So about Yasu and roles.... (Obviously spoilers for the entire thing)

[Crowd]

Reading another thread reminded me of a confusion I had once I read the official answer to the story:

Now as much as I love the story, the whole Yasu/Sayo is both Shannon and Kanon thing.... is weird at best and pretty stupid at worse. Stupid in "how was this done in practice" I mean. It's interesting from a thematic and character perspective.

That aside my main problem with it is: Was there actually any real hints of this through EP1-4? That Shannon and Kanon was the same person I mean? The most I've seen is people talking about are some vague thematic connections or just that they don't appear at the same time in front of Battler.... Which sounds rather weak as far as evidence goes? I mean going by that logic there is a giant elephant of a counter point: Nobody ever so much as even hints at Shannon and Kanon looking alike. The narrative even goes out of its way to cut down what otherwise could have been a potential explanation; When Kanon is described as Shannons little brother she clarifies that they are not actually related and only considers themselves "like siblings", something that otherwise could have been used as an explanation to them looking alike without people thinking to much of it.

[Battler Ushiromiya]

Yes, there were plenty of hints. Now it's been a long ass time since I've read 1-4, so I don't remember most of them, but they are certainly there, I have seen people figure it out that early, rare as it is.
The primary things I remember are the conversations between the three of them, which very much reads as them having an internal struggle (Notably, read basically any scene between any of the two in Episode 2 with the knowledge that they're all the same person, Episode 2 is recontextualized so much with that knowledge), as well as the Episode 1 Tea Party. Everyone in the Tea Party are the people who survived the entire Episode. Battler, George, Jessica, Maria, Shannon, Kanon, and Beatrice. Without the knowledge of Yasu, Shannon and Kanon are weird additions. But with the knowledge of her, it's only natural that they're there. Yasu also lived until the end. There's a whole ass Google doc compiling basically all of the foreshadowing for not just Yasu, but everything else such as Kinzo.
Edit: Kanon's introduction scene is also super obvious. It's VERY obvious that Kanon is in love with Battler, and without Yasu this makes zero sense. That scene has such obvious implications that never come up ever again if we take Yasu out of the equation, Kanon has zero reason to fall in love with Battler at first sight, and his relationship with Jessica is the only thing given any focus after this point, we never see Kanon pining after Battler ever again.

[Crowd]

Thanks for taking the time to answer!
(And I got caught up in writing when I really should have gone to bed, so if it sounds a bit rambly i apologize.)

Originally posted by Battler Ushiromiya:

Yes, there were plenty of hints. Now it's been a long ass time since I've read 1-4, so I don't remember most of them, but they are certainly there, I have seen people figure it out that early, rare as it is.

Yeah I'm not saying that people haven't managed to figure out that they are the same person, clearly they have. I guess it's just that the few times I remember reading people clock it in that they are the same person, it seems to have been with a very long jump in logic or based on what seemed like very flimsy evidence to me.... I think the most reasonable take on it I remember seeing was from Jokronos let's play where he tried implementing it to work around the issue with Nanjo's death and explain why Shannon and Kanon could resurrect from in magic perspective. But even then it still felt like a long-shot to me.... that is despite me already knowing the official answer when I first saw that let's play. Now I would argue it's not super hard to suspect Shannon and Kanon as the culprits or involved somehow, but I can't see these clues that feels like they would be one person when so much more would make more sense for them not to be. At least not anything that isn't far easier explained by other explanations.

Originally posted by Battler Ushiromiya:

The primary things I remember are the conversations between the three of them, which very much reads as them having an internal struggle (Notably, read basically any scene between any of the two in Episode 2 with the knowledge that they're all the same person, Episode 2 is recontextualized so much with that knowledge),

This is one argument I've seen a lot...... And I this might be a me thing (I admit it probably is), but I never saw this as a good "hint"/"clue" (no offense intended). The it "reads as them having an internal struggle" "/with the knowledge that they're all the same person" argument falls flat to me because there are a lot of character-conversations that could be read as internal conversation if one already jumped to the idea that they are the same person. And it's not like the conversation they do have is that odd for separate people to have. Though yes, them talking to Beatrice to begin with feels like a hint that they are involved somehow.... But again, I don't see how it implies that they are the SAME person.
If I where to use an example..... Let's go with the with the... "author theory"? I think it was called? That episode 1-2 and 3-4 + 5-6 where written by two separate people? (That was confirmed in EP6.) Then one could argue that those entire episodes are just one person "talking to themselves" by telling the respective stories stories. But we wouldn't say that everyone on the island is Yasu or Tohya, right? Might be a bit of a jump, and I again apologise if I unintentionally sound mean, but that's kinda how that "hint"/"clue" always felt to me? Maybe I'm just not understanding the argument?

Originally posted by Battler Ushiromiya:

as well as the Episode 1 Tea Party. Everyone in the Tea Party are the people who survived the entire Episode. Battler, George, Jessica, Maria, Shannon, Kanon, and Beatrice. Without the knowledge of Yasu, Shannon and Kanon are weird additions. But with the knowledge of her, it's only natural that they're there. Yasu also lived until the end.

That's a decent point, and I do like that one. However, it relies on us assuming "the people in the Tea party" = "the people that was alive until the end". With the ending in hindsight, that does seem to have been the intention, yes. But that's not really what the story says or really implies at the time though? Shanon and Kanon being there is honestly not odd at all given the epitaph talks about reviving the love that was lost, and Shannon and Kanon basically called out as the "love" of choice that George and Jessica respectivly would revive. If anything, by that logic, it sounds like the scene would imply Rosa is Beatrice since Rosa "should be there" (since she was the one Maria wanted revived) but she isn't (compared to Shanon and Kanon who George and Jessica wanted revived). Now that is obviously not what I believe, but to me it sounds like it fits the logic just as well, if not even more, with the information we are given in the first arc.
EP2's Tea Party have Rosa and arguably Maria (since her head is still talking) as well as Beatrice and Battler.... Which does not match with the surrvivors since Genji isn't there and Yasu is dead. So "the people in the Tea party" = "the people that was alive until the end" concept doesn't seem to apply there. But to be fair, neither does the "lost love revive" version either. EP3's Tea Party have just Beato, Bern and Lambda. Although I suppose one might count the ??? Tea party, that does have Eva (the only surrvivor) and Ange. And EP4 have Battler and Beatrice despite, again, Yasu being dead. (And Kinzo, who is also dead, if we count his breif apperance.)
So it seems the Tea Party doesn't really have a consistent pattern on who shows up, or am I wrong? So, and I mean this as a genuine question, what is it that makes "the people in the Tea party" = "the people that was alive until the end" interpretation more viable than "the people in the Tea party" = "The survivors + their resurrected loved" one if we only go by EP1-4?

Originally posted by Battler Ushiromiya:

There's a whole ass Google doc compiling basically all of the foreshadowing for not just Yasu, but everything else such as Kinzo.

Oh? That sounds interesting! Where can I find that?

[Battler Ushiromiya]

The Tea Party being the people who survived is basically just an Episode 1 thing, because that's before it becomes a part of the narrative (at least until the end)

Here's the doc
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JHzX1vyj9WG-oAsPPsYZlw4YwtwVlVIOGKUtKwtM754/edit?pli=1

Also do note I edited my comment and added something else

[Crowd]

Thanks for the link! I'll definitely take a look at that!

Originally posted by Battler Ushiromiya:

The Tea Party being the people who survived is basically just an Episode 1 thing, because that's before it becomes a part of the narrative (at least until the end)

Okay that's fair. But then we're back at the previous problem of there being explanations that makes more sense with the information we have actually been given at the time and that requires far shorter leaps. Though as far as hints go, I will admit EP1's Tea Party could still count, even if I don't hink it's a clear one.

Originally posted by Battler Ushiromiya:

Edit: Kanon's introduction scene is also super obvious. It's VERY obvious that Kanon is in love with Battler, and without Yasu this makes zero sense. That scene has such obvious implications that never come up ever again if we take Yasu out of the equation, Kanon has zero reason to fall in love with Battler at first sight, and his relationship with Jessica is the only thing given any focus after this point, we never see Kanon pining after Battler ever again.

Wait...... That's how that scene read to you? It might be me being bad at reading implied romances, but it honestly never even crossed my mind in the slightest to read that scene as Kanon being in-love with Battler. To me that scene it just seemed like establishing Kanon's characterization as unsocial and insecure in his masculinity? (Which still works with Yasu given their gender-issues?)

If anything, I would say Kanon's characterization in EP1 has him not show any interest in anybody? His priority in that entire episode seems to consistently be his "sister"/Shannon. With the other traits that stands out being his furnature/servant complex and a strong dislike for (at least certain members of) the family (and Gohda). I mean even when she is dead, Shannon tend to be what's on Kanon's mind in mind in EP1 when Kanon is the focus of a scene (the kitchen, twice, as well as his confrontation with Beatrice and talking about being the 0 on the roulette) aside from the 2nd murder (which had more pressing matters to pay attention to). If anything that episode read to me as if implying that even if Kanon does like Jessica (as later episodes implies, but episode 1 kinda... doesn't?) Kanon's most important priority is Shannon, since that was the (platonic) relationship that was highlighted for Kanon in EP1. This also matches up with their EP2 characterisation. (Even though Kanon like Jessica and dies protecting her, the rest of the episodes has Shannon taking up the majority of Kanons priority and Kanon is practically bending over backwards to try to protect her from Beatrice.)
But considering both of them are Yasu........ then.... what was all that in EP1 actually about????


Huh...... And going back to Kanon's introduction, I went back to double-check the scene in the manga (since I have the 1st episode manga on the shelf), and I was surprised because it didn't match my memory of the scene.... So I went to check the VN and it seems they actually moved some things around.

In the manga, Jessica calls out to Kanon in the rose garden, and he knocks the over wheelbarrow as she calls out to him. Then as Kanon is picking it up, Battler comes over and helps. After this Kanon introduces himself and the rest of the conversation happens. Then the everyone leaves. And sure, Kanon looks uneasy afterwards, but I'm not getting "in love" or even "attracted to" Battler vibes as much as "jealous about Battlers strength" or "frustrated at his own incompetence" vibes (which would match well with Kanon being associated with Wrath).

In the VN however, it's Hideyoshi that calls out to Kanon. And Kanon stops, greets the family and introduces himself without problem (aside from being unsocial and not seeming to want to have the conversation in the first place). After some small-talk that Kanon really doesn't seem to want to take part in (Jessica basically answers the questions for him while he only gives short answers, if any), he tries to leave and then accidently knocks the wheelbarrow over while doing so. (This makes it seems less like it's due to him being startled, like in the manga, and more like him tripping over himself to just get out of a conversation he really doesn't want to be part of.) Gohda tells him to hurry up and pick it up, which Kanon starts doing. Jessica starts trying to help, but is stopped by Ghoda (who comments that her clothes will get dirty). Battler jumps in to help regardless. Kanon is surprised that a guest would try to help with the job of a servant, but Battler is being Battler about it.


I suppose the narration that follows; "It would be extremely difficult for an outside observer to guess what emotions that favour had stirred up in Kanon. But as far as you could tell by watching him hang his head, there was something that he just couldn't let go of." could be looked at with an interpretation that said "emotion" was of love or attraction? But I wouldn't call it anywhere near as "obvious" as you made it sound it was? I mean if anything the narration seemed to me to imply that Kanon is insecure about not being the classically "strong man" kind of guy that someone like Battler is. I don't get the "Kanon is obviously in love with Battler" readings at all, even re-reading the scene with the knowledge of Yasu in mind. Again, it reads to me as Kanon/Yasu just being insecure with their masculinity (or lack there of) since Kanon supposedly "hadn't hit his growth-spurt" and a that even though well-intended by Battler, a guest intervening to help with the mistake Kanon himself had made is embarrassing for him a servant. Yeah in hind-sight with the knowledge that it IS Yasu, the scene might not be about that, though I would argue Yasu being insecure in Kanons masculinity, or lack thereof, still works as a solid reading of that scene.
So I guess I'm having a hard time understanding what part of the scene is the "super obvious" parts I'm missing?

The only thing I see that could get anywhere close to implying anything I guess miiiiight be the "Even I, ......" line Kanon makes after they leave, but that didn't strike me as particliarly romantic/love/atrraction-coded.... And as a side-note, the manga translation I have in my shelf has the line translated as "........I wish I could......" instead. Which definitely sounds more to me like he was bothered by not being able to do the heavy physical lifting like Battler did or was bothered by messing up (given he is trying to be a good servant).


Sure these scenes gets a new (and interesting) reading once you go in with the assumption/knowledge that Shannon=Kanoon=Beatrice. But..... those scenes still work just as well, and often better, without that assumption. And there are other conversations between characters that could read as internal conversations if we want to look at them like that. That said, yes, Yasu is the official explanation, so those scenes legit ARE them talking to themselves. But I'm scratching my head as to how these "hints" all seem to have more reasonable readings to me that doesn't imply the two are the same person. Them talking to/seeing Beatrice is a hint they involved somehow with what is going on...... but I'm having a hard time seeing how this translates to "it's all one person having an internal conversation" when...... It doesn't really read like that? It works as one, but I don't find it as obvious a read as some people make it out to be.



Hmm...... But maybe that is my problem. There are hints and clues out there, but maybe I personally have a hard time seeing them or accepting them AS hints and clues because I see something else that makes far more sense to me than the intended direction they are supposed to point at? (Insert "without love it can't be seen" vs. "with love you see things that might not be there" jokes here.)

I mean with the "in-hindsight" reading, something like Batttler trying to touch Shannon's chest is a narritative clue that something is up about them, since the narritative draws attention to them... But that is also countered with him doing the same to Jessica, and it's not like it's a hint to her chest being fake. If anything that whole scene seems to be more about establishing Shannon's characterisation as frighteningly passive and disregarding her own happiness in contrast with a normal reaction (like Jessica's) to Battlers joke.



But hey, I really appreciate hearing your thoughts on it. It's fun and interesting to get others perspectives even if I have a hard time grasping or agreeing with it myself.

[Battler Ushiromiya]

Well be the interpretation "Kanon is in love with Battler" or "Kanon feels inferior", it still works the same way because Kanon both also represents Yasu seeing what its like to live as a man, and also he never shows any feelings of inferiority towards his masculinity ever again. So the point stands.

[Crowd]

Originally posted by Battler Ushiromiya:

Well be the interpretation "Kanon is in love with Battler" or "Kanon feels inferior", it still works the same way because Kanon both also represents Yasu seeing what its like to live as a man, and also he never shows any feelings of inferiority towards his masculinity ever again. So the point stands.

Oh! That's a valid point. Although "Kanon feels inferior" in general is a recurring theme for him throughout the story. It fits right in with his furniture/servant complex, doesn't it? But I definitely agree that we don't get anything as outright blatant as EP1 in terms of Kanon being put in situation where his masculinity or capabilities are in such contrast with another man. Although.... thinking about it.... the same episode does have the kitchen scene where Battler grabs Kanon by the collar and uses his superior physical strength over Kanon to basically try to bully/intimidate Kanon to talk. (So I guess one could make the argument that the introduction was a set-up for that? Although that's not the argument I'm trying to make, it just crossed my mind.) That's also something that doesn't happen in later episodes either. And while it's not blatant about it, this scene does have similar elements to the garden-scene. Kanon's lack of physical strength (which is most often associated with masculinity) is not sufficient to handle his situation (Genji, another man, has to get Kanon out of that situation) in contrast with Battler.
But when it comes to the other episodes....... Yeah I can't think of other scenes at the top of my head where Kanon's "lack of masculinity"/lack of physical strength really is addressed over his furniture/servant complex. Good catch on that! I don't think Kanon even really actively interacts with Battler or George in the question-arcs aside from in EP1? Does he? I'm legit drawing a blank on any interactions at the moment....


Although on the topic one-off scenes that doesn't happen again...... Unless I'm misremembering we also stop getting scenes of things like Battler trying to grope the girls chests after EP1, or scenes of Kumasawa watching events unfold from the shadows, or Gohda intentionally getting Shannon in trouble to save face for himself....? And that's just the things that comes out at the top of my head. So in terms of oddball scenes, it's not the only one. So why is Kanon characterised this way in EP1? I would argue its' establishing characterisation. Like how Shannon doesn't have any other scenes in the where she is a door-mat to the degree that she would let a guest grab her breasts despite her obviously not being comfortable with that. Or how Rosa bringing Kumasawa tea (I think it was) in episode 1 seems like it would implyl they have a good relationship, but is neither not mentioned or followed up on in the other episodes. Rudolf and Eva also seems to not particularly like Kumasawa with how they attempt to pick on her when she is introduced in EP1 (or was that just a vibe I got?) which she handles as gracefully as the situation allows her. But this is not a thing that really comes around again later. We also get a scene of Krauss showing Natsuhi the gold-ingot, which never shows up again. I can honestly keep going on one-scene-wonders. I have some trouble seeing how Kanon's scene is more or less important than those other character-bulding scenes unless we are actively looking at it because we are looking at Kanons scenes specifically.

Also even if I agree that the scene is important, I might have to agree to disagree on it requireing Yasu's existance to make sense. At least to me, it doesn't really. It gives the scene more layers, sure, but the scene have interesting potential implications even if Kanon is his own entity separate from Yasu.

Just because we know in hindsight that is IS Yasu, the scene doesn't feel like a clue or..... Actually, let me correct myself because I realised that I might not have used the best words for it (a problem when english is not ones first language....). How about I re-phrase it as: I can agree that the scene can be seen as a hint, but I would hesitate to call it an outright clue, and especially not call it evidence of Shannon and Kanon being the same person. Maybe that makes more sense?

[Eisenerz]

No, there are almost no physical hints. The theme of love is treated as a normal young person problem in front of Battler, like how the adults have adult problems like making money. In the end, it was Meta-Battler who advise Beatrice to include LOVE in her games because he despised the first 2 games, doesn't he?

Calling other orphans siblings if you are an orphan sounds pretty normal to me. I wouldn't guess that their faces are similar enough to make a direct connection, because, ahem, anime style. Some sisters of purgatory are similar enough but their real counterparts are not relatives.

[Crowd]

Originally posted by Eisenerz:

No, there are almost no physical hints. The theme of love is treated as a normal young person problem in front of Battler, like how the adults have adult problems like making money. In the end, it was Meta-Battler who advise Beatrice to include LOVE in her games because he despised the first 2 games, doesn't he?

Yeah I think "physical hints"/evidence might be what I'm wondering about over thematic hints, which it kinda seems the whole Shannon=Kanon=Beatrice-theory was built upon. And I suppose that is not necessarily a bad thing, but I would have liked something more concrete as as evidence.

I mean I would say there are evidence for especially Kanon, and to a degree Shannon, having some involvement with what Beatrice is doing, but in terms of evidence for them being the same person..... It's a lot harder to argue unless we're going thematic hints.

To go on a slight tangent;
It kinda feels to me like some hint-scenes are given credit for what they become in hindsigh when you have the answers in hand. But with that logic one could make practically any character into Beatrice and analyze scenes with that in mind.... I mean as much as I don't like Rosa-trice, there is honestly quite a lot going for that thematically and in the "this fits if we think of this as symbolic"-kind-of-way that we are apparently supposed to look at things to figure out Yasu. Again, I personally don't like the Rosa-trice theory, and it is clearly not the official answer, but it is a good example for how one can twist the truth if one goes into scenes with already made assumptions. Hence why I'm wondering about more hard-cut evidences.

Originally posted by Eisenerz:

Calling other orphans siblings if you are an orphan sounds pretty normal to me. I wouldn't guess that their faces are similar enough to make a direct connection, because, ahem, anime style. Some sisters of purgatory are similar enough but their real counterparts are not relatives.

Yeah it does make sense for them to call each other siblings if they grew up orphans, especially if they where close growing up. I would personally have preferred some kind of implication or comment that they look alike despite supposedly not being related.... Even Battler going "Oh? So you're not related by blood? You guys kinda reminded me of one another, so I thought you were. My bad." or something when Shannon says she and Kanon are not related. Sure some might have considered that a bit of an "obvious" hint, but it would have been something.....
And I agree that one can't use the art-style as a hint at anything really.... I'm pretty sure the sister of purgatory don't just look similar, I think they have the same sprites just with different hair. And like you said, they are not supposed to be related.

[Eisenerz]

Originally posted by Crowd:

Yeah I think "physical hints"/evidence might be what I'm wondering about over thematic hints, which it kinda seems the whole Shannon=Kanon=Beatrice-theory was built upon. And I suppose that is not necessarily a bad thing, but I would have liked something more concrete as as evidence.

That's why I said "almost no evidence". You cannot really create a definitive theory around that in the beginning but you can only guess the culprits. It's easier for newbies (I guess they use spoilers as reading guides) to get the Shannon=Kanon theory, but back then the pauses between the releases gave you time for more for re-readings and the mystery doesn't really build on the relationship between the two servants and there are enough noise, like the Maria-Rosa relationship, to question wheather this mystery is big a unreliable narrator trick.

Originally posted by Crowd:

I mean I would say there are evidence for especially Kanon, and to a degree Shannon, having some involvement with what Beatrice is doing, but in terms of evidence for them being the same person..... It's a lot harder to argue unless we're going thematic hints.

Again, it's hard to say that is right to question it. (It is said) Kinzo was the first who has a deal/relationship with Beatrice, but you can hardly say that Kanon and Shannon are treated more special as we see that enough people know/are somehow involved with Beatrice. I would agree that the evidences are "reliable" if we had more hints that the epitaph was already solved before or Shannon showed more despair about Battler, or (answer to your last reply) has an earlier, precise hint they are connected together. Ehh, it wasn't commented or even lampshaded by any character that Shannon got a huge breast growth spurt.

Originally posted by Crowd:

To go on a slight tangent;
It kinda feels to me like some hint-scenes are given credit for what they become in hindsigh when you have the answers in hand. But with that logic one could make practically any character into Beatrice and analyze scenes with that in mind.... I mean as much as I don't like Rosa-trice, there is honestly quite a lot going for that thematically and in the "this fits if we think of this as symbolic"-kind-of-way that we are apparently supposed to look at things to figure out Yasu. Again, I personally don't like the Rosa-trice theory, and it is clearly not the official answer, but it is a good example for how one can twist the truth if one goes into scenes with already made assumptions. Hence why I'm wondering about more hard-cut evidences.

Yup, the hints are very dynamic in the first beginning. Of course, like they said in the VN, Beatrice corners herself if she gives more hints. Well, it's counterproductive when mixing hints from the message bottles and hints from any forgery can literally make any character into Beatrice. We happen to have a mystery with Sayo in spotlight.

[ange fumo *sniff sniff sniff*]

I've come to the opinion that yasu doesn't exist, this entire story is a sham and the manga is part of the "ARG" that's being ran on us.

First, take Battler. Who the ♥♥♥♥ is our protagonist? We learn nothing about him, we know nothing about him. Battler is not relevant to the plot as anything more than a piece, but Ange gets context, backstory and extra? Whatever moral we get from the Beattler/Beato interactions is just a red herring, there's a different story being told.

It's a catbox right? Written with the 8 episodes in mind. The manga changes a bunch of stuff, and I mean a bunch, which kind of ruins the catbox. The manga, esp Confessions Of The Golden Witch, defeat the point of umineko by applying backwards the logic that we know who the culprit is.

But we don't. Episode 7 tea party doesn't show the truth, just one truth Bern wanted to troll Ange and Lion with. All that matter is that Eva survives. and this was one of the configurations. Rosatrice, Evatrice, Yasutrice, Battlertrice(??) all exist equally within the novels themselves but are all annhilated by the manga add-ons.

I also heavily dislike the idea that Bern is some kind of mastermind and that Ange and Eva wouldn't just naturally fall out over Eva being horrible with emotions and generally abusive to the people around her. It's a tragic story, no need to supernatural it down to the bones.

Yasu exists as Battler and Beatrice does. They are one component of a story whose priority is the story. To exist as a person is to step away from the gameboard, which is unacceptable. The only human person in this story is Ange.

You know how you make a bully? You bully someone for as little as three days and then give them power. They will forever see themselves as the bullied kid as they reign as king of the bullies.

The first thing Battler does when he gets power is to aggressively gaslight Ange and the readers into thinking established facts don't matter. The reprise of Kinzo's theme was to a lot of people an "epic moment", but really it should be horrifying.

Ange is a victim of the patriarchal nobility: the Ushiromiyas suffer because Kinzo could not be challenged as the head of the house, and he used this power to scar each one of them for life. To buy his rehabilitation as a lost grieving soul is to take the culprit's account at the crime scene. There is a tension between how the story within the game wants to tell itself and the real tragedy that is all of these lives,

An expression of ownership is not an expression of love.

Yet this distinction does not exist within the Patriarchy, the productivisation of bodies under the head's management is in the meta-context of how societal norms perceive themselves an act of love for the good of the family.

Kinzo is convinced he loves Beatrice 2.
Lambdadelta is convinced she loves Bernkastel.
Rosa is convinced she loves Maria.
Battler is convinced he loves Ange.

Yet, as it were with all of these victims, Battler doesn't love Ange as she *is*, but rather, what she could *become in service of the Ushiromiyas*. At no point is there an attempt by Battler to consiliate with Ange or hear her out: the reality of his failure to come back, the reality of the Ushiromiya family, the people this family produces is not acceptable for Battler.

Episode 8 is about Battler trying to explain to create a legacy through Ange. It's selfish, it's rotten, it's not in service of Ange who might aswell not even be a Ushiromiya considering they're all dead and she's never known what that social relation would even entail.

This is Battlers love. It's rotten because he is rotten. Because when Ange was gaslit and Battler donned a cape, we were supposed to be scared that he had become like Kinzo. Kyrie being his mom should be an indictment of the man as someone who is not capable of acting in the self interest of others.

The Magic ending demands the death of Ange as a sacrificial lamb for a fever dream of an epilogue. Despite Episode 8 being the only impossible episode in the series post-loss Battler goes "This is exactly how the hallway was that day", meaning this "Magic/good" ending is still very much "in the catbox", as in there was no "real world" we entered into but rather a facsimile of it where Ange does what Battler wanted her to do.

As in, we are not reading an epilogue but another bottle.

And yet this theory finds no starting points as the merchandising around Umineko has itself begun to favour Battler's story as it makes for the better story overall, including the Manga going so far as to 'canonize' the worst ending and making this show come full circle.

This story is either so well told or so poorly told that a majority of fans have been gaslit and doesn't even know why Ange is in the story.

If there was a canon ending it'd be the trick one. I mean Erika is there, and Erika is just a weirdass nightmare version of Ange. The "old photo of Battler and Ange" in the novels p much confirms that much. and it doubles as Erika is a penetrating force for truth on the island as Ange is a penetrating force in 1998. Ange and Erika as pieces create one full person from two perspectives: Battler's and Bernkastel. The two game-masters in the end, how cute.

I do not believe Bern is good but I also do not believe the "good guys" are Battler and his Roger Rabbit clique because just to break Ange down and make her complicit in his story of Rokkenjima he had to split her into two separate people who are both p much worthless by themselves.

That's why Trick ending is such a statement. This is not piece Ange, this is 1998 Ange and Erika, as one person, as one uncertain destiny. Maybe it's not the good life the fans wanted for her, but she is the daughter of one Ushiromiya Kyrie. Refusing conclusion we get the notion that things have come to a sensible place. Ange is a full person and can no longer be subjugated by the narrative. Thus, the story ends.

it's a worse story. that's why people cling into magic ending and the mangas even as they tear apart the point of understanding the story yourself. to believe in the good ending, where Battler was right.

You know.

The guy who couldn't make a single right decision.

[ange fumo *sniff sniff sniff*]

Of course the much grimmer reality is that Battler doesn't mind the grooming and rape and incest because he's a creep himself. Somewhat confirmed by Battler getting more turned on by EVA when she had her hair "like Erika", something she suggested implying it's common knowledge Battler is sexually attracted to her?

[Eisenerz]

@Not Lambdadelta
Some people probably know that already though it's hard to get opinions from old readers, newer fans do usually not know it. Most scenes are rectons which I don't believe 100%, no, everyone shouldn't. I honestly think that most fans don't get most of story and its characters after finishing it.

I appreciate opinion other than "after reading THIS I cried *cry emoji* and creative theories.

[JAY]

Originally posted by grrrr:

Of course the much grimmer reality is that Battler doesn't mind the grooming and rape and incest because he's a creep himself. Somewhat confirmed by Battler getting more turned on by EVA when she had her hair "like Erika", something she suggested implying it's common knowledge Battler is sexually attracted to her?

When does he say this?

[Tamagon]

Umineko was written for people who were very familiar with detective fiction and wanted something different. And that's what it does: the real clues are in the fantasy. That's why the author eventually gave up and wrote the manga to explain everything, because Umineko left the intended audience and so you have people who didn't get it and write insane screeds on how everything is an ARG.

And while there is room for interpretation of the fantasy, I don't think anyone could seriously say that any explanation but Shkanontrice fits for EP 1-8. Even EP 1-4 is kind of a reach for anyone else. For example: Rosatrice has George doing a large chunk of murders which doesn't fit Beatrice doing them unless you're playing it real loose and being like "well it was part of Beatrice's plan"

I do agree Rosa and Beatrice do have some surface-level similarities, but its to show how Sayo acted as a kind of mother figure for Maria as well.

[O5]

Shannon and Kanon being the same person is super obvious when re-reading the earlier chapters.