Nasuverse Discussion Board (New Forum)

[Tarang123]

Again, Shiki wasn't always the root. Everyone knows that. Once she becomes the root, she became known as Void Shiki. Void Shiki IS the root. Shiki is merely a vessel. The person that was talking to Mikiya at the epilogue wasn't Shiki. That was Void. That one is beyond description. Whatever you see or you're able to describe is always going to be wrong. Void probably allowed itself to be seen for us to understand. After all, it can do anything. Even the impossible.

Yeah...I know. The point is that she becomes the Root and she still keeps those characteristics of herself. She can still be described in that way. Do we have any evidence that the form we see of her isn't actually void shiki but some other thing? Pretty sure a fictional character can't make it possible for us to see it. That was just Nasu wanting to show us what she looked like.

And like I said, her going from "not root" to "root" is a bit sus. It's a similar reason to why we don't give creator witches apophatic theology beyond the fact that there are multiple of them.

 

[Tdjwo]

Yeah...I know. The point is that she becomes the Root and she still keeps those characteristics of herself. She can still be described in that way. Do we have any evidence that the form we see of her isn't actually void shiki but some other thing? Pretty sure a fictional character can't make it possible for us to see it. That was just Nasu wanting to show us what she looked like.

I still don't get what you mean. Shiki is not always in "Void Shiki" mode. Shiki is an ordinary girl with broken eye powers. Void Shiki is the root. The form that claimed "she was the root" is the "Void form" aka 3rd personality(I think). Shiki isn't even aware of what happens whenever Void takes over.

And like I said, her going from "not root" to "root" is a bit sus. It's a similar reason to why we don't give creator witches apophatic theology beyond the fact that there are multiple of them.

Umineko does not have Apophatic Theology in the first place.

 

[Rakih_Elyan]

Umineko does not have Apophatic Theology in the first place.

Bro

Did you even read the VN and manga?

 

[Migue79]

Shiki isn't even aware of what happens whenever Void takes over.

She doesn’t even know she has Void Shiki inside of her lol

 

[Tarang123]

I still don't get what you mean. Shiki is not always in "Void Shiki" mode. Shiki is an ordinary girl with broken eye powers. Void Shiki is the root. The form that claimed "she was the root" is the "Void form" aka 3rd personality(I think). Shiki isn't even aware of what happens whenever Void takes over.

The point I'm making is that is there any evidence that the description of her physical features that we see aren't actually her but some manifestation?

Umineko does not have Apophatic Theology in the first place.

The Creators would fit the description of apophasis in a vacuum

 

[LehenDuo]

I was actually thinking of something. Maybe someone can answer this for me, but why exactly do we not take into account the natural contradiction to the Root's apophasis being that Shiki, a person who is very likely within description, quite literally is the root? Is there like some external context that changes this?

It's not that simple. She says for example that she isn't the root, but a part of it (like all of people's origins are), but as she lacks any actual directional impulse, she never differentiated from it. She is a part that kept the qualities of the original source.

The point I'm making is that is there any evidence that the description of her physical features that we see aren't actually her but some manifestation?

Technically, she literally says she can only speak with Kokutou because she uses Shiki intellect and "language", so it's not really far off.

 

[Tdjwo]

Bro

Did you even read the VN and manga?

The Creators would fit the description of apophasis in a vacuum

The creators do not have Apophatic Theology. I'm familiar with all the LN scans used for scaling Umineko and I know someone who tried arguing that they did have Apophatic Theology showing me scans of creators who are merely phenomenon and not actually a tier of power because they lose all sense of self and belonging as if they don't exist anymore. There is nothing Apophatic about the creators. If there was, they wouldn't lose their sense of existence.

 

[Tdjwo]

She doesn’t even know she has Void Shiki inside of her lol

That's my point. Shiki Ryougi is not Apophatic but Void Shiki is

 

[Tarang123]

The creators do not have Apophatic Theology. I'm familiar with all the LN scans used for scaling Umineko and I know someone who tried arguing that they did have Apophatic Theology showing me scans of creators who are merely phenomenon and not actually a tier of power because they lose all sense of self and belonging as if they don't exist anymore. There is nothing Apophatic about the creators. If there was, they wouldn't lose their sense of existence.

That's not what it is. The reason they lose sense of existence is that Creators are freed from all restrictions from life, death, existence, and even meaning itself. Therefore, witches that reach that realm lose their existence and become one with it.

 

[Tarang123]

It's not that simple. She says for example that she isn't the root, but a part of it (like all of people's origins are), but as she lacks any actual directional impulse, she never differentiated from it. She is a part that kept the qualities of the original source.

1. If she isn't actually the root, but just a singular part of it like the origins of others, then why is she scaled to it?
2. What do you mean by "actual directional impulse"?

Technically, she literally says she can only speak with Kokutou because she uses Shiki intellect and "language", so it's not really far off.

Can you post the scans for this?

 

[Tdjwo]

The point I'm making is that is there any evidence that the description of her physical features that we see aren't actually her but some manifestation?

From what we know, Akasha took over Shiki Ryougi's body to converse with Mikiya. But at the same time, Akasha still had a convo with Mikiya without any physical body when it was leaving. So it's safe to say that Void Shiki voluntarily allows itself to have a form of description because it had to talk with Mikiya face-to-face. It can chose not to have its physical characteristics if it wanted to even while possessing Shiki Ryougi's physical body.

 

[Grand_Saver_Ritsuka]

1. If she isn't actually the root, but just a singular part of it like the origins of others, then why is she scaled to it?
2. What do you mean by "actual directional impulse"?

Can you post the scans for this?

funnily speaking, i have seen solid arguments for archetype scaling above void shiki

 

[Tdjwo]

1. If she isn't actually the root, but just a singular part of it like the origins of others, then why is she scaled to it?

She is the root. It has been stated several times both in the novel and fgo profile

 

[Tdjwo]

funnily speaking, i have seen solid arguments for archetype scaling above void shiki

Please don't bring up that 20+ yrs old statement of Nasu mentioning top 3 in the verse without even ranking them

 

[Grand_Saver_Ritsuka]

Please don't bring up that 20+ yrs old statement of Nasu mentioning top 3 in the verse without even ranking them

not that. There are other arguments and from what i saw, archetype beat void in one of the games

 

[Tdjwo]

Archetype isn't even top 5 anymore

 

[Tdjwo]

not that. There are other arguments and from what i saw, archetype beat void in one of the games

What game? From what I remember, only base Shiki fought Arcueid and Shiki negged Arcueid.

 

[Tdjwo]

That's not what it is. The reason they lose sense of existence is that Creators are freed from all restrictions from life, death, existence, and even meaning itself. Therefore, witches that reach that realm lose their existence and become one with it.

This doesn't mean they are apophatic. It's never stated that they could only be described by negation. The very fact that Featherine could reach there even if she almost got erased proves that the Creators are not apophatic. Moreover, it has a description and predictability. The fact that Maria knows she would eventually become a creator is a red flag. Apophatic beings aren't supposed to have a reference.

 

[Grand_Saver_Ritsuka]

What game? From what I remember, only base Shiki fought Arcueid and Shiki negged Arcueid.

melty blood. in summary, I was told that
1.Archetype/aruceid also has a connection to the root
2.void's control over akasha isn't absolute
3.Archetype straight up has a victory quote on defeating void in melty blood games while void doesn't have one
This is very simplified. The actual explanation is much longer

 

[Grand_Saver_Ritsuka]

and the biggest reason: Archetype has a bigger chest. So she negs

 

[Tdjwo]

melty blood. in summary, I was told that
1.Archetype/aruceid also has a connection to the root
2.void's control over akasha isn't absolute
3.Archetype straight up has a victory quote on defeating void in melty blood games while void doesn't have one
This is very simplified. The actual explanation is much longer

1. Archetype has a "conndction" to the root. But she is NOT the root. Manaka also has a connection to the root but thay doesn't make her the root. Even Tohno Shiki and Kurogiri Satsuki also have connections to the root with special abilities but non of these makes them thr root itself. Just a connection.
2. Void doesn't have any control over Akasha. VOID IS AKASHA. Void means "Nothingness" which means "Kara"
3. I don't remember Void ever appearing in Melty blood. Only base Shiki with MEoDP and she defeated Arcueid from what I can remember. I would post the scans shortly.

 

[Grand_Saver_Ritsuka]

1. Archetype has a "conndction" to the root. But she is NOT the root. Manaka also has a connection to the root but thay doesn't make her the root. Even Tohno Shiki and Kurogiri Satsuki also have connections to the root with special abilities but non of these makes them thr root itself. Just a connection.

So she has

2. Void doesn't have any control over Akasha. VOID IS AKASHA. Void means "Nothingness" which means "Kara"

Isn't void shiki just a fan nickname? Also apparently she would had died if her family did not save her.

3. I don't remember Void ever appearing in Melty blood. Only base Shiki with MEoDP and she defeated Arcueid from what I can remember. I would post the scans shortly.

then that is a different game. The game i am talking about is the one where archetype and shiki face off

 

[Tdjwo]

Shiki vs Arcueid

 

[Tdjwo]

So she has

Yes Arcueid does have a connection o the roo. But not only is it not on the same level as base Shiki, but it desnt even make her Void Archetype or whatever.

Isn't void shiki just a fan nickname? Also apparently she would had died if her family did not save her.

Yes. Void Shiki is a made-up name. The real name is just Void lol. The reason we call it Void Shiki is because that's one of Shiki's personality. Actually, it created Shiki's other personalities.

then that is a different game. The game i am talking about is the one where archetype and shiki face off

I think its the same but I don't remember Arcueid winning.

 

[Grand_Saver_Ritsuka]

Yes Arcueid does have a connection o the roo. But not only is it not on the same level as base Shiki, but it desnt even make her Void Archetype or whatever.

well

Yes. Void Shiki is a made-up name. The real name is just Void lol. The reason we call it Void Shiki is because that's one of Shiki's personality. Actually, it created Shiki's other personalities.

i remember her name being "shiki ryoigi" basically shiki's full name in quotations. Apparently she was created by the ryogi family with their techniques or some stuff.

I think its the same but I don't remember Arcueid winning.

the ending is left up to the air as far as i know, but if you make shiki and archetype fight in a pvp, only archetype has a win quote implying she beat void. Also it is implied that void was urging shiki on to kill archetype, while archetype was aware she was void shiki and called her things like all encompassing order/will of heavens

 

[Tarang123]

This doesn't mean they are apophatic. It's never stated that they could only be described by negation. The very fact that Featherine could reach there even if she almost got erased proves that the Creators are not apophatic. Moreover, it has a description and predictability. The fact that Maria knows she would eventually become a creator is a red flag. Apophatic beings aren't supposed to have a reference.

She didn't reach it. She reached whatever was right before it. And like I said, it works in a vacuum. The idea that there are things beyond and unbound the very nature of meaning itself. And like I said before and just now, it only applies in a vacuum. The fact that characters can become the creator without losing their identity is indeed an anti-feat, but that's against the point

 

[Tdjwo]

i remember her name being "shiki ryoigi" basically shiki's full name in quotations. Apparently she was created by the ryogi family with their techniques or some stuff.

Shiki Ryougi wasnt created. She was conceived. She has a blood brother. Same father and mother. The Ryougi family merely did some voodoo shit to make her connected to Akasha. Alaya was going to kill Shiki when she was born due to he connection she had with the root. Basically,
Ryougi Shiki is not Void Shiki
Void Shiki is Akasha
Ryougi Shiki merely has a far better connection o Akasha than Arc, Tohno, etc which made Akasha take over her body in order to become Void Shiki

the ending is left up to the air as far as i know, but if you make shiki and archetype fight in a pvp, only archetype has a win quote implying she beat void. Also it is implied that void was urging shiki on to kill archetype, while archetype was aware she was void shiki and called her things like all encompassing order/will of heavens

Yeah, I just remembered that there wasn't any definite winner in that fight. But as we could see, that was base Shiki fighting Archetype. Shiki doesn't have a victory quote. All she says is "As long as it's alive, I can kill anything even if it's god"

 

[Tdjwo]

She didn't reach it. She reached whatever was right before it. And like I said, it works in a vacuum. The idea that there are things beyond and unbound the very nature of meaning itself. And like I said before and just now, it only applies in a vacuum. The fact that characters can become the creator without losing their identity is indeed an anti-feat, but that's against the point

If there is something "right before" a supposed Apophatic entity, then it means there's a certain distance between that thing and the apophatic thing therefore, it's no apophatic. Remember, any attempt to reach apophasis is always going to be by negation and totally unreachable or even close to i except it's dead and it's returning to it.

 

[Grand_Saver_Ritsuka]

Shiki Ryougi wasnt created. She was conceived. She has a blood brother. Same father and mother. The Ryougi family merely did some voodoo shit to make her connected to Akasha. Alaya was going to kill Shiki when she was born due to he connection she had with the root. Basically,
Ryougi Shiki is not Void Shiki
Void Shiki is Akasha
Ryougi Shiki merely has a far better connection o Akasha than Arc, Tohno, etc which made Akasha take over her body in order to become Void Shiki

i think the statement was

—Ordinarily a creature whose being is poured out straight from " " simply dies in its mother's womb. That was my case. But the Ryougi clan possessed a technique for keeping such a thing alive. - Kara no Kyoukai: Epilogue

Yeah, I just remembered that there wasn't any definite winner in that fight. But as we could see, that was base Shiki fighting Archetype. Shiki doesn't have a victory quote. All she says is "As long as it's alive, I can kill anything even if it's god"

about this

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1039008145495838740/1039024889748787252/WA.png

 

[Tdjwo]

i think the statement was

You see, I was right. She was supposed to die in her mother's womb, but the RYougi family did some crazy sho to keep her alive ill she got out of her mother's womb.

about this

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1039008145495838740/1039024889748787252/WA.png

Who is Archetype talking to? And if it's base Shiki with MEoDP, then that might make sense since Void Shiki wasn't shown in Melty blood at all.

 

[Tarang123]

If there is something "right before" a supposed Apophatic entity, then it means there's a certain distance between that thing and the apophatic thing therefore, it's no apophatic. Remember, any attempt to reach apophasis is always going to be by negation and totally unreachable or even close to i except it's dead and it's returning to it.

That's just missing the point. It's the equivalent of saying that a character in Fate was able to reach the cosmological structure before the Root, therefore the root isn't apophatic. That is basically your argument right now

 

[Tdjwo]

That's just missing the point. It's the equivalent of saying that a character in Fate was able to reach the cosmological structure before the Root, therefore the root isn't apophatic. That is basically your argument right now

Roa didn't reach the indescribable " " He only reached the other root which isn't the indescribable aspect. I think Theoretical already explained the connection of Taoism and the root's nature which is kinda complicated. Nonetheless, nothing really proves the Creators are apophatic. The fact that there could be more than 1 creator already makes it impossible for them to have apophatic theology. There can be only one apophatic being in a verse.

 

[Tarang123]

Roa didn't reach the indescribable " " He only reached the other root which isn't the indescribable aspect. I think Theoretical already explained the connection of Taoism and the root's nature which is kinda complicated. Nonetheless, nothing really proves the Creators are apophatic. The fact that there could be more than 1 creator already makes it impossible for them to have apophatic theology. There can be only one apophatic being in a verse.

I didn't give a specific example. I was giving a general scenario. I literally already explained why the creators would have apophasis in a vacuum. You're missing the "in a vacuum" part, which takes away context like multiple creators, or that people can keep their identities when becoming a creator.

 

[Darksmash]

Both are kinda snorefest materials. Especially DkD. So boring and made solely for battleboarding.

If you think that about Umineko then you have successfully failed media literacy. Stick to meathead shounen.

 

[Tarang123]

If you think that about Umineko then you have successfully failed media literacy. Stick to meathead shounen.

To be fair, you do need a certain level of media literacy above typical shounen to get through FSN's godawful pacing

 

[Darksmash]

To be fair, you do need a certain level of media literacy above typical shounen to get through FSN's godawful pacing

If someone's coming out of Umineko thinking it was made for battleboarding then I doubt they have any sort of media literacy or reading comprehension.

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

Most people who read umineko dont even think about "wow these characters so powerful lemme scale it!"

 

[Maxeez]

Well no you can't because that's not what an antagonist is. An antagonist doesn't need to develop or grow. That's a ridiculous misconception when it comes to character writing.

No, that's not a misconception. An antagonist is a character anyway and can be whatever it is, just like the main character sometimes can be "not developped" and stay a "static" character. So either you can concede on this aspect or just dismiss the comparison because they're not the same, but then the entire comparison falls flat.

And like I said, that's just not true at all. It being subtle does not mean it isn't fleshed out because it absolutely is.

I've yet to see how it is especially more fleshed out than Shiki though. Being mentionned by various characters doesn't make it enough for what you're assessing.

And yes, Johan is supposed to be a human character. He isn't supposed to appear human at first, and that changes throughout the story.

That's not what a human character is though, he symbolizes how you can regain your humanity from nihilism and disappears at the end leaving an empty bed as the "Monster" (the actual symbol) fades away. Also, you yourself admitted that Johan "isn't supposed to change as an antagonist" so why arguing this ? Throughout the story, we never see Johan actually changing, he just disappears at the end as the "Monster" within him was killed during the Rurenheim facing scene, like the symbol he is.

As for psychological depth, you shot yourself in the foot there by arguing that. The entire story of Monster is centered around figuring out the psychological nuances of Johan and specifically his motivations and goals.

You seem to be implying that there are plenty of nuances when there is really little amount of them, he's basically a reference to the ubermensch concept, not some kind of deeply layered psychological character in itself. His motivations and goals also aren't that hard to understand the moment you get it follows nihilism.

Neither of which are important for an antagonist to begin with, so this isn't a good argument anyway.

That's just dishonest. A lot of antagonists follow this kind of criteria and it seems like you're entirely dismissing the existence of such characters. Anyways, refer to my above point :

So either you can concede on this aspect or just dismiss the comparison because they're not the same, but then the entire comparison falls flat.

It literally shouldn't. Like, it's genuinely stupid to say that an antagonist, regardless of how good they are, need to develop in order to be better or comparable to a character that does develop. That's dumb. I'll give a counter example. Most people who've seen The Dark Knight trilogy would probably agree that the Joker is the best character in the trilogy. It's not hard to see why. Yet he's a character that literally does not develop from beginning to end. We know next to nothing about his backstory, we don't explore his psyche, etc., but he's still put head and shoulders above characters who do have high levels of psychological depth and good development.

That's just reiterating a strawman. I didn't say they NEED to develop, I said they can, and Shiki (as a character) does it far more than Johan, that's it.
If you don't want to compare this because Johan doesn't specifically need to do that, then you admit the entire comparison is not good because both characters have entirely different functions. But, matter of fact, Shiki still has the upper hand concerning this, especially if you still want to argue that Johan is a "human" character (which he quite literally isn't) ; because, well, "humans" are supposed to change and experience a character journey. It's different from a concept or symbol being deconstructed by the narrative of a work of fiction (which is the case in Monster).

As for being more complex, how exactly? She absolutely is complex, but more complex than Johan? I haven't seen anything that would put her above him in that regard.

Well, that's up to your incredulity, but I could ask you the exact same thing. Shiki has visual characterization of her conflict (through her vest and kimono for example), ties it with her double personnality that delves into different Taoists philosophical interpretations, and wraps it all up with her third personnality and Kara, not to forget the multiple characters she meets that questions her notion of existence and humanity, that's definitely more complex than a concept/symbol being deconstructed by a narrative (I didn't say it isn't complex at all, but simply far less and would at best mean that the narrative of Monster is more complex than Kara no Kyoukai's, but not Johan himself).

The whole symbolic thing isn't even true anyway.

??? I'll just ignore that.

I never said he was far better because of that, I'm saying you cannot compare Shiki's psychological depth to Johan's because fundamentally the two stories are built differently. KnK explores her psychology but it isn't a story built around that, unlike Monster.

In this case you're just admitting that the comparison isn't even relevant, and the whole comparison falls apart as I've said multiple times earlier.

He is superior in almost every way. You haven't shown why she's more complex in the slightest and even her psychology just seems to be the internal conflict between multiple personalities and her inner conflict between bloodlust and her value of life. That's great and all, but that doesn't really compare...at all.

And then right after admitting it, you're saying he is superior "in almost every way". Huge contradiction if you ask me, and once again how is he superior in almost every way if Shiki is more universal and diverse than he is ? That's a non-argument, I currently have a lot more reasons to say that Shiki is better than you do. So, elaborate on how he is more complex or simply concede that the comparison isn't possible.

Because half of your comparisons and points to Shiki can't logically apply to Johan because he's an antagonist. There isn't a specific type of antagonist that needs to be there in order for them to be good. And having an emotional core is just absolutely not necessary. Hell, it's better for the audience to not be overly attached to the antagonist because they're the literal antagonist of the story.

Again, refer to what I've stated above.

Shiki has more emotional depth and better development, but Johan handily takes psychology, complexity, philosophy, and motivation. The center point of Monster isn't that Johan isn't human. At best if you want to talk about his symbolism, he acts as a sort of Mephistopheles character, bringing the worst in people, and driving people into indulging in their temptations, regardless of how amoral they are.

Explain why, then, as you've never explained exactly what makes him better than Shiki using these criteria, or again you can just concede that they are different so not comparable (typically, comparing motivation is just dishonest if you yourself said that they fill different roles). As for the symbolic part, that's just nihilism being deconstructed, as the "Monster" (or the Ubermensch) disappears at the end which indicates humanity winning over nihilism.

You brought in like one or two factors for shiki and then namedropped other stuff without elaborating at all. I don't have to admit anything lmfao.

I did brought more, though, if you refuse to see it that's not really my problem. Besides, you didn't elaborate either so that's not a very relevant thing to say. And it's not like I will write a thousand words worth of an analysis or something if in the end you agree to stop comparing.

That's not what Johan's there for, what? Did you read Monster? The empty bed isn't the point. The point of the empty bed is that it's clear that someone existed there, that person being Johan. Johan regains his identity.

That's just one thing, there are many things to get from that conclusion, surface level interpretation being that Johan does exist. But the whole conflict of Monster was to oppose Johan's nihilism to Tenma/humanity, with the latter "winning" in the end by destroying the "Monster".

I literally explained it. He's a more complex character with his ontological insecurity crisis, his complex yet simple motivations, and the story itself depicting what could drive a kid to such nihilism. And the contrast between that and him by the end when he's proven wrong and regains his humanity is done better than her. The devil-like nature, the nihilism, the identity crisis he has, the ontological insecurity, etc. make him a more complex character.

You still didn't explain how this makes him more complex, so I disagree once again. You've even said "complex yet simple motivations", that's just word salad to me. And, for the sentence I've bolded, this is simply flat out wrong to compare their conclusions when their premise is literally not the same, which you didn't elaborated upon anyways, so uh yeah.

Nobody's changing each other's minds with this, so it's best to just agree to disagree at this point.

Fine with that, as I've extensively repeated above.

Besides, Mercurius is better written than both anyway

Don't care + didn't read.

 

[Maxeez]

And like I said, her going from "not root" to "root" is a bit sus. It's a similar reason to why we don't give creator witches apophatic theology beyond the fact that there are multiple of them.

Her "Void" self was always there though, it was said that it wasn't Shiki and was observing what was happening or something along those lines. It is worth noting that her manifestation isn't her "true self" which is apart of the Root.

 

[Overlord_Darkness]

Her "Void" self was always there though, it was said that it wasn't Shiki and was observing what was happening or something along those lines.

「Ryōgi Shiki」is the original Emptiness of the body. Literally the manifestation of the Root (as well as original Void Shiki). It created two other personalities: Ryougi Shiki and SHIKI in order to be in the eternal slumber. However, as was noticed, 「Ryōgi Shiki」should have died 'cause Emptiness cannot have a personality but Ryougi family did some shit and because of that Emptiness,「Ryōgi Shiki」, got a personality.