[Game] Umineko no Naku Koro ni - Ep. 4 Alliance of the golden witch

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Maho Momo

Kanon doesn't hate EVERYBODY. You can't really say that, he works with Gohda everyday and receives orders from Natsuhi all the time. Both of them mistreat Shannon, which is one of the reasons why he hates them so much. Same goes for Eva. The others don't really treat her that badly, and he doesn't really show any anger towards them. Especially Genji and Kumasawa.

We don't need to establish each character's motive to kill everyone; merely some motive to kill someone.

[momobunny]

I-I wasn't trying to establish any sort of motive, I was just correcting somebody's definition of Kanon's character. ^^;

[Marion]

Originally Posted by Maho Momo

I-I wasn't trying to establish any sort of motive, I was just correcting somebody's definition of Kanon's character. ^^;

Same xD; But still, I don't think he could kill everyone. He can't even lift a bag of fertilizer and you think he can actually carry bodies xD

[kaitwospirit]

Originally Posted by Christen

We have a similar theory, as I posted this before. The greatest obstacle for this theory are these two.

They definitely would not mistake any different person for Kanon!.
The only one who can claim Kanon's name is the person himself!

As of now, I can probably say this.

There is more than 1 person named Kanon. This doesn't violate the declaration in red that no one can claim Kanon's name aside from the person himself. Another person named Kanon existed before the game, and this Kanon was killed in the room which is now Jessica's.

The remaining problem is how to beat the 1st red text.

I'd argue that the second statement is a complete bait and switch, really. I don't think that a statement about who is supposed to be able to claim Kanon's name is relevant to whether or not someone did. After all, Battler could say that he was Rudolf. It would be ridiculous, but not impossible.

An alternate way to beat the first red text, or maybe even both: The person that Shannon and Jessica know well does not have the real name of Kanon at all. His birth name is something else entirely, and that is his real name. The person we see during the games is another individual whose true name is Kanon.

[Christen]

That's an interesting take. The 2nd argument is dealing with semantics. This means the disguised Kanon has Kanon for his real name, and a different furniture name.

[Jan-Poo]

Semantics... you can defeat almost any red truth with it.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

Semantics... you can defeat almost any red truth with it.

I personally hate to do it, but Beatrice has fired the first shot. "No more than 18," that sort of thing. Clearly the words themselves do matter. Although I think all the Kanon speculation is nothing short of ridiculous.

[Nih]

I completely agree with you, Renall.

However, the witch is fickle, we might all get burned on the Kanon=Shannon thing in the end

[Kitsu]

However, the witch is fickle, we might all get burned on the Kanon=Shannon thing in the end

Oh joy. Nice bad end for Jessica and George xD

But I agree trying to beat all the red truths with semantics is ridiculous because if you deny all red truth you won't have a truth at all and defeating the Kanon truth is not really necessary

[MeoTwister5]

Originally Posted by Kitsu

Oh joy. Nice bad end for Jessica and George xD

But I agree trying to beat all the red truths with semantics is ridiculous because if you deny all red truth you won't have a truth at all and defeating the Kanon truth is not really necessary

Of course whether it's a bad end for George depends whether (K/Sh)annon is physically male of female.

Agreed though, arguing semantics comes off as ridiculous. The problem is that no matter how much you care to reinterpret the meanings of the words used in every red truth, the fact of the matter remains that there still is a core truth that will remain unaltered even if the surrounding circumstances can be argued by semantics.

It's like saying So and so are killed by this person. While you can debate forever the true identity of the person who was killed and the true identity of the killer through semantic arguments, it doesn't change the core truth that someone was killed by someone else.

[maximilianjenus]

Shannon = Kanon = Narcicistic.

Krauss was investing in tsundere anime and ps2 games, too bad it was still the eighties.

About motives, ryukishi might pull the same thing as higurashi and not show the motives of the culprit until it's the last thing he can do. Like, genji might have been in love with beatrice so he wants to take anything form kinzo because he thinks he is the one that should have been the head, he might already be acting up as kinzo, considering the fact that he is the only one with the key to his room; if he is clever enough he does not even need nanjo as an accomplice as he can manipulate him as previously stated in this thread. when he is really killed in the first twilight everythign goes wrong, in the 4th Episode he can be one of the last ones to die and force kirye and krauss to lie about him being killed in the first twilight.

[Kitsu]

I would find it rather disturbing ot know that your fiancee is a crossdresser who actually pretends to ber her own little brother. And if. Kshannon must be male, since no one except Kanon can bear his name, so only Kanon could dress up as Shannon. Means Jessi wins


xDD
What does kill actually mean? "Kill" with killing intent or are caused accident out of this definition? I could say
So and so is dead
But what does dead actually mean? You could defeat a few of the red truth with this messed up logic as well so..

[MeoTwister5]

Originally Posted by Kitsu

I would find it rather disturbing ot know that your fiancee is a crossdresser who actually pretends to ber her own little brother. And if. Kshannon must be male, since no one accept Kanon can bear his name, so only Kanon could dress up as Shannon. Means Jessi wins


xDD
What does kill actually mean? "Kill" with killing intent or are caused accident out of this definition? I could say
So and so is dead
But what does dead actually mean? You could defeat a few of the red truth with this messed up logic as well so..

The problem is that no matter how much you debate the semantics of a red truth, the red truth can only exist if there is an unchangeable factual basis for it. Again no matter how much you debate semantics, intentions, identities, reasons and the like, the fact of the matter remains that the red truth states that something is true and indeed did happen by a concrete definition that is the foundation of this factual truth. Semantics only further clouds the ability of a person to figure out what each red truth really means. You have to strip away every layer in order to find out what each red truth means in its rawest form. Semantics only adds unneeded layering of the truth if used haphazardly, as is being done here, honestly. Semantics should be the last argument used, when nothing more can be uncovered.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Kitsu

What does kill actually mean? "Kill" with killing intent or are caused accident out of this definition? I could say
So and so is dead
But what does dead actually mean? You could defeat a few of the red truth with this messed up logic as well so..

This is how I'd put things:

"is dead": The person is dead at least as of the time of the red announcement. Thus "Kinzo is dead" is equivalent to "Kanon is dead" even if Kanon died just now and Kinzo's been dead a year. This doesn't preclude any reason for death, like accidents or natural causes, unless Beatrice adds more to it.

"killed": A human being (or possibly an animal) caused the death of the person by some affirmative act. The important thing here is they didn't necessarily have to intend to do it, and they didn't necessarily have to mean for the person to die. Of course, it also encompasses intentional killings.

"murder": A human being killed the person intentionally and with the desire that the person die. There are other legalese definitions of murder but I think this is the one Beatrice means. If a person was murdered, note, their death cannot be an accident or unintended. If Kumasawa tripped and fell down the stairs, she cannot have been murdered; if Kumasawa was pushed down the stairs, it may not be murder (if it was a bump or something); if someone decided to kill Kumasawa by pushing her down the stairs, THAT is murder.

Note that a consequence of this is that "x did not commit murder!" does not mean "x did not kill anyone!" It just means they didn't kill anybody intentionally.

Oh, and I wouldn't personally define a self-defense killing as "murder." However, Beatrice might. I'm not sure.

[Nih]

I don't think Beato would classify self-defence as murder either.

[rstrafford]

Explanation for the second twilight in Alliance of the golden witch:

Spoiler for Second Twilight:

George and Jessica are fighting over who gets Shkanon.

[Kitsu]

Tz! That's so typical for only childs! Never learned to share

[lovelysan]

I notice that in regards to motives, a lot of you are being too "easy" on the kids. This is mostly due to us knowing their personalities more, but still.....

POTENTIAL motives: (by "potential" I mean, if we didn't know this kids personally, but more as possibilites if we just know "situations.")

George: 6th in line to be the head. He would benifit the most (probably)from the death of both Krauss and Jessica. Deaths of Eva, Rudolph and Rosa would also be benificial towards succession. May hold a grudge against his mother for opposing his relationship with Shannon.***

Jessica: Resents her parents (in a sort of normal teenage way though.) 5th in line to be head. She would directly benefit if Krauss, Eva, Rudolph and Rosa died.
HOWEVER- She also doesn't have much interest in becoming head of the family in all. In that case, she would sort of benifit for a dissolution of the "Ushiromia family" in general.

Battler: Holds a grudge against his father for Asumu's death. Kyrie is the woman his father was having an affair with while still married to his mother (probably.) So "revenge" is a motive.
Is the seventh in line to be family head. So he would benifit from the deaths of George, Jessica and all of the parents. (but at that point, if only those people died, he would be suspicious as all get out XD....)

Maria: (the only one who is really "too young" to be a mastermind ^^; .) Holds grudge against mother. All the other parents tend laugh at her.
Oh, but if someone else wanted her to be heir, that person would need to kill the parents, and the other cousins (Including Ange? Technically, Ange is higher ranked than Maria.....)



**** A note about George.
.... okay, more like a crazy ass theory....

Spoiler for Crazy theory for epi I fun fun time 8D .:

IF Eva had killed Hideyoshi, for... uh, whatever reason , the hot water in the shower can actually affect rigor mortis, thereby confusing the exact time of death. She then could of faked her own death when everyone else came in the room.
If this was the case, one of the people who could of then ACTUALLY have killed her would be George. He ran directly to her bed when he saw her "body" and was there for a bit whilst everyone else was freaking out with shock.
He could of taken this moment to have killed the faking Eva with a hidden syringe or something.
Reason? Maybe it was planned by Eva, Hideyoshi and George to kill those in direct line to leadership of the family. Shannon wasn't SUPPOSED to come to the main house, but she did go and she got killed by Eva out of necessity for just seeing too much.

Knowing the basic plan and going along with it, George snaps when he discovers that Shannon got killed as well.

....Main problem with this theory is that it doesn't really explain why Hideyoshi had to die >_> .....

[Renall]

Jessica is second in line to be the head actually, isn't she? Provided Krauss succeeds as head, Jessica is his heir, so she would be next. Unless the succession doesn't happen until Kinzo "dies," and if Krauss is dead before that it passes to the next eldest sibling. Not sure how that works.

[Nih]

Yeah, it's pretty confusing right now, ain't it? Well the truth is probably not all that complicated. I'm sure we'll find out sooner or later.

P.S. I just realized how badly you can interpret this sentence

Edit: Wasn't trolling in this post, I was talking about who is working on the parodies. Two brothers. One of them is possessed by Beatrice. Guess who.