[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by Wanderer

People don't have to see someone as a threat to accidentally kill them. Say two paranoid people were fighting over a gun and then Gohda (being the *ahem* noble man that he is) tried to intervene but somehow got shot in the scuffle.

Honestly, I find Maria being killed to be the hardest to swallow. And jjblue1's idea that Rosa killed her just makes me want to cry.

Personally I want both Rosa and Kirye to be good mothers. I picked up that death for Maria because, among the ones hinted by the game, having Rosa losing it and inadvertitely killing her daughter (maybe slapping her and causing her to hit her head and die more than strangling her) seemed the only one that could work without a plan behind (giving her poison or cutting her throat are decidedly more on the planned murders side than losing it and hitting her).
Rosa hits Maria way too strong and too often and she's the one that seems more prone to go paranoid and suffer of the strain of the situation so it fits the picture.

The only other option for killing Maria accidentally would be that someone shot (by mistake or purpose) and Maria was/went/ended up on the way of the bullet and I doubt Maria could commit suicide.

Otherwise someone purposely killed her. She can't represent a threat as young as she is, if you want to see her as such you've to be insane with panic. The only thing she could do that could be harmful would be to testify against someone.

I'm not sure someone would take as true the words of a child who believes in witches but still it can cause suspicions to arise. Or the press' interest.
However, call me biased but I find purposely killing such a young kid a crime that's really hard to swallow.

Maria isn't the character that I like the most but still hers would be the murder I would condone the less.

[Kylon99]

Isn't it possible that Rosa and Kyrie *were* good mothers? Just that when driven to extremes and/or paranoia, they were capable of killing. For various reasons.

I agree with the recent statements about how several things would've gotten together to make murder all that more able to happen. From even Higurashi, Ryukishi's theme has always been to understand why good people do bad things.

I take this to mean that he's not going to bother with classic villains and classic heroes. He won't stick in a Fu Manchu; it's too boring. I always took his philosophy to be that people are people, they do both good and bad. (Just with some, maybe more one than the other.) If you look at the characters, Bernkastel aside, even Lambda wasn't portrayed as a pure psychopath. Neither was Erika nor Eva Beatrice in the end.

(Even Bernkastel had a sad background to her villainous role this time.)

[AuraTwilight]

We know quite a bit more than this for Rokkenjima Prime though.

Like what? We know Eva's keeping her mouth shut and Battler has amnesia. We know Maria's jaw was found and there's a big ass crater on the island, so something went baboom. What else do we actually know about Rokkenjima Prime, October 4th and 5th, 1986?

I think we shouldn't approach Umineko like it's finished, basically.

But it IS. Yea, a confession booklet is coming, but it wasn't actually in the text of Umineko, the novel.

It's nice to get the answers, sure, but only a limited amount of people are going to be able to see it given that it's a goddamn promotional deal, and it's fucking bullshit to gut out all the answers in a novel and sell them in a supplemental guide of information.

"Oh, the final book in my fantasy novel ended on a cliffhanger? Buy this artbook which mentions who won the final battle at the end."

I've made plans to get a hold of it (Merchandise thread) and I was thinking of summarizing it here when I do.

I look forward to it!

I try not to read it, really. But then it's everywhere and you won't stop. The main problem is you give up, and then you blame Ryukishi for it. But the reasoning where you blame him isn't either convincing... or even presented.

Or you didn't read it, because I try not to repeat myself because my reasoning could probably fill an essay. I didn't 'give up', so you can stop fucking projecting your opinion of my own thoughts onto me. I took what I learned and what I felt to it's logical conclusion, and I can't really progress without new information. Finite information means finite reasoning.

My main point is that this is the Spoilers, Theories and Interpretations thread, not the Present Blanket Statements, Swear at Ryukishi and Make an Asshole Of Myself thread.

You can't apply blanket statements at a single person, and Ryukishi isn't here to be sworn at, and you're not in any position to be judging me for making an asshole of myself.

You're actually being highly hypocritical, Mister "People-who-don't-like-Ryukishi's-conclusion-Gave-Up-And-Are-Clueless-And-Making-Blanket-Statements".

There are quite a few things we can criticise Ryukishi for of course. And those things should be discussed, although, I'm saying, that maybe we shouldn't be doing this on the Spoilers, Theories and Interpretation thread for pages and pages non-stop. By saying 'go elsewhere,' I mean maybe you should be doing this on the Overall Impressions thread.

Already done so. However, most of my grievances are tied up in things that can only be discussed here.

And that's the thing. I am INDEED discussing them. I listen to people's responses and am willing to amend my opinions and conclusions in accordance with convincing responses, and people are willing to talk to me about it; indeed, I'm not even the only person doing it, lots of people do. I'm just the most abrasive because I don't give a shit about swear words, and you seem to think that makes me more angry.

Spoiler for Bullshit Stuff:

Part of it is because my pain medication doesn't fucking work and it constantly feels like I'm on fire because of my disease so my temper is much, MUCH more aggravated and exaggerated than it really is; it's not solely Ryukishi's fault.

But I have never, NEVER told anyone they're not supposed to be talking about what they want to talk about, nor do I ask people to stop talking because I find their posts unsightly. No one forces you to read what I write, and you have no right to butt into discussions other people are having in order to tell them to change the subject.

Seriously, go shove it. I don't have to take that from you, and neither does anyone else.

I'm not sure what you mean by allegorical sense, but do you mean scenes like where 'Kanon' comes back from the dead at the end of EP3 and 'saves' Jessica, even though we know that's Yasu and Kanon was already declared dead?

Yes, essentially. Though given that Yasu and Kanon are the same entity, and their distinction is only made by behavior and people's perceptions, it's Kanon so long as Yasu acts as Kanon, or is seen as Kanon by those around her.

There's no difference between "Kanon" and "Yasu pretending to be Kanon", I suppose we can sum it up as.

From a detective mystery point of view, this is probably a big no-no. But then, the main point of this whole 6, possibly 7 or 8 episodes was to try and understand what Yasu is going through. And the main point to all of this is that she has these false lives she's been living that she has to give up now. And once they've been given up she has nothing left except to kill herself. This stuff is outside the detective novel fiction, but it can still fit into the genre of 'mystery.' (i.e. say, a Steven King style mystery or other works of 'mystery' that aren't necessarily detective stories.)

That's all fine, and I agree completely. But none of this requires the reds I'm talking about; infact, it HAMPERS are ability to understand this because it's engineered to give us an extremely false impression about Shannon and Kanon. It'd be significantly better to say things like Shannon has been removed from the board or Kanon has vanished or something like that. However, using "dead" equivocates the both of them to everyone else on the island.

Anyways, is this what you meant?

Not quite; I suppose it's hard for me to phrase (English being like my third language), but what I'm trying to say is how does Shannon/Kanon is dead not create some sort of Logic Error or something with the both of them re-entering the scene and effectively being alive again?

Why is the red able to say they're dead if they can get up and do stuff whenever they feel like it? They're not dead in any meaningful sense, and the red SHOULD be meaningful, given it's importance.

I just find the whole thing to be dishonest. Ryukishi had other options with expressing this idea, but he decided to go with the one that was the most damaging to his narrative's integrity in order to protect his twist as long as possible.

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by Renall

In that such a conclusion is absolutely morally repugnant, yes, it's completely unsatisfying.

If everyone is partially guilty, than more than anything else it should not be viewed as an accident! Besides, it's highly unlikely that absolutely everyone was equally guilty. Under a circumstance where tragedy unfolds from greed, how are Gohda and Kumasawa going to be even remotely as culpable as Kyrie or Rosa?

The truth - and justice - demand knowledge be shared. That this knowledge may be biased is understandable. However, we cannot analyze testimony and determine bias or truth if that testimony has never been given. And to spread the guilt evenly when it is impossible that it was actually evenly distributed is an injustice to those who are "less guilty," even if we accept the premise that everyone is somehow partially responsible.

Hum... this whole situation reminds me of a CSI episode in which a very small kid (around 2 if I'm not wrong) inadvertitely killed his baby brother.

The parents tried to hide the fact.

I don't remember all the details but when the truth was discovered the police said something along the line of how in a trial it would have been proved that the incident couldn't be prevented and how the kid was too small to be judged guilty so the parents shouldn't have tried to hide the truth because technically nothing would have happened as it would have been labelled as an accident of some sort.

The parents' reply was that this would have however ruined the life of the kid who 'committed the murder'. People would have talked he would have grown up knowing he killed his brother and so on.

Now, from an external point of view I say they would have done the right thing revealing the truth.
Hiding how things went could have lead to any sort of troubles, even accusing someone innocent of killing the baby.

However I can understand how the parents wanted to protect their other kid.
It was an incident and he technically couldn't be blamed for it but his life would become troublesome due to it (and I guess they naively thought they wouldn't cause troubles for anyone else).

However my main problems with applying this to Umineko are:

- it's hard to get 13 people to die by accident, with people only marginally guilty (oh, Gohda poured liquor from a bottle on which was written Almond milk without knowing Kinzo replaced it with potassium cyanide whoever drank it died, Gohda included but Gohda never meant to kill anyone and Kinzo died two years ago, before managing to tell it) without ending up in a ridicule or unbelievable scenario. You need to have people that can be partially blamed and... well, at least some less casual deaths...

- if only Eva was suspected and if she was the only relative of the victims... well, she decided to keep shut, she accepted to bear the blame for it. I can go so far as to apply this to Ange. Although she knows nothing the strain she suffers now might be less severe than the one she would suffer if the truth were to be known so too bad for her. However there's other people involved, the relatives of the servants. Saying they too deserved to suffer that strain means we've as equally culpable Gohda, Nanjo, Kumasawa and at least one of Ange's relatives. If said relative isn't Rudolf or Battler then we need a relative for Eva as well.
4/5 people who incidentally committed incidental murder without meaning it in the slightest and therefore deserve to be protected?... hard to swallow.
Someone is suffering in uncertain and didn't deserve it.

I can get Eva or Battler might say 'who cares? I'll protect the ones I care about' but then Umineko could at least end with them revealing it to... let's say their immaginary friend and leave up to the reader how to judge their actions like in 'Presumed Innocent' for example.

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by Kylon99

Isn't it possible that Rosa and Kyrie *were* good mothers? Just that when driven to extremes and/or paranoia, they were capable of killing. For various reasons.

Personally I hope that's the answer or part of it, though Umineko did his best to put Rosa in the position of a horrible mother.
Although she had nice moments with Maria, her bad moments are so... well BAD it's hard not to think she was abusive and neglected her child (though I saw so many 8 year old let on their own in anime I'm not sure how to judge this in Umineko... but I'll say she definitely hit her too hard).

Kirye being a bad mother was tossed in only at the end of EP 7.
I personally found hard to believe in the characterization of EP 7 because maybe Kirye was cold and maybe Kirye killed those people but somehow the way EP 7 presented how she acted... well, it felt over the top, fitting only is she was totally insane.
It stops being 'I'll kill everyone because it's more advantageous for me' and becomes 'I'll kill everyone because it's more advantageous for me and because HELL YEAH IT'S FUN!'.

The only thing that was missing was the mad laugh.

[LyricalAura]

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

There's no difference between "Kanon" and "Yasu pretending to be Kanon", I suppose we can sum it up as.

From the interview with Keiya:

R: "[...] Even though the clothes belong to Shannon, if what’s within is another being then that person would surely be able to kill George. Clothes are not a personality. And so, even though the clothes and the hairdo might be Shannon’s, there is the possibility that it was another person, when she started asking questions about George. "

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by LyricalAura

From the interview with Keiya:

R: "[...] Even though the clothes belong to Shannon, if what’s within is another being then that person would surely be able to kill George. Clothes are not a personality. And so, even though the cloths and the hairdo might be Shannon’s, but there is the possibility that it was another person, when she started asking questions about George. "

The problem is that this makes Shannon completely fake. And there's no real hint she's been acting for all her life not just in her behaviour (her work might have required she was nice to Natsuhi when in truth she wanted to kick her) but also in her feelings.

She should have faked having feelings for George, she should have faked being friend with Jessica since she could kill Jessica as well.

I can deal with Kanon being fake because maybe, he was created for some purpose and therefore had to pretend to be a different person from Shannon and have different feelings from her but what about Shannon's feelings?

I don't like George but the idea she was totally cold to him to the point she could kill him after playing the role of the girl in love... well, she should be a sociopath to do so... or suffering of split personality... or both.

This however kills the idea she loved George and that one was a love suicide.
She wasn't Shannon but another person therefore she didn't love George and could kill him in the same way she did with Gohda.

Somehow however I find this development pretty ugly.

... though game Shannon's motive for killing so many people was pretty weak IMHO so maybe things were bound to be ugly.... *sighs*

[Kylon99]

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

Like what? We know Eva's keeping her mouth shut and Battler has amnesia. We know Maria's jaw was found and there's a big ass crater on the island, so something went baboom. What else do we actually know about Rokkenjima Prime, October 4th and 5th, 1986?

All the stories that take place before the events also come from Rokkenjima Prime. For example, Shannon's date with George, Kinzo's back history, Beatrice-2's almost murder by Natsuhi, and Beatrice-3's tumble off the cliff with Rosa, Battler leaving for 6 years, Battler being convinced to come back by Rudolf.

I'd argue that Yasu's backstory is also true in only the common ideas that were put forth in EP7. That is she was the baby that fell off the cliff, brought to the household to be a pretend servant. And that she was miserable and created fantasies to help her cope. And that she also constructed the personas of Shannon and Kanon. How happy she was or not, is not really known.


By the way, it seems like we've been shown that the good and bad of nearly all the people on the island here and I would say that both are true for Yasu as well. Maybe she was happy at becoming the head, but later on, or at the same time she hated that it trapped her there. I'm not too upset at this kind of portrayal because I've seen some pretty bad people do good things once in awhile. (These were not sociopaths, of course.) I can believe someone innocent can be driven to murder, and someone who's hands are covered in blood can turn away from evil.

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

That's all fine, and I agree completely. But none of this requires the reds I'm talking about; infact, it HAMPERS are ability to understand this because it's engineered to give us an extremely false impression about Shannon and Kanon. It'd be significantly better to say things like Shannon has been removed from the board or Kanon has vanished or something like that. However, using "dead" equivocates the both of them to everyone else on the island.

Those reds are a problem. In other words an explanation needs to be made as to why dead for those two means different things than the humans.

Like I said in an earlier post, I think the reds need to be viewed in their proper context. Two points which I need to bring up are:

1. Red text is only the truth from the meta-world and down. From Rokkenjima Prime, they are really no more powerful than white text. This is because the red must only come from a truth that the authors know or find out; and the future ends up overwriting this truth. For example, Yasu didn't anticipate Eva would survive, so her red texts end up saying that she died. But by EP3, Tooya knows she did, so he constructed a world where she did survive. (And then he realized he didn't need to do that, so it was different for EP4, I guess.)

So in the beginning, the only ones who really told us to believe that the red text was the absolute truth were fictional characters. Ultimately they can only really be the subjective truth of the author in R-Prime.

2. Because of #1, then the red text could be excused as being Point of View based. Now, I agree this is a nasty dodge. But it does provide the explanation of that red text that said Battler was incompetent. Jan-Poo said that there are ways that 'incompetent' can be objective and I agree. But I believe that something more poignant can be found where the author him/herself can guarantee the incompetence of a character.

Like how Watson isn't really incompetent but for the Doyle writing him that way, on purpose.

So likewise with Shannon and Kanon it ends up being, yes a square peg forced into a round hole. It's bad writing, but to Yasu, bad writing that had to fit in and play out this way. (And I assume Tooya took up the mantle to continue Yasu's thought processes.) Because it's personal to her.

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

Not quite; I suppose it's hard for me to phrase (English being like my third language), but what I'm trying to say is how does Shannon/Kanon is dead not create some sort of Logic Error or something with the both of them re-entering the scene and effectively being alive again?

Why is the red able to say they're dead if they can get up and do stuff whenever they feel like it? They're not dead in any meaningful sense, and the red SHOULD be meaningful, given it's importance.

I just find the whole thing to be dishonest. Ryukishi had other options with expressing this idea, but he decided to go with the one that was the most damaging to his narrative's integrity in order to protect his twist as long as possible.

The only way it can't be a logic error if is this 'dead' refers to a non-dying entity.

So yeah, it is dishonest. I think this is what Ryukishi meant when he said it was a dirty trick. (Although he didn't specify which.)

I don't see that the narrative has been damaged entirely. But the idea that Beatrice wouldn't lie with the red truth is gone. However, I never believed that for a second. 8) I always thought there were ways to get around the red truth...

It's always been a question, back in earlier episodes about whether any interpretation of the red truth would make Beatrice too dishonest, now that I think about it. I'm not sure that we were supposed to put her on a pedestal like that now.

Spoiler for Just for AuraTwilight:

Entire Reply *snip* Let's just be nice to each other from now on.

[Kylon99]

Originally Posted by jjblue1

Hum... this whole situation reminds me of a CSI episode in which a very small kid (around 2 if I'm not wrong) inadvertitely killed his baby brother. The parents tried to hide the fact.

This reminds me of that special ep of Shinzanmono (japanese drama, based on Higashino Keigo's novels). The parents tried to hide their kids crime because they cared about him so much. For pretty much the same reasons. (This isn't a spoiler; this happens right away and you see the lies they spin and their desperation as the show goes on. Goes well with the series theme of 'why people lie.')

As for the stuff about everyone killing everyone else. I remember after reading EP1 that I thought it would most likely be like the 'C' ending of Clue; where it makes more sense that everyone had their little share of killing. Even Mr. Boddy. 8) (Who was only pretending to be a servant by the way, so he could be the true culprit.)

Originally Posted by jjblue1

Personally I hope that's the answer or part of it, though Umineko did his best to put Rosa in the position of a horrible mother. Although she had nice moments with Maria, her bad moments are so... well BAD it's hard not to think she was abusive and neglected her child (though I saw so many 8 year old let on their own in anime I'm not sure how to judge this in Umineko... but I'll say she definitely hit her too hard).

Oops! Maybe it would've been better if I said that they were 'loving' mothers. But at the same time, Rosa was a neglectful mother. At this point, some people fall in the trap of trying to decide whether Rosa was a good mother or a bad mother. Or whether she was a good person or bad person. I'm thinking Umineko, like Higurashi before, wants us to think of 'good deeds' and 'bad deeds.' And that Rosa, and many of the other characters have both.

Even poor Gouda had his good and bad moments. 8)

Originally Posted by jjblue1

Kirye being a bad mother was tossed in only at the end of EP 7.
I personally found hard to believe in the characterization of EP 7 because maybe Kirye was cold and maybe Kirye killed those people but somehow the way EP 7 presented how she acted... well, it felt over the top, fitting only is she was totally insane.

I think we all agree that characterization was over the top. The only thing it made me think though is that perhaps even Kyrie has a bad side to her, though not in the way EP7 describes.

See, everyone seems to have a good and bad side.... Kinzo, Kyrie, Eva, Rosa, Rudolf, Krauss (although his is maybe an 'incompetent side'). Etc., etc. Maybe only Battler didn't have a bad side in the stories because he was the target of Yasu's affections. Besides being incompetent, that is.

Maybe we all find Natsuhi so cute is because she's too dumb to be bad? Oh wait.. baby off cliff thing.. nevermind.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

The problem is that this makes Shannon completely fake. And there's no real hint she's been acting for all her life not just in her behaviour (her work might have required she was nice to Natsuhi when in truth she wanted to kick her) but also in her feelings.

...

This however kills the idea she loved George and that one was a love suicide.
She wasn't Shannon but another person therefore she didn't love George and could kill him in the same way she did with Gohda.

Well, I was thinking about Shannon. If you figured out she hid her gun behind the wardrobe after her suicide in EP2, it would've totally exposed her. (Based on the suicide trick in And Then There Were None.) But there's no way Ryukishi would've let it leak out so early, so the *only* clue we had was that there was a dresser in the room.

I can see how if he gave out too many clues, like there being a piece of string, people would associate it more with And Then There Were None and it would've all been over at EP2. 8)

Anyways, Yasu seems to segment her feelings onto different personas. So collectively she loved all the cousins, but at the same time, what he seems to be saying is that she's capable of advancing her own plans despite being in the Shannon costume. So, another example of both good and bad in a person?

[UsagiTenpura]

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

Not quite; I suppose it's hard for me to phrase (English being like my third language), but what I'm trying to say is how does Shannon/Kanon is dead not create some sort of Logic Error or something with the both of them re-entering the scene and effectively being alive again?

Why is the red able to say they're dead if they can get up and do stuff whenever they feel like it? They're not dead in any meaningful sense, and the red SHOULD be meaningful, given it's importance.

Well... hm isn't Ryuukishi sorta asking us that directly with what's pretty much the final scene of the game?
Everyone is said to be dead in red and then Ange revives them all nontheless and Bernkastel is like "how is this possible?". To me it shows two things.
The first is that the rules actually do allow for that.
The second is that the rules that allows to do that are something Bernkastel and Erika never understood.

I'm not going to attempt to answer that here, but I'm fairly certain Ryuukishi was trying to tell us there's something we don't get.

Originally Posted by Renall

~

I'm thinking that it'd be hard to pin "the culprit" in the Kinzo massacre from WW2 story.
Even if some of the people there had bad intentions, it doesn't change that what happened was pretty much going to happen anyway.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

~.

Doesn't have much to do with theories but it was interesting informations, thanks for sharing.

Originally Posted by Kylon99

~

I might be completely wrong but I got the feeling that Shannon and Kanon's personas' logic works closer to being a good writer.
Basically "Yasu" is making them do the decisions that a writer would make their characters do while keeping in their mindset.
That's probably pretty messed up from an outward look but I've always wondered about a few things...
Servants basically have to do what's asked of them, including having the attitude that's asked of them. She clearly went much farther then that with George as the story seems to hint she at least for a time considered to actually live as Shannon, but I wonder if originally Shannon and Kanon's personas were born in the mindset that you have to oblige the "masters" as much as you can.
The story does say that Shannon and Kanon were created for George and Jessica too.
We are after all talking about a girl who at least claims she cannot refuse someone who wants to molest her (Battler arc 1).
And we're talking about servants who went so far as becoming accomplice of their masters' crimes.

Someone who's completely separating their professional self from their inner self by treating the former as a scripted role, and then the said scripted role ends up causing emotional attachment from others. Through fulfilling these people's expectations, gradually grew to have a near relation with two of them. At that point she seriously considers becoming Shannon for real but Battler returns and everything crashes.
That explanation satisfies me on a number of issues actually... like the whole thing about furniture being unable to love.
Actually that explanation even puts a sort of role to Gohda.
Sure Genji is probably the "top furniture" but unlike Gohda we don't learn about the kind of person he is outside of his professional life, while the story tells us early on a lot about Gohda's inner feelings as separate from his professional self. He'd exist to hint us at basically "professional Gohda isn't exactly Gohda" combined with "is it really the real Gohda that everyone in the Ushiromiya loves or his professional self?" (to which the answer is obvious).

[Kylon99]

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

Well... hm isn't Ryuukishi sorta asking us that directly with what's pretty much the final scene of the game?
Everyone is said to be dead in red and then Ange revives them all nontheless and Bernkastel is like "how is this possible?".

Maybe it's the idea that they will live on in her memories. (And Battler wanted her to remember also the good parts too, not just the obvious bad people were rumoring about.)

And ok.. that is kind of a Care Bear Hug ending, but it is a common theme in many different works. 8)

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by Wanderer

Yes! It is! I am comparing the hints of Ikuko=Yasu as they are now to the hints of ShKanon before ShKanon was fully revealed. ShKanon, by actually being right, made a precedent: if the hints for ShKanon (as you wrote above) were good enough for ShKanon to turn out true, then the hints for Ikuko=Yasu as they are now are good enough for Ikuko=Yasu to be true.

I can't deny that the possibility exists and that Ryuukishi left enough hints to think about that, but even I, despite the fact I've always been a shkanon theory supporter, never considered that kind of evidence conclusive until EP6.

Even if we know now that the theory is right I wouldn't say that it was logical at that time to bank on that theory merely using that evidence.

Let's not forget that Ryuukishi also left many hints for ghosterika in EP6 and that lyricalAura was a supporter of that theory (and therefore shkanon denialist) as much (if not more) as she is supporting ikuko=yasu now.

Her arguments and logic there were as much sound as they are now, no more, no less.

And I'm not saying that ironically, her arguments had merits as they have now. But I think there is a flaw in making it sound as if the questions the theory would answer if true do not have other equally probable (if not more probable) answers.


To me, the main reason to oppose this new theory is the same as before. I value thematic analisys of the story a thousandfold more than any circumstancial "hint" or "foreshadowing". It was no hint, nor red truth that convinced me that shkanon was true in EP6, it was the estrapolation of the thematic message and narrative purpose of the whole episode that led me to that. In other words I understood the will and the effort of the author to create an artistic depiction of a situation where a person is torn apart between two (or more) different personalities.

What I perceived from EP8 is the author's will to depict artistically the situation of a tragic story of a love that due to various circumstances couldn't be fullfilled if not in fantasy.

The revelation of Yasu=Ikuko would completely devalue his apparent efforts to depict that tragic scenario. Narratively speaking I think it would be a very bad idea.

You know... it's like

Spoiler for Final Fantasy X and X-2:

Making Tidus revive and live happily thereafter with Yuna

1) Appease the radical fandom and their will to see their favorite couple be united
2) Ruin a wonderful story

[UsagiTenpura]

You seem to imply that you find Umineko a wonderful story?
Great if that's the case tho.

Still I don't think Yasu = Ikuko would really ruin the story, it mostly depends on what you accept of Rokkenjima Prime or not.

However I find hard to reconciliate Ikuko's backstory with her own family along with Yasu. Even if I try to think of either of one as a metaphor for the other, it simply doesn't seem to match up. So it'd turn out to discard everything we know (which is not much) about Ikuko as not simply "not true" but "entirely useless". I guess that's my own main problem with the idea.

[Klashikari]

I'm sorry if I barge in the discussion right out of the left field, but it seems the recent discussions went a "little bit" past the thread purpose for reasons I still ignore.

Frankly, while the thread guidelines were kinda broad, they were concise and simple: discussion and interpretations of the stories.
At this point, I really doubt it is the thread to bash/praise Ryukishi, nor the place to start ad hominem and other joust in order to prove one superiority and whatnot.

Exaggeration or not, I would ask all of you to stop derailing the thread with offtopic (such like ridiculing/defending the story and whatnot), and keep discussing about the story as a whole.
You are free to expose your opinion regarding how you like/dislike a certain theory of course, but the point of this thread is to discuss -together- about umineko plot. Nothing more nothing less.

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

You seem to imply that you find Umineko a wonderful story?
Great if that's the case tho.

Hell no, if I consider it as a whole there's too many flaws or decisions that personally make me shiver for me to stomach them.

But I do recognize the powerful potential of ryuukishi to create strongly emotional depictions of the circumstance he devises. For that part I sincerely admire him, that's what made him so popular (I believe) and that's what inspired me the most.

Now the scene we need to consider is the one where Beatrice "dies" in Ep8. Note that it was a "magical" scene, but that doesn't mean the feeling behind it was fake. It was highly metaphorical, but it was a metaphor of something and it was something extremely important.

There is no doubt that it was a scene in which Ryuukishi invested a lot, both artistically and economically. I don't really think Akiko Shikata offers her services at a cheap price. And Ryuukishi must have talked to her or to whoever made the lyrics quite extensively, meaning that he put a lot of care on that.

I won't buy that Beatrice "died" just because Yasu was sick of playing that part, considering all that. And even less I can buy that it was just a what if scenario or a troll.

That scene is beautiful and emotionally overwhelming. But it sounds just like a joke or a big wtf if in the end the person behind Beatrice is safe and sound.

[UsagiTenpura]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

~

I get what you are saying but I find it possible to built a number of metaphors where the value is not entirely lost.
The one I like to think the most is basically that the death of Beatrice also sorta represents the end of Umineko. Being "done" with a story that has been at the heart of so many readers' minds for so long, and even more so in the writer's mind, is certainly something sad.

The Ryuukishi who wrote Umineko is "dying" as Umineko will become a thing of the past and the readers we are of it also "dying" as we move on to other stories gradually.

... Except I guess neither side is yet done but it'll get there soon enough...

Anyway arc 8 sorta makes a point about Battler being "dead" but not "Toyah", I'm not entirely sure why I should find it different. For instance one could reminisce about their time as a student and how that part of them died as their studies ended. It is something that tend to have a particular emotional value for a lot of people. To take an example within the "setting"... Suppose Shannon x George somehow worked out, a very large part of her (including everything Beatrice) would've most definitively "died" as she'd leave the island to build her new life with George.
It'd be sweet yet it'd be sad. Exactly the sort of bittersweetness that I think the story was trying to communicate to us.
At least personally I find that kind of thing, if symbolized by a character, to actually
deserve the sort of scenes Beatrice got.

Small Edit: It'd be hard to argue, I think, that "moving on and giving up on the lost things of the past" is not a theme of the serie.

[Jan-Poo]

The Ryuukishi who wrote Umineko is "dying" as Umineko will become a thing of the past and the readers we are of it also "dying" as we move on to other stories gradually.

He wouldn't invest that much for such an abstract concept.

Anyway arc 8 sorta makes a point about Battler being "dead" but not "Toyah", I'm not entirely sure why I should find it different.

There is a fatality and a tragedy behind Battler's "death", that's at least more understandable. Battler is not "safe and sound". You need to find at least an equally valid reason for Beatrice's "death" which must be even more tragic considering the setting it was depicted.

Suppose Shannon x George somehow worked out, a very large part of her (including everything Beatrice) would've most definitively "died" as she'd leave the island to build her new life with George.

But it wouldn't be such a sad event. Have you read the lyrics of byakumu? Even then Beatrice should have been the one to survive if Battler won (which by the way it was always said and hinted that he came too late). And the metaphor shows that Battler died because Beatrice did, not viceversa.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

I'm thinking that it'd be hard to pin "the culprit" in the Kinzo massacre from WW2 story.
Even if some of the people there had bad intentions, it doesn't change that what happened was pretty much going to happen anyway.

Even if I accept that as true (I don't, as it's basically determinist fatalism to say the Italians and Japanese were on an inescapable course toward violence), you're missing a key distinction here between the story that cannot be told, the story that can be told, and the story that was told.

The story that cannot be told is the story of all the people who died, their perspectives, and how the situation ballooned to the point that it did. It's true that this story would be the most complete one. Bear in mind, however, that Kinzo is the fulcrum of the whole event (as one of only two people capable of communicating between the sides), so his story still winds up being more important, especially if the massacre was his idea in the first place.

The story that can be told is the one Kinzo could tell based on a frank discussion of what he saw and did.

The story that was told, however, appears to have been slightly different (assuming, of course, he told anyone; the only story that may have actually been told was the one told to Dr. Nanjo back in the 40s). It's possible the story was never actually told outside of Lion's world.

Now, what you seem to be doing is making the following claim: Since we don't have access to the story that cannot be told, we can't properly determine who is to blame for the WW2 incident because we lack information. Thus, there is little value in the story that was told or the story that can be told.

I'd argue the exact opposite though. It's very important that not only do we have one person's story (the story Kinzo did tell in ep7), but we also have some reason to believe he was at least partially lying (thus, the story he could have told remains unknown). Because we know that the story Kinzo did tell differs from the story Kinzo could have told, we can at the very least cast a light of suspicion on what little of the story we do have, and that suspicion leads to the very reasonable conclusion that Kinzo may have had some greater involvement in the massacre, particularly with the circumstantial evidence (such as him profiting from the gold afterward).

Now, why does this matter? Kinzo and Beatrice-1 are dead, right? Yeah, well, what about all those Japanese and Italian naval personnel? One day somebody's dad, somebody's brother, somebody's son just up and vanished. The Italians probably believe them lost at sea, sunk by American or British ships. The Japanese have no idea what happened; American bombers? Some kind of invasion? Are they still out there somewhere, unaware the war is over?

Don't you think it's important that those people know that their loved ones died on Rokkenjima? What did Kinzo do with their remains? Wouldn't you want to know where your son was buried? Your brother? Your father?

It's true we may never know, in total, the exact circumstances leading to the massacre in the sub pen. On the other hand, we know something, and we know one of the two survivors lied about it and covered up the incident for personal profit. Even if he was but an incidental profiteer, ought Kinzo not be called to account for his coverup by those who have been victimized ever since?

That's really the disconnect I see here for Ange and Battler. There's almost this implicit selfishness that they are the only victims, and if they've reached the point of satisfaction with the story that has been told, it no longer matters what story could still be told. That's a very selfish conclusion and it sours me quite a bit on their characters.

At the very least, Beatrice and Eva seem to have ulterior motives. The motives are in some ways selfish, but in other greater ways they are fairly selfless, since each was willing to shoulder blame. Granted, only Eva was willing to do so non-anonymously, but that's what makes her a heroic character in the end where Beatrice is just pitiable. Remember, if nothing else, Gohda's elderly mother could go blame Eva for her son's death and at least "know" what became of him. It was a lie, and it was probably wrong, but I can at least forgive Eva for it.

Don't have a lot of sympathy for Ange though.

[Jan-Poo]

I once tried to see if it could be possible to connect what happened on 1945 and the Kinzo's claim that he once was put in the position to decide who to sacrifice to safe the other two from:

yourself
the person you love
everyone else (!)

Considering Kinzo's character we all assumed he chose the option "c". What if that situation happened on that military base in 1945? What if he purposedly orchestrated that massacre so he could be with Beatrice?

And if it wasn't that... then when did he have to make that choice?

[Cao Ni Ma]

Beatrice was already pregnant by her lover, one of the officers in the submarine. Kinzo would never kill Beatrice, so he has two options: Suicide or kill everyone else and entrap Beatrice. Takes option two, Beatrice then dies while giving birth. Kinzo blames the child and distances himself from her. His reason for living now dead he takes over Rokkenjima and builds the device for the its destruction. Eventually as time passes Kinzo sees her more and more like the first one and falls for her.

There, an option where Kinzo is still crazy but it doesn't have rape in it. But now it has mass murder by his own hands.