a the gameboard goes, does that give the writer a free pass to do what ever they want him hence the drastically different prtrayal of Kinzo in different games? It would make sense as he is only character who is consistently suggested to do insane things on a whim. More so that he is always dead in every game hence that his characterization cannot be that consistent as everyone has a different portrayal of how he was like.

However with other characters, can the assumption be made that how they acted is certain games can applied to every game? For example in the tea party of game 7, we seen that Eva shot Natsuhi with what you can argue as a fit of passion. As well Hideyoshi shot Krauss when putting himself between him and Eva. After we seen Kyrie shoot Rosa preemptively as well the others. As well IIRC it was implied that Rosa would have shot Eva if Kyrie did not shoot first.

While I do find the circumstances somewhat dubious of how they killed each, however it is not likely that the way that they kill are their MO?


For example in the third game. That Eva killed Rosa and strangled Maria in a fit of passion like in the tea party. That they were having an argument about what to do with the gold and when Rosa told her she was going to go forward about the gold to the other siblings that she killed Rosa which caused Maria to make a ruckus which forced her to strangle the child.

As well in the third game that EVA forced Battler to come up with a reason why Kirie would leave the group as she did not think the food is important. Why it was said that she did so to confront Hideyoshi about Eva, could it not also be that she planned to kill him preemptively hence why they wanted to go far away from the others? It would make sense that EVA would not expect Battler to discover that reason as he does not want to think of his relatives as murderers. As well Hideyoshi worked out that they figured out that Eva was not in her bed tried to kill them. That he suspected that after they murder him, they would kill Eva hence he would try to kill them as well. That it resulted in all three of them dying.

[UsagiTenpura]

Concerning arc 7: something that only exists in arc 7 and wasn't hinted in earlier arcs ends up being most likely not very important. After all the solution can be attained with arc 1-4 alone. This is not to discard much of arc 7, as most has arguably been hinted beforehand, but it does put the answers within a certain context.

I guess you could put it that way, I think arc 7 is made out of "pieces of the puzzles that are mostly right" but the puzzle built from it is "Claire" and not ""Beatrice", which creates some variations/differences.

As for Kanon's absence in arc 7, to have leftover pieces of a puzzle once you're done building it is usually a sign you don't have the right answer, or rather the complete answer.

We do not even know if "Yasu" really existed before arc 7. Along that line I think that Yasu and Lion are the two sides of Claire in the same way that Kanon and Shannon are the two sides of Beatrice. Explaining to us a very similar story (but not the direct truth) and expecting us to understand it's similarities and understand the truth from it seems like something Ryuukishi would do. Giving us all the keys and letting us use them, too bad for those who just accept everything litterally.

Still it's probably a given that a sort of twist has been used in the process, to confuse things at least enough that you have to think about what's different in Claire and Beatrice to attain a solution.

Comparing Yasu and Lion, two characters that first appears in arc 7, is one of the main thing that lead me to think my current version of Kanon and Shannon.

[LyricalAura]

Originally Posted by goldendust

However with other characters, can the assumption be made that how they acted is certain games can applied to every game? For example in the tea party of game 7, we seen that Eva shot Natsuhi with what you can argue as a fit of passion. As well Hideyoshi shot Krauss when putting himself between him and Eva. After we seen Kyrie shoot Rosa preemptively as well the others. As well IIRC it was implied that Rosa would have shot Eva if Kyrie did not shoot first.

Well, here is some food for thought. In EP8, Ange complains that the happy family conference doesn't make sense because the adults should have been at each others' throats over the inheritance. Battler counters that she only thinks so because the media dug up info about their financial problems and got carried away with conspiracy theories.

Think about that for a second. The only reason she thinks the adults were fighting with each other was the media? Not the first two games? Then what sort of thing were all those scenes of bitter arguing we read?