[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[Smeckledorf]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

The current Ep6 patch from witch hunt has already all the characters TIPS translated.

none of them mention anything about any corpse found in the island.

I am unwilling to argue this point at this time for several reasons.
1. I actually don't care what Erika is.
2. I don't feel like going on my other computer to check.
3. I am studying for finals and only posting on here due to a self-mandated break.
4. I have a migraine.
5. If I remember correctly each character has an alive and dead tip and the tip I am speaking of should be a dead tip for Erika, then again I admit that I could be wrong. So, I am not sure if you checked the tip I am speaking of.
6. After posting reasons 2-5 I still do not care what Erika is.

[Kylon99]

Originally Posted by Judoh

Actually nonexistent Erika theories have been around since episode 5. People wanted to keep the spirit of the previous games. So because of that they deny Erika.

a quote I found from /seacats/

Maybe instead of saying 'came about' I should have said 'came to prominence.' EDIT: Maybe I should say, 'suddenly start clinging to theories desperately'

It's just like the Shkannon theories. They've been around since EP2 or so... hell, there's probably at least a handful of people who thought they must be the same person just by examining the artwork. So you can say the theory has been out there.

(For my claim to fame, I declared that Jessica was dressing up as Beatrice the first time I got a good picture of Beatrice and Jessica in the tips. Which was near the end of EP1 or so... :3 ... absolutely no clues for that at that point but hey, I had the theory. 8) )

But Erika'ss non-existance theory suddenly became serious once the twist at the end of EP6 was introduced. I don't think EP5 and 6 should be causing us to totally revamp our theories, especially in a way that causes massive problems, such as "If she's not real then what happens to the detective viewpoint?"


By the way, I was looking at the End roll for EP6 and Erika's name is listed with no 'result.'
http://umineco.info/?%E7%AC%AC%E5%85...96%87%E7%AB%A0

I thought maybe the end roll would say something like it did for Ange at EP4. But it's as if she's being treated as a meta-character or like Amakusa; not relevant to the gameboard. Mind you her actual death was on the meta level anyways...

EDIT: Oh also, I remember reading the original Erika's execute TIPs and the great revelation with her is that she was theorized to have been caught up in the Rokkenjima Explosion Incident. The only time I had heard of her 'body washing ashore dead' was on forum postings. I thought that that was just a theory or something. I don't ever remember any evidence from the game that that was what happened...

Here's her normal and execute TIPs from umineco.info (scroll up a few millimetres):
http://umineco.info/?%E7%AC%AC%E5%85.../TIPS#yc88f1ea

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

For Example, how Erika can have a 100% certainty that Natsuhi died, while Battler does not?

Unless Battler does know that. But if that were the case, Bern shouldn't have fallen for it even when Erika did.

[ijriims]

Still talking about whether Erika existed on Rokkenjima in EP6 or not?

Red texts: "Erika is a name which can be used by the person only". No Erika-ball throwing around I guess, unless you provides answer how someone on Rokkenjima could suddenly say he or she was Erika when character tips said Erika fell off from the cruise ship Eternal Maid II on 4 th Oct, 1986.

---------------------------------

BTW, the manga EP1 Ch 21 seemed to confirm there was really a letter in the parlor when Battler's group searched for Maria. Any thoughts on that?

[Renall]

Originally Posted by ijriims

Still talking about whether Erika existed on Rokkenjima in EP6 or not?

Red texts: "Erika is a name which can be used by the person only". No Erika-ball throwing around I guess, unless you provides answer how someone on Rokkenjima could suddenly say he or she was Erika when character tips said Erika fell off from the cruise ship Eternal Maid II on 4 th Oct, 1986.

No one needs to say they're Erika. "The person him/herself" always refers to some undetermined user of the name, whether that name is known or preferred by them or not.

Kanon is not "Kanon's" real name. Yet "only the person himself" can claim it. Who is the person himself? The guy who uses the name? The guy everyone calls by the name? It's only one person, but exactly who it is, that's less clear (hence Shkanon etc.).

[Judoh]

To be exact it's.

• All names refer only to the actual people!
  
• I already stated with the red truth that all names refer only to the actual people. Therefore, the names "Erika", "Battler", and "Kanon" refer only to the actual people.

But people tell me that an "actual person" is a vague statement and that as long as somebody represents the "body of Erika" that doesn't matter. Personally I think this should be taken literally, because it seems to be a red intended to deny Erika's theory about Kanon having more than one name, but not many agree.

[Renall]

Well, the flaw there in the "actual people" thing is that there is no "actual person" named Kanon. He has a name (if he exists at all, anyway), and it isn't Kanon. So in that case "the actual person" refers to a person whose name is not Kanon. The argument then follows that "Battler" or "Erika" is also permitted to refer to a person not initially contemplated as Ushiromiya Battler or Furudo Erika.

Of course, it can also mean exactly what it says it means. But in Kanon's case it doesn't.

[Judoh]

The red is not is not saying that it refers to an actual person named Kanon. It's saying something completely different. To rephrase it the name Kanon can only refer to the actual person referred to with that name.

It's the same as the red before only without the a different person cannot claim his name.

If your assuming that Kanon is not the same as a different person like with shkanon than only the person referred to with the name Kanon can enter Battler's room. That's a no brainer.

[Renall]

The point is more, names and bodies are disassociated. Battler could say that Ushiromiya Battler was born from Ushiromiya Asumu, but not that he was, even though he's Battler. This was speculated to mean that there are two Battlers, which means "Ushiromiya Battler" applies specifically in-context to whoever you happen to be talking about.

Kanon is an exception to the malleability of rules. Whoever he is, only he can claim the name Kanon. But that rule is a special case explicitly applied to him. The consequence of that is that, logically, other names are not as fixed.

At least, that would be the theory, and it's a theory most prevalent ideas right now use. It could be wrong, but a solution not using it is tricky, and Beatrice is the one who brought this to the table in the first place, so it isn't wild speculation.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

@Oliver: There are two problems I have with your way to see it. The first is the fact that you assume Erika is seeing the gameboard through the eyes of the Game Master. This is totally at odd with what we see in EP6. Since the Game Master of EP6 is Battler and if really everything that Erika sees is filtered through Battler's eyes, then how it is possible that Erika can do anything without Battler knowing it?

Two ways, which I have already explained previously.

• Battler's Master Stroke version: Continuing to lie to Erika is an integral part of his plan of Beatrice Resurrection and his best means of manipulating Erika into creating the logic error that Beatrice must solve to be reborn.
• Lambda Involvement version: In earlier episodes, Battler regularly addresses Virgilia and Ronove to reconstruct a scene or two, which implies that many metacharacters can show events on the board to others. Lambda certainly can, and can continue doing it for Erika in the interest of keeping Bernkastel around, because Bernkastel is rooting for her Erika.

In respect to Natsuhi's death and certainty, it's either Battler lying to Erika that he doesn't know to manipulate her, or Lambda telling her the truth because she is the Witch of Certainty anyway.

In any other explanation, Erika has to see herself on the board and hear other people call her Erika if her perspective is impartial and she is the detective. That clearly doesn't work very well.

Though, there is one loophole but going through it results in a worse situation: Any scene that is narrated by Battler is given from his impartial detective perspective. Any scene that is not narrated by Battler that refers to him in third person isn't, even if he is present in it. Great swathes of text become suspect if this is to be accepted.

There is only one real problem with a No-Piece-Erika explanation which somehow doesn't get addressed in all the questions. Namely, this:

At different points in the text, Erika has a location referred to in red. If no Piece-Erika that gives Meta-Erika an excuse to be in the story ever exists, this name has to refer to Meta-Erika, who cannot have a location since she's not on the board, or to someone who is distinct from Meta-Erika which we, and Meta-Erika, see as Piece-Erika.

That name refers to 'actual person', which means that whatever it is it's the same person. They're free to engage in activities which Meta-Erika accepts as her own, but they have to be an 'actual person', i.e. the same one in both Ep5 and Ep6, which I'm not sure works (or doesn't) -- and won't be until Ep6 is properly translated.

[ijriims]

Well, in EP5 I remembered Erika has introduced herself to the people on Rokkenjima, so who can this "Erika" be if Erika-ball was thrown around?

And when other people used "Erika", who this Erika was?

And for what reason people started referring that person as Erika but not the initial person?

[Ronove]

You know with these names, is it possible to switch around the Japanese kanji to make another name? Like i know in Shannon/Kanon's name has the 'Non' (or whatever it is in Japanese), is it possible to switch around for other names? Erika (in Japanese) can be played around into another set of words :s?

[Tyabann]

Originally Posted by ijriims

Well, in EP5 I remembered Erika has introduced herself to the people on Rokkenjima, so who can this "Erika" be if Erika-ball was thrown around?

And when other people used "Erika", who this Erika was?

And for what reason people started referring that person as Erika but not the initial person?

This is simple, and you don't seem to be understanding it: Any scene on the gameboard with Erika in it is a fake scene. Anytime Erika is referred to by name, that part of the scene is fake.

It's even more straightforward than Shkanon, in my mind.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by ijriims

Well, in EP5 I remembered Erika has introduced herself to the people on Rokkenjima, so who can this "Erika" be if Erika-ball was thrown around?

And when other people used "Erika", who this Erika was?

And for what reason people started referring that person as Erika but not the initial person?

My solution is that Erika never introduced herself. Other people never used "Erika". People never referred to any character as 'Erika'. Lambdadelta was showing Erika and others scenes that probably really happened (but not necessarily) which included some other character painted over with the image of "Erika" and adjusted for them to be called "Erika" in conversation. No Erika was ever there, so Meta-Erika, a creature completely extraneous to the game board, couldn't check this for truth with her own detective eyes. She had an ulterior motive in believing this even if this was a deliberate lie anyway.

Battler also wasn't in control of his own piece all the way up until the confession scene, for that matter.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by Ronove

You know with these names, is it possible to switch around the Japanese kanji to make another name? Like i know in Shannon/Kanon's name has the 'Non' (or whatever it is in Japanese), is it possible to switch around for other names? Erika (in Japanese) can be played around into another set of words :s?

I'm afraid "Erika" is written with kana, so there's nothing in this particular name other than the three syllables, e-ri-ka.

[Judoh]

Well Oliver I only really have one question about your theory. Battler basically boycotted almost all of episode 5 and he had to be shown the whole game over again to keep up. With your theory can't the entire game just be a fabrication to deceive both Battler and Erika?

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by Judoh

Well Oliver I only really have one question about your theory. Battler basically boycotted almost all of episode 5 and he had to be shown the whole game over again to keep up. With your theory can't the entire game just be a fabrication to deceive both Battler and Erika?

That's a possibility, though not a terribly likely one. Just what would make Battler, a nobody, interesting to Bernkastel and Lambdadelta, who only care about themselves, and are interested in other characters more or less only when they have an opportunity for psychological torture or watching drama? Once Battler doesn't play, he is no longer a source of drama and isn't interesting.

So unless they have a particular plan to milk him for enough drama to make it worth it, that bit probably did happen as described -- Bern was having fun kicking Natsuhi and Lambda was happy Bern still sticks around for this.

[Renall]

I would also think Erika would have whined about it, though there is actually no proof of Meta-Erika existing at all before Battler views the replay of the game.

[chronotrig]

Originally Posted by Kaisos Erranon

This is simple, and you don't seem to be understanding it: Any scene on the gameboard with Erika in it is a fake scene. Anytime Erika is referred to by name, that part of the scene is fake.

It's even more straightforward than Shkanon, in my mind.

Well, Shkanon can give a reason for why every individual scene is shown the way it is. Unfortunately, I haven't had time to follow all of the ghost-Erika logic, but does it actually explain why those scenes are fake, and how they are allowed to be fake in the ways that they are?

[Renall]

Originally Posted by chronotrig

Well, Shkanon can give a reason for why every individual scene is shown the way it is. Unfortunately, I haven't had time to follow all of the ghost-Erika logic, but does it actually explain why those scenes are fake, and how they are allowed to be fake in the ways that they are?

The one-sentence summary is: It's an intentional contrast to the Beatrice magic scenes, only inverting mystery and fantasy while remaining no less fantastic. While we in this thread may be well-established with the notion that we can't take magic scenes completely at face value (and thus, we can't necessarily take a non-magic scene completely at face value either), there are probably a lot of people who need that hint.

That aside, it seems to trip the rest of us up, so...

I mean, honestly? Honestly? Erika is the most ridiculous character on the board (magic or "real") since Beatrice herself. And she serves an almost identical narrative function (cruel antagonist who throws red text around and tries to make out someone as a suspect).