[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[musouka]

Originally Posted by Renall

It almost feels like "Bern" (some reader or critic) had reviewed the many Rokkenjima stories and wrote an "answer" based on his/her ideas. This was then given to "Will" (another critic or an editor) who read the story, dialogued with the writer, and arrived at some criticisms about the answers given (while providing his own set of orthodox-conforming solutions to the ep1-4 mysteries).

I don't think it feels like that at all. Bern set up a situation that allowed the detective to interview the suspects, so he did and came to his own conclusion about what happened. Will's role isn't as editor or author or anything like that, the story itself says that he's the detective in charge of discovering who killed Beatrice.

To solve the mystery of who killed Beatrice, Will didn't really have to touch the original four episodes at all. He did so to allow Beatrice a peaceful rest, because he's a nice guy.

[Renall]

Yes, but you can't actually question characters in a story. Granted, we have no idea if ep7 is a story at all (it has not been presented as such, unlike other episodes where some sort of external authorship is suggested). So for all we know it's the meta-fictional exercise of meta-fictional exercises, and Will is given the opportunity to ask literary characters questions, which one normally wouldn't be able to do (for obvious reasons), but for which certain models of exposition are possible (such as dialogue with the author as to his intentions for the characters).

But then you get something like Kinzo's story which can only really make sense as researched (and potentially embellished) information or a blatant speculative fabrication.

You can definitely read ep7 as a meta-fictional exchange like any other episode (much like how you can read ep1 as such even though it doesn't contain any in-text elements that confirm it), but it isn't like any other episode, so whatever kind of exchange it may be, it isn't the same kind.

I'd also question being too dismissive of Will's desire for appropriate closure. In three places, he doesn't like leaving a story on the wrong footing: He exonerates someone on the basis that a good story wouldn't make them guilty, he wants to resolve things for Claire by providing actual answers, and he wants to preserve the happiness of Lion's story. This is an essential personality quirk of his.

One could even call it a personality flaw from a certain perspective. Notice that he gets annoyed when it appears that answers are evasive (Shannon, Maria). His dissatisfaction with the "endings" his work was providing also seem to have been the prime motivating factor in his resignation. His sentimentality could well be clouding his judgment, or making him misjudge a story (if nothing else, Bern seems to be able to defeat him). It's an enjoyable personality flaw that makes him likable as a character, but it may also paint him as someone with very strong literary preferences which may or may not be working to his own benefit.

[AuraTwilight]

Yes, but you can't actually question characters in a story. Granted, we have no idea if ep7 is a story at all (it has not been presented as such, unlike other episodes where some sort of external authorship is suggested). So for all we know it's the meta-fictional exercise of meta-fictional exercises, and Will is given the opportunity to ask literary characters questions, which one normally wouldn't be able to do (for obvious reasons), but for which certain models of exposition are possible (such as dialogue with the author as to his intentions for the characters).

Let's not lose sight of the fact that Will is, himself, a character in the story. He just has more awareness of his situation. He's not anymore real than anyone else, so there's nothing weird about him interviewing characters.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

Let's not lose sight of the fact that Will is, himself, a character in the story. He just has more awareness of his situation. He's not anymore real than anyone else, so there's nothing weird about him interviewing characters.

True. He's indeed a character in the story, but is he a character in a story? It's hard to tell. Ep7 doesn't claim to be an in-universe fiction, and while there are definite points at which Bernkastel clearly seems to be "running her game," which would presumably make that a fiction, the line blurs as to exactly what parts are hers after all. All of it? Some of it? Certainly that final bit with the chessboard suggests Will and Lion have just been part of a tale all along. Is there a "real-life" Requiem? Was there ever a "real life" version of the non-message bottle stories? We're still knotted up in that Featherine-generated mobius strip from ep6, so I can't say.

What I mean is, Will appears to be a representative of a higher-order fiction (whether that's the "true" meta-world or "reality" or neither is irrelevant) within a lower-order fiction setting. His interviews with the characters he meets at the chapel strike me less as the detective in a mystery interviewing suspects (that is, characters on the same "layer" discussing information they know) and more someone on a "higher" level poking and prodding at the "pieces" in a way that has normally not generally been allowed without "pulling" the pieces up to a higher layer (as in ep5).

Will is clearly operating on knowledge nobody else in that setting has. He has access to the Beatrice stories and tries to pry into discrepancies between the worlds (the seating order, etc.). Normally a detective within the story lacks that advantage. So it's like Will is himself in a story, but there's stories below that, some of which he can question directly (the chapel layer), some he can't (Kinzo's flashback, which technically derives from questioning but isn't as subject to direct questioning).

[AuraTwilight]

Well, being a meta-character, it's not like this is really all that much of an issue. I get what you're saying, but he's ultimately able to get this information because it's being given to him out of his inquiry. I don't think he can obtain anything that the theoretical "Author" doesn't want him to know, whether that author is Bern, or someone else.

Or he was just written to have this knowledge, continuity be damned.

[Renall]

Well yeah, but he also seems to know that.

He's been presented with the scenario "You can interview these characters to find out what I've asked you to solve!" yet there are times where, clearly, he isn't allowed access to certain information. I believe he even comments on this when Maria runs off.

So what level of characterization is he operating on? Higher than Lion's world, apparently (though Lion himself seems to operate on the same level as Will), yet probably lower than Bern's. And what about Battler's? He "buries" a book in a chapel, and suddenly we're in a chapel for a funeral (yet one which apparently has nothing to do with him as far as we know).

Will's definitely in some kind of middle layer, higher than some, lower than others. But whether his collection of layers are all part of some story, I'm not really sure.

[UsagiTenpura]

Haven't been here in forever, but decided to read some things to see the current state of Umineko theories.

Just a thought, if we do make choices, it feels to me like the most logical way it would work is that we control "Ange" and make choices on a more Meta level. She's the one most in position of deciding the "accepted truth" so I think it makes sense.

[Jan-Poo]

I think you are right. That "certain character" must be Ange.

[TehChron]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

I think you are right. That "certain character" must be Ange.

Oh good, then we get to kill her after all.

Hear that, Will?!

[Renall]

I guess the Bad Ends are Hamburger Ends then?

[AuraTwilight]

I don't see how the "Ange is the decider of the Truth" angle leads to "We can kill off Ange." Ange's opinions on what happened 12 years ago have no bearing on her living or dead status.

[Used Can]

But it'd be fun.

[TehChron]

Very fun.

And you know we'll all try to anyway.

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by Renall

I guess the Bad Ends are Hamburger Ends then?

Like I said before. As long as we get a game over screen where the protagonist gets turned into catfood or hamburger meat. I think it will be fun!

[Jan-Poo]

I think the first thing you mentioned happened already.

[AuraTwilight]

Yea...I already played EP2.

[UsagiTenpura]

Hehehehe Angeburgers

Seriously tho, Meta Ange did become Angeburgers before, so why couldn't she again?
There's also the possibility of having to be both a meta character and a "future" character at the same time, with the possibility of dying anytime in the future.


Edit: I'm not really sure where else to write/ask this. I'm very much assuming that PS3 Umineko won't be translated (that's fine) but is there a japan release date announced ?

[AuraTwilight]

Seriously tho, Meta Ange did become Angeburgers before, so why couldn't she again?

It'd be anticlimatic? Repetitive? Unnecessary to the narrative? She only did because she broke a promise, after all.

[UsagiTenpura]

That's not a necessarily good reason. Many seems to wish for it and so everything you said ends up meaning "because I wouldn't like it" and that's not a very good reason.

Also I find it really odd to complain about the repetitive death of a character... in Umineko.

[Leafsnail]

Not many characters have repetitive deaths, though. I think only Shannon and Krauss suffer the same death fate twice (other than Kanon and Kinzo, of course).