Grand Unified Theory: CHALDEA

[InsertNameHere]

Also, I'll answer this question. I'm not Tresser and I don't know what they think, but I feel like what I'm about to touch on is probably close to what they were implying.

INCREDIBLY mild spoilers for Umineko

Umineko at its core is really a philosophical metanarrative that strikes at the idea of stories, why we read them, and why we engage with them. More specifically, Umineko is an examination of, and partial love letter to, murder mystery novels, particularly the ones of the Golden Age (Agatha Christie and so on). You know, the classic ones where the detective takes the suspects to the main room and goes "you did it! here's why!" and the audience goes "oohhh" at the explanation of the mystery.

One of the central debates of its story is how one goes about solving a mystery. Do you go for purely the logical approach of "what makes sense" out of a desire to 'solve the plot' no matter what, to be ahead of the detective, to prove your own ability? Or do you go for an interpretation that strikes at the story's themes, character motivations, and meaning - to look directly upon its 'heart?' Put simply, of the "whodunnit", the "howdunnit", and the "whydunnit", which one matters the most to a story?

It becomes extremely clear during the course of Umineko's story that this isn't really a debate at all. It unequivocally sides with the latter interpretation, as its main phrase "without love, it cannot be seen" demonstrates. Umineko posits that not just mystery novels, but all fiction, is ultimately a dialogue between a reader and its author. Only once a reader understands the author's message and ideas can they complete a work by offering their own interpretation. Focusing too much on what's "objectively correct" demonstrates only self-centered thinking on the part of the 'reader' - that they alone have been given the esteemed position of having to 'solve' the story.

This opened my eyes. I previously thought that stories were more like corpses. Things to be examined, dissected, taken apart, comprehended on a fundamental level, and then 'solved'. It angered me when a story I was reading for a long time contradicted itself, or ended up resolving in a way I didn't think fit

my personal theories

all the foreshadowing the author put forward

. "This doesn't make any sense", I thought, "is it not meant to make sense? To be its own world I can be immersed in?". How on Earth am I supposed to win arguments online if the story isn't always internally consistent?

But the ultimate lesson is that doesn't matter. Obviously, you can have fun theorizing and thinking about a story's lore and setting. But what ultimately matters more, at least, to me, and to Umineko's worldview, is what the author has to say, and whether or not you understood that heart. So long as that's what remains the most important to you, a story will never annoy you - unless of course, your hearts aren't in sync. Basically, set aside your ego as a reader aside and try to have a dialogue with the author. And then, and only then, can you decide "I disagree with the author's worldview" and say the story isn't for you.

I've enjoyed many stories. But Umineko is one of the very few that changed how I interact with fiction altogether. So it holds a special place in my heart.

I take an entirely different approach, starting with the simple question of "does it even matter what the truth is when the characters who died will stay dead anyway barring literal miracles?" I see no reason to solve a mystery when the victims, potential culprits, etc. simply do not matter to me. With FGO at least, I have a real investment in the characters and that is why I post here to say my piece on them.

And my view on its question is that a story belongs to whoever can imagine it: should I determine a story is not for me but has enough value in it to justify not abandoning it outright, I seize it and make it mine, and if the author doesn't like my spin on it they are free to take it up with me. I alone decide whether or not an author is worth having dialog with or if their heart is worth understanding- otherwise, nothing stops me from taking what they've got and recreating it into something that may very well end up being better than what they had.

And to me, a world that contradicts itself is a world that breaks its own immersion. But I'm not foolish enough to pass off my view as objectively correct, only that it is mine and that I will only give it up if I no longer find it worth having. Should it run into direct contradictions with the actually existing story that are beyond my ability to explain or justify, I will drop it then but not a moment before.

So all in all, I think I've already learned the lesson Umineko is trying to teach. I just take it to a more radical extent and butt heads with others when I stick to my guns.

- - - Updated - - -

But how do you know the answer is "it just works like that" if you've never looked at the story before?

Because people here tell me that, and reading the story for myself verifies it.

[Petrikow]

I take an entirely different approach, starting with the simple question of "does it even matter what the truth is when the characters who died will stay dead anyway barring literal miracles?" I see no reason to solve a mystery when the victims, potential culprits, etc. simply do not matter to me. With FGO at least, I have a real investment in the characters and that is why I post here to say my piece on them.

And my view on its question is that a story belongs to whoever can imagine it: should I determine a story is not for me but has enough value in it to justify not abandoning it outright, I seize it and make it mine, and if the author doesn't like my spin on it they are free to take it up with me. I alone decide whether or not an author is worth having dialog with or if their heart is worth understanding- otherwise, nothing stops me from taking what they've got and recreating it into something that may very well end up being better than what they had.

And to me, a world that contradicts itself is a world that breaks its own immersion. But I'm not foolish enough to pass off my view as objectively correct, only that it is mine and that I will only give it up if I no longer find it worth having. Should it run into direct contradictions with the actually existing story that are beyond my ability to explain or justify, I will drop it then but not a moment before.

So all in all, I think I've already learned the lesson Umineko is trying to teach. I just take it to a more radical extent and butt heads with others

Holy shit, lmao.

[InsertNameHere]

You can do whatever you please, but I am just as free to deem them pointless.

I'll leave that evaluation for other people to make. Your opinion holds no more power than my own, and we'll see whose speculation truly ends up worthless eventually. I'm a good sport so I won't rub your nose in it if I end up being right in some form or another.

- - - Updated - - -

Holy shit, lmao.

What, I'm not allowed to reappropriate stories as I see fit? Is the canon police going to arrest me for it?

[Petrikow]

I'll leave that evaluation for other people to make. Your opinion holds no more power than my own, and we'll see whose speculation truly ends up worthless eventually. I'm a good sport so I won't rub your nose in it if I end up being right in some form or another.

Right about what? You once went on a spiel that spanned several tens of pages of how you don't even want to share your theories because of your immense humility. There is nothing you can possibly be evaluated on, because the small things you've actually shared are practically already ruled out by LB7.

- - - Updated - - -

What, I'm not allowed to reappropriate stories as I see fit? Is the canon police going to arrest me for it?

That post was just about the most hilariously unaware cringe I think I've seen on this website in a damn long while, is all.

[Formless Creature]

I will however say that I'll wait for the story to decide how to reconcile the split that may or may not exist (or perhaps even take a completely different form, like how Tiamat was split between her main body and cerebral corpus, no soul involved anywhere) before saying any more on it. I simply prefer to have actual explanations for those things that tell me how and why they work and see "it just works like that" as little more than a sign of lazy writing. So when people think they're explaining things, I see them as making excuses for the story's lack of explanation. If the story wants me to accept that it's just the way how it works, it can start by explaining why it works that way in the first place. It's very simple, and I'm sure Nasu et al. could do it if they tried.

I mean that's the thing though. KnK Epilogue is an (admittedly completely pointless, because only people very concerned about lore actually care) entire little story dedicated strictly to explaining what Void Shiki is and where she came from. In the process it also happens to conveniently explain TYPE-MOON's philosophical stance on the anatomy of sapient life.

The idea that the three partitions of an individual each have their own will is simply a baseline framework and isn't actually some sort of revolutionary BS idea that Nasu came up with because he had no other explanation for why Void Shiki exists - it is simply based on existing belief systems and philosophies that he had already been working with.

This is the big clincher here. Every story has a basic framework upon which it operates under, and is not really meant to be questioned. This isn't a matter of logical understanding, it's just sort of a concession you have to make to the author in order for the story to work. For example, in the Nasuverse, "magic" is "a thing that humans can perform". We can get bogged down in the specifics of how it's actually 'magecraft', how it requires fuel to function, how humans interface with it using 'magic circuits', how it's actually quite limited and requires an understanding and application of 'systems' to achieve, how it's influenced by 'Mystery', etcetera etcetera but regardless of how many layers deep you can go, you simply have to accept that this is a thing that is real in the universe.

This is common to all stories, and all human forms of communication. When someone tells a spooky tale at a campfire, you must allow yourself to believe for a moment that monsters may exist. When a religion passes down its stories, it is meant for the reader to merely accept the supernatural elements at face value. Some things... simply are. They are the foundation for greater mysteries. That's the way it is.

[Lobo]

Because the explanations are just rephrasings of "it just works like that", which I have just said is woefully inadequate as a reason in my eyes.

Because the explanations are about how the setting works like that, you're failing at the basic premise of the suspension of disbelief to engage with the story, digging holes in the very premise of it because it doesn't offer all the explanations to how it should work base on your own logic and preconceptions instead of suspending your disbelief and accept the explanation of how it works. Instead of looking at the internal logic of the setting and how is consistent within itself, you are trying to poke holes into it by applying your own preconceptions and real life logic which don't apply at all to the story.

[Sath]

I think there is a difference between:

* Holding your own interpretation of a work
* A work living on in the hearts/minds of the readership and becoming its own thing separate to the author's intent

And:

* Considering fanfiction equivalent to claiming ownership of a work and believing your fanfiction is superior to the original author's, whilst simultaneously suggesting that a work you're invested in sufficiently to want to write your own ending/AU on could also be a work where you look down on the original author and deem them "unworthy of a dialogue."

---

RE: Verse stuff

Mind/Soul/Body has been covered numerous times, it's an element of the setting and well within possibility to be split. What was Olga in Fuyuki?

Human behaviour doesn't have to match your values and expectations. I think you ahoild read Traum instead of digging your heels in further, then see what you think.

[InsertNameHere]

You can do whatever you please, but I am just as free to deem them pointless.

Right about what? You once went on a spiel that spanned several tens of pages of how you don't even want to share your theories because of your immense humility. There is nothing you can possibly be evaluated on, because the small things you've actually shared are practically already ruled out by LB7.

A fair amount of those theories did overlap with yours, namely about how Marisbury desired the bleaching: the main difference was that I did not believe Olga was incorporated into the creation of CHALDEAS and that she was not Subject E. And yes, a fair amount of that has been ruled out by LB7.

While I've mentioned the general gist of my theories/speculations, I'll do it again here in case you've forgotten. It has changed since LB7 to incorporate what we know now, of course.

*The Alien God was likely meant to manifest as Marisbury himself. Olga falling into CHALDEAS likely forced it to use her instead, hence the implementation of the Subject E simulation to break her spirit and make her follow Marisbury's plan.
*The Priestess may be her soul, or it could be something like an Elemental for CHALDEAS by way of acting as its eyes and ears.
*If Marisbury's goal is not the root, we can assume his idea of protecting human order would be something like the cosmic parasite theory I alluded to and has been previously linked to here, or essentially halting the pruning process completely to force all of Alaya's energy into a timeline of his choosing.
*The Apostles were always planning to set the Crypters and Chaldea against each other. The Trees likely serve as a sort of crop that they had to harvest- the Crypters sowed the Trees, and Chaldea acted as the harvesters. The Lostbelts themselves likely served as both a source of energy and as a means of weakening Chaldea to ensure that by the time they had pruned all of them they would be easy prey for the Alien World's lackeys.
*There is a non-zero chance that Marisbury still lives in some form or another, as the Alien World is able to communicate in a way that Alaya doesn't normally do.
*The true "Alien God" is CHALDEAS, which is also the Alien World. We do not yet know if it is a willing accomplice or if it is compelled to follow the plan in some form, and currently the difference doesn't matter.
*We lack the information to understand how exactly David Bluebook relates to all of this, so I will acknowledge that as a weakness.
*The Count's role in this is to keep Guda sane and healthy, since he's Chaldea's primary weapon against the Trees.

[Dragolord09]

I'll leave that evaluation for other people to make. Your opinion holds no more power than my own, and we'll see whose speculation truly ends up worthless eventually. I'm a good sport so I won't rub your nose in it if I end up being right in some form or another.

- - - Updated - - -

What, I'm not allowed to reappropriate stories as I see fit? Is the canon police going to arrest me for it?

To be honest, even if you didn't have theories and conclusions locked away and out of the public eye for whatever reason, you still give off the impression of a guy who's done a five-minute browsing of a subject and thinks he knows everything about said subject better than everyone else around him.

[InsertNameHere]

I think there is a difference between:

* Holding your own interpretation of a work
* A work living on in the hearts/minds of the readership and becoming its own thing separate to the author's intent

And:

* Considering fanfiction equivalent to claiming ownership of a work and believing your fanfiction is superior to the original author's, whilst simultaneously suggesting that a work you're invested in sufficiently to want to write your own ending/AU on could also be a work where you look down on the original author and deem them "unworthy of a dialogue."

I'm not going quite that far. If I truly found them unworthy of a dialog I wouldn't bother with the fanfic. Think of it this way, what's a fanfic if not a response to the author?

- - - Updated - - -

RE: Verse stuff

Mind/Soul/Body has been covered numerous times, it's an element of the setting and well within possibility to be split. What was Olga in Fuyuki?

Human behaviour doesn't have to match your values and expectations. I think you ahoild read Traum instead of digging your heels in further, then see what you think.

Lev's words were "residual thoughts", which sounds like the mind, the soul, or possibly both. And honestly, Traum is a slog to read through because it feels like nothing actually happens in it. The only part I really paid attention to was the Holmes reveal and the Area 51 segment at the end.

Now would you care to give feedback on the actual theorizing I posted here, such as it is?

[Dragolord09]

If you honestly think this is a slog right now, you're really not going to be happy with the more text-heavy portions of this franchise.

[InsertNameHere]

If you honestly think this is a slog right now, you're really not going to be happy with the more text-heavy portions of this franchise.

I called it a slog in the sense that much of the chapter didn't seem to actually lead to anything that mattered in the long run. I liked the character interactions, but when it came to providing answers it fell very short. I'm fine with text-heavy stuff if my posts didn't tip you off already, but I'm not fine when it ends up being of dubious relevance, especially when I'm already impatient with the atrocious speed in which we're given substantial information to work with (and the flaming "screw you" in which we don't even get to learn what "Subject E" actually is just seals the deal).

Why yes, quite a bit of my ranting here is fueled by my frustration when it comes to getting straight answers.

[Formless Creature]

but when it came to providing answers it fell very short.

I understand that your edit essentially answers my question. But it bears repeating, even if rhetorically so. That's really what you care about?

[InsertNameHere]

I understand that your edit essentially answers my question. But it bears repeating, even if rhetorically so. That's really what you care about?

A part of it, at least. It all feels like a big shaggy dog story, a well-told shaggy dog story but one nevertheless. I will give it credit for showing how Kadoc got his shit together and I genuinely liked the character interactions, but it felt disconnected from the greater narrative (the sole exception being the reveal with Holmes).

Or do you mean overall and not just in Traum?

[Red Dingo]

Because the explanations are about how the setting works like that, you're failing at the basic premise of the suspension of disbelief to engage with the story, digging holes in the very premise of it because it doesn't offer all the explanations to how it should work base on your own logic and preconceptions instead of suspending your disbelief and accept the explanation of how it works. Instead of looking at the internal logic of the setting and how is consistent within itself, you are trying to poke holes into it by applying your own preconceptions and real life logic which don't apply at all to the story.

It's honestly easier to just ignore them. It's like they live to be contrarian and self-aggrandizing.

By the way, "it just works that way" is the answer all speculative fiction worlds eventually boil down to when get to the foundation of their science/functional magic systems. Eventually, you just have to shrug your shoulders and accept that souls are independent of consciousness and that Heisenberg Compensators just work very well. Because if the writers actually knew how they worked, they wouldn't waste their time entertaining geeks.

[InsertNameHere]

It's honestly easier to just ignore them. It's like they live to be contrarian and self-aggrandizing.

By the way, "it just works that way" is the answer all speculative fiction worlds eventually boil down to when get to the foundation of their science/functional magic systems. Eventually, you just have to shrug your shoulders and accept that souls are independent of consciousness and that Heisenberg Compensators just work very well. Because if the writers actually knew how they worked, they wouldn't waste their time entertaining geeks.

As I said before, I'll wait and see how it's executed before I say anything further on it.

What more do you want, a big hullabaloo about how you were right and I was wrong? A confession of guilt? The abandoning of every single idea I've had? I'm perfectly willing to let bygones be bygones here if you and/or anyone else is.

[Kirishima]

Sorry I cannot read your posts long enough without my soul shattering to a million cringe pieces but is your point just "I don't like theories because I think things should not work like this because that's how I want it personally, regardless of author intent, so I can pointlessly say your guesses are wrong based on how I personally feel, and also I know what Umineko is as a complete work based on TVtropes"? Are you speedrunning cringe?

[Mercedes4321]

As I said before, I'll wait and see how it's executed before I say anything further on it.

What more do you want, a big hullabaloo about how you were right and I was wrong? A confession of guilt? The abandoning of every single idea I've had? I'm perfectly willing to let bygones be bygones here if you and/or anyone else is.

I think they are waiting for you to realise that you are acting like the personification of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

[InsertNameHere]

I think they are waiting for you to realise that you are acting like the personification of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

Alright, fine! I'll shut up, bow to the superior knowledge of others, whatever it takes to make sure what I have to say is at least considered without being immediately branded as a joke! Just let me start over from a clean slate instead of constantly beating me over the head with any and all of my old mistakes, OK?

[Sath]

I think if all you're looking for in main story is answers to the setting mystery then sure, you're going to be disappointed. By design that will not have conclusive answers until the nth hour.

That's not the purpose of these stories; the mystery is a hook, but each story's journey is its own reward. The character interactions and arcs and settings all have value. Maybe try enjoying them for what they are? Because if you're just looking for answers about the bleaching and CHALDEAS and Marisbury then you're saying a few bullet points of information are all you care about in a script you can stack up to your face.