silenthill2ost - Tumblr blog

silenthill2ost · 20 days ago

Text

Infodumping about Train Conductor and the Train Essence to try and solidify how I interpret him. Written for a friend, but I figured I'd share my thoughts here as well.

Murder on the Orient Express. It’s a good book. I will be summarizing out the wazoo, but there are still a Bunch of words under the cut. Spoilers for an Agatha Christie novel from the 1930s, you know how it is.

Train Conductor was the very first A-tier introduced for Andrew. At face value, it represents his sense of duty, dedication to up keeping order, and his isolation. This time, the isolation is shown through the lens of someone who is constantly moving, sequestered away from the rest of the world on rails caked in ice and snow. While the essence doesn’t focus particularly on him, nor is there any indication of the true culprit by exposition alone, looking towards the novel the essence is based on touches upon one last important character trait of Andrew’s: his tendency towards taking justice into his own hands.

Something that has always stuck out to me from the design notes is that he’s a ‘fake snow conductor’. This aligns with the other themes within the essence itself. Every single B-tier in the essence except Victor’s “Sheriff” is a character who is renown for pretending to be someone they are not. Chloe pretends to be Vera, Joseph pretends to be Claude, Martha’s original name isn’t even known. Smiley Face is Joker pretending to be Sergi, and… Well, with Kreacher, you can make an argument for him pretending to be an upstanding citizen while running the orphanage, or his attempting to pretend to be a scarecrow to entice Emma. Either way, that man is not who he says he is, and his appearance may very well be because Robbie is there too.

Sophia hides her face with a veil. Ivan’s entire head is covered in bandages. Andrew is the only one who does none of these things. Andrew is the only one who does not pretend to be someone he’s not, and is the only member of the performer game who does not wear a mask.

Just because he does not hide his face does not mean he is who he says he is, however. Him being an imposter would make him a likely culprit for the murder. Andrew is rarely innocent in any of his depictions. Willfully ignorant at best, murderer at worst. So with the vagueness of the story as told through the animation, and the source material it derives from, I’m willing to say Yeah, He Probably Had A Hand In It.

(Spoilers for MOTOE become more prevalent from here on out.)

If he’s meant to represent an imposter with little more nuance than that, that would likely lead to Poirot’s first theory being correct. The culprit was someone who disguised themselves as a train conductor, boarded the train, murdered the victim, and departed without a word, before anyone could catch sight of him. It was always just the bloody result of a mafia feud. A complete third party who did not match the stakes of the rest of the story being told, for the sake of protecting the innocence of everyone else on that train.

But that does not sound like Andrew to me.

This explanation is only offered because there is one, more likely, theory.

(CW: Child Death, suicide)

In the book, every single other person on the train was responsible for the murder, because the victim in question affected everyone in some way. The murdered man had, in turn, killed a 3 year old girl in the past, and got off without punishment for it, devastating her family and everyone around her. Innocent people were blamed, and others never recovered from the attack. The train conductor’s daughter, for instance, was the one accused of murdering the 3 year old. Unable to take the stress or the accusations, she killed herself, leaving her father heartbroken. He had every reason to be in on the murder.

In fact, in one of the film adaptations (I have not actually seen it, it was just in the summary of the movie so forgive me if there are any inaccuracies), the conductor was the person who gathered everyone on the train together so they would be far away from society, only among fellows, and with the ability to completely delete the evidence of their involvement by sheerly allowing it to melt away with the rest of the ice and snow. He planned the timetables so the train would pass through the blizzard, and give everyone an opportunity to kill the man. The conductor was the only one who was exactly as he said he was. It would not have worked if he were anyone else.

How does this relate back to Andrew?

He very rarely takes this amount of action as is implied by the essence unless he has been personally wronged in some way. Yes, he dislikes sinful people on principle (because it is very easy to dislike someone you see yourself in), but you only get that burning, low simmer loathing if they have treated him like garbage. At which point, Andrew sits down, shuts up, and decides that they no longer deserve a single ounce of his sympathy, kindness, or mercy.

To have Andrew be responsible for this murder, he, too, would have a reason to kill Melly’s husband. Possibly for the same reason she murders her husband in every timeline she is able to have a husband. Possibly because he has something to gain. Possibly because it aligns with his goal.

…They would also revisit the exact idea of Andrew murdering a woman’s husband because he was an abusive piece of shit in the anniversary event like 3 years later (Not to her, but to him), so perhaps it’s just a narrative path they enjoy going down in regards to his character.

If Train Conductor is also meant to represent his coldness and level of detachment from society spawned from isolation, this is also shown in the setting being on a train far away from the world and its laws. The intention is, even in civilized society, there are places you are able to get away with murder. Once you get off the train, the evidence will be lost, and there’s no possible way for any of the occupants (who are not who they say they are) to be tracked down. It’s the 1930s, in that time period you could change your name over, move thirty miles away, and completely start your life over.

The fact that there is a sheriff on the train at all was a fluke. He was only meant to be returning to London and got caught up in a murder. (Shout outs to Victor, truly. This is the exact type of scenario he would find himself dragged into.)

Speaking of Victor, his outfit description is a direct reference to the novel the essence is based upon. It lists off random pieces of evidence found on the victim’s body. All of it was planted as a red herring, a last minute intention to mask their intentions. Everyone on the train was in on it. They would never, ever, get a chance like this again. This, more than anything, makes me believe it’s more directly referencing the book in who the culprit(s) are, and that there’s definitely more than one person involved.

This is also a me, personal, thing but. I also just don’t like the idea of Andrew being an imposter who stowed away on the train. Or a scheming mastermind who is responsible for the murder and hasn’t had any help at all in orchestrating it. I could buy him murdering in an impulsive fit and attempting to pin it on someone else because he is scared and doesn’t want to be caught and punished for it (Which, again, they do a really good job of in the T&I event!), but to both be that and an imposter feels like it would go against his usual characterization.

I would accept a ‘they replaced the real conductor with him to make it easier to commit the murder’. Which, if they’re going with the other themes of the essence itself, would not be that far fetched. Andrew still would be part of a game much larger than he is while still having the story of the essence itself centered on Sophia (Due to being the S-tier).

My personal belief for Andrew’s role is close to the adaptation mentioned rather than a direct retelling of the novel. Andrew was the only person on the train truly meant to be there, he was even the one who suggested that they perform the murder in the midst of the blizzard. He is pretending to be someone he is not. Not for Sophia, and not for anyone else on that train, but for himself.

One common theme with Andrew’s costumes is representing someone who is constantly on the move, or helping other people get around in some fashion. A train conductor is someone who is meant to be a guide, who falls into the background, finding themselves amidst many people but truly getting to know almost none of them. Andrew, as Conductor, stands tall in his showroom animation. He is one of very few able to keep eye contact with the viewer, and does not hesitate when walking into the storm. At the very least, this is an Andrew who is not beholden to his usual anxious hang-ups. But still likely has anxiety because you know. It is still Andrew.

With the idea that he Is an actual train conductor (as opposed to a fake one, which I am still shaking the game to explain what that means (it never will)), my characterization for him would be a lot less socially adverse due to working with the public, but still rather shy and reclusive. He’s very dedicated to his work and timetables, and can often come across as impatient due to checking his pocket watch constantly. Some might even describe him as ‘cold’, but really, he just has a hard time talking to people when it’s not strictly business they’re discussing. It still is Andrew. People still believed he was a demon. He still has his scars.

He’s a bit hard to pin down re: Andrew’s usual values, with the essence being as open ended and vague as it is, but I think it’d be easy to say he has a strong sense of duty and work ethic, as all Andrews are dedicated to their beliefs. In that sense, he also has no qualms with enacting justice on those he believes ‘deserve it’.

There's one more thing I'd like to mention though, the fact that they drew his jacket backwards at first as a mistake, then leaning into it in the final draft. The coat Andrew wears is a woman's jacket due, visible by the placement of the buttons, perhaps this is meant to be the mask he wears, and the indication he is not who he says he is. It would very much be a mistake someone unfamiliar with the job would make, someone pretending to be someone without quite understanding all the nuances.

Or he might just be wearing a female jacket because he likes it. Ultimately how you interpret the essence is up to you.

#Andrew Kreiss #Idv Rambling #character interpretation #This thing speaks!

7 notes · View notes