[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[Uberzaki]

Originally Posted by Cao Ni Ma

Problem is that we didn't even know the existence of the baby before EP5 and as stated you are able to solve the mystery before at the end of EP4. Even worse is that if Battler was really the baby then he would be the prime candidate for the actual culprit in EP5. Battler has time and time again been declared to not be the culprit in any of the games.

I do agree that Shkanon thing being a dead giveaway. A lot of the elements from the first 4 games felt to intentionally lead us in a direction so that we, using the internet, would elaborate and create possible truths with other readers. In essence we are the Witch Hunt, trying to find the truth and making crazy speculations in the process.

I don't really want to add any layers to this little tidbit (yet) because I just want to hear the criticisms. I would like for it to be a better (maybe weaker...) alternative to Shkanon. I also can't deny Battler being a prime suspect in this case. One cheap way around it is that 'Battler' is not his birth name but Asumu went with it because it would be suspicious to use the previous name when her and Rudolf might have agreed beforehand.

[Zekses]

Sorry, non-russian speakers but I just can't avoid posting this

The whole situation with uncertain Battler / shkannon birth reminds me of :
"Так сколько младенцев в титьку просило?" XD

[Klashikari]

... it isn't like you just can't translate what you have posted you know.

[Keriaku]

Originally Posted by Renall

The idea of meta-fiction isn't all that new. Untrustworthy narratives told by unreliable narrators stacked upon unreliable narrators. The question is, which of the famous works have influenced Ryukishi?

Spoiler for Obviously this would be spoiling lots of things...:

Spoiler for Nabokov's 'Pale Fire':

A novel about a poem by a fictional author (who may or may not exist in the context of the story) with footnote commentary by an individual whose comments strongly suggest him as the subject of the poetry... if any of that exists at all.

Spoiler for Danielewski's 'House of Leaves':

A story about a punk (who may not exist) who finds a movie review (by a man who may not exist) of a movie that, yes, may not exist. The movie narrative described in the review and footnotes conjures up supernatural weirdness in a house whose internal dimensions do not match its external ones.

Oh, and there's red and blue text in it. Watch for the minotaur.

Spoiler for King's 'Secret Window, Secret Garden' & 'The Dark Tower':

A man threatens and harasses a writer, accusing him of plagiarism... except it's not clear if that man exists. But if he doesn't, he's doing a damn good job of affecting reality and tearing down the author's life.

King also appeared - as himself - as a character in The Dark Tower, in which Roland (the protagonist of the novel) has to stop the villains from the novel from killing Stephen King to prevent him from writing the novel that everyone is in. Yeah. Also it's in continuity with The Stand... somehow.

The Dark Tower also directly addresses the reader at one point in the story, asking them if they really want to continue reading and recommending they stop.

Spoiler for Calvino's 'If on a winter night a traveler':

Which is about the reader reading a book, and also the book that the reader is reading. And I don't mean just you reading a book about reading a book. You are an actual character in the novel, and your story is about trying to read some novels (and the various things that happen to prevent you from finishing any of them). Then you read the actual novel excerpts... until something prevents you from finishing again.

There are others that are about fiction or fictionally-aware or which treat the subject matter as a narrative or are just plain bizarre: Infinite Jest, One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, Slaughterhouse Five, Foundation, Fight Club (arguably moreso the movie than the novel), A Clockwork Orange, "The Trial" by Kafka (which Dlanor channeled in ep6), American Psycho (more the novel than the movie), One Hundred Years of Solitude and The Garden of Forking Paths (though thankfully I don't think South American magic realism is something he's read or we'd be even more screwed).

I'm sure I'm missing a meta-fictional mystery novel (and probably some Japanese meta-fiction, as it's by no means a localized idea in 20th century fiction), but hopefully he's read something preceding it. If not, at least he's pioneering some genre mixing.

The point is (for those not reading spoilers), he could definitely be doing this sort of thing. It wouldn't be taking meta-fiction too far at all. Some of the greatest authors of the 20th century (and also Stephen King) have done it, so it's certainly not niche either.

Even more so after your examples, I feel that Umineko (and Higurashi just barely) have done something special over those stories. Instead of just having meta elements, narrative or perspective, Umineko takes place on a meta realm. Something I find akin to a 4th dimension, with the story being based around characters manipulating this higher realm, in the Fragments and characters who appear. He has characters observing the events through the meta setting over with many years distance compared to the human setting, while the events on the meta realm are still going. The meta narratives and perspectives are all just small parts of the setting rather than the meta elements. It is for this reason that I love Umineko, and it has made me think about our own reality of many different levels.

Are there any other stories with the level of meta complexity? Because I would love to read them.

[Zekses]

Originally Posted by Klashikari

... it isn't like you just can't translate what you have posted you know.

It'd be kind of useless since it is a quote from the movie that is funny (and related) if only you watched it

[witchfan]

Originally Posted by Renall

Spoiler for Text:

The idea of meta-fiction isn't all that new. Untrustworthy narratives told by unreliable narrators stacked upon unreliable narrators. The question is, which of the famous works have influenced Ryukishi?

Spoiler for Obviously this would be spoiling lots of things...:

Spoiler for Nabokov's 'Pale Fire':

A novel about a poem by a fictional author (who may or may not exist in the context of the story) with footnote commentary by an individual whose comments strongly suggest him as the subject of the poetry... if any of that exists at all.

Spoiler for Danielewski's 'House of Leaves':

A story about a punk (who may not exist) who finds a movie review (by a man who may not exist) of a movie that, yes, may not exist. The movie narrative described in the review and footnotes conjures up supernatural weirdness in a house whose internal dimensions do not match its external ones.

Oh, and there's red and blue text in it. Watch for the minotaur.

Spoiler for King's 'Secret Window, Secret Garden' & 'The Dark Tower':

A man threatens and harasses a writer, accusing him of plagiarism... except it's not clear if that man exists. But if he doesn't, he's doing a damn good job of affecting reality and tearing down the author's life.

King also appeared - as himself - as a character in The Dark Tower, in which Roland (the protagonist of the novel) has to stop the villains from the novel from killing Stephen King to prevent him from writing the novel that everyone is in. Yeah. Also it's in continuity with The Stand... somehow.

The Dark Tower also directly addresses the reader at one point in the story, asking them if they really want to continue reading and recommending they stop.

Spoiler for Calvino's 'If on a winter night a traveler':

Which is about the reader reading a book, and also the book that the reader is reading. And I don't mean just you reading a book about reading a book. You are an actual character in the novel, and your story is about trying to read some novels (and the various things that happen to prevent you from finishing any of them). Then you read the actual novel excerpts... until something prevents you from finishing again.

There are others that are about fiction or fictionally-aware or which treat the subject matter as a narrative or are just plain bizarre: Infinite Jest, One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, Slaughterhouse Five, Foundation, Fight Club (arguably moreso the movie than the novel), A Clockwork Orange, "The Trial" by Kafka (which Dlanor channeled in ep6), American Psycho (more the novel than the movie), One Hundred Years of Solitude and The Garden of Forking Paths (though thankfully I don't think South American magic realism is something he's read or we'd be even more screwed).

I'm sure I'm missing a meta-fictional mystery novel (and probably some Japanese meta-fiction, as it's by no means a localized idea in 20th century fiction), but hopefully he's read something preceding it. If not, at least he's pioneering some genre mixing.

The point is (for those not reading spoilers), he could definitely be doing this sort of thing. It wouldn't be taking meta-fiction too far at all. Some of the greatest authors of the 20th century (and also Stephen King) have done it, so it's certainly not niche either.

Now, whether he's a Vladimir Nabokov or more of a Stephen King...

EDIT: Actually now that I think on it, it's quite easy to imagine Ryukishi considering the "message bottle" part of And Then There Were None and asking himself "What if the confession only coincidentally matched the evidence found? What if no evidence was found? The only thing 'proving' a mystery happened is the story that told the mystery itself..."

What a great, insightful post! This forum is lucky to have you.

[AuraTwilight]

Originally Posted by Uberzaki

I have a question since I haven't read episode 6 or 7 yet; is Battler explicitly mentioned or make an appearance on episode 7's gameboard?

I just feel that the Shannon = Yasu is just too obvious, there has to be something new twist that could happen. I personally believe that a member of O7th Expansion started the Shkanon rumour and mentioned it regularly to makes it rise in prominence.

I believe the actual reason our Battler didn't return to the Island was because he WAS Lion/Yasu. What I believe happened was that if Natsuhi didn't accept Baby battler, a deal would be struck with Asumu to make her 'give birth' to Battler when both Kyrie and Asumu miscarried (or perhaps Asumu had a ghost baby (if that's the correct term)).

I believe this might make more sense with Battler's being the person from 19 years ago epiphany in EP5 after knowing that he wasn't Asumu's son. If Rudolf was aware of this, it would explain why he went to high lengths to get Battler to come when he had Battler as his son. (hope that doesn't sound too confusing)

If there was a Battler in EP7 then I could guess that he is another of Kyrie's sons called Battler since Rudolf would not have the obligation to marry Asumu and could therefore have a new child without original battler being annoyed.

Did anyone else think of this?

I would really recommend actually reading EP6 and 7 before speculating about characters you haven't even seen yet. I can't begin to describe how this is totally wrong.

[Jan-Poo]

the "too obvious" argument didn't prove to be successful so far.

In my opinion it only works for what is actually apparent. If something is apparent (i.e. outright stated by some character) and yet not 100% confirmed then yeah it's most probably false. But if something is just hinted, no matter how heavily it is hinted, if it is just hinted then it's probably true.

[Renall]

Several things are outright stated by Eva (and possibly others) in ep1 which have turned out to be strongly suspected as true. Granted, their context is off, but you have things like "Shannon in a dress posing as Beatrice," "Father had a mistress," "a secret child of Father's mistress," etc. just blatantly sitting there in ep2. But that speculation is largely the only direct evidence of the thing itself. Is that a hint, or a "too obvious" throwaway? It'd be like if small bombs were confirmed true. Was that "hinted" just because Battler said it out of nowhere? It certainly wasn't backed up by much more than flimsy logic.

[Uberzaki]

I would really recommend actually reading EP6 and 7 before speculating about characters you haven't even seen yet. I can't begin to describe how this is totally wrong.

Ouch! Message understood.

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by Renall

Several things are outright stated by Eva (and possibly others) in ep1 which have turned out to be strongly suspected as true. Granted, their context is off, but you have things like "Shannon in a dress posing as Beatrice," "Father had a mistress," "a secret child of Father's mistress," etc. just blatantly sitting there in ep2. But that speculation is largely the only direct evidence of the thing itself. Is that a hint, or a "too obvious" throwaway? It'd be like if small bombs were confirmed true. Was that "hinted" just because Battler said it out of nowhere? It certainly wasn't backed up by much more than flimsy logic.

Oh you are right on those. They were awkwardly on spot. Good thing I never payed too much attention on those in either way.

However this just counters my statement that outright stuff are false (I said "most" though), but it provides yet another argument for the non validity of the "too obvious" argument.

It's something that you can't really tell. Maybe Ryuukishi can completely twist a certain fact, but you shouldn't go with the assumption that he will definitely twist an obvious fact.
Actually so far... it seems that he's been going with the most obvious explanations for several parts of the mystery.

[Kylon99]

It seems to me that he wrote them down as after-the-fact proof of his plan from the beginning. i.e. he dropped the foreshadowing as a way of showing that he had that plan since at least the time of the foreshadowing.

So it's not really meant to be clues for us to use.


By the way, I was thinking of the earlier discussion on Battler's birth circumstances. Exactly HOW did Beatrice get this tidbit of information? In fact, how did *anyone* get this information? Supposedly no one knows; not even Battler, right? The only one really in a position to know is Rudolf, and the one in a position to suspect is Kyrie.

How on earth did this information go from Rudolf to Beatrice? (or, Yasu.) I suppose Yasu could've just 'bought off' Rudolf and made him say it; but how did anyone even know to ask? Does anyone go around normally suspecting that someone, but not everyone in general were switched babies at birth?

So I'm thinking there must be something else mixed into this that will let another party be privy to the secret...

[Kealym]

Originally Posted by Zekses

Maybe, but we were constantly reminded that it's a detective genre which basically makes a servant being an illegitimate child a very logical and highly probable development.

P.S. I'm of the opinion that there are no unrelated remarks in the first episode as it is basically the real world. All the later setups deviated from reality as witch needed to change character personalities at least a bit to make the board work differently.

Wait, as far as we've been told, then Episode 1 is ALSO a deviation from reality. It's just not apparent at the time, and relatively subtle since the most "magic" we witness is Kanon waving a machete at some butterflies.

Considering the whole "roulette" theme, and the fact that we've been told that the pieces will only really be themselves in their actions, I dont think anybody's personality changed at all, and the various differences come down to coincidental changes (Maria gets slapped in front of the cousins vs. Marai gets slapped while alone), or outright whims (the First Twilight victims keeps changing, Jessie attacking Kyrie just because she saw her first).

I think if someone shows a sudden change in character, they havent really changed, youre just seeing another side of them. Like, "I want George to be happy!" Eva versus "My George-kun shall not be stolen by that lowbred hussy!!" Eva. <_<

[Keriaku]

I've started reading through EP1, and I'd like to hear what other people's thoughts are on some of the situations.

First of all, based on my vague recollection of EP1, I had always thought we were being shown Natsuhi's thoughts directly. Then after the reveal in EP5 I just assumed we'd be able to go back and reread EP1 and have it all fit. But it seems a little off, like we're being given Natsuhi's thoughts through an interpretive filter. I find it amusing that this is almost exactly what Featherine and Ange's conversations were about, but I still find it strange. It's like instead of being shown exactly what she thought, it's how she would be thinking based on the illusion she's trying to present with Kinzo. I know Author Theory can handle this, but are there any other ideas about this?

This leads into my second observation, Kinzo. How do people interpret the scenes with him, such as when Kanon, Shannon and Genji are 'with Kinzo' in his study while the others are knocking on the door? Is it just Genji and Yasu talking there, for the sole purpose of perpetuating the illusion? How do people interpret the conversation between Nanjo and Kinzo that explicitly have to do with going down to dinner and such, just simply a scene from the past or something?

Something I did realize was that the illusion that people have created about Kinzo is very similar to the illusion of Beatrice. They are almost exactly the same actually.

Then finally, Kanon. I guess we can take him to be another side of Yasu, which I'm fine with. What I have trouble understanding is when Shannon will leave the room to do something, Kanon with stay behind and Genji will talk with him. How do people interpret these scenes? Is this Yasu sorting through him/herself emotionally? Then why get Genji involved?

I'd love to hear people's thoughts.

[Zekses]

they havent really changed, youre just seeing another side of them.

They definitely change. Natsuhi's treatment of Shannon consistently improves during the course of the series and Kanon becomes more decisive. These at least are quite different in later novels.

Scene with Nanjo and Kinzo (the one at the very beginning) I believe to have happened earlier, when Kinzo was still alive. I haven't really reached the point when Kinzo appears again yet though. (I'm slow as I olny read on my break at work)

The one confusing scene was when Kanon and Shannon talked with Genji after Shannon served tea. The problem is - who is the observer there or at least the narrator? Unless Genji was OK with Yasu's multiple personalities the scene looks weird.


Btw, can anyone remind me : was it confirmed that Kinzo died exactly one year prior to 1986 or was it stated that he was dead for at least a year by the time?
Looking at a lot of things that happened it seems that he died not one but two years ago. The same time that redeveloping of Rokkenjima occured (would he EVER allow this to happen?), Gohda joined and portrait was hung in the hall.

Speaking of portrait btw : it is clearly stated that it was painted 2 years ago. And... you know, portraits are normally painted with the model present... but Kinzo obviously didn't know about Yasu at the time or he would've immediately announced succession changes (imho at least). So, is that possble that the whole epitaph ploy is not his doing?

P.S. Was Krauss born before Kinzo met Beato? I remember him saying that he got a family by this time (at least a wife). But if so - why foreign name? At this point he clearly could not be planning anything yet...

[Zekses]

As you asked, here are my notes. I've placed them into spoiler as they are rather long and inconsistent.

Spoiler:

I've been taking these notes more like for future refernce than to actually formulate any theories so they contain a lot of senseless ranting
and wild "brainstorm type" ideas Also - I'm not really far into re-reading even the first novel so they do not cover much.


1. Check what game had the ear-pull code that Rudolf used on Battler. Might give a clue.
2. Absense of Ange can actually be a plot to make sure she doesnt get involved. Kyrie does seem to be a plotting type.
3. Is George being a bit too good a facade?
4. Why exactly does family conference get held in October?
5. George being an apprentice of Hideyoshi must be aware of the company's problems. Thus he can be involved in whatever is planned.
6. (for the future reference) Hideyoshi has problems with voice loudness
7. (for the future reference) Maria - 9yrs at the time of the conference
8. Battler met maria 6 yrs prior to conference. Pretty much the same time his sin or whatever happened. At the time the two used to play together a lot but she doesn't remember his face. Considering how she tends to see people for their behaviour instead of their looks it might be possible that he made her think he was someone else at the time.
9. Foreign family names are weird. Some of the kids were born even before Kinzo really started caring about anything(needs confirmation), thus at least Krauss should've been named normally.
10. Battler seems a bit too afraid of shaking and vehicles. Subconsciously afraid ... hmmm.
11. Kumasawa - total slacker that DID for some reason come to greet the family _personally_. Was something she needed to buy this important to do herself?
12. At the harbour Rosa gives Kumasawa a bag of "tea" promised to her last year. Tea, huh?
13. Battler's feeling that Rudolf betrayed late Asumu - I've always felt that there's more to it than him just marrying Kyrie.
14. Maria gets overly serious over shrine's disappearance.
15. Withered rose. No reason my ass.
16. Kanon - working at the mansion for 3 yrs. When asked about his age struggles with the answer. Supposed 16 by Jessica, agrees.
17. Gohda - working for 2 yrs.
18. Battler self-estimates himself to be 18 yrs.
19. Yasu vanished in the Rokkenjima's darkness. When, how and for what was Kanon born?
20. What was in the heavy sacks he pushed on a cart? It was heavy for sure but would he be wasting time in the garden THIS close to the conference?
Imo, this could be the corpse of late Kinzo he planned to burn. (Wild, I know)
21. My opinion is that Kanon supposed that Battler would not make it to this years conference too.
22. (for the future reference) Toraian(visitor's retreat) - can it have another meaning in Japanese? Built 2 yrs prior to murders. Same as Gohda's appearence. Is it even possible for Kinzo to agree on any remodelling of teh island?
23. "They made us sleep here" (about visitors sleeping in guesthouse). Why so - the main manison is huge enough.
24. Jessica admits to seeing Kinzo when he is actually dead. Either she knows that he is not and thus is involved or she is making things up. Also - she mentions about him "stinking up the house" and this I believe is what really did happen at some time though for some other reason. Might be important.
25. Rosa giving Natsuhi some kind of present "as always".
26. Rosa is much younger than the 3 siblings. Did Kinzo really have any interest left interest in his wife then?
27. Pretty much any remark Eva makes to Natsuhi i9n the first part when they talk without kids seem to have a second meaning suggesting that Natsuhi is unwilling to cooperate with something but has no choice.
28. Kyrie urged people to drink tea that Rosa bought "all at once" but Natsuhi interferes as if it should not be done.
29. Shannon is not certain of what brand tea she serves, true - it can be because she was not the one to make it, but it can as well be that the tea is normal and the aroma is something that masks whatever been put inside.
30. Kanon despises Rosa and Eva, hates Gohda. Way too much actually, I think that it has nothing to do with trifle mistakes, must be something going between Eva, Rosa, Gohda and him.
31. What was a mistake Gohda made while making tea? Or was there a quarrel?
32. Genji - is aware of shkannon double personality.
33. Maria - "It was nice to be like him" ("unsociable" like kanon, heh)
34. Cousins hurried from guesthouse to avoid interfering with shannon's "housework".
35. How did Genji and Kinzo met each other anyway? Could he possibly be a survivor of the massacre?
36. Portrait of beatrice was hung the year before last (i.e. 2 yrs ago). I'm not that certain that Kinzo was alive at this point.
"The master ordered to paint it and it was put on display" ... HOW THE HECK could the artist paint the portrait of Beatrice 2 yrs ago when she was certainly long DEAD at the time.
37. Had Rosa been told about the witch? If yes, why Lion had not?

[Kevs]

I've read as much of the manga EPs as I can and all the spoilers I found about the story, and I am still really confused with all the worlds and what really 'exists' and what doesn't. What stuff being shown even happens or if its all just created?

I have no idea what the direction of the story is, is it just a bunch of battles or is there really a truth to what happened during the incident?

Can someone spoiler tag me like, the general basis of the story and what's going on?

Spoiler:

Apparently Battler's parents are the culprits? And a new character Yasu was introduced in Ep 5 who is apparently Shannon / Kannon / Beatrice? How do the events in ep 1 and 2 get explained if they were all the same person?

[erneiz_hyde]

Spoiler for just some rambling:

it's probably nothing or have been mention in the past, but this has been on my mind for sometime already. if you add another "ri" between "do" and "ri" in "Kuwadorian" it became "Kuwadoririan", homophonic with Quadrillion. The same thing 'could' be applied to Toraian if the Japs pronounce "Trillion" as "Try-llion". This is kinda similar to the western naming using Kanji that is the Ushiromiya's forte.

Also, even though it is now heavily hinted that yasu-shkanon is true, I kinda remembered that one of the reasons shkanon was hard to accept is that the person behind Shkanon must be a ninja as much as s/he is nuts...

After reading Zekses' notes...I need to replay the past eps... I'm forgetting too much already.

[zorahk]

Originally Posted by Kevs

I've read as much of the manga EPs as I can and all the spoilers I found about the story, and I am still really confused with all the worlds and what really 'exists' and what doesn't. What stuff being shown even happens or if its all just created?

I have no idea what the direction of the story is, is it just a bunch of battles or is there really a truth to what happened during the incident?

Can someone spoiler tag me like, the general basis of the story and what's going on?

Spoiler:

Apparently Battler's parents are the culprits? And a new character Yasu was introduced in Ep 5 who is apparently Shannon / Kannon / Beatrice? How do the events in ep 1 and 2 get explained if they were all the same person?

You need to read the VNs. You're just going to get confused if we try and explain this to you.

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by Zekses

Btw, can anyone remind me : was it confirmed that Kinzo died exactly one year prior to 1986 or was it stated that he was dead for at least a year by the time?

According to EP7 Kinzo died the 29th day of November, 1984.

Originally Posted by Zekses

Speaking of portrait btw : it is clearly stated that it was painted 2 years ago. And... you know, portraits are normally painted with the model present... but Kinzo obviously didn't know about Yasu at the time or he would've immediately announced succession changes (imho at least). So, is that possble that the whole epitaph ploy is not his doing?

I think we can be pretty much sure at this point that the model of the painting is Beatrice2. Therefore it was either painted a lot earlier, or it was painted with a picture as a reference.

Originally Posted by Zekses

P.S. Was Krauss born before Kinzo met Beato? I remember him saying that he got a family by this time (at least a wife). But if so - why foreign name? At this point he clearly could not be planning anything yet...

Absolutely. Both Krauss and Eva were already born at the time Kinzo met Beatrice.
Rudolf is a little trickier to determine. But if he wasn't born already then he did shortly after.

Originally Posted by Kevs

Spoiler:

Apparently Battler's parents are the culprits? And a new character Yasu was introduced in Ep 5 who is apparently Shannon / Kannon / Beatrice? How do the events in ep 1 and 2 get explained if they were all the same person?

I think only Mousoka here actually believes that Bern's tea party is the truth. So the general consensus is that the real culprit is someone else, or perhaps just Kyrie.

As for Yasu I'm not sure if we can consider her a new character. It's a character that has always been there although masked as someone else. And it's also a character whose existence has been hinted since EP1. One can also say that Yasu is basically Beatrice.

Originally Posted by erneiz_hyde

it's probably nothing or have been mention in the past, but this has been on my mind for sometime already. if you add another "ri" between "do" and "ri" in "Kuwadorian" it became "Kuwadoririan", homophonic with Quadrillion. The same thing 'could' be applied to Toraian if the Japs pronounce "Trillion" as "Try-llion". This is kinda similar to the western naming using Kanji that is the Ushiromiya's forte.

The right transliteration of quadrillion is: KU-WA-DO-RI-RI-O-N
So it would still be off by one letter. Also the correct transliteration of Trillion is: TO-RI-RI-O-N

so it's even more different than TO-RA-I-A-N