umicatto

[umicatto]

Count von Count counting humans to the End! Or numbers crunching in EP5.

Let's take a look at how they count people/human on the island.

First, after they added Erika and the rest of the cousins joined 'Battler' counts the number of human. He specifically uses his personal pronoun with inverted commas- 'I' or 'ore' in Japanese- and sees from his piece's eyes, apparently.

"The number of humans on this island has returned to 18… `I' glanced around at the humans in the parlor."

---after listing every character in the parlor---

"This is everyone. The true number of people on the island at the moment..."

It's unconvient for him that Bernkastel control piece Battler during this time and Meta-Battler doesn't know about the difference between person and human. Now then, what I want to approach?

Claim: "Battler is not the detective/is an accomplice. Thus, he is an unreliable character. Therefore, he could see Shannon and Kanon together."

This is probably the common fan explanation and Battler also admitted it with red truth. However, it's intriguing that he uses his possesiv pronoun with inverted commas, again.

"Furudo Erika is the detective, and the `me' in this game isn't one."

It's hard to track what character was actually refered to, because Battler effectively represent more different versions of himself (Piece, Fantasy and Meta). It it also true for other characters like Beato, Maria or Erika.

Meta Battler didn't make this distinction anymore in further red truths.

Example: "The fact that I claimed to have seen Grandfather is prooooooooooooff!!!"

Oof, does this mean we can bend Battler's truths to the point that he, his Meta Version, objectively saw Kinzo on the game board? Yes, we might have different versions of red truth, but this might be a real mind f***! But let's be fair and don't overcomplicate things.

"Does it go against the rules of Beato's game?" "No, it does not. Lambdadelta-sama actually does understand the rules of Milady's game very well. …However…"

So it might be true that Meta Battler just counted everyone in the parlor, why exactly did he need explicitely view from his very piece's eyes (in other words: control his piece Battler) in this moment instead of not just puts him self in piece Battler's shoes? Imo, it's unnecessary and I thought the fan explanation lack this specific detail (and it's a re-telling, the story was almost finished) . It might be true that piece Battler's pov might be unreliable, but it's debateable that we are reading from piece Battler's eyes in the parlor scene. The manga give us the chance to believe "it's from Battler's perspective" theory. So, can we trust Erika's deduction? No, because she was a schemer.

Meta Battler counts 18 humans. Piece Battler doesn't count. Erika cannot be trusted.

We have another counting in this game.

Let's see whether Erika knows the true number or not. At least she knows about Shannon and Kanon.

Sidenote: The manga states that Erika know about Kanon, but it is shown she doesn't see him in the parlor.

In the chapter Ten Wedges to Pierce Witches Erika suspects that 13 lives will be taken and drifts in a speech about mystery books.

"As far as I know, the mystery novel with the most dead people in a serial murder was 'And then there were none' by Agatha Christie, which had 10 deaths. In the realm of Japanese mysteries, it's probably 'The Tokyo Zodiac Murders' by Shimada Souji. Though there were less than 10 deaths in that one."

"And if everyone on this island is killed... That would make it a historical achievement in the world of serial murder mysteries. With even more deaths than the longest murder mystery in the world and the longest one in Japan put together, don't you see?! Hey, didn't you know? Everyone?"

It's an important clue that Erika is indeed aware of the lowest number of people on the island. "What does this mean?" It means that the manga hasn't an excuse to explain it at all and Erika knows of both (without really showing it) - Erika would mislead the cast because she intentionally ignore the "one missing person" and claims that Natsuhi is the murderer after Hideyoshi's death. In the other hand, Erika join with the cast 4 times (parlor after the first Twilight, Kinzo's study, the closed guest room, the parlor after the 2nd Twilight) and she doesn't notice that 1 is always missing? The manga seems not notice this but the canon explanation got a self-induced plothole because Erika apparently knows about Shannon and Kanon but doesn't noticed that one is always missing. Strange! In that case, she shows her unreliable narration on a silver plate. To the numbers:

'And then there were none' has 10 deaths (9 murders and 1 suicide in the classic version).

'The Tokyo Zodiac Murders' has 7 deaths (6 murders and 1 suicide).

(I don't know 'Non-serial Murders''s plot, it is stated it has the same number of people as in 'The Tokyo Zodiac Murders').

This makes 18 deaths. Therefore, Erika knows at least Shannon OR Kanon if she counts Kinzo, too. I already mentioned it in my Erikatrice theory: The red key "The window wasn't opened once after the rain started" means Erika knew atleast about an open window and that Natsuhi was lying about Kinzo's dissapearance.

"Rudolf. The window was locked, right?" "...Yeah. That's why I smashed the glass." "The other windows are all locked as well. They're built so that you can't lock them from the outside...!"

Erika knows all the people, including Kinzo.

Last words: Obviously, the number of people is clear, but not the number of humans. I showed that the manga hurt itself by showing Erika's deduction which would explain Battler's false POV but twisted her own POV. Sometimes, I wish the manga wouldn't added these extra.

[umicatto]

(Huge Spoiler/EP1) The sixth body in the first Twilight and identification errors

In the official explanation the first Twilight in the first game says there was nothing. Kanon and (the accomplice) Hideyoshi are pretending that Shannon was lying in a dark corner. The sixth corpse doesn't exists. Lambdadelta also confirmed the deaths of all unidentified corpses (which is an actual problem, explained later).

Battler was saying this when he saw the crime scene:

"How many people died…?……You're fucking kidding me! That's more than I can count on one hand! Damn iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit!!!

This is also true in the Japanese version. Retrosprectively, many noticed that it's kinda off. Battler has all his 5 fingers on each hand so I can exlude that one of his hands was missing a finger. Maybe it was exaggeration or assumption, but let's say Battler has a good overview of the scene. Of course he could see 5 very clearly and could described the damage of their faces

A side note of this, Battler was identifying 4 corpse by their clothes. It was briefly discussed by Gretel, Battler and Beatrice in EP4. I saw many people said "Battler is the detective and says X is dead so it's true". This might be true but identifying by clothes is a huge mistake by the detective and Battler intuitively assumed the corpses are the people he know. Thankfully, Beatrice won't use this move anymore. A second note: Any bodies who haven't seen in full shouldn't be declared dead. This is true for later Episodes. In that means the sixth body that Battler "could" see a part of can be dead or alive.

Anyway, back to the sixth corpse. We have a simple problem with the narration because it was George who asked if a sixth person was in the garden shed and the pov narration switched to the unreliable authorial narration. Hideyoshi is really unreliable here because could lie about even seeing the face (as George mentioned Shannon's face Hideyoshi responded accodingly in a wiser manner.

"...Why...? After all, I won't be able to see Shannon's face again, right...? So, why can't I see... her last face...?"

From here, we have more possibilities.

"Illusions to illusions. ...The corpse that cannot return to earth returns to illusions."

(let's forget about the canon culprit for a while) Will's explanation is vague and speaks about faking death. The obvious answer would be lying about the existence of the corpse. Incorporating the previous collected information could also mean that the body (dead or not) was real and was tainted with a false identity and fake blood, Kanon and Hideyoshi failed to identify it and Hideyoshi felt to give George a proper, delicate answer and an excuse not to see his dead girlfriend and lied about the smiling face.

"OMG there are only 16 humans on Rokkenjima! YOU R WRONG!"

If we forget the canoncity for now that can easily means that the sixth body can belong to someone who prepared one of the 4 daceless body with their clothes and a wig, effectly faking their death. Taking into the account that the sixth body belongs a female (breasts) it could be Rosa or Kyrie.

"It's not CANON!"

There's a possibility that a substitute corpse exists. [Gold Truth] The sixth body belongs to Erika Furude who was found dead before by the culprit comitted the crime. Thus, the culprit changed their plan and included the extra corpse in their plan. It was hidden in the dark corner just in case.

If you think about it, in the canon, EP1 was the only Episode where Shannon "dies" first before Kanon and it was avoided to remove her corpse by actively lying about it and place it in the fate of the roulette. In my theory, I think it was strange to create such a crime because Battler was free to go in. If he went in before Hideyoshi made a remark about Shannon's corpse then it would a whole Episode about "is Shannon the killer because she didn't go to her guest house shift?". If Hideyoshi made a remark about Shannon's corpse and Battler disproved this it would Shannon and also Hideyoshi/Eva suspicious. In these cases, it makes more sense, for the culprit's best interest, to change their plan (using another person as the 6th corpse and "killing" Shannon or Kanon in the 2nd Twilight) or using a real substitute with make-up to complete the 1st Twilight. The garden shed is a nice hiding place and Kanon usually tends the garden. This might be a good reason to consider a substitute corpse.

(yeah I know about Eva's hints but it was started by Battler anyway) . Since I mentioned that Hideyoshi lied for George's sake I think it can be explained rationally. After a heated discussion in the parlor Eva tried to convince George to go with them. I'd say it's a 50/50 chance Eva/Hideyoshi were accomplices. The 2nd Twilight can be explained with an assault (cutting the chain/unlocking the room with a master key and rushing the guest room, the chain could be cut afterwards). I read people said they let the culprit in but it doesn't really explain why Eva found lying on the bed.

Well, that's all for today. Happy thinking!

[umicatto]

I was busy and I forgot about tumblr

Yeah it does mean I stopped re-reading. I started other things because I needed to focus on other things.

I think I'll cover plot holes of Umineko next post.

[umicatto]

Had a break

Took a KitKat! Honestly, I had leisure and didn't want to stare at the screen nor want to write. And now I fell ill and I'm in quarantine with my life partner and have too much spare time. My body always feels cold and I don't want to make it worse. Over 2 days, I overcame the muscle pain and now it's like a bad cold with a little painful coughing. The health department is supposed to contact us, but yeah, they are too busy right now.

[umicatto]

Addendum to "Bending and breaking"

I forgot to mention 2 points. If we remember the circumstances about Battler's birth it should be clear that Rudolph's son will be named "Battler" - just read the scene where Beatrice demanded Battler to repeat "It was from Ushiromiya Asumu that Ushiromiya Battler was born". While it is an interesting theory itself I would like to tackle I just wanted to show how a hint of a namesake can create creative theories because you can add AND remove attributes to a person. Certainly, there are only a few moments to trick the reader like Beatrice died in an accident and was revived as a witch. Therefore, it's imaginable that we have an additional "name confusion" in EP5 and EP6.

[umicatto]

Busy

Wow, I didn't hang in there (tumblr). Job is pure stress and I just like to follow the news on the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Also, I have the feeling I get paid to be able to drive to my work place. So I didn't mind reading the VN at all. Digging in the garden was a stress reliever and I changed my mind and visited my blog and write something ...

[umicatto]

Erikatrice (pt.1.B) Bending and breaking

(B) The Rules and my theory

Nothing to say much about here. I'll present the hints why I think Yasu!Erika is possible even if a character says it's IMPOSSIBLE.

Rule: The detective isn't a culprit. Therefore, Erika couldn't be the culprit.

In my previous Erikatrice post I claim there is a second Erika Furudo who is already dead. If someone in the story says "Erika is the detective" then I usually attribute the "detective" title to Human!Erika (unless there are certain scenes). Of course, she isn't the culprit because she is dead.

Hint: Double names exists

There are more than one Beatrice (mother & child and persona) and one Battler (half-siblings). Also, the culprit could've learned the name from the Coast Guard. Why should Bernkastel make a detective proclamation about someone she hadn't in mind? So many questions I'll answer!

Hint: The power of the detective is the detective's authority, not the title.

Citing from EP6: "Yes, the detective's authority bestows several powers that are useful for reasoning, but it eliminates one single privilege. That is Knox's 7th. It is forbidden for the detective to be the culprit...". There are several moments I think "what, why do they say detective?". And this particular scene made me realising the word "detective",even said in red, can be outruled:

Argument: A "detective" breaking rules is de facto not a "real detective".

Let's break this apart. Battler was under Bernkastel's control so the detective's authority "push" was nothing more than an agreement and a show (please memorize that, it'll be significant hint later). But Bernkastel called herself detective! That means several things: She cannot employ supernatural agencies as a detective technique. However, she is using this all the time later in the game. Also, she is using red truth revealing several facts seemingly out of air. Well, this makes me positive that a red [detective] could be use as a leverage if you believe in 100% red truth corrrectness (I leave out the exact spots for now) If you've followed this correctness Erika's introduction and parting line would be just weird, because she calls herself the detective in red and at the same time she was the culprit in EP6. (I used another theses but I wanted to mention this plothole in the official explanation)

Uhm, there isn't much to explain it any further because several rules of Knox are intervending each other. You can claim as much as you want if it doesn't conflict the rules. Knox's 1 doesn't forbid Yasu!Erika because I can claim Erika is one of the original 17 people (same blue truth as Battler's). This and my later revealations also explain Knox's 10th (hey, Erika's hair colour isn't real!). Because we don't have a real detective I would say it doesn't go against Yasu's real goal. Too bad End and Dawn have open but I'd like to speculate it in another post. Fans are thinking (thanks to the manga...) End is a revenge story against Natsuhi but I disagree. It feels, yes, more heartless than the others but maybe there is a purpose which is more convergent to the previous game's motives. That's all for today.

[umicatto]

Erikatrice (pt.1) - Interpreting Counting, Rules & Perspective

Continuing my introducing Erikatrice post I'll start with my exegesis in (A) how Erika is included in the people/human counting, (B) how I can explain certain things like culprit Erika and (C) what do we or the characters see: truth or illusions? This post discusses (A)

(A) Counting - personas, impersonation, true number of people

Thesis: Erika is a persona of Yasu.

I'd say in End's and Dawn's world Erika's role is more pragmatic than a emotionally one. Following the hint of the reveal of an unknown man Yasu's ability -having different roles- is more flexible. At the end of EP4 she showed Shannon, Kanon and Beatrice but I think it's ok that 1 or 2 more can be added or changed. I know people thinks that the (evil) man from 19 years ago IS the true Sayo/Yasu but I couldn't find a good reason why it should be true (other than the true gender hint). By that argument Sayo can be whoever she likes if she changes the voice. I want to have a more reasonable approach by looking on Erika's traits and Yasu's motives and goals whose I want to inspect more closely in a later part. If we believe Dawn's and Requiem's depiction of Yasu's and Battler's common hobbies -reading mystery books- I can see why Erika is snarky like Beatrice and why she is a self-proclaimed detective. While Erika didn't get womanly attributes she got intelligence and mystery knowledge. On the other hand Beatrice's appearance was Battler's supposed ideal woman. But the mystery hobby is the main reason why Beatrice challenged Battler to murder mystery "games". That's why I believe in a connection of Erika and Yasu since she can appear in front of Battler to test him. Showing why Erika and Yasu are the same human is talked in a later chapter where I show my solution to the logic error.

Thesis: Yasu is impersonating another human

Genji claimed he called the police and the Coast Guard which is pretty much a lie because it would break the closed circle. But this is a good hint that the call from the Coast Guard told the servants about a girl, probably . Having an believable excuse Yasu could put on a new masquerade with a new background. Maria is easy to foolish. It's also suspicious she stopped searching for her rose which means Yasu could introducing the naive girl her new role. Bernkastel mentioned that the blue hair color isn't the natural one so it's likeley Erika is wearing a wig. Using other identities (the original Beatrice) is hinted since EP1 so it's a fair assumption. Using a name of a different person has interesting effects and my theory needs to bypass many rules but that later in rules.

Main Argument: There are two Erikas (Furudo)

I think it's strange that Lambda says "worlds" instead of "games". This means she could really mean the whole earth. If a real human Erika Furudo existed then she didn't existed until End...therefore the Erika Lambda is talking about is a fictional one. Bingo. It's like the grounddog day loop always includes an Erika Furudo but not the one we can see on screen. Which makes the World of End and Dawn special because a second Erika Furudo existed there and I think it's the Erika persona Yasu is using here. The influending part is just a plus and it confirms Yasu wasn't using Erika at all in Episodes 1-4 and there was no need to create her implying the two Erika games are special cases. In that case I will use Human!Erika for the drowned dead Erika and Yasu!Erika for the gameboard one and Meta!Erika for the one in meta scenes.

Thesis: The parting and introduction line Meta!Erika is using is from the Human!Erika

(Using the official translation) She said it: "This is the detective Furudo Erika's final parting line...and self-introduction!!" . The finale of Dawn is kind of self-realising and acceptance of Meta!Erika without Battler and Beatrice realising it. I can see some people are struggling with the red truths because previously Shannon and Kanon are separate people and now they are supposingly the same person. But I thought it makes perfect sense they aren't counted together. And if Meta!Erika citing someone else explains pretty much else because human!Erika is dead anyway.

Theses: The counting doesn't matter with Yasu!Erika.

She adds one person, nothing more . If the parting+introduction line is a intentionally misleading red truth then we have not to worry about contradictions with too many humans. Yasu!Erika is on the island and Human!Erika is the sea.

Final thoughts: Nothing really to say here. It happens to leave out many explanations and analaying isn't my strenght. When I release motives etc. it should be a little bit clear even if you don't believe in this.

[umicatto]

Thank you

Man, some scenes of EP4 are like [plain salad]. And I felt I didn't do my blog in the right way because I have some ESL-issues (grammar and wordings) and confusing posts. Anyway, Umineko is finished and most people know the story. Maybe there's little need to adjust my postings and I won't repost art or memes unless I really, really like them and have an urge to share them. Spring is coming and I'd enjoy some outside activities but these are limited . Thank you, COVID-19.

[umicatto]

Erikatrice, not Erikantrice

Years ago I had ideas of Erika being a different persona of the culprit. You might find some snippets of my posts out there. But here, I can go in a deeper detail. It has little to do with a certain Italian on 4chan.

What it makes so easy to create many theories like this is the open interpretation of Sayo/Yasu and the creation of her character. We see how the piece Beatrice was placed on the gameboard. She can be an ally or an enemy. But she is still a manifestation of motives of the real culprit. In my opinion she has the same goal over and over even if Beatrice switched the sides but Sayo resolves things differently on the gameboard like killing off a lover or a persona. This means Sayo can decide which pair gets support by bringing them together (and killing them off...). Otherwise, bringing and killing the pairs together serve as important hints.

Well, this has to do something with my theory Erika=Sayo and it explains the goals of the mastermind on the gameboard(!), not in the meta world. This is because Tohya has pretty much all the hints of howdunnit. Because Piece!Battler has practically no real rival in End, Erika is becoming his counterpart. She got Beatrice's rival job. My theory can only work if Erika intentionally works against Battler. Why? You can look how End and Dawn end and resolve. Natsuhi is confessing about the baby and it explains some details of the sad origins of Sayo. And the logic error reveals the multi-personas thingy. Of course I will explain the logic error with Sayo=Erika.

For now, this is discussed in different posts. In the next one I want to explain why Erika and Sayo can be the same person, how it can bypass the true number of people on the island and why certain rules don't affect her.

[umicatto]

(EP1) What if...

...George decided to go with his parents?

His decision is clearly suspicious and it's justified. This is the first Episode and we don't know if Yasu had written branching alternative plans for this.

The killer might have killed George along with his parents but hid one body for the 4th-8th twilight. This means one extra corpse and and this causes "asthetical" problems if the story stays the same. One of the servants dies on the 9th Twilight and it isn't neccessary to gouge him/her.

The killing order need some adjustments. Battler should think Kinzo nor the corpses aren't the killers. That's pretty difficult to think of an alternative! If George is dead, there's no need to kill all servants.

[umicatto]

tu fui ego eris

Bernkastel's TIPS info is quite interesting. She can be literally everyone!

I believe Bernkastel is connected with Tohya's mind like Beatrice and of course Battler (and Lambda).

The manga shows that Tohya was fine with accusing Eva in Banquet and accusing Natsuhi in End and refused to meet Ange which means he's not very emotionally attached to his family (much to Battler's demise). I thought it kinda makes sense to represent this side by Bernkastel. She was giving the aspect to reap out the guts of the tale. Isn't it the same as searching truth but with no love? I can imagine Tohya initially hadn't Battler's aspect because it he isn't like his past-self who does not share many traits but the reading hobby. But Tohya mindset could have the aspect of Bernkastel. This needs a closer inspection....

[umicatto]

I think I start with this one. Ryukishi's statement in the interview "Say it in Red" made apparently clear what the canon solution is. People were quick to announce the confirmation of the truth of Yasu after the release of the 6th Twilight manga volume. However, the previous scene "Interlude : Hachijo Ikuko" shows a cliffhanger and a hint which makes me think why the following chapters can't be right.

This is the very first message bottle to be seen and it's not Legend of the Golden Witch. And both were about to read it (before Tohya got flashbacks and lost consciousness). If they were in the possession of the confessions of the mastermind why do we see the events of EP1 to EP4? Maybe he forgot about it because of the brain damage. Maybe it was fiction or an illusion we see. I cannot see that Tohya gained any knowledge from this message bottle - Ikuko, however, could have read it. But there is barely any hint that she knew the truth. It was possible for her to play dumb and acted as a guide to lead Tohya to the truth. In Dawn she (Tohya) states she didn't reach the truth...

Many Confession scenes are similar (not the same) to Requiem's backstory. I doubt Confession was read after many years it was found by Ikuko. There was no reason because they had the message bottle!

I think it's a noteworthy plothole introduced in the manga. The interlude seems to be forgetable just by seeing how many people stumble over this rather big detail. The way it was depicted could mean pretty everything - it's a catbox. It's too hasty to say that the contents of Confession of the Golden Witch is really canon because the interlude is canon, too. In the catbox I say!

[umicatto]

 Some thoughts might be appearing on other sites but this blog is going to be a small collection of my findings in the last year. Also, re-reading the VN again at the same time again.

[umicatto]

It's starting

Gonna post my original Umineko ideas and theories. You might have seen them before!