Umineko and Split Personalities

EP7 really likes to push the supernatural factor but I won’t get into that until I finish completely reading the EP. As possession goes I don’t know how valid it could be but  I interpreted as a hint for multiple personalities that has been mentioned before in the story.Starting with a hypothetical examples I choose Natsuhi as responsible/innocent for a crime. Natsuhi has a Split personalities she isn’t aware of in this example. The issue is whether these claims can be valid against the red or not.

“Natsuhi killed Gohda.”

> The explanation we give it is: the character that we know as “Natsuhi” did in fact kill the character we know as Gohda. It’s been proclaimed that the person who was responsible for his death was no other than Natsuhi.

There’s little doubt about this claim as it clearly mentions that the character Natsuhi murdered Gohda. I wouldn’t doubt this claim if it were to be said in red because there’s no “other” Natsuhi we know in the story. If there were more than one Natushi (say Natsuhi A & Natsuhi B) then it would be mandatory to specify who we are referring to. But the idea here is that there’s not much to doubt about such straightforward red unless we’ve suspected it to be something suspicious about said character or the context in which it happens.

In another scenario we work with one where is claimed that “Natsuhi” didn’t kill Gohda – yet she did. This is a contradiction.

“Natsuhi didn’t kill Gohda” (red?)

> Natsuhi was not responsible for Gohda’s death. She didn’t kill him. It wasn’t suicide, it was somebody else who killed him.

To be more specific (and this probably wouldn’t be mentioned thus why it would be tricky) this should be something like “The person you ‘know’ as Natsuhi didn’t the kill Gohda.”

Natsuhi is a character who we know. She behaves, thinks, as she does, there are many things that make her “her” but the main fact is that the reader have accepted all the information about this character and directly connect it to her person. There’s no other character who we could accept as Natsuhi other than her – that’s her identity. If she stops being Natsuhi then would it count as her or not?

  • What if a character has another or a fake name?

As far as we know most of the characters have the same ones they’re given with the exception of the furniture who were given new names when they enter to work for the Ushiromiya. The characters’ names, in the general, in the story don’t show any trouble  with the red in this matter when they refer to them. I’d feel a bit cheated if the answer to one of the mysteries would be due to a character having a different name other than the one she or he gave, but I suppose that’s a possibility.

Then again

EP6’s red: “At the time the next room over was sealed, Hideyoshi, George, Kumasawa, Shannon, and Nanjo were in it. And, the number of people in the next room over was five. No one existed there except for those to whom those five names referred! All people can only use their own names!!” reminds one of the possibility of denying the possiblity of other characters having any other names other than their own (this however I think was restricted to EP6)

  • So what if at some point one character changes his or her behavior drastically?

Can this be valid in case if it were? It’s a half truth because it was “her”  (Natsuhi) that killed him but it’s also not fully truthful because it wasn’t the “Natsuhi” we know, it was a different personality – another Natsuhi.

The two ways to go about it are:

It is possible because these are “two” (or more) people They should count as separate people even if this “new” character has a entirely different personality and goals we cannot know. Assuming Natsuhi (theoretically assuming) would have a split personality she isn’t aware of and this personality appears every now and then and is responsible for the crimes or helping the culprit – then it’s doubtful a crime could be attributed to the “regular” Natsuhi because she “isn’t her” at that time. It would be the other personality. Reasonable?

OR

It would not be possible – Impossible. Because she’d still be the same person. It doesn’t matter if these multiple personalities are known or unknown to the character because it would “still” be the same person even though the personality and everything else changes completely. In other words, this doesn’t change anything.

More than anything I interpreted this further hinting on split personalities to the similar scenarios in past games where Master keys and Letters disappear or never leave the hands of some characters among other tricks. Actually if split personalities could bypass actual red claims because the person “isn’t himself or herself but another entirely different person” then it’d be extremely difficult to know who does what or who doesn’t. To provide an extremely example the “knock on the door” on EP5. Assuming one of the characters have multiple identities and they couldn’t count as being themselves then it’d be impossible to pin who did it.

And of course even more than anything this hints me back to Shannon & Kanon and also who other else than Beatrice’s human counterpart on Rokkenjima.

solution: I’d say that overall is better to know the number of bodies to not get confused . This is so the number of people as of that moment in time won’t change no matter what “personality” is currently dominating.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Reasoning and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Umineko and Split Personalities

  1. Rob says:

    I was rereading that “knock on the door” bit from Episode 5 recently, and while I don’t think extra personalities can be used to bypass it (red text says “at 24:00, except for Krauss, Natsuhi, and Genji in the second floor corridor and all of the people in the dining hall, no humans existed inside the mansion.”), Erika is surprisingly incompetent in her investigations there – she’s the detective, and she wasn’t present at the time, yet she forgot to check in any way that the events actually happened. It’s actually not said in red at any point that there was a knock on the door (or even a letter outside it). There are variations on the theme of “none of the characters misidentified a knocking sound”, but they wouldn’t have misidentified a knocking sound if nobody actually thought there was a knocking sound in the first place.

    That particular scene is also interesting in the light of the multiple personalities stuff from Episode 7 in that we’re not specifically told in red that, say, Shannon and Kanon are present in the dining room. We’re told who left for the guesthouse, and that “of those who remain” in the mansion that Genji, Krauss and Natsuhi are elsewhere, and “all others were in the dining room”. It’s not actually excluded that a certain person was at that time taking an alternate personality called Erika, and as a result “all others” didn’t include that person even though we would otherwise assume that it did. Battler and Beatrice’s final red to Erika in the sixth game also points to this interpretation of her. “Even if you do join us – there are 17 people.”

    • Elyon says:

      heck, you’re right! This could be a simple set up from the adults in the dining hall. It might be a story they all concorded to make Krauss and Natsuhi surrender to the idea of Battler becoming the new head. There is no need for the knock part or the letter outside the door. However there is a mather that arises in this case (which humanly could be understandable) How did they get the ring? Even negletting the letter part, how did they enter in possession of the head ring which is actually acknoledged by the detective herself later? I think it can be immagined that at that point in time Yasu has the ring (Kanon and Shannon)……so what? Kanon and Shannon said they were able to get the ring and give it to Battler? A bit of a forsed setup. Hard to be belived…….

      about the alternative personalities, it’s true the story playes a lot with it….and yours could be a nice explaneshion however this feels a bit like Battler’s “ani-fantasy” more than genuine mystery. Of corse I’m not critisising, mine is just an observation. And about Battler’s and Beato’s red at the marrige I belive it verts more on the point “on Rokkenjima on that day we are 16 (Shannon and Kanon are acutally equal to 1) so if you join we rise up to 17.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s