Umineko Chiru explained - Against the official explanation - Part 3

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 26 дек 2024

Комментарии •

  • @Докторпарадокс
    @Докторпарадокс 4 года назад +47

    me in part 1: this guy is nuts
    me now: no no he has got a point

    • @fraye
      @fraye 4 года назад +22

      At the very least, its more grounded than the magical shkanontrice golden truth

    • @rjmax3311
      @rjmax3311 3 года назад +16

      Ether that or Ryu made some mistakes. I've been wondering some things myself like how Shannon knew about Battler's biological mother situation.

    • @fraye
      @fraye 3 года назад +1

      @@rjmax3311 its was 'Beatrice' who knew it.

    • @Fragmentsinfractals488
      @Fragmentsinfractals488 3 года назад +20

      @@rjmax3311 Remember episode 4 spoilers:
      is written by Battler (Tohya) in the future), so BEATRICE knows because "Battler" worked it out in the Future.

    • @josuelafountaine5147
      @josuelafountaine5147 3 года назад

      @@rjmax3311 the manga shows that Sayo overheard a discussion about it as Shannon. She carried the knowledge with her to Purgatorio.

  • @keicamboom9915
    @keicamboom9915 3 года назад +5

    1:11:37 I always thought that the sound of the gunshots were creating the illusion of the thunders, since there is always a storm. From a distance and also being blocked from clear hearing it's pretty resonable to assume a gunshot being a thunder in a storm.

  • @TheBBCSlurpee
    @TheBBCSlurpee 6 месяцев назад +2

    I love the way he says natsuhi for some reason lmao

  • @sharkdog5386
    @sharkdog5386 4 года назад +15

    One thing I ask about "manga is the way" believers
    Were Will's 'truths' ever stated in red?
    It was all..in white.

    • @theczman007
      @theczman007 4 года назад +20

      Actually, it was in black

    • @Докторпарадокс
      @Докторпарадокс 4 года назад +6

      in the novel yes also he intentionally hid Beatrice's identity but when again Shannon refused or rather could not call Kanon and Clair accepted Will's explanation
      while we can disregard whole section we can't say the whole episode was a lie so i have my doubts

    • @rjmax3311
      @rjmax3311 3 года назад +2

      @@Докторпарадокс I wonder if Bern's game can even count. Her red statements are useless at the end.

    • @ana-mariaungureanu4660
      @ana-mariaungureanu4660 3 месяца назад

      @@theczman007 Actually, it was in white

    • @SonGoku-hd6ro
      @SonGoku-hd6ro Месяц назад +1

      Will's manga truths weren't even stated. He was thinking them. You didn't actually read the manga and were just going off a wiki summary, weren't you?

  • @ana-mariaungureanu4660
    @ana-mariaungureanu4660 3 месяца назад +2

    I never understood why people got behind the Shkannontrice theory, but if you think about it, it's been set up to compete with Rosatrice from the beginning:
    EP1- Both Rosa and Shannon are among the victims of the 1st Twilight. While Shannon is visibly dead and close to the doorway (cancelling any theory that she might be alive), Rosa is obscured in the back. The 3 cousins getting their loves in the Golden Land: Maria gets Rosa (Beatrice), Jessica gets Kanon, George gets Shannon.
    EP2-Biggest focus on Rosa and Maria's relationship, Jessica and Kanon's relationship, Shannon and George's relationship. Not only is Rosa the only adult woman to make it till the end, but she is shown explicitly to fight of goats. I don't know how it could get more obvious than this! And Ryuukishi-sama had to rewrite Land because people thought Turn was difficult???

    • @alternateperson6600
      @alternateperson6600 3 месяца назад +1

      >Shannon is visibly dead and close to the doorway
      Rather strange remark to make about a game that has no graphic depictions of murder. The real comparison is that Shannon's corpse is the only one not seen by the detective, while everyone else's is.
      >Rosa the only adult woman to make it till the end
      She also has a tighter alibi than Shannon. Not sure what kind of point you were trying to make.

    • @norton7954
      @norton7954 3 месяца назад

      ​@@alternateperson6600Are ridiculous.

    • @I_Tacocat
      @I_Tacocat 20 дней назад +1

      @@alternateperson6600 "How many people died...? I can't even count them on one hand!" was said by Battler during the 1st game with detective's authority, unless you're suggesting that Battler has less than 5 fingers on a hand, he absolutely identified 6 laying bodies (one declared to be Shannon by Hideyoshi). Body double tricks were guaranteed false, and every other person on the island was present at examination except Maria, including Kanon.

    • @alternateperson6600
      @alternateperson6600 20 дней назад +1

      @@I_Tacocat the key here is "how many people died?", meaning Battler is expressing doubt about there being more corpses than the five he positively identified i.e. he hasn't actually seen anything, only suspects. Not being able to count something on one's hand is just an expression; it doesn't mean what you think it does, so it doesn't say anything about the number of corpses. However, if you want to be pedantic about it, I can take you to town. Technically, he said "on one hand", not on his fingers. For all we know, he could be talking about his palm lines; humans generally have three of those, and five corpses would be enough to exceed that.

    • @I_Tacocat
      @I_Tacocat 19 дней назад +1

      @@alternateperson6600 “he hasn’t actually seen anything, only suspects” alright you’re clearly trolling here, the entire scene before what I quoted is about Battler being the only cousin to not be caught by a sibling and ABSOLUTELY seeing the carnage in full. As for “just an expression”, yeah, what do you think the expression means lol, it is always in reference to the number of fingers being 5. Battler’s words being a statement of doubt is also only a devil’s proof, counterable with hempel’s raven, there are no possible instances where Battler doesn’t doubt that he sees 6 bodies clearly and doesn’t make a statement, making it more evidence for him seeing the bodies.

  • @rodrider20
    @rodrider20 4 года назад +1

    hola muy buen video, sigue asi :D

  • @DavidWest2
    @DavidWest2 3 года назад +23

    Fully on board with this. Makes more sense than the “official” explanation. It seems clear to me that Rosa was intended to be the original culprit, even if the author changed his mind later because he had some ideas he wanted to use. The shannon=kanon explanation is not sufficiently hinted at in the first four episodes, and is more of a post-hoc theory that has a lot more moving parts. Whereas the Rosa explanation simply has fewer moving parts and is more elegant.
    I almost feel like the author is trolling his readership with the official explanation. It’s his way of figuring out who is even worth talking to (anyone that believes the official explanation, at least unquestioningly, is a rube). That fits perfectly with him saying he’s Tohya in interviews, who also had incredible disdain for her (dumb) readers.

    • @Fragmentsinfractals488
      @Fragmentsinfractals488 3 года назад +29

      It is hinted everywhere in the first four episodes that Shannon Kanon and BEATRICE are the same human.

    • @norton7954
      @norton7954 Год назад +2

      ​​​​​@@Fragmentsinfractals488where exactly? never is said before that are the same person, they are seen like separated 🤨.

    • @mattiswan1
      @mattiswan1 Год назад +8

      @@norton7954 the entire conflict in episode two with shannon, kanon and beatrice is pretty clearly an inner struggle with yasuda upon a reread, beatrice saying that betraying a woman is the easiest way to hurt one as well as constantly putting them down for being furniture because that is how she views herself as a result of her body, shannon mentions straight up the white horse promise in episode three, and then later on with the final scenes in episode four beatrice's red truths about battlers sin which line up with battler's false promise, kanon's body dissapearing and there frequently being some sort of trick with the detective not being able to properly check both shannon and kanon's bodies, i could go on but in short the rosatrice theory is ridiculous and completely ignores the themes of the story out of some strange notion that the author is just trolling, when the mystery is intentionally written to be a little unsatisfying to force you to grapple with the themes, the whydunnit. this is the entire point of episode seven!! this is also why erika could not reach the truth no matter how logical her theories were, she refused to look at the story with love because she didn't believe love exists. literally the entire point is that yes, the red truth is absolute but also everything else is there for a reason, its a truth hidden behind layers of fiction that yasuda desperately wanted someone to work to understand as her final gamble before death.

    • @Rafael-rn6hn
      @Rafael-rn6hn Год назад +9

      A (brief) list of why Ryukishi never meant for Shanon=Kanon:
      - Shanon and Kanon are separate people--see EP5's detective perspective.
      - The numerous red statements concerning Shanon and Kanon that count them as separate people...
      - ... or red statements which refer to them as people at all. In intelligible conversation, the word 'person', used in said red statements, never means 'a personality of a person', much less when used in conjunction with words such as 'killed' or 'dead'. Introducing selective subjective interpretation into red truth defeats the purpose of red truth. For example:
      - Game 6 requires 17 people to be in Rokkenjima. Furudo Erika is not one of those 17 people since she washed up dead on the island (see Tips). Shanon and Kanon count as two separate people. The calculation is straightforwards and works out fine. Introducing 'personalities' or what have you only makes utter nonsense of the entire scenario. For instance, there should be at least one more 'person' on the island, i.e. Beatrice, making the total of 'people' greater than it should be by 1.
      - Shanon and Kanon being the same person is obviously not part of Will's solutions, yet his solution is correct anyway. (The whole event is an intentional warning by Ryukishi warning readers that this idea is bs -- for the second time in the 7th novel.)
      - Knox. 8th, the case cannot be solved with clues that are not presented: multiple personality disorder is never hinted at for the either Shanon or Kanon. 2nd and 6th, the case cannot be solved with mystical/magical explanations: magical meta scenes are not evidence this multiple personality situation exists. 8th & 10th, a character cannot disguise himself without clues: no clues exist to the effect that any part of their appearance is a disguise. (Funnily enough, the only person who does show hints of multiple personality disorder is Rosa.)
      - The implausibility of everything. The baby (male) surviving the fall off of a cliff; Shanon/Kanon tricking the entire family, servants and everyone else for 3 years minimum; the required recruitment of changing accomplices in every game; etc. You need to buy into a chain of unreasonable premises to even begin to contemplate Shanon=Kanon.
      - The 6th game's love battle scenario turns into nonsense. The love trilemma is moot since it is not true that all three couples were even possibilities: 1) We are asked to believe Shanon/Kanon 'have a body incapable of love'. Since physical conditions are irreversible, it doesn't matter who wins, 'love' has already been ruled out as impossible from the start, for any pairing. 2) Battler, George and Jessica form two groups of people of opposite sexes. If all of the are in love with the same person (who is male), then at least one couple is impossible (two are). 3) In particular for George, he has specifically made a promise to have children with Shanon; that again contradicts what we are asked to believe in 1 and 2.
      If Ryukishi ever meant to let Shanon=Kanon, then I must applaud his consistency in making it completely implausible in every way possible accross all games from start to finish.
      @@mattiswan1

    • @norton7954
      @norton7954 Год назад +1

      ​​@@mattiswan1 they are seen like separated, Yasuda never have appeared before in any moment, never is showned, is like if don't exist.

  • @TheShadowHawkz
    @TheShadowHawkz 3 года назад +14

    A huge contradiction with the official explanation is that it is the CANON solution that Genji killed Nanjo and Kumasawa in the second game. However, we have IN RED that Genji is not a killer.

    • @Fragmentsinfractals488
      @Fragmentsinfractals488 3 года назад +18

      That red is specifically for Episode 1 only. If it was for all games, it would say so.

    • @TheShadowHawkz
      @TheShadowHawkz 3 года назад +3

      @@Fragmentsinfractals488 it was stated in reference to episode one but it was never stated it was exclusively for episode 1.

    • @Fragmentsinfractals488
      @Fragmentsinfractals488 3 года назад +17

      @@TheShadowHawkz Look at the Red about Kinzo. *"Kinzo is dead at the start of all Games"* The Red states it applies to all four games since we are on the four game.
      The Genji is not a killer is applied by LAMBDADELTA while talking about Episode 0ne. She doesn't state it applies passed the point she is speaking, nor does she say it applies to all games.

    • @TheGreatDetectiveKnows
      @TheGreatDetectiveKnows 2 года назад +11

      Shkanontricers will just arbitrarily dismiss that red truth depending on the game or the scene or who said it. This is why their theory is logically contradictory; whether or not they acknowledge a red truth, and to what degree, is always up to them. Almost anyone can be the culprit if you use their rules. They don't follow the rules of logic.
      If you consider the red and take it to its logical conclusion - you come to Rosatrice. This is why Rosatrice explanation doesn't require the red only applying to certain fragments or plot points.
      As Sherlock says: It's a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly, one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.

    • @Fragmentsinfractals488
      @Fragmentsinfractals488 2 года назад +8

      @@TheGreatDetectiveKnows Red truth is subjective objective. It is objective but only from the person saying and what they believe. In other words, "without love, it cannot be seen". Also why would certain reds say *"This applies to all games"* if they all applied to all games? It would be entirely unnecessary to say that in red if they all applied to all games.

  • @sinisis_sinisis
    @sinisis_sinisis Год назад

    Wat