9

GinaSzamboti Posts: 27,612 Registered: 09-16-2003 Message 401 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to awonderfulname - Message ID#: 65117348 06-05-2012 10:42 PM I don't remember it in the anime (my memory is selective), but that page from the manga certainly is damning (do you know which volume or chapter it's from?). :) How bout we just chalk it up to the old man being delusional? It's really the only explanation that makes sense. :D Ok so...they set the fire, run away, leave Nina in a safe place while Johan goes back to be "rescued" so he can get them some road food, and then disappears to go meet up with Nina. Yep, that's what happened. Argggghhhh. ::headdesk::
awonderfulname Posts: 20 Registered: 06-02-2012 Message 402 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to GinaSzamboti - Message ID#: 65117422 06-05-2012 10:43 PM Yeah...there are still so many chronological holes, and it still is basically showing "two" fires now, instead of ...the one fire. So we have three contraditing stories: What we're shown on panel, what the old man says, and what's mentioned in AM. X) This is making my head hurt... Edit: It's from Chapter 141 - "Welcome Back" :)
GinaSzamboti Posts: 27,612 Registered: 09-16-2003 Message 403 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to awonderfulname - Message ID#: 65117442 06-05-2012 10:46 PM Well, it only shows one fire, right? It only tells of the other, albeit twice. :/ (I'm starting to have a very hazy memory of them running away in the anime, but can't place the context of the revelation.)
awonderfulname Posts: 20 Registered: 06-02-2012 Message 404 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to GinaSzamboti - Message ID#: 65117492 06-05-2012 10:49 PM Hm, I guess because since we're shown everything through nina's flashbacks, and not Johan's, it makes sense for the fire that Johan experienced alone to not be "shown" and only told...poor Johan, most of his memories got snagged at Kinderheim 511, like he had said on the tape while being interrogated. It's just strange, since they mentioned that "one" fire where the boy was saved, but neglect to mention the fire where Nina and Johan set it together and ran off ...the fire Johan got saved at either took place before or after...but if before, why would Johan be left alone after being saved...? Makes no sense.
GinaSzamboti Posts: 27,612 Registered: 09-16-2003 Message 405 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to awonderfulname - Message ID#: 65117534 06-05-2012 11:16 PM awonderfulname wrote: but if before, why would Johan be left alone after being saved...? Makes no sense. Exactly! Skimming the manga just now, it appears that a) Nina started losing track around 21 meals, which would be from 7 to 10 days or more, and when she returned, they spent a week together recounting her experiences (I think it said a week, but maybe it was just day after day after day - I've already forgotten. >.< ).
abeiramar Posts: 13 Registered: 06-04-2012 Message 406 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to KrillXIII - Message ID#: 56598798 06-06-2012 05:38 AM I got a proper time of sleep and I think what happened is starting to make sense in my head. It was only one fire. Nina was taken but she ran away from the Red Rose mansion and came back to Johan. The house was set on fire. They ran away. The reason the man mentions that only one kid is saved is because everyone believed the woman only had one child. The people who saved Nina&Johan thought Johan was just a kid passing by and not Jomama's son... I think the scenes about Margarot might give more clues about why Jomama abandoned the twins. Margarot abandoned Karl and she was murdered... I need to reread these scenes to see if I can find more clues.
awonderfulname Posts: 20 Registered: 06-02-2012 Message 407 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to abeiramar - Message ID#: 65119010 06-06-2012 06:30 AM Yes, Halenka/Margot abandoned Karl and was murdered...by Johan. Because they lived together, remember? But you're right -- the fire thing makes sense that way :)
abeiramar Posts: 13 Registered: 06-04-2012 Message 408 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to awonderfulname - Message ID#: 65119180 06-06-2012 08:47 AM Did he o.o ? I don't remember a thing... I need to reread Monster again ;--;
GinaSzamboti Posts: 27,612 Registered: 09-16-2003 Message 409 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to abeiramar - Message ID#: 65119010 06-06-2012 10:26 AM abeiramar wrote: The reason the man mentions that only one kid is saved is because everyone believed the woman only had one child. The people who saved Nina&Johan thought Johan was just a kid passing by and not Jomama's son... Ok, I think I'm going to have to eat some of my words, because this comes awfully darn close to being a satisfying explanation. :D The "they" who rescued the child is never specified, so we assume it was the adults there. But if people saw a boy and girl (it's hard to tell in the drawing, but I think the child on the left is in shorts) running away, they could have assumed the boy rescued the girl. Or maybe it's just as you say, that they assumed he wasn't living there, and so didn't count him as "rescued." The only thing still bothering me is why set fire to the place and run off in broad daylight, instead of sneaking off unnoticed by anyone at night? :D Why torch the place at all? There's just nothing to be gained from it, except possibly an attempt to alert Mom that they're still alive. Wild Mass Guessing of the day: Chapek torched the place and was the anonymous rescuer, to further convince the people in charge that both children had been disposed of. Since only one child was brought to the RMM, this would be the excuse for two children's bodies to be found among the dead, although the time gap is problematic (but that's ok, since I don't believe this for a second. :) ). Been thinking about the car(s). Although there are counters for cars in Japanese, just as Tenma was asking about children while the old man thought he was talking about one child, maybe the old man was talking about cars, without it being clear he meant more than one because of the peculiarities of Japanese when it comes to plurals. I dunno. @ wonderful: are you reading from the original Japanese? If you're fluent in reading it, maybe you can offer your interpretations of some of the crazier sentences from time to time. As you were reading the thread, you probably noticed some of my screwed up translations! :) Even between the Japanese and Spanish, there are still a couple of points of uncertainty for me.
Konankun Posts: 7 Registered: 08-21-2011 Message 410 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to GinaSzamboti - Message ID#: 65121008 06-06-2012 01:19 PM Ohmygosh you guys! While I've been immersed in little ponies for the past five months (thank you so much TophBeiFong, for pointing me in that direction), you've all kept working on Urasawa's insolvable puzzle. After reading six months' worth of posts today, my head is swimming... Gina called me back into this discussion yesterday (thanks Gina!) because of the new light you've shed on that confusing flashback scene I was wondering about. I fully agree with the idea that this is (more) probably one conversation between Bonaparte and Nina, or Bonaparte and the twins, than anything involving Anna. The way I read the scene now: It takes place in the Three Frogs apartment, some time after Nina has fled the RRM and rejoined Johan. Bonaparte shows up, Nina asks him where their mother is. Bonaparte apologizes to her for the Sophie's Choice thing, tells the two of them that they have to keep on living, then turns his head and looks at Johan, who has started to cry Why Johan? Because in the next scene, Nina talks about how Johan must have been crying while he was in the room full of paintings, "just like that time...". She's not referring to the night she shot him, because Johan was clearly not crying then (as can be seen on the next page), so she must be referring to the 'don't cry!' flashback as the other moment when Johan cried. And why would Johan start crying during Bonaparte's final visit? Perhaps because he infers from Bonaparte's "you have to keep on living" remark that his mother is dead.
AliasPseudo Posts: 3 Registered: 06-06-2012 Message 411 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to Konankun - Message ID#: 65122536 06-06-2012 02:59 PM Hello! I recently finished reading Gina's fabulous translation of AM (for which I would like to echo my deepest thanks) and even more recently finished this thread, which actually took me longer than the novella. Every time I finished a page there were more posts. Zeno's forum post, heh. Not that that's a bad thing, as the discussion was/is compelling and ongoing. Hopefully you don't mind me jumping in with both feet. Anyway, I like your time line for the abandonment/massacre/fire/escape as well as the 'Where's Mommy?' memory. I never really considered the order of events after Nina's return to the three frogs upto being found by Wolf important in an overall analysis, mostly because the author skips over it so summarily. Though the fact that Bonaparta must have left The Nameless Monster with Johan was something I'd never truly considered. It's a bit of a mixed message to tell one twin not to become a monster while 'abandoning' the other with a copy of that specific book, which I suppose may support Bonaparta changing his mind suddenly (which is actually a trait attributed to Johan later) or could be read as just another experiment. I do have a theory that the Door That Must Not Be Opened is in each of the hearer's minds and that 'sleep' is equal to amnesia or repression. Basically, the children he told the story to were the 'servants of darkness' he was sealing away by telling them to forget what they had learned there in a similar way to how he told Nina to forget everything. I'm sure that's full of holes. I know it's a bit unfounded, but the image of Bonaparta with his untouched glass of wine before turning to Nina always mirrored Johan walking on the edge of buildings. It's as though he's contemplating drinking, even as everyone around him is dying. An attraction/comfort with the idea of dying/ending, which may also feed into the fascination with others' fear of the same. If I can back track a bit to the Grimmer/Tenma discussion for a moment, I'd like to take it from another angle. I was quite struck by the similarities between them. That young Tenma was not inclined toward team sports sparked the thought for me. It speaks to Grimmer having a similar independence to Tenma's, or vice versa since Grimmer was first to notice the trait in the anime. That is echoed in Bonaparta commenting that, though Grimmer's was not a rare reaction, in those similar cases most of the children had killed themselves. And in the fact that though his son had died like other K511 survivors' children, he was aware of his deficiency of reaction and perturbed by it in a way most of the others never managed. He went questing to find his name and the origins of his friend/monster, which never occurred to the other K511 or RRM survivors. In a way, he takes all the blame for his son's death on himself, whether or not this is founded. He remembers his friend from K511 (no matter how sad that ended up being), but not himself. Also, he seems to prefer personally taking abuse over doing harm to others. I guess what I'm getting at is that Grimmer, as a character, may have been an attempt to present the end result of someone like Tenma going through K511 or RRM. Finally, after reading everyone else's Wild Mass Guesses, I wanted to throw out one of my own: Fuhr/Weindler is Jomama's twin. It has already been postulated that Jomama's twin may have been male instead of the assumed sister, but I also think Nina/Johan echo this. Not to mention, it was stated that Jomama was young enough to be Bonaparta's daughter and thus her twin could possibly participate in early book readings. In this interpretation, Jomama still has the survivor's guilt of her lost twin, which her mother could still have considered female if she never saw the baby and thought it had died in the womb. So, Jomama's real name could be Viera, her hypothetical 'twin sister' being Anna. Bonaparta could tell her her 'true' name is Anna in an attempt to wiped away Viera's guilt and love for Jodaddy, but Viera's anger soured even the beloved 'Anna' leaving Jomama shattered and bitter as we see her in France. Maruska would be an alias, as the old man said she was using while in hiding at the Three Frogs. Fuhr could have been nameless or been named Johan, thus giving us two Johan/Anna pairs wherein both 'Anna' does not actually exist. Here's the odd part, in the last episode of the anime when Johan 'wakes up' to tell Tenma about the Sophie's Choice, he says he saw the monster outside of himself. If it's Bonaparta, then Fuhr could be considered another story maker/experimenter monster. If the monster was his mother, then Fuhr could be another monster in the sense that he is Jomama's twin, also. Alright, I'll stop rambling in a likely incoherent and unbecoming manner. Thanks, again!
awonderfulname Posts: 20 Registered: 06-02-2012 Message 412 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to Konankun - Message ID#: 65122536 06-06-2012 05:15 PM Konankun wrote: Ohmygosh you guys! While I've been immersed in little ponies for the past five months (thank you so much TophBeiFong, for pointing me in that direction), you've all kept working on Urasawa's insolvable puzzle. After reading six months' worth of posts today, my head is swimming... Gina called me back into this discussion yesterday (thanks Gina!) because of the new light you've shed on that confusing flashback scene I was wondering about. I fully agree with the idea that this is (more) probably one conversation between Bonaparte and Nina, or Bonaparte and the twins, than anything involving Anna. The way I read the scene now: It takes place in the Three Frogs apartment, some time after Nina has fled the RRM and rejoined Johan. Bonaparte shows up, Nina asks him where their mother is. Bonaparte apologizes to her for the Sophie's Choice thing, tells the two of them that they have to keep on living, then turns his head and looks at Johan, who has started to cry Why Johan? Because in the next scene, Nina talks about how Johan must have been crying while he was in the room full of paintings, "just like that time...". She's not referring to the night she shot him, because Johan was clearly not crying then (as can be seen on the next page), so she must be referring to the 'don't cry!' flashback as the other moment when Johan cried. And why would Johan start crying during Bonaparte's final visit? Perhaps because he infers from Bonaparte's "you have to keep on living" remark that his mother is dead. Ahhh, I really agree with this chronology. This is how I see it. I think it just simply makes the most sense, and jeez, if Johan was abandoned as long as Gina and I figure he was, it made sense for Nina to know that he had been crying "alone" before in the room, too. But yeah, I do think Johan either thought his Mother was dead, or simply felt abandoned completely. I definitely don't think the crying thing refers to the night she shot him, but of course, the day they were officially informed of their abandonment and that they'd have to survive on their own and no longer with their Mother. It is said Nina spent days and days recounting everything with Johan, and I think that after Bonaparta had that conversation with them, is when they set fire to the Three Frogs and ran off, only to be found by that old couple later on in the countryside. The Mother, like so many other women mentioned in the RRM experiments, barely remembered her twins. She even told Tenma that she had only just recovered the memory of their names. She was messed up from those experiments, too. I think she was taken to a separate place to have her memory wiped out. I think Franz Bonaparta changed his mind at the last minute, destroyed everything involved in the project at the RRM, and had their Mother's name returned to her (with that letter), and basically let her live a new life. I am really fascinated with Anna, she's really probably the most mysterious character of the series that plays such a pivotal role...
awonderfulname Posts: 20 Registered: 06-02-2012 Message 413 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to AliasPseudo - Message ID#: 65123678 06-06-2012 05:22 PM I really agree with your first paragraph (I agree with the second too but just have very little to say on it past that :P ). I think a very important theme in Monster is abuse, impunity, and the cycle of abuse. I think that Johan was shaped and crafted to become a lot like Franz Bonaparta, whether he realized it or not. Franz Bonaparta created someone very much like himself. Someone obsessed with names, someone who played around with others lives as if they were experiments, someone who thought the most appropriate expression of love was erasing themselves from someone's life once they realized how much they had hurt them and how much couldn't be undone, someone who changed their plans on a whim, someone who was as reckless with their own life as they were with others, someone who saw death as an escape rather than facing justice, someone who ultimately tried to make Tenma make a similar "Sophie's Choice" as Franz did to Anna. I think people forget that Franz Bonaparta's "change of heart" doesn't erase what a delusional, abusive man he is. Just because he had a change of heart regarding Anna, it doesn't stop him from being a messed up person who felt strangely entitled to the twins... I think him giving Johan that book (this really was why Johan blacked out when he saw it, I think, along with the existential crap ...) was his way of trying to have Johan choose not to become a monster. He told Nina not to become one, but I think with Johan, who he contacted before he got to tell that to Nina, he gave him that book and waited around for Johan to come to the conclusion that if he ran around becoming a monster, that he'd have no one left to call him by his name. It was his very strange, messed up way of trying to use him as an experiment and see what he chose. When he heard about the Liebert's death, that's when he knew what Johan had chose, and he knew that Johan would come for him one day. And, I think, Franz Bonaparta wanted to punish himself for everything he did (to Anna, since I think he didn't regret anything else that much at that point, up until later at Grimmer's death), so he sort of was ambiguous with Johan because he wanted him to come for him. At least, that's how I see it.
GinaSzamboti Posts: 27,612 Registered: 09-16-2003 Message 414 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to Konankun - Message ID#: 65122536 06-06-2012 09:05 PM Glad you dropped in! :) I still think it's all one scene, at the RRM. His telling her that the two of them will have to survive together is his deflection of (as well as his answer to) her direct question of Where's Mommy? That makes more sense to me than her time-shifting her flashback at that point. I don't think her turning her head is indicative of looking at Johan, but just looking away from Nina as he breaks this to her. And I think the string of six "Don't cry!"s is part Bonaparta telling her not to cry, and part her helpless telling Johan not to cry, as he sits alone in the apartment. Or that could just be all her being stuck in that groove of remembering Bonaparta telling her not to cry, and then when she regains her senses, that memory makes her realize/remember that Johan was crying alone in the apartment, as well as in the present day cabin. Or maybe she's telling her younger self not to cry, trying to keep from getting overwhelmed by her own emotions. I keep thinking that while she was in her isolation room, Johan was sort of in his own isolation room too, so the idea that they were emotionally communicating, if not verbally yet, seems likely to me, since I believe Erna Tietze's story about Nina talking to Johan and knowing when Johan was going to destroy K511. In any case, I just can't imagine Bonaparta coming to the apartment after Nina ran away from RRM. If he was going to do something like that, he could have just taken Nina home and talked to the twins then.
GinaSzamboti Posts: 27,612 Registered: 09-16-2003 Message 415 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to AliasPseudo - Message ID#: 65123678 06-06-2012 09:38 PM Whoo hoo! Welcome aboard! ^.^ AliasPseudo wrote: I do have a theory that the Door That Must Not Be Opened is in each of the hearer's minds and that 'sleep' is equal to amnesia or repression. Basically, the children he told the story to were the 'servants of darkness' he was sealing away by telling them to forget what they had learned there in a similar way to how he told Nina to forget everything. "When she lies down to sleep one night, he kidnaps her and brings her to his castle of darkness. But the Queen of Light begins to lose her shine, and is on the verge of death. The King of Darkness realizes that this is because of the darkness, so he calls together all his servants to the 'Room of True Darkness,' and puts them in an eternal sleep." This to me is almost an exact telling of Bonaparta's plan to kill everyone and set Anna free. I think he means "eternal sleep" almost literally, as in dead. Since he told this on the last day that Sobota attended the seminars, and mentioned it to his editor as well, I can't see any other explanation than that he planned it well ahead of bringing Nina and Anna to the RRM. Of course there is a problem. >.< Were they still conducting the reading seminars while Nina was locked up? O.O Sobotka says he went once a week, but the last time he went as usual, the place was deserted. That means Bonaparta killed everyone and buttoned things up within a week's time. So...I've changed my mind. Now I'm thinking that Bonaparta only relented and decided to kill everyone after he brought them to the mansion and saw that Anna was deteriorating more and faster than he expected. It would explain why he still went through with making her choose and leave the book with Johan and other evil stuff. Oh and I can't subscribe to the Wiendler as twin theory because a) I believe Anna when she said she knew her sister in the womb (for the purposes of this story - in real life, I'd have my doubts. :) ), and b) because it contradicts my pet wild mass guessing cousin theory. ;D
awonderfulname Posts: 20 Registered: 06-02-2012 Message 416 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to GinaSzamboti - Message ID#: 65128112 06-06-2012 10:01 PM Gina you are a lifesaver as always. Lmao I loved this entire post -- this is how I buy Bonaparta's decision, too. Or at least, a very plausible version. Also the post above makes sense chronologically, too. It's one of only two explanations i'm willing to accept at this point :)
TophBeiFong Posts: 145 Registered: 09-05-2011 Message 417 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to AliasPseudo - Message ID#: 65123678 06-07-2012 01:12 PM @AliasPsuedo (Nice name, btw): I agree with you about Grimmer being the Tenma who went through Kinderheim. I've actually thought that may have been intentional too. As for Fuhr being Jomama's twin, eh, I doubt it. But I did have a theory a while back that he was actually Jodaddy and Bonaparta didn't actually kill him. :P I'm now beginning to accept the Bonaparta theory since I realized that no one else's faces were shown while Nina was acting it out. Jomama's was the only exception. However, I think I have a somewhat different take on it. I believe Johan could have been the one who was asking "Where's mommy?" As Johan asked that, Nina (as a child) remembered the conversation at the RRM with Bonaparta. However, the repetition of "Don't cry!" may have not been Bonaparta, but Nina. As Nina was thinking about that conversation, Johan began to cry. Nina was the one telling him not to cry. I like the "Bonaparta changed his mind" theory more than having it preplanned. It just makes more sense. Also, I think Bonaparta may have been apologizing not just for putting the twins through that torture, but also for depriving them of their mother. After subjecting Jomama to the sadistic choice, she lost her mind to the degree that she wouldn't have been stable enough to take care of them. Therefore, Bonaparta couldn't return the children to her. On top of that, I think he may have wanted the children away from her in order to undo everything he did to her (at least, in his twisted mind). And going along with the above idea, Bonaparta may have left The Nameless Monster book with him not to try to convince him to not become a monster, but to shape him into a monster. It was part of the original plan. Since Johan had the book already and Bonaparta going back to The Three Frogs after Nina was taken away seems unlikely, I think Bonaparta just may have placed it somewhere for Johan to find. Thus, when he told Nina not to become of monster, he was hoping that she could undo the damage for him. Gosh, you guys are all brilliant! :-)
AliasPseudo Posts: 3 Registered: 06-06-2012 Message 418 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to TophBeiFong - Message ID#: 65133016 06-07-2012 03:33 PM @Wonderful - Well, I consider both psychopaths/sociopaths, so I suppose that fits. Honestly, I prefer to say Bonaparta changed his mind, rather than had a change of heart precisely because I doubt it truly had much to do with emotions. It likely had more to do with fascination and obsession. I also doubt he consciously planned things out long term. @Gina - Actually it does make a good deal of sense that he told the story after he'd taken Jomama and she had deteriorated. I still think there's a link between sleep in the stories and repression/amnesia. Most of the survivors interveiwed don't remember much at all of the reading seminars and if he really wanted no one to know about the project he would have had to kill all of the children. Who's to say it didn't serve two purposes: talking out his plan and planting a trigger to forget in the last of his boys? As for my theory, I took that she 'knew her twin in the womb' to be more survivor's guilt, like how she would work twice as hard or think about what 'Anna' would have wanted/done. Also, I didn't really expect you to considering how fond you are of your cousin theory. However, though I haven't done a full timline, I do believe the ages would line up. Of course, it's possible she could be a crossdresser. @Toph - Thanks! There are actually a couple of characters I think are simply stand ins for 'what if' scenerios in the story. I love Grimmer, so I don't think it makes them any less whole of characters. It's just a bit interesting. The Jodaddy theory, much like the Cousin theory, seems to have a few too many twists for me. And, actually, I have no problem believing Jodaddy may still be alive, whether as an experiment or a fugitive. So, here's a question: why do you think it was only boys at the RRM and K511? Also, do you think it might have played into Jomama's choice? Assuming she could tell them apart, of course, could she have thought a girl wouldn't have interested Bonaparta/been effected as much?
TophBeiFong Posts: 145 Registered: 09-05-2011 Message 419 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to AliasPseudo - Message ID#: 65134664 06-07-2012 03:53 PM I think boys were taken because boys tend to be more aggressive....maybe. Testosterone and all that. Perhaps that could have factored into Jomama's choice. But here's the kicker: I think Bonaparta knew that she would do that. That's why he probably left the book for Johan. He would then take Johan back and tell them that this was the real golden child for the communist party. I wouldn't put that sort of gambit past him.
GinaSzamboti Posts: 27,612 Registered: 09-16-2003 Message 420 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to AliasPseudo - Message ID#: 65134664 06-07-2012 06:07 PM AliasPseudo wrote: I still think there's a link between sleep in the stories and repression/amnesia. Most of the survivors interveiwed don't remember much at all of the reading seminars and if he really wanted no one to know about the project he would have had to kill all of the children. Who's to say it didn't serve two purposes: talking out his plan and planting a trigger to forget in the last of his boys? ... However, though I haven't done a full timline, I do believe the ages would line up. I agree with the sleep/repression link as far as the other stories go, but in this particular one, I just think it's referring to killing everybody. And he wasn't trying to wipe out all traces of the experiments (of which memory loss was a key part anyway), he was just trying to wipe out everyone who personally knew Anna and the twins (I expect there was a lot of collateral damage at that party though). I imagine there were people at even higher levels who knew about them, but had never seen them in the flesh, so dead bodies would suffice to satisfy them that they were dead. Anyone who had known them could look at the corpses and say, wait a minute... Yeah, the ages line up, or it wouldn't fit my cousin theory either. :D As for why only boys, I'd chalk it up to the patriarchal authoritarianism of the regimes. I was actually surprised that people weren't disappointed that the perfect child they'd been waiting for turned out to be a girl. Maybe that's why Anna dressed them as girls instead of as boys.
AliasPseudo Posts: 3 Registered: 06-06-2012 Message 421 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to GinaSzamboti - Message ID#: 65136478 06-12-2012 07:25 PM Sorry, I was away at a friend's wedding for the weekend. @Toph - Perhaps it was aggression, but if the RRM's goal, or at least Bonaparta's, was to create a child that could create its own stories, I find it odd that they would focus purely on aggression. From Grimmer's notebook, aggression seems like a fine requirement for K511, though. As for the whole choice being a gambit set up by Bonaparta, I don't believe so. I wouldn't put it past him to have taken advantage of how it turned out, but I don't believe he engineered it beyond inforcing the choice. Even then, he may not have known he was going to have her choose until he was in the room with them. If he had intended to pull and bait-and-switch he could have just as easily taken both twins at the same time. @Gina - Yes, you're right that it was to cover up Anna and the twins. I suppose I have trouble with the idea that one of his stories should seem so simply straight forward while the rest are more metaphorical. As for the patriarchal authoritarianism of the regimes, I suppose that makes sense, though I find it hard to believe they would turn away test subjects simply because they were female. Bonaparta showed interest in both Jomama and Lipsky's mother, yet there doesn't seem to be any interest in young females' development and we don't have a single female serial killer in the series. It seems odd that outside the breeding program, women seem completely forgotten in a system that was at least purporting to strive for sexlessness on its surface. I would have thought that at least in the K511 program there would have been a counterpart for girls, simply because the children were available. Also, I had the same thought about why she passed them off as a single girl instead of a boy, to draw less attention. On a timeline note, I realized that both Bonaparta and Chapek are shown with the twins as babies (when Bonaparta sketches them in the crib), which means Jomama had to have escaped twice. Once while in labor, then again after the children were a little older. Right? They could have been with the RRMers for a years as infants/toddlers.
GinaSzamboti Posts: 27,612 Registered: 09-16-2003 Message 422 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to AliasPseudo - Message ID#: 65183544 06-13-2012 12:11 AM The goals of Bonaparta and his superiors were apparently not quite the same. As Lipsky said, "The ones that these people chose... Well, they would have been the ones who took in and understood his storybooks, and believed them entirely. You can guess what kind of jobs they'd be given. The children that he wanted, however, were the ones that understood his stories and could also come up with their own... To create children who would create the children his partners wanted." If it helps, remember than when Bonaparta was telling this story (which is still metaphorical :) ), he was in the process of changing his mind. I think it was an expression of this process, where the other stories had a completely different purpose and goal. That's why, like "A Peaceful Home," the story about the thief who forgot how to steal, it's different from the ones before it. I've always wondered how long before she escaped with the kids. I guess they were still young enough to be considered babies though, so maybe a year or so?
GinaSzamboti Posts: 27,612 Registered: 09-16-2003 Message 423 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to GinaSzamboti - Message ID#: 65186478 06-15-2012 06:31 PM While I appreciate it when people write back to say thanks, it totally cracks me up when they write back in Japanese. :-D Like they think I can read it. :-D :-D Anyway...are we ready to tackle the question of the twins again, now that we have some new minds pondering it? Or who the buyer is? Or anything else? >:D
JohanT Posts: 70 Registered: 12-10-2011 Message 424 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to GinaSzamboti - Message ID#: 65214390 06-17-2012 05:41 AM Hey everyone. It's been....months, perhaps? Lol, ok, well, hopefully I'm back for good this time, since school recently ended, meaning the end of the oppressive educational system for the time being. Wow, it took me forever to finish reading the last few pages that I missed, and you've all succeeded in messing up my neurons to the point that I really can't make heads or tails of this anymore >.<. But, to give the slightest effort, it was my view, though potentially inaccurate/implausible, that Bonaparta, for the time that the mother of the twins was in hiding with her children, was more than aware of their whereabouts. It has probably been suggested, but I am of the mind that Bonaparta was the one who set up their stay at The Three Frogs. I might need to brush up a bit on how many times they escaped from some place or the other, but I believe that, at one point, the three of them were staying with one of the mother's aquaintances, but it is possible that they were captured soon afterwards. In continuation of their capture, they might have been placed in The Three Frogs, and kept under surveillance. Though Jomama naturally despised Bonaparta, I doubt she would be able to stand in conflict with his efforts to brainwash her children. Two reasons come to mind, one being her inability to fight against him, but her wish to stay with her children, and two being her wish to cultivate a hatred that would eventually erupt into one of her children taking out her vengeance on Bonaparta. Now, Bonaparta might not have been a regular visitor, but I do not think that evidence suggests that either of the twins were strangers to Bonaparta when he arrived to take one of them to the Red Rose Mansion. It is possible that, at this time, when the twins were 3 or so years old, Bonaparta brought his storybooks as presents for the children. Perhaps he even read to them. This may serve as an explanation for how Johan got his hands on The Nameless Monster, and most certainly, The God of Peace. After all, his confrontation with Nina in the Liebert home had to have suggested that he read that storybook as well, though he did not carry it with him while on the run (or so it seems). Though one could argue that Jomama's purpose of dressing the twins alike would be negated had she known that Bonaparta was aware of their presence in The Three Frogs, her purpose could perhaps be directed to the surrounding neighbors and what not, so that she did not draw attention to herself. In addition, the theory of her knowledge of her upcoming Sophie's choice could come into play. She might have known, all along, that she would have to give up one of her children, and so dressing them the same would give people the impression that no child was given away. Just a few theories, feel free to point out any holes :-D. I also had a few afterthoughts regarding Johan's wish to let Nina finish off Petr Capek. I personally think that Johan's knowledge of his sister's nature is entirely spot on, so I was always curious as to why he may have considered that she would have pulled the trigger in the end. I've come up with a few conclusions, one being the fact that, for all her goodness, she had pulled the trigger on her own brother once before. Capek, for all that he's done, should not be so different. Two, I think that Johan knew that Nina would not kill Capek, but that Capek would be finished off by those he trusted, and instead wanted Nina to learn of their past, just as he had regained his memories not long before. A bit off topic? Yeah, it is. And to those who are interested in Kinderheim 511, I have to say that I too share a personal attraction to its concept, as I was speaking to my parents, both of whom were raised in a communist Czechoslovakia. I'm not sure I can verify the accuracy of the details revolving around the StB secret police, but I'll be sure to ask them.
GinaSzamboti Posts: 27,612 Registered: 09-16-2003 Message 425 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to JohanT - Message ID#: 65228772 06-17-2012 03:37 PM Whoa, paragraphs are your friends. ^.^ Actually, they're my friends. No, seriously, my vision is crappy even glasses and enlarged text, so it's hard for me to follow unbroken walls of text. Even if it's technically a single-paragraph thought, it really helps me if you find places to break after about a dozen lines. And Welcome Home!!!! :D I think one theory can be successfully argued as well as another on this topic, but from a narrative construction point of view, I think we're meant to believe that Jomama was hidden at the Three Frogs by her friend (or rather her friend's contacts), because that's mentioned twice by different interviewees, albeit without the name, and there's no mention of any other hiding place. (of course there is a school of thought that what an author intended is irrelevent to determining the meaning of a work, but I am adamantly opposed to that idea. :) [did someone bring that up here, or did I run across it elsewhere? oO]) That said, there's no telling how long they were there before Bonaparta found them, and he could indeed have visited them more than once before the scene we're shown. If he made it clear there was no point in running again, she might've just accepted it, but to me that flies counter to a woman of such spirit that she traversed ventilation shafts and scaled wired fences during labor to escape...and then escaped with young children in tow later on. It seems like the only way to make her stay put is to chain her down. I agree that Bonaparta probably knew where she was long before he let her know he knew, probably precisely to keep her from running off again at an inconvenient time. I've thought that maybe he found her through the same channels that Schuwald did. He must have known about Helenka, since he'd been observing Anna for years? at least awhile, before she entered his program, and would have had access to the records of Anna's arrest and her companion's escape. He might not have looked at those records, but they were surely available to him, so when she escaped from him, digging into Helenka's past might've occurred to him as a lead. Maybe he let Schuwald do all the work. ;) But why do you think she would not want to call attention to herself with the neighbors if she knew that the people she feared were already on to her? Why would she care whether her neighbors knew one of her children had been taken (assuming she didn't expect to be taken herself)? My thoughts exactly re why Johan didn't kill Chapek. Have you shown Monster to your parents, or just discussed it? I am very interested in their comments! As a side note, could you ask them what they know about the history of the provisional government set up in Czechoslovakia immediately following WWII, and prior to the elections in May the year after? I ask because when I was translating Chapter 29, I spent way too much time trying to find an actual election in October of 1945-48 in Czechoslovakia (their elections seem to all be in May), when it turned out to just be some unnamed people installing a temporary government. But none of the histories I could find say who had and used the authority to set up this government at that time. Did the Russians set it up, or did the Czechs do it themselves, and if so, by whose authority? I mean, I can't just declare myself a government and have people fall in line, much as I'd like to. ;) What I'm wondering is how you set up a government when there isn't one to build off of. It took Americans years to work it out, but the Czechs (or somebody) seem to have thrown something together in a few months.
JohanT Posts: 70 Registered: 12-10-2011 Message 426 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to GinaSzamboti - Message ID#: 65231848 06-22-2012 08:34 AM Oh, sorry about that. I'll split it up so as not to strain your eyes any further. I was being a bit masochistic, seeing as my vision is sucky too lol. Before I skim over the chapters concerning those interviews, do you think it likely, or at the very least possible, that Jomama's friends somehow fell under Bonaparta's commands? Naturally, we are meant to believe that they were activists, and did not associate with Bonaparta at all, but personally, I find it too strange to think that Bonaparta would be unaware of where Jomama resided, and would not have payed her a visit until he came to take her children away. Straying away from this, a theory that comes to mind may be one which incorporates a subordinate of Bonaparta's experiment befriending the mother, and giving her children those storybooks. We are never told whether or not the mother was exposed to them, are we? If not, then perhaps she would not have recognized them as Bonaparta's work. And thus, with this theory, she would not have suspected him knowing of her whereabouts at all, and would be compelled to continue dressing her twins identically. Your point about Schuwald could be meshed with this potentially. Now, if Bonaparta had popped in on them from time to time, and Jomama was well aware of his presence, I see her as either having no choice (as in they are being too closely watched), or wanting to go through with the experiment after all, so that one of her children will end up killing Bonaparta for her sake. With the former, I think it is possible for her to have been threatened with having her children taken away right then and there if she did not follow orders. She's a smart woman, so maybe after assessing her options and her potential escape, the chances of her succeeding at all would be slim. As for why she wouldn't have wanted the neighbors to know, I think that she may have guessed that she would be disappearing herself. Either that, or Bonaparta ingrained into her that she would eventually be abandoning her children. I never thought that it was solely her choice. Maybe she wished to somehow alleviate her conscience by presenting herself differently in the eyes of the people around her? In her eyes, she knew what she truly wanted. But by keeping one child there, and giving the other away, it appears as though she never gave one up in the first place. Just a random thought, and it may not fit in properly with her characterization. Then again, we don't know very much about Jomama, so I cannot say. I will be sure to ask my parents. In fact, I should probably ask my grandfather, who would be far more knowledgeable, seeing as he actually grew up during that time. From my own limited knowledge, I believe you are talking about the time of the Third Republic?
GinaSzamboti Posts: 27,612 Registered: 09-16-2003 Message 427 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to JohanT - Message ID#: 65280542 06-22-2012 09:45 PM JohanT wrote: Before I skim over the chapters concerning those interviews, do you think it likely, or at the very least possible, that Jomama's friends somehow fell under Bonaparta's commands? I would say that's a plausible theory except for Hauserova's interview in Chapter 16. I was searching for the journal of an activist named Jirik Letzel, who died in prison in 1982. I searched for this because he once told me that he was harboring a witness to what he called 'the most vile and inhumane crime our government has ever perpetrated.' Soon after, he was apprehended by government agents, and died of a sickness in a penitentiary near Prague several months later." — And did you find something in Letzel's journal? "Yes, and it matched up with your story. He wrote that he had hidden a woman in one of his hideouts, on the Mill Colonnade in Prague. More precisely... (puts on glasses and looks at her notepad) 'Today, I hide an activist from my hometown, a beautiful woman with blonde hair and blue eyes, at the hideaway on Mill Colonnade. She has with her a twin son and daughter, also very handsome, and fortunately they are quiet and obedient. I will keep her here for a time, until we can reveal the truth, the entire shocking truth, to all.'" From this it seems that a) Letzel was not her friend, but probably someone Jana hooked her up with, and b) if he had been captured and turned and used as a spy, why arrest him soon after and lock him up till he died instead of continuing to use him? I think it's more likely he was captured after they found Anna, or even that they found Anna because they captured him and he told them, rather than the much more elaborate scenario of turning him into a spy. Their even meeting at all seems rather unpredictable for setting such a trap for her. This fits the timeline, and is actually more sensible to me than my Schuwald theory. :) They capture Letzel in 1981, he tells them where he's been hiding Anna all this time, the massacre occurs shortly thereafter, and he dies in prison in 1982. I think you make a good point that Anna might very well not have realized the books were written by Bonaparta. Although if at any point she knew the book was given to Johan by him, she probably would've burned it. :D I'm almost to the point of thinking that Johan saw it in a bookstore and asked his mom to buy it and she did. :) I mean it's not like Bonaparta was the only source of copies of the book. Maybe it attracted him the same way Weindler's books did. I've done a little more digging about the Third Republic. Wiki says it was set up in April of 1945. But Procházka said, "After the war a provisional National Assembly was installed in October," and that's what I can't seem to find any clear information about. Although I think the kanji indicated "election," I used the word "installed" because I could find no mention of any elections in October in any year, but did find something about a provisional government set up in October (of '45, I think). So I'm confused about it. :) At any rate, I guess it was Benes who was running it, since he was operating in the Czech government in exile during the war, so apparently they weren't quite starting from scratch.
JohanT Posts: 70 Registered: 12-10-2011 Message 428 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to GinaSzamboti - Message ID#: 65288144 06-25-2012 05:44 AM Component A I see as valid with regards to the text. As for component B, there is the potential fact that Letzel had little to no use after turning in the mother and the twins. While the general state would argue that Letzel would prove to be an important figure when rallying up all activists, Bonaparta may have employed him secretly, and as we are all aware of, Bonaparta's vision and primary goal differed greatly from the government's. Maybe Bonaparta leaked information to the government so as to get him arrested once he had served his purpose. :D Too much? I think so. I suppose the real question with regards to all of this is how Johan got his hands on the books. I do not recall, during my initial reading, ever coming across proof that the twins were apart of Bonaparta's reading circle...Am I correct in saying that they were not? That Nina's first time in the Red Rose Mansion was in 1981, that week in which the massacre occured? In that case, I feel as though it is safe to say that the twins had never been read to by Bonaparta. But, when I had mentioned Jomama's "friends" bringing the books as gifts for the children, I did not necessarily mean those who were housing her. Perhaps someone as harmless as a neighbor had taken the pains of buying these books, at the request of a shady figure, no less :). Jomama may have been unaware of what the books were, unaware that Bonaparta was the one to indirectly provide her children with them, and unaware that this so-called friend was under the orders of the experiment. I do see the likely theory that Johan just happened upon The Nameless Monster, just as he did when he found it in the University of Munich. But also The God of Peace? I'm not one to leave much to chance, so I'm not sure if it was just a coincidence for Johan to pick out such books. Also, it seems that Nina knows the book quite well from what we see when Lotte presents her with it. I think this suggests that she was exposed to its presence a little longer than the few days she and Johan were alone in The Three Frogs, before they escaped. Johan's situation was ripe for a monster's growth. And as others have said, Johan and Bonaparta are alike in that they both change their minds rather spontaneously. Before Bonaparta conducted the massacre, he may have observed the twins' situations, concluded that the environment itself was the perfect household for a monster's emergence, and secretly gave the storybooks to Jomama. To venture a bit off-topic, I was always plagued by puzzlement at the thought that Jomama did not seem to call the children by the names she wished to give them...Of course, this is never confirmed, seeing as the children's memories of early childhood seem limited to just a few instances, but all the same. The reason is a mystery, yet, when contemplating the difference in ease with which both twins take on names, there may be a hint at what may have occured. Nina, for all intents and purposes, was the "real" twin. And therefore, to appear normal and blend in, she would have been called by a name in front of others. Because of this, she was essentially that name. Johan, the "fake" twin, would have been called by that name too, but when out of public view, his mother may have turned to him, and said, "But that's not your real name". Throughout the story, it appears as though Nina easily believes that her name is hers. She concludes that, whatever name is given, that it is her own. In a sense, Johan being called by Nina's name may have reinforced, in Nina's mind, that this name was truly hers. Johan, however, never considers his name as the true one, due to the possible repetition of his mother's words in his head. She believes whereas he never does. Just a thought :). Now, I am really writing a lot, but I came across something rather interesting while reading The Book of Revelations. Revelation 16:13 states, and I quote, "And I saw, coming out of the mouth of the dragon and out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet, three unclean spirits like frogs." As I said before, coincidences occur, but in fiction, they are a rarity :D. This may have been addressed before, but it drew my curiosity to the symbolism of "The Three Frogs". Within the physical representation, there live three people, Anna, Johan, and Nina. The dragon, the beast, and the prophet? The dragon gave power unto the beast, perhaps meaning that it gave it a purpose, and indicating the mother's likely embodiment of its character. However, the dragon is soon revealed to be Satan in disguise, and his power is said to reawaken the beast, ressurect him, reminding me forcibly of Tenma. Lol, as I've seen some posts regarding the similarities between Jomama and Tenma, maybe this can serve as yet another component ;). While one may argue against this "reawakening" that Jomama (as a respresentation of the dragon) had caused, one could also argue that, in the last scene of the series, the mention of Jomama, and the mention of Jomama granting him a name (and thus individuality and variation of power), shook Johan from his sleep. Johan, the beast, has seven heads and ten horns, and is the silent figure upon which man must make war. As Johan's connection with the first beast has been looked at in great detail, I'll move on to the false prophet. The false prophet, according to an analysis on the Revelations, is the second beast, the one to spread the influence of the Antichrist. It is said that, "He was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that it could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. " "Breath to the image" gives the distinction, in my opinion, of Nina strengthening the image of Johan, through her own image. For textual evidence, I only ever see it said that Nina is the spitting image of Johan. She is only ever compared to him, but it is surprisingly never the other way around (no matter who used to dress like who :)). When commenting on her beauty, on her eyes and hair and features, the following phrase of "just like Johan" is incorporated into the sentence. When you give breath to something, you are giving it life. But figuratively, I take it to mean that the prophet is there to bring life to the beast's image within the minds of others. He is there to spread the beast's influence, to etch his presence into humanity's collective brain. In a sense, Nina's entire physical appearance is just a carbon copy of Johan's, though the genders differ. Whenever people see her, they sigh and compare her to her brother. Within these details, her image reinforces Johan's image in the minds of other characters, as they are reminded of him whilst looking at her.She is the enhancer of his overall presence. Her chracter serves to give power, to emphasize his image, in other words. Rather like the objective of the the false prophet. A few thoughts here and there. Naturally, none of the three characters embody any of these biblical figures in entirety, but I do see small aspects that can be pulled out, and blown up into a larger visual. With the three frogs in mind, they are described as "unclean spirits". According to a source (which I will provide), the reason they are viewed as frogs is because John saw them as leaping from country to country, as ambassadors of deception, and labeled them as such. In response to this, it is shown that all three characters in Monster leap from identity to identity, place to place, in search of their significance in the world. And it is said that they will continue to hop until their goal is completed. While in The Three Frogs, all three inhabitants were frogs, perhaps poised to leap. Here is the source, which may or may not be accurate. As interpretations vary considerably, this is the one that I thought held the most importance: http://www.americaisraelprophecy.com/threeuncleanspirits.html
JohanT Posts: 70 Registered: 12-10-2011 Message 429 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to JohanT - Message ID#: 65310574 06-25-2012 06:43 AM I apologize for the double post, but I wanted to bring out any significance in the frogs' positions on the sign. http://i1118.photobucket.com/albums/k605/MonsterAnime/Screenshots %20Etc/The-Three-Frogs.jpg Two of the frogs appear to be hovering over a third frog, which seems to be in a hunched, crushed position. The two frogs above are looking elsewhere, while the third one is staring directly at the viewer. If I were to somehow give each of the frogs a purpose, I would say that they symbolize not only the revelations, but, of course, Anna, Johan, and Nina. The frog that is squashed beneath, who is staring directly, is the beast sent to delve into the human heart and destroy it. It is the one whose purpose is that of a monster, radiating its power on the two surrounding frogs, both of whom represent the prophet and the dragon. The dragon sits highest, for it is the one to give power to the beast. The prophet is the second in rise, the one whose purpose is defined by the dragon (for without the dragon, the prophet would not be able to spread the beast's influence), but whose purpose must be directed at the beast, whose goal is straightforward and stagnant. While this is not necessarily measuring the differences in power and influence, it is, given the situation, a cause and effect sequence regarding the birth of Johan's monster. s an additional note, it appears as though, seeing as the beast is a key player, that the prophet and the dragon, according to the sign, shield it, perhaps reinforced by the fact that Johan was in a sense shielded from the outside world (as he was more or less nonexistent). On a tangent, and a serious spoiler from The Legend of Korra: Spoiler Amon and Tarlok were to be used as vessels for revenge?! Sound familiar? :D
GinaSzamboti Posts: 27,612 Registered: 09-16-2003 Message 430 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to JohanT - Message ID#: 65310574 06-25-2012 06:57 PM JohanT wrote: I do not recall, during my initial reading, ever coming across proof that the twins were apart of Bonaparta's reading circle...Am I correct in saying that they were not? That Nina's first time in the Red Rose Mansion was in 1981, that week in which the massacre occurred? ... I do see the likely theory that Johan just happened upon The Nameless Monster, just as he did when he found it in the University of Munich. But also The God of Peace? I'm not one to leave much to chance, so I'm not sure if it was just a coincidence for Johan to pick out such books. Also, it seems that Nina knows the book quite well from what we see when Lotte presents her with it. I think this suggests that she was exposed to its presence a little longer than the few days she and Johan were alone in The Three Frogs, before they escaped. I agree, I don't believe they were part of Bonaparta's seminars. However, Johan was subjected to readings at K511, likely among which was The God of Peace. Which is probably why Nina knows about it - remember, she was having daily conversations with him about what he was doing over there. ;) Also, Johan took Nameless Monster with him when they fled Prague. He had it with him when Wolf found them. It's not a stretch to imagine he might've read it to her while they were traveling. JohanT wrote: Nina, for all intents and purposes, was the "real" twin. Very interesting way to look at it. I like it. Let me think about it some more. I think the symbolism in the rest is more in Toph's bailiwick than mine to comment on. :) However, I'm glad you posted the sign - I'd never really thought much about it before. From a less metaphysical perspective, it might be meaningful (or not) that the flag of Prague from its creation in 1784 as a single city from 4 previously separate cities was two horizontal stripes, black on top, yellow on the bottom. Since these had been the colors of the Habsburgs, the Czechs weren't too fond of it, so in 1886, the flag was changed to yellow on top, red on the bottom. This may or may not be related to the colors of the vests on the frogs. :) Most likely not. :D Btw, do we know who brought Bonaparta's methodology over to the Germans? For a minute I was thinking they might've picked it up from looking into Johan's book, which would have been a chilling thing if that were the case, like he's the vector for it or something. :) But I'm pretty sure K511's program was up and running well before Johan arrived. I'd assume it happened during the Communist domination of both countries, which would implicate the Russians as a possible facilitator...and that leads me back to the people who are trying to start the program again, and the world leader that can't be touched by the US...
JohanT Posts: 70 Registered: 12-10-2011 Message 431 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to GinaSzamboti - Message ID#: 65316416 06-26-2012 05:41 AM GinaSzamboti wrote: I agree, I don't believe they were part of Bonaparta's seminars. However, Johan was subjected to readings at K511, likely among which was The God of Peace. Which is probably why Nina knows about it - remember, she was having daily conversations with him about what he was doing over there. ;) Also, Johan took Nameless Monster with him when they fled Prague. He had it with him when Wolf found them. It's not a stretch to imagine he might've read it to her while they were traveling. Do we know if Bonaparta's works were featured in the Kinderheim 511 curriculum? We know that the program was based off of his earlier research, but I'm curious if there is any indication that people like Grimmer or Roberto recognized those stories, if ever they came across them during the course of the tale. We know Grimmer did...I can't quite recall his reaction, however. I'll go look it up once I'm finished responding to this. Ah, that's right. Nina could have definitely been treated to the readings by Johan. And their current situation would be even more fitting, running as they were. I've always been curious about the effects of the stories on the readers as well as the listeners. I wonder, if by reading, the impact could be an even greater one...Readers will be more solitary in mind than listeners. As it is, within a story, a person chooses a character to whom they relate to the most. It's easy to become that character, to think like them, and to become unecessarily attached to them. Or, at the very least, want to be like them. Maybe Bonaparta's obsession for producing a human who could create stories like his stemmed from this fact lol. A goal of duality, wherein the term "monster" is expressed in two ways. I think the symbolism in the rest is more in Toph's bailiwick than mine to comment on. :) However, I'm glad you posted the sign - I'd never really thought much about it before. From a less metaphysical perspective, it might be meaningful (or not) that the flag of Prague from its creation in 1784 as a single city from 4 previously separate cities was two horizontal stripes, black on top, yellow on the bottom. Since these had been the colors of the Habsburgs, the Czechs weren't too fond of it, so in 1886, the flag was changed to yellow on top, red on the bottom. This may or may not be related to the colors of the vests on the frogs. :) Most likely not. :D Hey, I don't see why not :D. At first, I thought the vest on one of the frogs was a navy blue haha. I'm going to look for the flags from 1975 onwards, to see if they hold any significance in the colorings. I'll tell you what I find. Btw, do we know who brought Bonaparta's methodology over to the Germans? For a minute I was thinking they might've picked it up from looking into Johan's book, which would have been a chilling thing if that were the case, like he's the vector for it or something. :) But I'm pretty sure K511's program was up and running well before Johan arrived. I'd assume it happened during the Communist domination of both countries, which would implicate the Russians as a possible facilitator...and that leads me back to the people who are trying to start the program again, and the world leader that can't be touched by the US... That would be very eerie if that was the case. But, as you say, Kinderheim 511 was up and going by the time Johan arrived. We have people like Grimmer and Roberto, who both appear to be a fair bit older than Johan, most likely graduated before he came along. If they were there along with him, even for the smallest amount of time, I think there would be evidence of memories of an uproar that spread through the orphanage, because of this supposed perfect "specimen". o_O Quite possibly, that might be the case. I smell some more research brewing. As I'm pressed for time right now, I'll get back to you on this one too. Oh, something I found on the ----YeahJohanLiebert Tumblr blog that caught my interest: The question was asked: " Why do you think that the color red is often associated with evil? I'm not sure how prominent the color red is in Monster, for though I watched the anime, I mainly focused on the manga. In fact, I'm in the middle of translating the original Japanese to English, just to experiment a little bit on different wording styles and what not. We see, in the opening credits, that the title is depicted in black, and then it fades out through a blotch of red, which appears to be blood. On certain covers of the manga that I've seen, the title is in a bright red color. As most know, red is the primary shade connected with Communism. In addition, on the Nazi flag, their symbol was surrounded fully by the color red. Any ideas on why it is so actively used in general? In Monster, one could argue that the fact that red is respectively hidden, and only comes out in small doses throughout, emphasizes the secrecy and corruptness of the current society, and the people who comprise it. Underneath the false exterior, much like the experiments themselves, there are worse things bubbling, and the worst is still to come. But, as it is, the worst to come is not necessarily the worst to go. Hmm... Anways, just as red is the most pleasing color to the eye, evil is the most pleasing concept to the mind.
JohanT Posts: 70 Registered: 12-10-2011 Message 432 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to JohanT - Message ID#: 65320498 06-26-2012 08:17 AM Sorry, double posting again. I was under the impression that the Czech flag had changed more than once since the end of communism, but I must have gotten it confused with the flag for the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic. After its end in 1992, the flag did not change for the Czech Republic, as my mother clarified for me. During the Communist regime from 1945 to December of 1989, the flag comprised of two colors: white and red, in that order. Afterwards, a third color, blue, was added to it. Does the year 1990 have any significance in Monster? I believe that was the year when Johan started the underground bank for money laundering. Once the fall of communism commenced, and ended officially in late 1989, Johan began to make a statement in the criminal world. Is there a correlation? What could this indicate, I wonder... And is there, if any, connection to the third color added to the flag, and would it have any significance with regards to the Three Frogs sign? It is interesting that the blue in the flag is triangular in shape, a figure of stability, and makes a cut through the white and red, either uniting the colors, or pushing them to the side. Almost...imposing in presence. Similarily, the "blue" (or black) vested frog in the sign stands higher than the other two, seemingly intimidating them... :D Or perhaps both symbolic features are there to state that, with the fall of communism, there is the possibility of reuiniting with what was lost before...In other words, it gave Johan a better possibility of reuiniting with Nina and his mother. Personally, the "stability" in shape is very ironic, considering the unsteadiness presented in the text. Of course, I have no idea if Urasawa intended for any of this, though I do suspect intention on behalf of the significance of the Three Frogs in themselves :). The revelations just keep popping up, don't they?
GinaSzamboti Posts: 27,612 Registered: 09-16-2003 Message 433 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to JohanT - Message ID#: 65320498 06-26-2012 01:20 PM >.<' I don't know what I was thinking (too narrowly focused, I guess), but of course K511 was doing its thing long before Johan was born. D'oh. But, yes, not only were they using Bonaparta's methods, I'm sure they were using his books too. It's not just any stories which are disturbing. It's said over and over that there's something evil in Bonaparta's stories in particular (and stories from his students), so I think we can safely assume they were used, at least during Johan's stay there. That said, they couldn't have been using them from the start of K511, because they didn't exist (God of Peace looks like the earliest, published in 1968). K511 was established circa 1960, probably earlier. It must have started as its own independent experiment, and then matured later with Bonaparta's influence. However, it's clear from Zweifelstadt (1958) and The Magnificent Steiner (1952, via Bargeld) that Bonaparta was successfully experimenting before the books or even his report to the Czechs in 1962. Hey, I thought it was green at first, until I blew it up. Different monitors. :) Actually, you were right. Between 1990-92, the flag of the Czech Republic was the Bohemian white over red, in part because the separation agreement with Slovakia said neither could use any of the old symbols. However, most Czechs continued to use the old r/w/b Czechoslovakian flag and finally in '93 the government officially reclaimed it, which sort of pissed off the Slovaks. Apparently the Czechs said, the country that agreed to not use it didn't exist anymore, so bite me, we've always used it, we're using it now. :) From what I can gather, it doesn't seem to be common knowledge that the '90-'92 w/r flag was ever used though. But since the Three Frogs sign has been around for about 200 years, if there were any color significance, it would probably be in 17-1800s history, not 1990s. :) I thought the colors might refer to the chronology of the Prague flag, top to bottom from black/yellow-yellow/red. I think it's more black = evil than red. Red = danger, which is biologically based - insects and other poisonous critters use it to alert predators to leave them alone. I'd have to look it up, but I think more species can actually see red, and it's more noticeable to those that can. Red also = strength, probably due to association with blood.
JohanT Posts: 70 Registered: 12-10-2011 Message 434 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to GinaSzamboti - Message ID#: 65323782 06-26-2012 01:59 PM So, according to the years and evidence, Kinderheim 511 was functioning for a while. Is it ever stated that Bonaparta may have set this facility up? Or that Capek or one of his underlings headed the program initially? Oh, really? Lol :D I wonder if the Czechs refused to use it in great quanitity. I am guessing that the aforementioned people were partial to the red, white, and blue. But here's something interesting. The German flag is black, red, and yellow, in that order. In addition, when Germany was divided, the resistance utilized similar colors, according to wikipedia. At any rate, I'm more inclined to agree with you about the Prague flag.
GinaSzamboti Posts: 27,612 Registered: 09-16-2003 Message 435 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to JohanT - Message ID#: 65324174 06-26-2012 06:15 PM It's never said straight out (this is Urasawa, remember) that Bonaparta started the Kinderheim program. But the more I think about it, the more things I see that point to exactly that. Remember in Grimmer's notes, he found that Bonaparta had outlined in his report to the Czechs what essentially was the K511 program. That section starts with a notation by Grimmer that he was shocked that the plan was about to be implemented, but it's entirely possible that I mistranslated something or misinterpreted the font changes there and either it wasn't Grimmer noting that, but rather the person who wrote the document back in '62 or whenever, or else he was shocked that it already had been implemented (but having been through it, I'm not sure why Grimmer would be shocked either way). It ends with "Establish proving ground --> Berlin." Maybe it actually says "established"? Maybe it's supposed to be understood that it's past tense and that went over my head? I dunno. In any case, he may have arranged K511 as his proving ground before he gave the report to the Czechs. There are three more things that suggest this: Bonaparta was a German at heart, like his father before him, and his father met with the East German Stasi in 1950. We don't know why, but this would have paved the way for his son if and when he wanted to contact them. And he had already experimented with the German town of Zweifelstadt in 1958, so we know he was traveling freely in East Germany and mucking about with people. Finally, Bargeld was an East German, and I think we all have agreed that he was acting on Bonaparta's direction in the US in the 50's. So yeah, I think establishing K511 was Bonaparta's trial run of his program in Germany. I think the East Germans continued independently after he went back to Prague to focus on the RRM program, perhaps refining it to their liking/needs under people like Hartmann and Biermann (who perhaps not incidently was flying under a Russian alias). Edit: in looking it over carefully again, and comparing to the Spanish (which says "center of experimentation"), I'm convinced it should be "established," or "proving ground establishment --> Berlin." So yeah, it seems pretty clear now that K511 was Bonaparta's baby. :) Also, it might be that what I thought indicated "shock" was actually talking about the impact of the program. I still can't quite sort that out, and the Spanish doesn't really make a lot of sense either. :(
TophBeiFong Posts: 145 Registered: 09-05-2011 Message 436 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to GinaSzamboti - Message ID#: 65316416 06-27-2012 06:02 AM Stuff happens whenever I don't post on here. I'm addicted to tumblr right now. GinaSzamboti wrote: I think the symbolism in the rest is more in Toph's bailiwick than mine to comment on. :) I'm honored that you consider me smart enough to comment on symbolism. :P I had no idea about that verse in Revelation, though. That was a good find. I very much like JohanT's analysis. I've always considered those three frogs to represent Jomama, Nina, and Johan. However, the only connection I may have made was that the frogs of Revelation, much like Jomama and the twins, were a product of evil. Heh, I ought to go through Revelation one day and see how many parallels to Monster I can find. XD As for the nature of Jomama's stay at The Three Frogs, I simply thought that she was hiding there and Bonaparta found them eventually. She seemed too taken aback for him to have visited her regularly. Yet here's an idea that popped into my head: What if someone who had befriended her turned her in? It would be kinda like the guy at the antique store where Winston bought his diary being a double agent for the Party in 1984. I also like the idea of someone Jomama befriended giving the books to the children. Speaking of books, Tietze's chapter pretty much confirms that K511 used Bonaparta's books, since she mentioned that the children sent to her orphanage from there were afraid of storybooks. (How many times have I referenced Tietze's chapter? XD) Though I do imagine they were only introduced after Bonaparta had written them, for obvious reasons. Funny, I always thought that K511 was Bonaparta's project. Not just because of the stuff in Grimmer's notebook, but with how Grimmer blamed Bonaparta for what happened to him and the other K511 children. I believe the inclusion of Grimmer's notebook in AM only served to make that more concrete. ;) Finally, I like JohanT's theory about the twins' names. I believe that Jomama did call them by name in The Three Frogs, but using Nina's real name for Johan while he was dressed as Nina in the company of others may have screwed up Johan's psyche when combined with the trauma he went through. *stuff about the Czech flag goes over head because I'm horrible at history*
JohanT Posts: 70 Registered: 12-10-2011 Message 437 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to TophBeiFong - Message ID#: 65330254 06-27-2012 03:26 PM GinaSzamboti wrote: That section starts with a notation by Grimmer that he was shocked that the plan was about to be implemented, but it's entirely possible that I mistranslated something or misinterpreted the font changes there and either it wasn't Grimmer noting that, but rather the person who wrote the document back in '62 or whenever, or else he was shocked that it already had been implemented (but having been through it, I'm not sure why Grimmer would be shocked either way). It ends with "Establish proving ground --> Berlin." Maybe it actually says "established"? Maybe it's supposed to be understood that it's past tense and that went over my head? I dunno. What you have said thus far makes me agree that Bonaparta was the initiator of, if not the one who commandeered, Kinderheim 511. As Toph points out, there is the fact that Grimmer seems to directly blame Bonaparta for the structure of the orphanage, and the similarities between the reading sessions and the sessions in K511 only further provide proof. While the orphanage may have had access to the books and various other sources, without Bonaparta's direct influence, they may not have been able to produce near identical results to the Red Rose Mansion experiment. TophBeiFong wrote: Finally, I like JohanT's theory about the twins' names. I believe that Jomama did call them by name in The Three Frogs, but using Nina's real name for Johan while he was dressed as Nina in the company of others may have screwed up Johan's psyche when combined with the trauma he went through. *stuff about the Czech flag goes over head because I'm horrible at history* Looking more closely at that theory of mine, I question whether Johan was frequently called by the name Jomama gave him. In the scene where Bonaparta and Capek burst through the doors to take one of the children to the Red Rose Mansion, the twins are dressed in their usual identical fashion, though Jomama appears to be surprised at Bonaparta's arrival. This may suggest that the children were dressed in the same garments for the good part of their daily lives, spending only some intervals dressed in gender-preferred clothes, such as when they took off from the Three Frogs, set ablaze, or when Schuwald came to visit when they were very young. Because of this, I am inclined to believe that, due to a cautious and careful mindset, Jomama had occasionally called the twins by the same name in the household as well, so that neither would be confused if they were ever in public. She may have dressed Johan repeatedly in his sister's clothing while in their home, so that he would get used to the idea of "being" her. Within the safety of their home, if she were to call out the name, she would most likely clarify to a young Johan that she was talking to his sister, not him. While I believe that Johan was given a name, and that it was said out loud, it was not one from which he could draw familiarity, for it was not the one he was most accustomed to hearing. From any conclusions I might have drawn, it seems as though the most prominent name to Johan would be Nina's name, while his own name virtually meant nothing. But, the most interesting aspect of all of this is that, with the fact that he is being called by Nina's name, and with the fact that Nina's name is the one that may ring clearer in his head, it is only when he is ultimately himself (the boy, the son, the brother) that this name is rejected from him, as his mother simply tells him "That's not your name", or, "I wasn't talking to you". Even though he might have been addressed afterwards by his true name, that simple statement, that denial of the identity he thought he harbored, could very well have sent him spiraling. And this may have invoked confusion. He was taught to respond to both.To everyone else, he is this name. But to his mother, he is not this name, but this other name. And is he even this other name, seeing as the mother raised him to respond to Nina's name? Ultimately, which is his real name? He may have concluded that neither were. And since he didn't have a name, it was likely that his sister didn't have one either. When close to death at the border, Nina asks Johan to say her name. He tells her that "we" do not have any names. To Johan, the two are one and the same, and a name is simply a name. If the name is false for one, then it must be false for both. For it cannot be Nina's name if it was Johan's name too. If that makes sense :). Now, in the final scene, Johan awakes when Tenma is on the verge of saying his real name (or, for those who prefer it, says his real name out loud). It is my belief that, if the name were said aloud, Johan thought, just as he did before, that it was false, as it always was. Even if the name was not said aloud, Johan awoke in a state of mocking disbelief, of rejection, as whatever name would have been said, whichever of the two, they would both be untrue. In the end, did his own mother even know what his real name was, and thus, who he was? Who am I to you, am I Nina, or am I Johan? That might form his inner battle with existence and identity. :D I may be going off in a completely different direction. If I am, I'll just stick to my original theory.
GinaSzamboti Posts: 27,612 Registered: 09-16-2003 Message 438 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to TophBeiFong - Message ID#: 65330254 06-27-2012 05:56 PM TophBeiFong wrote: Funny, I always thought that K511 was Bonaparta's project. Not just because of the stuff in Grimmer's notebook, but with how Grimmer blamed Bonaparta for what happened to him and the other K511 children. I believe the inclusion of Grimmer's notebook in AM only served to make that more concrete. ;) I think that was sort of my vague impression too, without giving it any thought, but when I started thinking about it, too narrowly at first, I realized I didn't have anything concrete in my head to conclude that. And I think what was stopping me from drawing the obvious conclusion that Grimmer hated Bonaparta for creating him specifically, and not just all the evil he'd done with such programs in general, was that I was keeping Bonaparta's activities limited to Czechoslovakia in my head. So anyway, the discussion was fruitful for me because a) I saw some more errors in translation and b) it gave me a better picture of how much and how easily Bonaparta got around. :) I had not put that all into one frame before, just had the individual pieces in my hands to idly fiddle around with.
TophBeiFong Posts: 145 Registered: 09-05-2011 Message 439 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to GinaSzamboti - Message ID#: 65334064 06-27-2012 08:19 PM @JohanT: I love your speculation. That's all I have to say. ^_^ GinaSzamboti wrote: it gave me a better picture of how much and how easily Bonaparta got around. :) My unintentional double entendre sensors are going off! :D
TophBeiFong Posts: 145 Registered: 09-05-2011 Message 440 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to TophBeiFong - Message ID#: 65335342 06-27-2012 09:09 PM At Gina's request: Spoiler Johan's opinion of the Korra finale.
JohanT Posts: 70 Registered: 12-10-2011 Message 441 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to TophBeiFong - Message ID#: 65335778 07-03-2012 07:13 PM So, I just posted my first entry on my new livejournal account ^_^. I basically took all of the parts of my "Johan's real name" theory, and pieced them together. Call me lazy for not re-writing it all in a better format lol. But, I did add some new thoughts here and there, though the elaboration was minimal. I'll post it here for anyone who is interested. I'll have to edit it at some point, but it'll do for now. http://johant.livejournal.com/592.html :D I have to figure out how to get it into a happening Monster community, so that I can get some constructive feedback from people who haven't read it yet. I'll be posting my three frogs theory up too. I think I might have found another revelations connection in the concept of "fire", though ;). I'll be addressing that sometime later. EDIT: I posted the three frogs theory, and added a few things here and there. I hope you don't mind that I mentioned your thoughts on them being a product of evil, Toph :D. I gave you credit, though. EDIT...AGAIN: I just posted an entry regarding the relationship between Johan and Tenma. If I took anyone's ideas unintentionally, please just tell me, and I'll give you credit :D.
JohanT Posts: 70 Registered: 12-10-2011 Message 442 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to JohanT - Message ID#: 65395714 07-06-2012 06:55 PM I was recently re-reading Monster, specifically Lipsky's chapter, and his initial puppet show gave way to some questions. Within the show, there are three characters: the young man, the demon, and, out of the picture, a dragon. It is interesting that the behind the scenes villain, the one looking to destroy the world, is depicted as a dragon, indicating a small hint directed at the Revelations. The "Devil", in other words. However, what truly intrigued me was that the young man seemingly killed the demon simply because he was a demon. It is never stated why the demon was attempting to find the dragon, whether it was for malicious purposes or not. The young man slew the demon once he found out what he was. But in the situation outside of the story within the story, it is not a demon who the man (Tenma) has to kill, but a human. There is a profound difference in the circumstances, and the question posed would be whether or not it is inhuman to kill the inhuman. Nina states, in the chapter, that "a human could save that demon". Could this potentially mean to make him human? I wonder now, whether Nina's thoughts about Tenma's purpose were focused on Johan's death. Perhaps it is the case where Nina believed Tenma could save the demon from being a demon, but were this to fail, she would be the one to kill the demon, as she states vehemently, "I would do the same thing [as the young man in the story]". Of course, this is a rough, literal interpretation. One could say that the young man and the demon are dual sides of Tenma, and that Johan is the dragon. The human in Tenma works to destroy his own demon, the one that wishes to end the life of the one he saved. The young man had initially re-awoken the demon, so that Tenma could perform the righteous task of slaying the dragon (Johan). However, the young man soon realizes what this demon side truly is, and kills it in the end. The demon Tenma resurrected in himself was destroyed by his human side. A connection to the final chapter, in which Tenma saves Johan's life again? I think I may have succeeded in confusing myself. In the chapter succeeding this one, The God of Peace is told, and I noticed something about the God's face. Though the panels are in black and white, it appears as though his nose could be presented in the color red. And his face is seemingly pale, round, jolly, and with a stick on smile. Much, in my opinion, like a clown's. In the story, the end result serves to make a fool out of the God, furthering this perspective. :D In addition, to me, it appears as though the God is wearing make-up, concealing his true face. Could his devilish reflection be him behind the false paint? Also, another little tid bit I came across was when Johan was addresssing his mother's portrait in the Red Rose Mansion. He says, "I'm home". The portrait seemingly responds, "Welcome back". We all know that Johan was the one to say it to Nina, after she escaped the RRM massacre. But was there someone to say it to Johan? With all of the confusion with regards to the multiple fires in the Three Frogs, and the child left behind in the fire, there might be something telling in this instance. Of course, it might just be insignificant, as his mother saying "Welcome back" in his head is reminiscent of "Nina" saying it to him, as he states later, "You are me, and I am you. She is me, and I am her". As all are the same, then it would fit for him to transfer the words of one to the other. Johan says that he is "home". Could this be Johan's acknowledgement that the birth of the monster truly began in that building? That he was, in his mind, born there? This could be more exact than I considered. Are we ever told where exactly the twins were born? Could they have been born in a room in the Red Rose Mansion? Ok, another little thing I found was, in the one of the panels, Lipsky is describing Bonaparta's storytelling techniques, and Nina immediately envisions Bonaparta leaning towards her, asking, "Do you understand the meaning?" This would suggest numerous things, one that Bonaparta had told a story to Nina at one point, and this could very well be the case, seeing as she was locked in the Red Rose Mansion for some time. However, it should be noted that the image of him saying these words is the exact same image of when he told her "Humans can become anything." With this in mind, it is possible that, though Nina was locked in a room, the stories were read to her from the outside, where she could hear the words, but she could not see the reader's face. It is also probable that, with this, Johan was exposed to the stories, as Nina escapes to tell him everything. The various tales of Bonaparta could have been spread to Johan in a way such as this.
TophBeiFong Posts: 145 Registered: 09-05-2011 Message 443 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to JohanT - Message ID#: 65395714 07-06-2012 10:40 PM Must...organize...stuff...o_O Johan's Identity Crisis: As I said before, brilliant theory. Tri Zaba: Again, brilliant. The part about Schwald's view is new, though, so I'll comment about that. I think the "greater monster" is someone who judges others unequally. Johan is a monster because he condemns everybody, but a greater monster has picking and choosing. The idea I suppose is that only God can judge, so a man who does it is a monster. Yet if you look at it in terms of C h r i s t and Antichrist, Tenma is the former and Johan is the latter. C h r i s t triumphs because he is the true savior Antichrist is simply an evil imitation. The question "Who is like unto the beast? Who can make war with him?" is a statement of the monster's supremacy. Yet since the beast is simply an imitation, the true savior will trimuph. Tenma triumphs over Johan in a different way by sticking to his priniciples in the end. So perhaps throwing the beast into the fire can be symbolic of two things in Monster: both the deconstruction of the classic struggle between good and evil in which judging someone makes you become a monster and a reconstruction in which good will ultimately triumph. ...Did that make sense at all? *head spins* (EDIT: This filter is insane. C h r i s t is a legitimate term and not everybody uses it as a swear! ::mad::) The Thematic Relationship Between Johan and Tenma: Hey, this is basically the discussion we had several months back! :D I think some of the ideas may have originated with me, but I really don't care. Anwyay, I think identity and worth is part of the human struggle, and Tenma and Johan represent the dual sides of that concept. Also, while I agree that they're both aiming for equality, I would say that they are aiming for different types of equality. Tenma's view is what you think of when you think of equality, while Johan's view is a warped sense of equality...the dark side of equality, if you will. Tenma believes that people can coexist equally, while Johan thinks that this is impossible, so death ultimately triumphs over life. I see their philosophies as being put head to head, with Johan trying to convince Tenma that his way is the only way equality can ever be acheived. This is anathema to Tenma, of course, since his instinct is to create and protect rather than to destroy. And yet, he must destroy in order to protect...which is what makes his conflict so interesting. Still, I have to disagree that Tenma does what Johan does in regard to names. (I think I discussed this before, but I'll try to go into more detail.) I don't think he views everyone's name essentially being the same simply because he views them as being of equal value. Since he acknowledges people's identities and encourages them to be themselves, I think he realizes that people are different. It's just that they are all valuable. Let's say you had a gold piece worth $100, $100 in bills, and a television you bought for $100. These all have different properties, but the same value. Tenma isn't rejecting the concept of names in and of themselves, just the idea that a name implies that you are valued more or less than another. Johan, in contrast, sees names as putting different values on other people, and is thus trying to destroy the concept of the name. Tenma acknowledges people's names, while Johan erases them. You could say that these methods are both linked to the goal of equality, but the methods and type of equality are opposites. Yet opposites are linked, since they make up two halves of a whole. Life and death make up the two halves of existence, as you pointed out. So...Tenma and Johan are different and the same at the same time. :P Heh, I just love analyzing the dynamic between these two characters. Klaus Poppe and The God of Peace: While the idea is interesting, I think this depends on whether he wrote it before or at the time he fell in love with Jomama. If before, I think the book was simply another story to mold the minds of children. He was probably trying to get children to think that good doesn't truly exist.
TophBeiFong Posts: 145 Registered: 09-05-2011 Message 444 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to JohanT - Message ID#: 65421402 07-06-2012 11:13 PM JohanT wrote: I was recently re-reading Monster, specifically Lipsky's chapter, and his initial puppet show gave way to some questions. Within the show, there are three characters: the young man, the demon, and, out of the picture, a dragon. It is interesting that the behind the scenes villain, the one looking to destroy the world, is depicted as a dragon, indicating a small hint directed at the Revelations. The "Devil", in other words. However, what truly intrigued me was that the young man seemingly killed the demon simply because he was a demon. It is never stated why the demon was attempting to find the dragon, whether it was for malicious purposes or not. The young man slew the demon once he found out what he was. But in the situation outside of the story within the story, it is not a demon who the man (Tenma) has to kill, but a human. There is a profound difference in the circumstances, and the question posed would be whether or not it is inhuman to kill the inhuman. Nina states, in the chapter, that "a human could save that demon". Could this potentially mean to make him human? I wonder now, whether Nina's thoughts about Tenma's purpose were focused on Johan's death. Perhaps it is the case where Nina believed Tenma could save the demon from being a demon, but were this to fail, she would be the one to kill the demon, as she states vehemently, "I would do the same thing [as the young man in the story]". I also think she said that she didn't want "him" to do it, meaning Tenma. I think it could possibly mean that she believes Tenma could help Johan. It contradicts her later actions, but maybe after the library fire she started thinking differently, but once she regained her memory she wanted to kill Johan again. And then she changed her mind again after Tenma stopped her from committing suicide. Of course, this is a rough, literal interpretation. One could say that the young man and the demon are dual sides of Tenma, and that Johan is the dragon. The human in Tenma works to destroy his own demon, the one that wishes to end the life of the one he saved. The young man had initially re-awoken the demon, so that Tenma could perform the righteous task of slaying the dragon (Johan). However, the young man soon realizes what this demon side truly is, and kills it in the end. The demon Tenma resurrected in himself was destroyed by his human side. A connection to the final chapter, in which Tenma saves Johan's life again? I think I may have succeeded in confusing myself. I always thought that the dragon was Bonaparta, and the demon seeking the dragon paralelled Johan seeking Bonaparta. Or, going along with your theory, the dragon is Jomama, and the demon seeking the dragon is symbolic of Johan seeking his past. That's probably what the real intention was in throwing in that story. Tenma fighting his own inner demon could be said to be a theme, I guess, but it doesn't make much sense here. :/ In the chapter succeeding this one, The God of Peace is told, and I noticed something about the God's face. Though the panels are in black and white, it appears as though his nose could be presented in the color red. And his face is seemingly pale, round, jolly, and with a stick on smile. Much, in my opinion, like a clown's. In the story, the end result serves to make a fool out of the God, furthering this perspective. :D In addition, to me, it appears as though the God is wearing make-up, concealing his true face. Could his devilish reflection be him behind the false paint? Hey, that's a neat explanation. Though it seemed like the God never knew that he was a demon. Maybe he forgot what he really was and it took looking into the mirror to remind him? Also, another little tid bit I came across was when Johan was addresssing his mother's portrait in the Red Rose Mansion. He says, "I'm home". The portrait seemingly responds, "Welcome back". We all know that Johan was the one to say it to Nina, after she escaped the RRM massacre. But was there someone to say it to Johan? With all of the confusion with regards to the multiple fires in the Three Frogs, and the child left behind in the fire, there might be something telling in this instance. Of course, it might just be insignificant, as his mother saying "Welcome back" in his head is reminiscent of "Nina" saying it to him, as he states later, "You are me, and I am you. She is me, and I am her". As all are the same, then it would fit for him to transfer the words of one to the other. I think it was just Johan reminiscing about what happened, though in his mind the ones saying each line is reversed. Johan says that he is "home". Could this be Johan's acknowledgement that the birth of the monster truly began in that building? That he was, in his mind, born there? This could be more exact than I considered. Are we ever told where exactly the twins were born? Could they have been born in a room in the Red Rose Mansion? Or maybe this is related to what I said before. :P Still, perhaps he does think of that being the birthplace of the "monster." Ok, another little thing I found was, in the one of the panels, Lipsky is describing Bonaparta's storytelling techniques, and Nina immediately envisions Bonaparta leaning towards her, asking, "Do you understand the meaning?" This would suggest numerous things, one that Bonaparta had told a story to Nina at one point, and this could very well be the case, seeing as she was locked in the Red Rose Mansion for some time. However, it should be noted that the image of him saying these words is the exact same image of when he told her "Humans can become anything." With this in mind, it is possible that, though Nina was locked in a room, the stories were read to her from the outside, where she could hear the words, but she could not see the reader's face. Eh, I doubt that she was read to while locked up. I recall her saying that she only heard screams occasionally, via Johan's retelling of course. Yet maybe that was something he said to her right before saying "Humans can become anything." The story in question is the story of what happened to her at the mansion. Or maybe that line was a continuation of Lipsky talking and his words were simply triggering Nina's memory.
JohanT Posts: 70 Registered: 12-10-2011 Message 445 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to TophBeiFong - Message ID#: 65424202 07-07-2012 03:59 AM So, I'm pressed for time, so I'll just say this for now :D. I changed The God of Peach theory...somewhat. Wasn't so much of a theory as it was an attempted analysis. I considered Bonaparta's father.... He was highly important in the political realm, and he was looked to as a leader amongst others, right? He was unaware, oblivious, to what his son had become. So when he finally took a break from playing God, he looked at his "reflection", and then it is said that everything, his identity, his name, were stolen from him. Could this be a parallel to The God of Peace, in some way? About the names business....I have to say that I partially agree with you, but I myself am confused on this part :p. As all are valuable, they are all equally valuable? And with that, none can be above the other. I said in that long, long entry that Tenma sought to encourage individuality. And he did. But viewing everyong as individuals of the same value takes away specifically from the meaning behind a name. They all have names, meaning that they all have unique identities, but the meaning behind the name, the one that provides the set value above or below other humans, is absent in Tenma's mind. So, it's not literally "namelessness", in a way. But it takes away the portion of the "name" that gives people a leg up on others. Ok, done. For now.
JohanT Posts: 70 Registered: 12-10-2011 Message 446 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to TophBeiFong - Message ID#: 65424202 07-07-2012 12:06 PM ....."God of Peach". Really now :D. Tri Zaba: That's a good point about the "greater monster". I believe I said somewhere in the thread that the greater monster may only be a monster in the eyes of the other monster...and I think, with that particular statement, it would fit more comfortably with the fact that, in the end, it appears as though C h r i s t and Tenma are destined to defeat that which appears to be the "beast". The difference between the two is, referencing Lipsky's puppet show, that C h r i s t defeats evil embodied in the inhuman, whereas Tenma is on a journey to defeat evil embodied in a human. Because of this difference, C h r i s t is not necessarily a monster, as he does not judge a human, thus taking on the duty of God. He merely judges the inhuman. However, it must be kept in mind that C h r i s t, for religious purposes, is known as the son of God, and in some faiths, God. In Tenma's case, his difficulty is presented in the fact that he is being forced to judge a human evil, whilst being human. And because of this, I don't know if I'd call the conflict as comparatively similar to the one brought forth between C hrist and the Antichrist. If that makes any sense whatsoever :D. Thematic Relationship: Lol, yeah, I decided to compress all of those jumbled thoughts into one essay-like analysis. I recall the "names give values" theory being yours, so I just went back and cited you on that :). If you saw anymore, just say the word. With Johan, I can never claim to understand his character. And that lack of understanding is what makes me like him more and more. So, I'm naturally averse to fully determining what it is that went on in his brilliantly crazed mind :D. But, I do honestly think that, though Johan is completely detached from the concept of "life", he is just as detached from death. And this is one of the reasons for my thoughts on the meaning behind the conflict. I'm not sure that Johan was trying to show Tenma that death was the uniting component as much as he was attempting to show Tenma that he must acknowledge death, just as he acknowledges Johan. He must see nonexistence in order to comprehend existence. How will he know life if he doesn't see death? How will he know value if he doesn't see something without value? If Tenma had indeed killed Johan, it would be Tenma alone in that nameless world. He would see what Johan saw, but he would be solitary. By showing Tenma this picture, a picture only the two of them saw, Johan drew a conclusion that, after his death, Tenma would truly understand. He would finally see, for he would be all alone in that world, the only other person who was with him, gone and dead. In truth, perhaps it is so that it is not just Johan and Nina who cannot exist without the other (The God of Peace), but Tenma and Johan. Yes, Johan and Tenma go head to head. But just how head on is their conflict, I wonder. Is it as straightforward as life and death? Hopefully, what I said was of some worth, and not just ramblings :D. In addition, I'm not sure that there are differing types of equality. I see it as such that equality is equality, for the end is simply that all are the same. Oh, and I cleared my head a little with the "same name" thing. The equal value is depicted in the same name, for everyone is same in that they are all individuals. It is not that they literally all have the same names in Tenma's mind, but it would be more akin to the names simply being names, but nothing beyond this. And that would be exactly like them all having the same name. The names determine the fact that everyone is a solitary human being. However, behind the names, there exists nothing to depict an extended value. The value is in the name being given, rather than any differentiating. ::frustrated:: Hmmm, I wonder if I made it even worse...
GinaSzamboti Posts: 27,612 Registered: 09-16-2003 Message 447 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to JohanT - Message ID#: 65421402 07-07-2012 02:36 PM JohanT wrote: In the chapter succeeding this one, The God of Peace is told, and I noticed something about the God's face. Though the panels are in black and white, it appears as though his nose could be presented in the color red. And his face is seemingly pale, round, jolly, and with a stick on smile. Much, in my opinion, like a clown's. In the story, the end result serves to make a fool out of the God, furthering this perspective. :D In addition, to me, it appears as though the God is wearing make-up, concealing his true face. Could his devilish reflection be him behind the false paint? If he never looked in a mirror, how could he apply make-up? ;) Seriously, I think you're right that his nose is intended to be red (and is in the anime), but I think there's no more to that than he's modeled after Bacchus (particularly the Disney version from Fantasia, it seems to me), the god of wine and pleasure. The red nose and cheeks are just a sign of his carefree joy (drunk with happiness) in doing his job. JohanT wrote: Are we ever told where exactly the twins were born? Could they have been born in a room in the Red Rose Mansion? Ok, another little thing I found was, in the one of the panels, Lipsky is describing Bonaparta's storytelling techniques, and Nina immediately envisions Bonaparta leaning towards her, asking, "Do you understand the meaning?" Could you tell me which vol. and chapter this is in? While I like your idea that to Johan at that time, the RRM felt like where the monster was born, I don't think they were physically born there, because if I remember correctly, it's surrounded by high solid walls with a gate, and Jomama escaped over a barbed-wire-topped chain link fence. I could be wrong, but I didn't get the sense that they had the same surroundings. Where she escaped from seemed more...remote? At least on the outskirts. Which makes me realize how bizarre it is that Jomama and the kids were hiding out practically on the doorstep of the RRM. It was at least close enough for a five or six-year old to run home from. Hell, Bonaparta probably spotted Jomama at the grocery one day on his way home from work. :D
JohanT Posts: 70 Registered: 12-10-2011 Message 448 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to GinaSzamboti - Message ID#: 65427878 07-07-2012 05:28 PM Hey, he had to have asked for something in exchange for all of that magical water he sprinkled around :D. The least they could do was give him a handy makeover. Hmmm...just from joking around, a weird theory opened the doors in my head. Unwillingly, but let me see this through. If the other characters were the ones that gave him his clowned up face, and were the ones who presented him with the hat, could they be malicious figures looking to both make a fool out of the God, and then kill him through his own realization? The God gave everyone names, acting the part of the God, but in general, the other characters may have sought to make a fool out of the God, therefore making a fool out of identity. In the end, though the God hands out names like pieces of candy, he himself did not know what his own identity was, as he had not gazed at his reflection, and had not seen that within him, his true identity was mixed with the Devil. How can one assign identity when one is unaware of what identity is? And, of course, there is just the fact that "Johan" was the one to give him the hat, and cause the starting event that led to the God's demise *whistles*. Yeah, it's a bit much, but I'm glad I got that out without confusing myself too much :D.....But seriously, if anyone views this analysis as anything other than lunacy, I'd take out the part about the other characters giving the God a makeover :p. Ummm, let me see....the chapter in which Nina and Lipsky are first talking about Bonaparta is Chapter 116. Chapter 117 is where Nina sees Bonaparta saying "Do you understand the meaning of this story". As for the volume, I have no idea, since I read everything online. It says Vol. 116, but is that right? You're probably right about the birth of the twins. The Red Rose Mansion seems in open view compared to where Jomama was kept. But I can't really remember the scenery, so I can't determine whether or not I should completely rule out the Red Rose Mansion...many people disappeared in there, after all. And no questions were raised until Bonaparta deserted it. Lol, that always confused me too. It seemed too convenient that Bonaparta never stumbled upon them, or at least Capek. Maybe Jomama disguised herself as well? :D At the moment, I am reading Chapter 119, "What Johan Saw". General Wolf appears, dying on his hospital bed. He tells Tenma that soon they will reappear, "the ones who had their names stolen". Simultaneously, officers are at the now burned down Red Rose Mansion, unearthing the skeletons of those who perished in the massacre of 1981 (?). Wofl said that "there is no one alive who knows their names". Could those forty six or so skeletons in the mansion potentially be some of the older students of Bonaparta's? The earliest ones, the ones who joined with him in his experiment? In the same chapter, Wolf states that he has a theory about the Red Rose Mansion. Specifically that "[he] believes that those children were born there", indicating that he has concluded that the Red Rose Mansion was the birthplace for Johan and Nina.
GinaSzamboti Posts: 27,612 Registered: 09-16-2003 Message 449 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to JohanT - Message ID#: 65429134 07-07-2012 06:10 PM oO The make-up is the most sensible part of that theory. :) Just how evil do you think those people were, to try to make a fool of someone who gave them everything they valued? From what I took away from AM, there were the 46 bodies unearthed from the massacre (42 of the attendees, and the 4 substitutes), and below that bodies from the Communist era, when the secret police disposed of people. I think it was Ranke who said that aside from the massacre, no one got buried there without the secret police approving it. So I don't think it's likely that it was other students there, and I haven't seen any suggestion that they were killing off any of the students anyway. If they were, I don't think the failed students like Lipsky would have lived to tell (being Bonaparta's son would not have saved him), and Sobotka would also have been tracked down and silenced. Why would Bonaparta kill his earliest students? The God of Peach - I like it! :D
GinaSzamboti Posts: 27,612 Registered: 09-16-2003 Message 450 of 529	Re: Another Monster Reply to JohanT - Message ID#: 65421402 07-07-2012 06:22 PM JohanT wrote: Ok, another little thing I found was, in the one of the panels, Lipsky is describing Bonaparta's storytelling techniques, and Nina immediately envisions Bonaparta leaning towards her, asking, "Do you understand the meaning?" This would suggest numerous things, one that Bonaparta had told a story to Nina at one point, and this could very well be the case, seeing as she was locked in the Red Rose Mansion for some time. When I look at that in context, what it says to me is that Lipsky's resemblance to his father triggered the memory of Bonaparta reaching out for her, and even while it's still Lipsky's voice finishing the sentence, it's Bonaparta she's seeing in her head. Note that every time Lipsky is speaking as Bonaparta, he assumes a posture that is downright creepy and totally his father.