[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Cao Ni Ma

Because they want it to be true? Its the reason why these reds are sometimes so hard for Beatrice to say. She genuinely wants Shanon, Kanon and herself to be independent people, by using the last reds she effectively nulls any possibility of that happening.

Yet Kanon and Shannon themselves don't seem to believe that to be possible, state outright that it isn't, and also whatever happened in Banquet.

We know that there's some give and take in these games, but actually changing the story as the challenger participates in it strikes me as cheating on the part of the GM (and see ep6, where the player and GM essentially retroactively cheat and screw up the whole thing). Did ep1 simply not have a firm solution until Will guessed at it? Because before that point nobody had even come close to "getting it right." For whatever definition "right" is if it doesn't matter until the possibility is disclaimed. Likewise, if any solution that fits and isn't countered is allowable, can Erika's ep5 theory become true even though there's a red that says it isn't, and even though it's not even clear anybody is actually dead?

You can't say "oh yeah it's solvable" if you don't actually have a solution, or if there are a million different solutions and you haven't decided on which one is right until your opponent starts guessing them. Because that's what it turns the red and blue into: A guessing game. It cheapens literally everything about the first four episodes... which makes it plausible as a Chiru development, I admit. If that's the brilliant innovation Ryukishi wants to add to the mystery genre, he's an even worse writer than I thought, because he's incompetent and lazy.

[GreyZone]

Originally Posted by Renall

[...]

You can't say "oh yeah it's solvable" if you don't actually have a solution, or if there are a million different solutions and you haven't decided on which one is right until your opponent starts guessing them. Because that's what it turns the red and blue into: A guessing game. It cheapens literally everything about the first four episodes... which makes it plausible as a Chiru development, I admit. If that's the brilliant innovation Ryukishi wants to add to the mystery genre, he's an even worse writer than I thought, because he's incompetent and lazy.

What was all the talk about "Anti-Mystery" then? Personally, I think that "Anti-Mystery" only applies to Rokkenjima-Prime, but the possibility that it (or at least elements of it) refers to the gameboards as well, cannot be completely disregarded.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by GreyZone

What was all the talk about "Anti-Mystery" then? Personally, I think that "Anti-Mystery" only applies to Rokkenjima-Prime, but the possibility that it (or at least elements of it) refers to the gameboards as well, cannot be completely disregarded.

My point is it makes Beatrice intellectually dishonest and runs at odds with her entire purpose. It doesn't make any sense. And it creates an implication that Ryukishi didn't know where he was taking the story until he decided to take it where he did, meaning he's intellectually dishonest and a hypocrite.

[GreyZone]

Originally Posted by Renall

My point is it makes Beatrice intellectually dishonest and runs at odds with her entire purpose. It doesn't make any sense. And it creates an implication that Ryukishi didn't know where he was taking the story until he decided to take it where he did, meaning he's intellectually dishonest and a hypocrite.

I guess your are right. He talked about "trust between reader and author" after all and if he of all people deliberately destroyed that trust, then he really would be a hypocrite.

It is possible that Erika and Bern misinterpreted the rules in EP6 about switching locations retroactively (hidden under bed VS hidden in closet) escpacially considering that there was no need for that in Beato's solution. Aside from Erika talking about it, it was never shown directly to us readers, if such a trick by the GM is possible, or not. If we assume that the actions of the characters are set in stone from the beginning, then Genius Battler is required, else it all falls apart.
Alternatively there is the option that such tricks are only possible directly as a reaction to the actions of the human side.
It is also possible that the player holds no power at all and all actions the player chooses are "written" by the GM as well, but then the whole "Meta-Layers" would not make any real sense.

[Renall]

Once Erika and Battler start agreeing to retroactively change the story, things get fuzzy. Since we have no idea how Dawn was "intended" to play out (if indeed it even was), there's no explanation for things like the shower trap or why Battler wouldn't have left his room yet or why Kanon even came to get him.

If anything I think that whole thing should be illustrative of why the game can't be like that, because nothing makes sense once you start trying to manipulate the story around each other.

Also: How exactly does a Logic Error even work if the GM can Later Queen him or herself out of any problem with subsequent declarations? Why couldn't Battler just declare it was all a dream or something? Obviously with Genius Battler it makes more sense as he's established a set of apparently contradictory reds that actually aren't, and is merely choosing not to fight the Logic Error motion. But if Genius Battler isn't true, he either didn't know about Shkanon or deliberately chose not to invoke it to save himself. Why would he do either of those things?

[Kealym]

Man, discussion is getting to be over my head. XD

So, in laymens terms ... EP6 is very direct that a GM can Later Queen themselves a solution, and how this would work. It also says openly that doing so is usually a really bad idea that can turn your game into an incomprehensible mess, and we have little reason to believe Beato ever engaged in it as a GM, anyway, since, if anything, Battler was too incompetent to even approach her intended answer, which she wanted him to.

Originally Posted by Renall

Here's the issue I have with that:

• Furudo Erika only increases it by one person.
• Besides her, the number of people on this island is exactly the same as it was in the previous games.
• In other words, the number of people in this parlor now is equal to the total number of people on this island.

The only way around this is to say Kanon was always a "person" but never an existent independent body. But that gets dangerously close to letting us say Kinzo is a "person" or "character" even though he's dead, because doesn't exist == doesn't exist. Someone else trying to perpetrate the appearance of his existence is philosophically indistinct from Yasu posing as Kanon to validate the appearance of his existence.

Plus, per the end of ep6, Kanon and Shannon aren't two people. And we can't give him a body but not personhood, because that's impossible (or at least cheating).

"Kanon is a "person" but never an existent independent body" is exactly what I'm saying, though. You say it's a slippery slope to wierd reasoning about Kinzo's status, but Kinzo is very obviously his own particular case - he's dead, and after that comes forth is explicitly excluded from the "person" set. You're worried about a slippery slope with a brick wall built in front of it.

As for EP6, of course he doesn't have a body there, so there's no problem.

Also, I mean ... ... the pages show him right there with everyone else.

[GreyZone]

Originally Posted by Kealym

So, in laymens terms ... EP6 is very direct that a GM can Later Queen themselves a solution, and how this would work. It also says openly that doing so is usually a really bad idea that can turn your game into an incomprehensible mess, and we have little reason to believe Beato ever engaged in it as a GM, anyway, since, if anything, Battler was too incompetent to even approach her intended answer, which she wanted him to.

I really have to doubt that a player is able to do actions reatroactively without the GM noticing. Also Battler obviously knew about Shkanon, otherwise Lambda would never "acknowledge" him.

In a way Genius Battler would be way more cruel to Erika in the 6th game than Beato ever was. He made her misinterpret the rules multiple times and played along with those non-existant rules.

We also know that the NPCs of a game are usually written by the gamemaster as well, so at least Beato the elder was "scripted" by Battler.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Kealym

"Kanon is a "person" but never an existent independent body" is exactly what I'm saying, though. You say it's a slippery slope to wierd reasoning about Kinzo's status, but Kinzo is very obviously his own particular case - he's dead, and after that comes forth is explicitly excluded from the "person" set. You're worried about a slippery slope with a brick wall built in front of it.

As for EP6, of course he doesn't have a body there, so there's no problem.

The problem there is you seem to be saying that Kanon also has a body and/or is a person in ep1-4, then suddenly isn't, because that's how the math works out:

• EP1-3: X, where X <= 18.
• EP4: X - Kinzo, where X <= 17.
• EP5: Y + Erika, where Y = X+1.
• EP6: 16 + Erika.

Per your theory, X = 17 in the first four games, because for Erika to only increase the person count by one and the number of people to be the same as before with Kanon among them, Erika has to increase that value to 18. But I think you'd agree Kanon didn't have an independent physical body in ep1-4, or at least no evidence exists for this. Otherwise what you seem to be saying is the final red of ep6 eliminated Kanon's body... except it would appear Kanon never actually had one, what with Battler never seeing it after his "deaths."

But if Kanon is a bodiless person, then he still counts regardless (based on what you've said). So he counts in ep6 without respect to whether he has a body or not, just as he did in every previous episode. Plus, Kanon kinda has to exist, because red describes his actions in that episode. Yet if Kanon and Shannon counted separately, then Erika is right and she is the 18th person. And she apparently isn't.

It just seems cleaner to say there were always only 16 "people," and that "people" count in the normal expected sense, but that "characters" can be spoken of in red without violating that number. Thus, Kinzo and Kanon actually are completely identical: Nonexistent persons being spoken of in red but not actually part of the person count. The difference is Kanon is being portrayed by a (usually) living person, so he can actually take actions while alive. Beatrice can describe "the person who is Shannon/Kanon/Beatrice" (who is just one person) as either of Shannon or Kanon at will. Granted, I never liked this tomfoolery, but it is cleaner.

Originally Posted by GreyZone

In a way Genius Battler would be way more cruel to Erika in the 6th game than Beato ever was. He made her misinterpret the rules multiple times and played along with those non-existant rules.

Is it really cruel if he gave her multiple chances to back out of what she was doing? He wasn't going to let her make retroactive moves, but then she begged him. He wasn't going to confirm certain things, but she demanded it. He freely offered her detective authority, but she intentionally rejected it. All he did was give her enough rope to hang herself, but she could've stopped at any time.

Although having discussed this, I suppose you could question - per Erika's more humanizing characterization and backstory in ep6 - whether she was also scripted. Although if that's the case either Bern never noticed, or didn't care, or Erika intended to just hijack her own character development... but then Dlanor was there, so I dunno. Or maybe Battler scripted everybody, including Bern.

[DokEnkephalin]

How reliable are EP6 and 7 supposed to be? 6 has no qualified witness to draw clues from and 7 has the most reliable and qualified witness of all. But both boards were constructed by Featherine. She claims to have the Golden Truth and therefore can craft a story just as true and valid as all the previous ones, but she's never shown to issue a Golden Truth.

[AuraTwilight]

Featherine didn't construct either boards; Battler and Bern did, respectively.

Featherine and Toya Hachijo are not the same person.

[DokEnkephalin]

Even if Battler did create EP6 rather than Featherine creating her own interpretation of it, EP7 isn't the same board; Featherine lured her into her drawing room, displayed the board she created, then demanded Bern read for her. Since Bern is echoing Featherine throughout conversations with Willard, I wouldn't credit her with being in charge, even if she's nominally Game Master.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by DokEnkephalin

How reliable are EP6 and 7 supposed to be? 6 has no qualified witness to draw clues from and 7 has the most reliable and qualified witness of all. But both boards were constructed by Featherine. She claims to have the Golden Truth and therefore can craft a story just as true and valid as all the previous ones, but she's never shown to issue a Golden Truth.

There's no point in even having a story if lack of a "qualified witness" makes the story unsolvable. And if Featherine knows the truth, that means there was a truth to reach and that she was capable of reaching it without needing additional information that she seemingly has no ability to acquire (or at least never did acquire).

All of which points to the idea that Beatrice did have an answer in mind from the start, making ep6's retroactive play between Erika and Battler the anomaly.

[DokEnkephalin]

I didn't say 'unsolvable', just unreliable. You just can't take anything away from it that isn't substantiated in the POV of a qualified witness in a valid representation of the events. Featherine can claim to know what the truth is without actually knowing it, even if parts are corroborated by other sources.

The problem is that the guarantee of an honest POV that was in Knox's original 9th is now just implied in a conjunction of the revised 7th and 9th. And every prior chapter has shown even the omniscient 3rd person POV isn't objective, and can be completely full of shit. You at least had Battler's perspective as a qualified witness, plus Red Truth to fact check anything outside that.

In EP 6 Erika completely subverts that by violating the 7th and engaging in lies of omission, and since Battler isn't the detective and Meta-Battler can't be the detective, there's no honest POV to expect anywhere. But this would be a trivial problem if the entire board can't be relied on, which would be a problem even with the most objective and disciplined detective possible, such as is presented in the EP7.

[haguruma]

Originally Posted by GreyZone

What was all the talk about "Anti-Mystery" then? Personally, I think that "Anti-Mystery" only applies to Rokkenjima-Prime, but the possibility that it (or at least elements of it) refers to the gameboards as well, cannot be completely disregarded.

The question that's not been asked often enough and not been cleared up is, for me, what Anti-Mystery and Anti-Fantasy (especially the second one, since the first one is at least talked about) actually are. When Renall says, changing the story makes it an unfair challenge between the author and the reader, then I think he is only partially correct, because by employing terms of the "Anti" category and questioning, whether this is mystery, fantasy, anything in between or something else entirely, he already opens up a potential new field.

I think we can safely agree that EP1 and 2 are Classical Detective Fiction (honkaku misuteri), but in EP3 already we have a shift in narrative perspective, the author is no longer all-knowing because only with End of the Golden Witch does Tohya also realize the truth, which he either forgot or never realized in the first place. This means it is not the system of Classical Detective Fiction (nor the Classical High or Low Fantasy) in which the author narrates from a position of omniscience.

Anti-Mystery is described as "Being Detective Fiction while rejecting the idea of Detective Fiction". This leads into the aforementioned Later Queen Problem, how can we know that actually "all the clues have been presented?"
Anti-Fantasy is considered to be the refusal of contributing to neither a blind belief system nor to absolute unreflected nihilism, but using the framework of Fantasy Fiction to ironically or cynically point out the flaws of absolute, unfounded belief.

And in the end both are the only options that stay with us, in a time where philosophy has denied most of all ideas of an absolute truth being available to humans. And isn't this exactly what Umineko mirrors?
What it contributes to is, for me, not simply mystery fiction, but a discourse on writing vs. knowing in general. I don't want to say that Ryukishi reached any new philosophical ground, because this has all been said and done by the 90s. But he presented it in an entertaining and engaging way, especially because he didn't give a set answer, even if he decided on it. That would be the point, he knows it, he is the God of his world and can decide how much he imparts on us, but everything else is for us to work with the clues we have.

Concerning the Genius Battler discussion.
If we consider EP6 to be the continuation of the quarrel between opponents of EP5, then Battler's intent would be clear. It is to make all people innocent, the only person he is willing to sacrifice is himself. His original goal might have been to have it all be a giant game, but not making this clear in his narrative he opened up a window for anybody to say "nope, this character killed them all" and this is what Erika did.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by haguruma

What it contributes to is, for me, not simply mystery fiction, but a discourse on writing vs. knowing in general. I don't want to say that Ryukishi reached any new philosophical ground, because this has all been said and done by the 90s. But he presented it in an entertaining and engaging way, especially because he didn't give a set answer, even if he decided on it. That would be the point, he knows it, he is the God of his world and can decide how much he imparts on us, but everything else is for us to work with the clues we have.

You're giving him way too much credit. He isn't even remotely that ideologically consistent and the narrative wears those supposed themes more as window dressing and armchair philosophy. He's honestly not narratively consistent, and I'm not going to give your argument a pass and try to twist my brain in knots believing that was somehow the point. I'm almost positive he only vaguely understands what "anti-mystery" and "anti-fantasy" (and also probably "mystery") even mean in the context of his own story and in greater relation to each other (and I'm also fairly confident in describing both as pretentious mental wankery for the modern uncommitted, but that's practically all this thread is for, so...).

Ignore all that nonsense for a moment and look at the Battler/Beatrice contest simply as a relationship between human beings (or witchly beings, whatever): Beatrice has a particular purpose for which she has engaged Battler. To act in a way that is fundamentally inconsistent with this purpose would not benefit her. The people advancing this notion that she can arbitrarily employ red to pare down the reality and that it isn't set until she says it is essentially suggest that there is no ideal reality for each story in her mind. But if that were so, there would be no truth until such time as it is created, meaning Beatrice either never really had one (which would make her a hypocrite, demanding of Battler a realization she herself does not even have for him to find) or that she is fine with whatever truth is collectively constructed by their battle (and she isn't, not even a little bit; see ep4 and ep5). The point I'm trying to make here is that even if such a way of going about things is possible, it's something Beatrice would not have done, as otherwise it ruins her character. And I had about enough of her character being assassinated in Chiru, thanks.

Now, perhaps the argument is that these are reflecting deeper themes about the uncertainty of truth beyond the grade school level realization that it's impossible to know all information. Perhaps the point is that there is a conflict between Battler and Beatrice who believe in the importance of a full Truth versus people like Erika and Bernkastel who just want to know facts and draw whatever conclusion sounds easiest from them. But if these supposed nuances were important to the story, then they should have actually been developed as important aspects of the story. Perhaps the story was building to that originally, but it certainly never got there. The conflict I described could have been the conflict of Twilight, but it really wasn't. For it to have been, it needed a lot more depth than it got. Was that the fault of rushing ep8? Will the manga establish that better? I have no idea, but I know the text as presented and it wasn't that.

I agree that what we got was entertaining, but philosophically it's laughable; it's essentially on par with the guy on a pot binge who suddenly realizes that, like, there's no reason anything has to be true at all, maaaaan. It makes no claim to any meaningful understanding of Truth beyond what it speaks of on a surface level (and perhaps it never meant to, in which case it isn't the author's fault). It can essentially be summed up as "Did you know it's hard to know facts, and that Truth isn't just an aggregation of facts?" Certainly a valid point, but not necessarily a deep one.

If indeed we're arguing it's anything more than that, it fails to support itself. Making a point one refuses to back up or defend is intellectual cowardice. On the other hand, if Ryukishi's purpose was merely to take some ideas he'd heard about and write what he considered to be a fun story blending genres that he enjoyed and hoped others would as well, then I'm not going to lay that charge at his feet. But if that's so (and I suspect that's exactly what it is), we shouldn't take his themes too much deeper than he himself did, as it's questionable whether he knew, cared, or even thought about those themes beyond what he actually advanced. That entire essay about Anti-Mystery and Anti-Fantasy always struck me as about the same level of reflection as a book report. It's a neat idea he didn't entirely grasp but wanted to use as a vague basis for a story about witches battling over truth with truth.

And that's a cool concept! I don't mind so much if that's all it was meant to be. But there's a number of philosophical issues the story merely raised and never actually followed through on. It would certainly have been interesting to see more development of the idea of deception as a moral good, and whether that's actually justifiable (Beatrice seemed to think it was, Battler initially seemed to think it wasn't; then the changed his mind, why?).

[UsagiTenpura]

I've been thinking lately 07 was reading about various fallacies and thought paradoxes that aren't commonly known when he came up with Umineko - tho I'm not suggesting he did an insightful work on them.

The so called "homonculus fallacy" in particular sounds like it rang a bell in 07 about the rules playing themselves, the multiplication of observers constantly creating new meta-levels, behavior vs rules and the endless created by infinite recess.

[Kealym]

Originally Posted by Renall

The problem there is you seem to be saying that Kanon also has a body and/or is a person in ep1-4, then suddenly isn't, because that's how the math works out:

• EP1-3: X, where X <= 18.
• EP4: X - Kinzo, where X <= 17.
• EP5: Y + Erika, where Y = X+1.
• EP6: 16 + Erika.

Per your theory, X = 17 in the first four games, because for Erika to only increase the person count by one and the number of people to be the same as before with Kanon among them, Erika has to increase that value to 18. But I think you'd agree Kanon didn't have an independent physical body in ep1-4, or at least no evidence exists for this. Otherwise what you seem to be saying is the final red of ep6 eliminated Kanon's body... except it would appear Kanon never actually had one, what with Battler never seeing it after his "deaths."

But if Kanon is a bodiless person, then he still counts regardless (based on what you've said). So he counts in ep6 without respect to whether he has a body or not, just as he did in every previous episode. Plus, Kanon kinda has to exist, because red describes his actions in that episode. Yet if Kanon and Shannon counted separately, then Erika is right and she is the 18th person. And she apparently isn't.

It just seems cleaner to say there were always only 16 "people," and that "people" count in the normal expected sense, but that "characters" can be spoken of in red without violating that number. Thus, Kinzo and Kanon actually are completely identical: Nonexistent persons being spoken of in red but not actually part of the person count. The difference is Kanon is being portrayed by a (usually) living person, so he can actually take actions while alive. Beatrice can describe "the person who is Shannon/Kanon/Beatrice" (who is just one person) as either of Shannon or Kanon at will. Granted, I never liked this tomfoolery, but it is cleaner.

/shrug

I can't really argue with the math, and your argument is sound. But, "Kanon was hiding behind Godha" is just so ... flat on it's face dumb, and contrary to everything about how the scene is presented I just can't go along with it. I also don't feel good eliminating both Shannon and Kanon's individual personhoods, and referring to them as "just characters". Doesn't sit well with me thematically, I mean.

I would rather keep abiding that Kanon had a body in EP5 alone, and any discrepancy in the biody count, before or after, is just Ryukishi stumbling, yet again, over his own somewhat mastubatory narrative contrivances on the matter. So I guess I agree to disagree.

Originally Posted by Renall

But if that were so, there would be no truth until such time as it is created, meaning Beatrice either never really had one (which would make her a hypocrite, demanding of Battler a realization she herself does not even have for him to find) or that she is fine with whatever truth is collectively constructed by their battle (and she isn't, not even a little bit; see ep4 and ep5). The point I'm trying to make here is that even if such a way of going about things is possible, it's something Beatrice would not have done, as otherwise it ruins her character. And I had about enough of her character being assassinated in Chiru, thanks.

I don't think anybody's arguing that Beatrice ever engaged in Later Queen solutions. At most, maybe she teased that she would, but as you say, she clearly, clearly had an intended puzzle/narrative layout, and stuck to it. EP6 is more or less Ryukishi trying to directly comment on the idea of what that would mean for a writer or a reader, in his way. Featherine is, after all, pretty much Ryu in a nice dress, and that's the EP where she gives most of her "being a writer is such a toughie sometimes" schtick.

Originally Posted by Renall

And that's a cool concept! I don't mind so much if that's all it was meant to be. But there's a number of philosophical issues the story merely raised and never actually followed through on. It would certainly have been interesting to see more development of the idea of deception as a moral good, and whether that's actually justifiable (Beatrice seemed to think it was, Battler initially seemed to think it wasn't; then the changed his mind, why?).

Welp, a lot of the themes in Umineko seemed to be him reflecting on the experience of writing Higurashi. There's a new WTC confirmed for when RGD is finished, so ... maybe later he'll have a better handle on these things.

[Drifloon]

Originally Posted by Renall

And that's a cool concept! I don't mind so much if that's all it was meant to be. But there's a number of philosophical issues the story merely raised and never actually followed through on. It would certainly have been interesting to see more development of the idea of deception as a moral good, and whether that's actually justifiable (Beatrice seemed to think it was, Battler initially seemed to think it wasn't; then the changed his mind, why?).

Well, we did kind of get a little coverage of this, but it was certainly undeveloped. I can definitely see that Ryukishi was at least trying to show Battler starting to change his understanding of this issue throughout EP5. The first part where Battler starts to seriously question whether 'magic' is inherently evil is the scene where Bern destroys Natsuhi's illusion, and then the later talk with Dlanor about magic gives him further reason to question his view of the issue. But I would agree that the limited development he gets isn't really sufficient to justify the radical change in EP8. (It doesn't help that we never really get to fully understand exactly what kind of understanding Battler did reach from the 'And then...I...knew' scene.) That might be justifiable if BATTLER in EP8 is supposed to represent some part of Ange rather than BATTLER himself, though, which would make a lot of sense.

I feel like EP8 is really disconnected from the rest of the series as a whole, and a lot of that can be put down to how the whole thing seems to describe an internal struggle of Ange's that doesn't really have any connection to the meta-narrative of the rest of the series, yet still uses characters from that same meta-narrative to display its points. I do think that was really kind of awkwardly done, and it does bug me how the tone of EP8 is such a departure from everything before it. Part of me would honestly have been happy if the series had ended after the main part of EP7, since its final chapter really is a beautiful scene to end on. I do like a lot of EP8 though, especially the parts with Tohya (even though that whole thing deserved to be covered in a lot more detail than it was).

I mean, it isn't just BATTLER in EP8 who seems to be strangely disconnected from his previous portrayal; Beatrice being there is also weird since she was supposed to have been put to rest at the start of EP7. And Dlanor's viewpoint seems to have undergone a radical change for no particular reason as well. In EP5, she said "Magic that hides the result in darkness is EVIL. I will not permit IT. However, magic that governs the process is not necessarily EVIL." But in EP8 she seems to be fighting on the side that wants to 'hide the result in darkness' without any problem, and also seems to suddenly completely hate Erika even though they seemed to have reached some sort of an understanding at the end of EP6. Renall has already gone into how Erika herself seems to have reversed all her EP6 development in EP8 too, and we've talked lots of times about Ange seeming to have lost all her EP4 development. So yeah, I really do find it hard to connect EP8 to the rest of the series properly. I sort of like it as a stand-alone, but it just doesn't seem to fit somehow.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Kealym

I can't really argue with the math, and your argument is sound. But, "Kanon was hiding behind Godha" is just so ... flat on it's face dumb, and contrary to everything about how the scene is presented I just can't go along with it. I also don't feel good eliminating both Shannon and Kanon's individual personhoods, and referring to them as "just characters". Doesn't sit well with me thematically, I mean.

Well, they are just characters; that's why they can only be human in the Golden Land where there is no such distinction (although there's it's more that everyone is like them than that they are human). Honestly the Golden Land is kind of disturbing to me on many levels...

• What does everybody do when they get bored of having self-congratulatory parties?
• How does George fulfill his ambition to have a family with Shannon if they're eternally the same age? What if Kanon and Jessica break up after actually getting to spend some time together?
• Can anyone have more kids? Can Rosa get laid? With whom?
• Can Maria grow up? What if Rosa doesn't want her to?
• What if the happiness one person wants is different from what somebody else wants?
• Does Gohda have to spend eternity at his job? Does he never want any time off?
• Will Ange go there when she dies or will she have her own Heaven-esque thing considering that was only a small part of her life and she established a bunch of other bonds with people over hers? This is actually something of a non-joke question because the answer is kind of thematically important.
• Does Battler go there but Tohya goes to his wife/kidnapper/witch dominatrix/writing partner's eternal sex dungeon when he dies?

Originally Posted by Kealym

I would rather keep abiding that Kanon had a body in EP5 alone, and any discrepancy in the biody count, before or after, is just Ryukishi stumbling, yet again, over his own somewhat mastubatory narrative contrivances on the matter. So I guess I agree to disagree.

Couldn't we also argue that Kanon being there is just a giant boneheaded contrivance or mistake? Yes, the manga still also shows it, but that doesn't make it not a mistake, just a non-corrected mistake.

The other possibility is that Ryukishi earnestly believes that if there's no reliable/detective perspective, literally anything can be shown and it's not unfair to Erika, hence why she can have Kanon in the room in front of her piece's eyes and not complain about this later, or why she can separate everyone into two rooms in ep6 and somehow not notice Kanon isn't where she intended him to be.

[GuestSpeaker]

On reread, Ep 1 manga realllllyyyyy spells out how suicidal getting to the golden land is for Beatrice "rest in eternal sleep" and all.

Also, Beatrice was a soft author, because she essentially always had the power in red to proclaim that "Beatrice did X". Apart from the fact that Beatrice was definitively non-human, she was constructed in much the same way as Shannon or Kanon. As Ronove said, it would break the game, but you could easily have said. "Beatrice killed Dr Nanjo" in red.




Plus, I think all those points you raise about the Golden Land are points I've always wondered about heaven in general. The conclusion to draw is that if a state of eternal happiness exists, it can't be that concrete. It would just have to be eternal happiness, otherwise what happens if you die and 30 years later your wife dies? Same issues.

Also note: Someone needs to always be on the outside door of the golden land, because if you don't stay alive to tell people that everyone in it is happy, the golden land doesn't exist. Proof for Battler/Yasu surviving maybe?