While I wouldn’t say that it solely rests in backstory, I do consider it an integral part of characterizaton. The backstory doesn’t even have to be elaborate nor tragic! It simply has to give us an idea of the characters’ motivations and why they have this, as opposed to the writer just showing us that “hey, this is how this character’s personality is; deal with it”
Therefore I find it quite odd that you would think it as something of a cheap tool. Like, I am sitting here, right now, genuinely confused as to why you see it that way. While yes, there are numerous examples of backstories that are overbearing, too tragic, or downright silly; I still see it as a good tool that, when used correctly, makes for a more engaging story than one without.
My reason for doubting is simply that I do not know the character; her being a meta-character has nothing to do with it. So, yes, I do doubt every statement of philosophy from every character because, well, I believe that truly complex characters aren’t even sure of their own philosophies themselves. Unless I know their motivations, I cannot be attached to a character’s own philosophies in such a heartbeat. So when they do suddenly undergo a distinct change in their pattern of thoughts, this change offers absolutely no engagement, because no attachment was formed with their previous philosophy.
This attachment doesn’t even have to be good or bad; you just have to be convicted that their motivations drive them as a character, to the point that when they are forced to confront the inevitable change, you can feel the internal conflict that said character had to face, and, as such, that surge of emotions you get from seeing that character changing is just incomparable.
So maybe you are correct when you say
but the kind of feeling that I get from seeing that sort of character growth is my raison d’être for reading fiction, and I would not give it up for anything else.
How does that even make sense. Certainly not everyone is self-aware of everything about their own philosophies. However, I am aware of my own philosophies, does that make me not complex? Self-awareness is not at all related to complexity of character in any way, shape or form. People achieve self awareness by reflecting on their actions and principles. Some characters are the type to do this, others are not.
Therefore I find it quite odd that you would think it as something of a cheap tool. Like, I am sitting here, right now, genuinely confused as to why you see it that way
Backstories, like any other literary device can be very effective and useful in doing their job. On the other hand they are often overused and can seriously hurt the flow of a work. Authors generally have extensive backstories for all their characters, but they don’t show everything to the audience. A well constructed story does not oversell and only shows the minimum necessary to convey the character’s motivations. Backstories are not always necessary, especially elaborate ones. All of the meta characters have backstories. They are given in their bios and brought up at some point or another in the story. But the backstories are not the majority of the characterization for these characters.
Unless I know their motivations, I cannot be attached to a character’s own philosophies in such a heartbeat
Motivations do not have to come from backstories. They can be brought forth by any number of methods. I would say that the motivations of every single meta character in Umineko is made clear. The need for specific explicit backstory in order to explain every motivation of every character is quite frankly ludicrous.
you just have to be convicted that their motivations drive them as a character, to the point that when they are forced to confront the inevitable change, you can feel the internal conflict that said character had to face, and, as such, that surge of emotions you get from seeing that character changing is just incomparable.
I agree. But that has nothing to do with backstory. Take my previous example of Tatami Galaxy. The main character of the story does not even have a name, let alone a backstory. However you follow his journey throughout the episodes, see his failures, learn his flaws, live his mistakes. And then you get to see him confront those, grow and overcome them. The experience is far more rewarding than seeing motivation coming out of a backstory, because it is motivation coming out of the story itself.
Backstories are only a single way to flesh out a character and add motivation. Ignoring all other information until it is confirmed via backstory is quite frankly crazy.
As they say, “without love, it cannot be seen.” You lack any love for the meta cast, so you are blinded to any characterisation they go through. You don’t even acknowledge them as characters. In the case of Dlanor, she has more characterisation than most of the cast. In the case of what you’re defining as ‘backstory’, it’s already been established that her backstory involves her commitment to SSVD, her stance on Knox’s decalogue, and the point of her being forced to kill her own father who broke his own rules.
It really just seems like you’re adopting a very tunnel-minded view to this. You’ve determined in yourself that the meta doesn’t matter, so you don’t care about any characterisation that does occur there. What you’re feeling is distanced from the main cast on Rokkenjima. Which we’ve already explained is an odd stance to make, since Chiru offers plenty of exploration of the cast on Rokkenjima. Look at Ep5 and all the attention Natsuhi’s character gets. EP6 is all about Yasu. EP7 lets us go back and investigate the stories of a number of the humans, look at Kinzo’s backstory! And EP8 is pretty much all about the family.
Nonetheless, you’re just limiting your own appreciation of the story by refusing to acknowledge anything outside of the Ushiromiya family. An openness is required to appreciate the many facets of Umineko, you can’t just choose run and run with it. It would be a mistake to focus solely on the witches and dismiss Rokkenjima as irrelevant. It’s not all about solving the mystery, and it’s definitely not all about preserving mystery. They’re just different parts which make up the totality of Umineko. It’s like if you read Rewrite and completely disregard everything in the character routes because they’re ‘just blueprints and not relevant to the main story’. Or conversely, if you completely rejected Moon and Terra because ‘they’ve got nothing to do with the rest of the story’. That kind of thinking just makes me really sad. Why would you limit your own enjoyment of something so much?
Perhaps that specific statement was an overstatement on my part; I apologize. What I want to say is that a character may or may not be truly convicted of what they claim their philosophy to be, and I think there should be some way to convict the reader to be convinced of the fact. Even if the character appears to be convinced of their own philosophies, without understanding the character on a deeper level, I personally would not be able to be convinced.
I do agree with you on the first statement; and what I am trying to say right now is that the Chiru does not give the minimum necessary to convey the character’s emotions and, from my own experience with reading it, I feel that including more details on these characters’ backstories would have achieved that which is minimally necessary.
What I am saying is that the bios and the little bits and details weren’t enough for me to fully appreciate the motivations of the characters in the metaworld, which is why I was complaining over the lack of a backstory. Even if you do get me to agree that backstory is not essential in achieving this, I still feel, with strong conviction, that Chiru failed to do so.
And while yes, having to explain the motivation for every character is indeed ludicrous, I would like to at least have this bare minimum to be able to empathize with the motivations of the metacharacters who are directly involved in the fight against each other; like, I can’t empathize with why Erika is so dead-set on cracking the mystery because the writing wasn’t able to attach this motivation to me. Unlike, say, Battler, who had a direct motivation that was touched very well upon, I could feel his struggle and his enjoyment when he fails and when he succeeds in his battle against Beatrice.
Having not watched Tatami Galaxy, I can’t fully discuss it well enough; but the way you describe it sounds like the character’s motivations in the story are driven by the events of the story itself, and not by his experiences before the story. This seems like a stark contrast to the characters of Umineko, whose involvement and motivations in the story are all affected by their previous relationships with the other characters and their own personal struggles.
I don’t know how to say this without being rude to the author so let me just say this outright: Ryukishi07’s writing in Chiru was incapable of getting me to feel the importance of the characters in the metaworld. My current argument is that the reason I feel this way is because the backstory was lacking. Yes, even that example you gave about Dlanor was not sufficient for me to understand and empathize with her as a character. So it’s not that I determined in myself that the metaworld doesn’t matter, it’s that the writing wasn’t able to make me feel that it matters.
And because I wasn’t made to be able to care about the metaworld and it’s characters, I felt that the large amount of screentime it was given took away from my enjoyment of Chiru, as a whole. I’m trying to say that Chiru would have been better off without it. If it’s purpose was to complement the main story of Umineko by having meta characters represent the complex emotions of the characters in Rokkenjima, then I feel that it would have been better off if these complex emotions were shown through the words and actions of the characters (thinking back, they probably were already shown in the first four episodes) . And if it’s purpose was to provide an additional, interesting story on top of the one happening in Rokkenjima, then I am claiming that by the fact that it failed to get me to care for any of the meta characters, it also failed to be interesting.
So I am not in any way claiming that I refuse to acknowledge the occurrences simply because it isn’t part of the story that I was interested in; the only thing I am claiming is that it failed to be interesting, and thus took away from the rest of the story which I did find interesting. You know very well that I did not feel that way about Rewrite because, unlike Umineko, I found those distinct parts of the story equally interesting.
This is possibly the think you have said that I disagree with the most. Umineko would not be the masterpiece it was if not for the meta-elements. That’s what separates it from other excellently written mystery works. That added complexity, that expanded cast, that’s what elevates it to a level of it’s own.
Ryukishi07’s writing in Chiru was incapable of getting me to feel the importance of the characters in the metaworld
I’ve spent a lot of time reading other people’s thoughts and opinions on Umineko. Over in /r/visualnovels we have a weekly “what are you reading” thread and over the past 3 years I have read comments from many people reading Umineko and discussed all kinds of elements of the story with them. The characters in the story, including the meta characters, are one of the most universally praised elements of Umineko. Whenever popularity polls are held the meta characters overwhelmingly score higher than most of the humans
So claiming it is a fault of Ryukishi’s writing that prevents you from engaging with these characters is foolish. The majority of readers treat the meta characters as real and valid characters, who are interesting and engaging. Your hangups in this matter are your own. You are entitled to your opinions of course, but claiming it is a fault of the author when you are pretty much alone in this belief is ludicrous.
Anyway this has been a very interesting discussion. I hope you don’t feel I was too harsh or attacked you directly or anything. I look forward to discussing more about Umineko with you in the future.
And that’s why I said I didn’t know how to say it without being rude. If I really do want to appreciate the rest of the cast, then perhaps I need to change my mindset in looking at the characters, because I simply cannot empathize with characters like Erika nor Dlanor unless I figure out why they are motivated the way that they are. However, I’m pretty proud of this mindset of mine as it has brought me the satisfaction of enjoying other pieces of fiction on a very emotional level.
I am also very well aware that these characters are quite popular; moreso than the characters from Rokkenjima, and these 4 years since I have finished reading Umineko I simply could not understand why. Perhaps one day, someone would be able to explain that to me, but all the previous explanations I have heard have fallen flat (majority of them being “but she’s soooo cool!!!”).
Maybe my biggest problem was that I did not, at any point, read it with the mindset of it being a mystery work. The entire time I was reading it, I did so as I would any other story: an adventure through the minds and motivations of the characters and how they deal with the events that transpire throughout the story. So I really wasn’t able see how the metaworld separates it from other mystery works when I didn’t really compare it with other mystery works, but with other fiction in general. I’ll be honest, I never even tried, let alone wanted, to figure out the mysteries behind the deaths in any of the chapters, because my mind was preoccupied with questions like “why was Rosa so shunned by her other siblings” and “why was Eva so desperate in claiming head of the family”.
Indeed it has! It’s brought me a lot of self-awareness, more than anything. And hey don’t worry about it! I never really take arguments personally, so it’s all good~
Yeah, @ctom42 already put it pretty well, but it really just feels like you want Umineko to be something its not. The things you’re citing as issues, the existence of the metaworld - are the same things that people love about Umineko, and that make Umineko unique when compared to other similar murder mysteries. Without the Meta, Umineko would’ve remained just another murder mystery, and would’ve ended at Episode 1. Maybe a timeskip to Ange’s investigation from EP4. Maybe that would’ve been more to your tastes, but that’s not what Umineko is, and I can guarantee that people wouldn’t appreciate it half as much if that was all there was to it. Through the framing of the Metaworld, we can explore so much more of the Ushiromiya family, their motivations and whatnot, and the Rokkenjima incident that would’ve otherwise been possible. Just look at everything that Ushromiya Lion embodies, for example.
It’s fine if it’s not your thing, but don’t go criticising that as bad writing. This is a difference of taste, nothing more.
To be fair, I only criticize it as bad writing looking solely from the perspective of “the metaworld is a separate story with separate characters each of which have their own motivations and character growth”. Elaborating further on why I consider it as such is just going to get me to start from the beginning of this whole debacle…
Coming from the perspective of “the metaworld is a story with characters that complement the thoughts and emotions of the characters in Rokkenjima”, however, then I can see it as something pretty creative, sure, but here is where I openly admit that it isn’t my cup of tea and would have preferred that the thoughts and emotions of the cast in Rokkenjima are shown through their own thoughts and actions. So yes, my lack of appreciation towards this facet of the metaworld is solely anchored on my own personal taste, I admit.
There is a tangible reason for this change which is lost on a lot of newcomers (this was a pretty big deal when Umineko was still in progress).
Ryukishi’s best friend and one of the members of 07th Expansion, BT, passed away during the production of Episode 6.
Ryukishi was put in a huge depression because of this (he outright stated it) but chugged on with EP6 despite not being in the best state to carry it on. You can definitely find changes in tone from the Question arcs compared to the Answer arcs (at least post-EP5): part of this is thematic and intentional, but a lot of it was different for other reasons.
So this perceived change in tone and quality is not imaginary, but is a tangible reaction to a tragedy that befell 07th Expansion.
Do I think the quality suffered?
I haven’t read Umineko since 2011, and maybe I wasn’t a good enough reader to pick up on such subtleties, but I do remember enjoying the first four more than the second four — that might have been out of virtue of “questions are always more exciting than answers.”
EDIT: One more thing that might be responsible is the Shkanontrice reveal. I hate the “you had to have been there” argument, but this theory was actually reviled by the Western forum audience when Chiru was coming out.
I sympathize with them on the basis of —that— EP5 scene in the parlor which is flat-out unfair. (Shannon and Kanon ARE shown in the same scene, a scene which BEGINS in the perspective of Erika Furudo but then shifts perspective halfway through). I get that it’s legal strictly speaking, but this is the closest to an “unfair trick” as there is in the entirety of Umineko. The Shkanontrice reveal did not make a lot of people happy. Some of them DESPERATELY tried to enforce Rosatrice, which imo I find really lulzworthy, but hey I can’t entirely fault them for that.
If I were to resume as simply as possible my disappointment in Chiru it revolves around the idea that Umineko is solvable with arc 1-2-3-4 alone, as was said in red.
This implies that whatever couldn’t be concretely solved or even be thought about from the question arcs alone aren’t really what needed to be solved in Umineko. The answer was meant to have a lot of “dark zones” which were left to our imagination as long as we understood the essential, which revolves around Sayo’s heart.
Everything else that Chiru bought forward as “answer” or “backstory” that couldn’t be concretely guessed at or sometimes at all was often so stupid that I find myself more satisfied accepting the fantasy narrative then the mystery one. Kinzo’s backstory ranks very high there. Too many things that were basically metaphors were given concrete equivalent that distracted the story from it’s own points and messages and were better left in their abstract state. It really feels like most mystery answers are basically comparable to fantasy answers - the same abstract ideas are given concrete shapes and sounds about as absurd after the process, except one of them takes itself seriously whie the other has a premise anchored in suspension of disbelief.
Beside that I also find arc6 to be overall a disappointment of a story. I’m not going to say it’s outright bad, but as the arc with Battler as gamemaster that was supposed to be his answer to Beatrice - and especially after the end of arc5 - I believe I’m not alone in having had high expectations from it which left a rather empty feeling afterward. Are my expectations wrong? Perhaps. But gamemaster Battler arc! Come on. I’m sure Ryuukishi would’ve done something much better if not for the event that crushed him then. It is afterall Umineko’s finale. Arc 7-8 are basically epilogue arcs. Arc7 could even have been numbered arc0 in many ways and arc8 could’ve been outright called the epilogue. I have nothing against this, I’m just saying that as the finale arc6 should’ve aimed to be the most memorable arc possible. As far as I know it tends to be pretty low in “arc ranking” in people’s opinion, so I don’t think it’s entirely biased to say that it failed to be on par with what it should’ve been.
On a final complaint I will say that there’s obviously many dropped plotlines, some of which were very promising to me and I personally would’ve hoped they got pursued further.
Hm, I´ve been meaning to tackle this topic for a while and I think now that I have assembled most of my thoughts, I can discuss it.
First off, it should be recognized that Chiru is a mystery and whoever states otherwise is full of shit.
But anyway, despite my immense love for Chiru, I can recognize its problems, and I think its best to start off with the criticism first.
The Answers
Unlike Usagi, I actually liked most of Umineko´s answers and thought a good chunk of them were very clever and well thought out (EP3 closed room anyone?), even if some of them were a bit on the ridiculous side. However, I think that the way the answers were presented was a bit poor. For example, in the EP8 manga, a lot of time is spent really explaining why and how Sayo is the way she is. While this is all fine and good, the same cannot be said about the answers to the mysteries.
Its not that the answers to the mysteries is bullshit (though I would argue that EP4´s ¨everyone is the accomplice¨, is pushing it), its the way they are presented. The answers are to one note. For example, Erika states that one of the answers to EP5 was that Beatrice met with the adults in the parlor and bribed them. That´s literally all she says. While the answer does make quite a bit of sense after you put a bit of thought into it, I´d prefer if Erika´s deduction addressed all part´s of the mystery.
Such as why the adults decided to trust Beatrice. Of course it makes sense why they would but Erika doesn´t go into it. And there is also the problem of some of the answers sounding dumb on paper when they make sense in application and few relying a bit on convenience.
Basically, Ryukishi made his concrete answers really vague and that hurt the mystery a bit for me. I shouldn´t have to explain the answers-especially if they make quite a bit of sense after thinking about it. Willard and Erika should have gone more ¨in depth.¨ Though I will admit that I am conflicted on this as I don’t really like textbook style answers.
Also, certain things about the mystery aren´t answered (though they can be explained through context clues so I´m not sure if this is a flaw.)
Too many things going on
While I do appreciate Chiru´s attempt to explore a wide range of topics and have multiple storylines at once, even though Ryukishi succeeded wonderfully at a lot of them, I feel like the story focus was a bit…muddled at times and it didn´t help that new characters were introduced every EP. Dawn is probably a good example of biting off more than you can chew. Also, two plotlines in particular felt redundant but at least are contained to their specific Episode, with one of them being dropped entirely (but for reasons that were understandable at least.)
The Meta
This one is a bit more subjective, but I still think its important. While the Metaworld is easily the greatest thing about Umineko as a whole, and I love the way Chiru handled it for the most part, I think that the meta overshadowed too many things and the narrative structure-while good-could get rather weird at certain parts. Also I would like to mention that the way the Meta works gets extremely confusing sometimes. Also, Also, while the execution of its storylines and themes is generally applause worthy, I feel like the messages can get a bit muddled during the examination process-which is a bit unfortunate even though clarification is always provided.
Anyway, those are my three main points of criticism about Chiru other than the fact that it could have used more polish. I´ll go into the AMAZING parts of Chiru in another post and despite my criticism-I still gave it a 7/10.
Because I don’t want to make my original post to long, I will now write why Umineko Chiru is actually the lovechild of NGE and Utena, and why its the best thing since sliced bread.
AMBITION
The thing about Chiru, is that Umineko wouldn’t be Umineko without it. While I think 1-4 is comparable to FMAB in quality, Chiru is what MAKES Umineko so fucking special and unique. From the things Chiru explores (the nature of truth and magic, theme of love, nature of humans), to how Ryukishi masterfully makes the logic battles into meaningful studies of the mystery genre and the mystery itself as well as characters (whereas in lesser stories it would’ve become formulaic), and finally to the way that Ryukishi creates his message.
Its one of a kind and so unlike many visual novels I have ever read. God bless Dragonknight and his wonderful mind.
EVOLUTION
Edit note: I’ll add on more and go further in depth later in the week, I still have the assemble most of my thoughts, but this is what I came up with so far. So stay tuned~! (I’ll continue this post guys, I just have to sort my thoughts out)
This is an old topic and Im a bit late to the party, but reading through I wanted to comment my little idea as to why;
Now, personally, Chiru was what made my love for Umineko solidify. I absolutely adore everything about it.
I feel like what irritated some folks about Chiru and feeling as if it suddenly turned a 180 was essentially I feel the prominence of the “outsiders” raised (Bernkastel and Lambdadelta) and of course, Miss Erika Furudo is one of the biggest points here. People either loved her or absolutely detested her. She was seen as an outright “Mary Sue” ( of course I dont think so, but she was famous for being called one) and seemed to trod in with mud covered shoes to Battler and Beatrice’s dynamic.
Alongside the shift in tone to be much more meta focused and the Eiserne Jungfrau’s introduction, and Beatrice taking a step to the side and Erika being in the limelight - the world built up in Ep1-4 seemed to tumble down or even to some suddenly crash. The theme was one of Agatha Christie / Occult aesthetics, and overall mystery aura, and it went into a completely different aura into the characters taking apart the story as if they were like us, the readers, that could leave some feeling detached or as if it was a completely different story.
Most were expecting a Battler focused Ep, an Ep of reflection and redemption on his sin; but with all the new characters and events, and especially Erika’s presence, left a lot feeling cold to Chiru I feel.
Given the release of the arcs and the revival of this post, I’ll give my opinion.
I really like Chiru, but it’s probably true that many would hate it. I have nothing against “the truth” about Beatrice, but given many people seem unsatisfied with it, it’s only natural they would dislike Chiru, because the first three arcs have the sole purpose of leading you to that “truth”. At least, that’s how I see it, since around EP 2, I already had this idea of who Beatrice was and it only grew stronger and stronger, specially on the Chiru arcs. Chiru is the mud of Umineko, where the ugly and distorted truth is, and where Beatrice’s heart is explored and toyed with. To me, Chiru must be ignored to create a different “truth” than the one showed in EP 7, because if you consider these episodes there’s no way anyone else would be the culprit of the first four games. It’s still important, though, since it’s where we can see who the characters really are, their heart, specially Battler.
Overall, I adored Chiru. Maybe it was because I read the manga before the VN, and as such I read EPs 6, 7, and 8 blind, but I enjoyed Chiru much more than 1-4. Chiru is less cohesive than 1-4, but the payoff for Chiru is a lot stronger. Each episode gives you one huge component of the puzzle, but it never shows you which piece goes where. Episode 5 reveals Natushi’s backstory, and thus introduces us to the first piece of Yasu. Episode 6 hits us with the infamous 17 people whammy. Episode 7 is really the symphony pulling together all of the individual instruments, if you get what I mean. Plus, I mean, that Tea Party. Episode 8 is great too, although not as much as Episode 7. Gosh, I loved Chiru.
The internet flaming of Chiru back when it was first translated was an unbearable event. What I thought was beautiful was being from my perspective unfairly trashed. IIRC alot of flaming was about being betrayed or something, given “cheap answers” or unwanted aesops.
I feel Chiru is more of an exploration of the themes and characters of Umineko, and a subtle one at that, moreso in the VN. What Ryukishi wanted to emphasise here is the themes and the ‘why’ of the mystery, maybe you can even say ‘the heart’ of it and wanted to give a look into the characters’ psychological states and why some of them are how they are or did what they did. For some reason, he wanted the motives of the characters to be explained much more than the ‘how’. Now, if you compare this with Higurashi, which probably a lot of people who read it before Umineko did, Higurashi is more… well-balanced, I guess, or, more precisely, it seems so. The answers are given to the reader directly in it and it also spends time exploring the characters’ stories, but since most were focused on the mystery and after being given the answers directly in the Answer arcs, the story was much more understandable, I think. Meanwhile, Umineko wants to make the reader think with the characters and whilst it gives subtle answers, in the end, it leaves the reader having to make everything completely clear by themselves. The new characters it introduces are also meant to give new perspectives and takes on the mystery, I think and thus give the reader more clues. I mean, Umineko, the meta world itself is about analysing and figuring the story, which is apt for what Ryukishi wanted to do with the story. It’s about the process of figuring it out rather than being given the answers directly. Even though it headed into a different direction than Higurashi, I do enjoy Chiru and I feel the character additions were pretty good. I didn’t expect it to go into the direction the Answer arcs of Higurashi did, like some people might have and I definitely enjoyed the new take on the mystery.
