Live-reviewing Umineko: When They Cry
Progress: End of Umineko Episode 2 + Tea Rooms
This time we’ll keep things shorter. If I say everything there is to say about every episode, I’ll never get around to actually reading the next one. Last time we left off with my crackpot theory that the culprit was Rudolf Ushiromiya. Of course, that isn’t exactly what I said — to be fair to myself: I said I did not believe that this was the case, but the mere fact that Rudolf Ushiromiya could have committed the crimes as shown was a substantial contradiction in the narrative put forward by Beatrice.
If I were to christen a subtitle for this second episode, it would be “the devil’s proof”, which was a frequent motif throughout. Given that one of Beatrice’s goals is to have Battler submit and accept that magic was behind these locked-rooms, it just won’t do to have a need for such a dubious kind of proof. The only way to established beyond doubt that it was so is to stand in front of Battler and create a locked-room using magic. Otherwise, Battler is stuck in a paradoxical situation. The proposition that Beatrice’s magic is behind these locked-rooms remains unfalsifiable both ways, and can only be contradicted or asserted by dubious innuendo.
However, before we get into the genre minutiae, let’s return to the beating heart of the story that really keep this thing afloat: Umineko: When They Cry has much, much more consistently well written characters than its older sibling, Higurashi. I’m sure the primary cast members of the cousins, Kanon, Shannon, Beatrice, etc. get the most focus from fans, but I’d like to focus on a character who really stood out this time around.
Rosa Ushiromiya is a brilliantly written and fully realised character. There is a noteworthy phenomenon in the Neon Genesis Evangelion fanbase, where the teenaged stars of the series receive outsized attention from fans, who themselves tend to have first seen the show when they were young; but, later, once viewers grow older and revisit the story, these characters are eclipsed by more mature characters like Misato, Ritsuko, or Kaji. I strongly suspect a similar dynamic lurks within Umineko, where many of its best characters find it difficult to shine in a story aimed at an audience demographic that skews younger. This is hardly the fault of the viewers, but it is an interesting dynamic.
It is easy to demonise Rosa for her inconstant personality, and for her deeply problematic and abusive relationship with her daughter Maria. And to be clear, she deserves this demonisation. There are basically no justifications for physically assaulting your daughter, especially as often as Rosa does. However, there would be absolutely no point having a character with no serious moral failings in a story like this. And the interconnected depth of Rosa’s insecurities, and how they explain both her strengths and weaknesses, and instantly and continuously compelling. While she really could have carried a whole episode as the principle character on her own if needed, she was instead used to delightful effect here as a sort of tritagonist.
However, Umineko does have its problems, which I expect to talk about in much greater detail once I get further into the series. The last two episodes have confirmed a hypothesis which I could only suspect to be the case in Higurashi: Ryukishi07 is not writing flawed mysteries which rely on contrivance and excessive backfill by accident, he is doing this on purpose. He has seen a tradeoff to be made by defying the guidelines of rigorous plotting, and is trying to achieve something by going off the established path.
In many ways, Umineko has been a repetition of Higurashi’s basic structure, attempting to improve on the ways that story did not quite come together. And while this case is more successful than the last attempt, I can’t help but think Ryukishi07 has a flawed conception of narrative flow and cohesion from the start, and at the end of the day this will end up being little more than “Higurashi, but better”, with most of the same problems still showing up.
Still, Higurashi was good. In fact, one of the key theses of my Higurashi review was that that story was close to some degree of greatness if it was only improved on. So, the unambiguous improvement shown in Umineko is deeply encouraging. Yet, unless we talk about those problems and why they are dragging down the experience, I will be difficult to communicate exactly why I am so worried about where this story is going.
The witch’s proof
It is often said that the first way to learn how to write a mystery novel is to pick up another mystery novel, read it until just before the solution is revealed, and invent your own solution. This is intended both as a serious exercise for practicing one’s creativity as well as a comment made in derision towards the dime a dozen mystery novels that make use of shoddy assumptions and leaps in logic. In such novels, several solutions could fit the clues as given. Ryukishi07 seems interested in this dynamic of narrative ambiguity, especially in the case of Umineko.
In many ways, both Higurashi are Umineko are narratives that offer the audience a case filled with ambiguity, and then ask them what conclusions they can draw with absolute certainty within a cloud of doubt. I will leave the answer that Higurashi offers aside for now — out of deference for any peculiar cases of people reading these impressions in the inverted order. However, Umineko’s answer seems to be an attempt to create a direct commentary on this state of ambiguity.
This second episode is filled with references to the devil’s proof: Which is a shorthand name for the logical dilemma of trying to prove a negative assertion. In summary; proving the existence of the devil in falsifiable, he either appears before you or does not; in contrast, proving the non-existence of the devil is unfalsifiable, no matter how lacking one is in evidence, it is possible that the devil does exist, just in hiding.
Any proactive mystery readers will immediately notice how this presents a problem for solving mysteries. While proving that a culprit committed a crime is one thing, there are many absolute defences which make use of this unfalsifiable devil’s proof. A culprit may claim to be framed, which would require the detective to prove the negative statement that “the alternative culprit did not commit the crime” in order to contradict them. A culprit may claim to be the underling of the true mastermind, which would require the detective to prove the negative statement that “the culprit did not have an accomplice” in order to contradict them. And, a culprit may claim that “the crime was committed by an evil witch by way of magic powers, which would require the detective to prove the negative statement that “witches and magic are not behind these crimes” in order to contradict them.
If the devil’s proof is the concern that “negative statements are unfalsifiable”, Umineko offers a revised epistemological theory which I will henceforth call the “witch’s proof”. It asserts that because the world is inherently ambiguous, there is an ever present devil’s proof in a mystery story that requires the detective to prove that “there is no secret trick they do not know about”, leading to the collapse of the certainty necessary to offer deductions. As a result of this contagious uncertainty, the entire premise of a honkaku mystery falls apart, and we enter a realm dominated by the late Queen problem, supernatural henkaku tricks, and the trappings of anti-mystery.
As for the answer on this witch’s proof that Umineko offers, I cannot even speculate on it in full until the end of the fourth episode. After all, that is where When They Cry games offer their challenge to the reader and complete the clue finding stage. That said, as for the proposition put forward this particular episode, that Beatrice is truly a witch who could commit all these crimes — that all these locked-room are simply the by-product of magic, and set up to torment the participants of the ritual. Well, that idea simply won’t do. Zenzen dame da.
My chief mistake when I put forward Rudolf as a possible culprit back in episode 1 was not my reasoning that he could have committed those crimes — that remains essentially true. It was that it was faulty to even make the declaration that finding a culprit had any meaning at all in this stage. Merely demonstrating the mechanics of the locked-rooms is sufficient the overcome the witch’s proof, which is the goal before us. We must wipe away the cloak of ambiguity before there’s any meaning in alibis, culprits, etc.
And in episode 2, we did not merely receive the first proven locked-room solution, we received something much grander which went unstated in the text itself. It was demonstrated that the locked-rooms, whether or not magic is real, are in reality created by physical means. It does not matter whether or not Beatrice is a witch, because of the red text, we received confirmation at the first locked-room was not merely made to look possible by physical means for the sake of tormenting the survivors, it was literally done by way of a trick of swapped keys. This smashes the first brick holding up the tower of the witch’s proof to pieces.
Now, let’s take the format of the later locked-rooms as an example.
Throughout episode 2, locked-rooms are created whilst all the master keys are accounted for: either being held by the servants or by Rosa. This fact creates several seemingly unsolvable locked-rooms due to the conditions set by Beatrice’s red text. However, many possible tricks still exist. And Beatrice gives the clue one herself when she refuses to repeat the statement that these locked-room were created after being locked by a master key. In other words, tricks involving the specific room keys.
Of course, in the case of the servant room, the red text specifies that after the trick is complete, the servant room keys all end up locked within the key box. Similarly, Jessica’s personal key remains locked within her room. However, many of the obvious tricks that are specified as impossible, such as duplicate keys remain uncontradicted in the case of these keys. Furthermore, a more pressing question is which key was swapped with the chapel key temporarily during the first locked-room? Just any random old key? Doubtful. There might well have been keys that were swapped at crucial times that explain the tricks to these rooms.
The important thing is not solving each individual room at this stage. We are nowhere near the end of the clue collection stage. It is the simple fact that Beatrice continues to create locked-rooms which are physically possible, and this fact is likely the key to breaking through the witch’s proof. Let’s take it easy and try to get through the clue collection stage before commiting to any further theories.
