Reichu wrote:About the ulcers, maybe there's more to it than stress alone. Now, I'm just pulling stuff out of my rectum here, but is it possible that: Stress reduces the effectiveness of bodily systems --> Insufficient mucus is produced for the stomach lining --> Stomach acid effects stomach lining --> Ulcers.

Actually, the primary causative agent for ulcers seems to be helicobacter sp. - antibiotics have proven effective against gastric ulcer.

More to the point for this thread, there is at least anecdotal evidence that people under hypnosis, when told that they are being touched by something that is red hot will show reddening of the skin and even blisters - even if it's an ice cube being used.

Reichu wrote:I've been uploading WAY too many screenshots lately, but, just because it gives me so much pleasure to be right :





(snip)


I'd go with the former, myself. I think Asuka started to feel something, but was cut off before the trauma could kill her.

She's just had "her" arms cut off, and can see what's coming. A vivid imagination could well supply the rest when she feels the the impact through the entry plug.

Originally posted on: 14-Nov-2004, 11:25 GMT

Reichu wrote:Original: The only instance where we KNOW a 400% synchronization was achieved is with Shinji in #19. "400% Synchronization Rate" is just gabbledygook for losing one's ego boundary in the Eva (or some such thing), splatting into LCL, and entering a "quantum state". There is conflicting evidence that it connected Shinji's soul to EVA-01's core, as well, though I'm not sure how I currently stand on this.

Asuka's synch rates in EoE can only be GUESSED. It is never stated what they are. Shin-seiki has speculated that she does achieve 400% immediately before dying, but obviously didn't beforehand, otherwise she would have Tang-ified.

Quote: with Asuka she attains that 400% sych and even when the power runs out on her eva and berserker mode activates she still has control over her eva. when she moves the eva moves. and we clearly see that when the eva feels pain she feels pain. when the eva gets hurt she gets hurt, as we can clearly see from her screams of pain when her eva is getting torn appart and her eye clearly gushes blood from the wound the eva took from the lance.

Hard numerical data for synch are fairly thin on the ground, between the (IIRC) 12% minimum for activation and Shinji's > 400% in ep#19. The rest of the time results are cast as relative to previous (unless someone out there has spent a lot of time poring over screen caps and can shed any light on what Maya will be reading).

If we take ~400% as a point where the pilots own AT field is suppressed or perhaps merged with the Eva's, so losing individuality, that still leaves the (relatively) unexplored 2-300% range where the AT fields might become locked in resonance (or some such), possibly even requiring power to forcibly de-synch, and providing scope for a much greater degree of sympathetic damage.

That at least is enough arm-waving to keep me happy.

Reichu wrote:Asuka only seems to take on wounds "as the creators see fit". EVA-02 is quadruple-pierced through the skull (none of the eyes hit directly), and Asuka enigmatically starts bleeding from her eye. If this is supposed to represent "EVA-02's injuries manifesting in the pilot", Asuka seems marvelously oblivious to the two long tines going through the Eva's head -- this part of the injury obviously skipped Asuka by, as it should have killed her. She also should have been bleeding from the Spear's two exit wounds on the back of EVA-02's skull, if nothing else.

When she is having to map an injury sustained between her upper left eye and lower left eye onto a human face. I'm not sure we'd notice an exit wound with her hair in the way.

Reichu wrote:how come Asuka's own brains and intestines aren't being spilled onto her seat?

In the latter case, at least, that's the plug-suit doing its job.

Originally posted on: 14-Nov-2004, 11:47 GMT

Mr. Tines wrote:Hard numerical data for synch are fairly thin on the ground, between the (IIRC) 12% minimum for activation and Shinji's > 400% in ep#19. The rest of the time results are cast as relative to previous (unless someone out there has spent a lot of time poring over screen caps and can shed any light on what Maya will be reading).

Thin on the ground. but certainly not non-existent. There's a point during Asuka's first appearance where Shinji's synch rate is mentioned. In the few episodes directly following that, the relative values which are mentioned give you grounds to suspect that the other pilots do not normally deviate much from Shinji's typical value. I don't recall what exactly that was, but it shouldn't take long to find out, if it's of any importance.

Originally posted on: 14-Nov-2004, 12:28 GMT

Knives wrote:... further clarification, I only recall you suggesting this and then refuting it.

I was somewhat unsure of some the facts, so I made a minor error in reporting the details of that episode, but that shouldn't be allowed to devalue the more general point I'm making. If the point won't stand up to scrutiny, fair enough, but allow me the lattitude of a minor error.

It doesn't poke any holes in the fact that she is indeed experiencing physical strains on her body.

When you take Asuka's very clear, real, distinct injuries
Add that to the fact that we see Rei and Shinji both experiencing physical manifestations of what the Eva is experiencing
I don't see any other way to view it than it is the case that the pilot's mind (which we know to be experiencing the pain) has caused the pain to form real physical manifestations.

There's no proof in the case of Rei that there were physical strains on her body. If you don't believe in the idea of non-literal visual representations, then that's your view, but there's no proof either way, and it's my view that Rei would have been dead from physical strain of that nature long before she actually died. Therefore, the 'visual metaphor' theory, to me at least, serves to explain this sequence better. Sure, she was suffering from terrible pain, but only the pain of the Eva, through the synch, in my opinion.

And yes, I would say it's in large part due to sync ratio, otherwise they wouldn't care so much about cutting the sync in dangerous situations (Shinji vs. Bardiel, Asuka vs. Zeruel).
I believe in Asuka's case the quote (as Asuka's charging Zeruel) is
Misato: "Cut her nerve connections NOW!"
(dub version ... )

Clearly then, NERV knows it's dangerous for the pilot to be experiencing these sensations.

First of all, cutting the synch ratio does reduce the pain which is felt. This much is clear. What is equally clear, at least to me, is that if a person experiences a great deal of pain, even if the pain is not objectively 'real', then they may go into a state of shock. This, to me, is the reason that NERV choose to cut the synch ratio in dangerous situations. A pilot may loose consciousness due to shock, perhaps, or become too panicked to act. For this reason, I agree with your statement that it is 'dangerous'.

Finally, I suppose that it is possible to concede that in the case of a pilot who has achieved an abnormally high synch ratio, wounds may indeed physically manifest, upon leaving the entry plug. Indeed, a pilot in this state looses their physical form, and becomes one with the Eva, so it is not entirely unlikely that they would receive physical damage. I do, however, still view this as separate from most normal situations in the show. To the best of my knowledge, there have been only two occasions on which any of the pilots have acheived, what for want of a better term, lets call hyper-synchronisation with their Eva. I am thinking of Shinji and Sho, following the Zeruel incident, and Asuka and Nigouki, following the Harpy fight. I don't recall any others, but experience tells me not to rely on my memory too much.

Originally posted on: 14-Nov-2004, 12:51 GMT

Mr. Tines wrote:Actually, the primary causative agent for ulcers seems to be helicobacter sp. - antibiotics have proven effective against gastric ulcer.

The bacteria you mention is a cause of ulcers. They've actually done studies in this area of biology and found patients suffering from ulcers have no sign of the bacteria (caused instead by stress).

As I said, "that's not to say all ulcers are caused from stress alone."
In that, I was referring to the bacteria.
But again, there are cases of ulcers sans the bacteria.

Soluzar wrote:There's no proof in the case of Rei that there were physical strains on her body. If you don't believe in the idea of non-literal visual representations, then that's your view, but there's no proof either way, and it's my view that Rei would have been dead from physical strain of that nature long before she actually died.

A.) That's like saying "There's no proof that Gendo actually wears (sun)glasses — it's just a metaphor to show how he's seperated from the rest of the world."
B.) My "view" is based on what we see in the show (in other words "evidence"). Your view (placed in bold) is based on a personal belief that Rei couldn't handle the strain (which has no bearing whatsoever in the show [in other words, "unsubstantiated opinion"]).

I don't think you should be one to start talking about or asking for proof when it's right there in front of your eyes and your own theory has no support whatsoever other than your personal belief that Rei couldn't handle the strain.

Reichu wrote:If the bleeding eye is simply a result of trauma and is not supposed to "mirror" Kyoko's wounds... perhaps it might be possible to pull out the old theory that Asuka simply imagines her arm being split in half and it does not actually happen. Depends on how much one wants to read into the fact that no details are shown of the cross-section of Asuka's arm, whereas the artists go wild with this sort of stuff when drawing Kyoko and the damaged harpies.

I may be wrong, but just to throw it out there, Asuka's bleeding from the eye region (which may not necessarily be the eye itself) ... (but even as I write this, I realize we do see a close up of her face as she reaches toward the harpies before her death ... I'd have to review that shot).

The fact that no details are shown in Asuka's arm could be simply for the fact that she's a human character and the artists/director felt it better not to show the gruesome effects on Asuka (a character we've grown close to), and yet don't care so much when it comes to non-"human" Evas (less attachment).
Speculation, sure. But then, so is suggesting that what we clearly see as happening is in fact not happening at all.

Originally posted on: 14-Nov-2004, 14:28 GMT

Knives wrote:A.) That's like saying "There's no proof that Gendo actually wears (sun)glasses — it's just a metaphor to show how he's seperated from the rest of the world."

That is quite ridiculous. In the first place, there's no need for such a metaphor, that facet of his personality is explored thoroughly through other narrative devices. Iin the second place, there's no reason at all to suppose that he is not wearing some variety of spectacles. If you intend to discredit the theory, I suggest you do better than that.

If there were any basis for arguing that the image of Gendo as wearing spectacles was a non-literal visual representation, then I would argue it. One of the strengths of visual media is that anything can be a metaphor, even if it appears prosaic at first glance.

Knives wrote:B.) My "view" is based on what we see in the show (in other words "evidence"). Your view (placed in bold) is based on a personal belief that Rei couldn't handle the strain (which has no bearing whatsoever in the show [in other words, "unsubstantiated opinion"]).

Your view is predicated upon the assumption that what we see on screen is a literal representation of what is 'really' happening. If you can watch NGE without ever understanding that sometimes what is shown on screen is not quite a representation of objective reality, then I suggest that you go back and watch it again. My recommendations would be #20 and #26 in particular. If you still believe that everything that you see on screen is a representation of objective reality, then I would be fascinated to hear your reasoning.

Knives wrote:I don't think you should be one to start talking about or asking for proof when it's right there in front of your eyes and your own theory has no support whatsoever other than your personal belief that Rei couldn't handle the strain.

Very well, I am no longer asking for anything, proof or otherwise. I'm relatively satisfied with the theory that explains these scenes for me. Just in the interests of accuracy, I don't think it is correct for you to refer to it as my theory. I don't know whether Reichu is the originator, or if it was someone else, but I don't wish to take the credit (or blame ) for this idea. I merely happen to agree with it.

In regards of the matter of proof, you may notice me admitting in a previous post that there is no proof either way. You may argue the 'in front of your eyes defense as much as you wish, but I believe that the non-literal representations that I have pointed out to you in #20 & #26, to name but two relevant episodes, thoroughly demolish the concept that what we see on screen must always be taken literally.

Speculation, sure. But then, so is suggesting that what we clearly see as happening is in fact not happening at all.

Fine. I'm just about done here. You are, of course, free to believe what you choose, but don't expect me to believe that everything seen on screen is the literal representation of reality. Not in the light of things like the instrumentality sequence, and the mind-trip Shinji experiences during his hyper-synchronisation with Shogouki.

Knives, I believe this is what is called an impasse. I can't convince you, and you can't convince me. Shall we call it quits, or will you choose to pursue this further? I have admitted that there is no conclusive proof, so it's not as though I am presenting this as some kind of victory for me.

Originally posted on: 14-Nov-2004, 16:01 GMT

Hmm, why didn't anyone mention A.T. Fields in the first place? I suppose that makes allowances for the body receiving otherwise impossible types of damage out of nowhere.

Regarding the whole "perceived" vs. "real" deal -- as I mentioned earlier, the "Armi-veins" on both Shinji and Rei are apparently gone after the battle. One could draw any number of conclusions from this, though.

Soluzar wrote:To the best of my knowledge, there have been only two occasions on which any of the pilots have acheived, what for want of a better term, lets call hyper-synchronisation with their Eva. I am thinking of Shinji and Sho, following the Zeruel incident, and Asuka and Nigouki, following the Harpy fight. I don't recall any others, but experience tells me not to rely on my memory too much.

Shinji gets the melt-down (again!) after EVA-01 is merged with the Spear in episode #26'. I guess after you've done it once, getting a 400% becomes second nature, regardless of whether or not you are actually doing any piloting whatsoever.

Mr. Tines wrote:When she is having to map an injury sustained between her upper left eye and lower left eye onto a human face. I'm not sure we'd notice an exit wound with her hair in the way.

Were it actually there, Asuka should at least have been agonizingly clutching the back of her head. And, to repeat myself, the massive injuries sustained by Kyoko to the braincase and the brain itself are marvelously ignored by Asuka.

Mr. Tines wrote:In the latter case, at least, that's the plug-suit doing its job.

I hadn't considered that maybe the suit was "holding her guts in" -- but I doubt it, personally. That's kind of like saying that her suit would have held her arm together, as well -- isn't it?

For those in doubt about whether it is her actual eye or just the eye region, the script seems to be pretty implicit about it: "Clutching her left eye", "Blood is flowing from her left eye", etc.

Originally posted on: 14-Nov-2004, 17:06 GMT

Reichu wrote:First off, there is no such thing as "berserk mode". Using the term "berserk" or "berserker" in reference to the Evas is a liberty taken with translation that English-speaking fans have run wild with. In the original Japanese, they simple say bousou, or "out of control", "running wild", etc. Ritsuko says this when EVA-01 goes ballistic in episode #02 (but is still connected to a power source), and Hyuga uses it in #25' when EVA-02 starts moving without power.

I mentioned this earlier with regards to Asuka and EVA-02:



I personally think that the idea that Asuka is in TOTAL control to be a bit of a fallacy. She and Kyoko are "working together", for lack of a better term.

I should point out, also, that Asuka does not bleed as a result of Kyoko being gutted. She simply clutches her abdomen with one hand and her left eye with the other. No physical damage manifests. I would post pictures, but they're all too crappy to be very useful...

If the bleeding eye is simply a result of trauma and is not supposed to "mirror" Kyoko's wounds... perhaps it might be possible to pull out the old theory that Asuka simply imagines her arm being split in half and it does not actually happen. Depends on how much one wants to read into the fact that no details are shown of the cross-section of Asuka's arm, whereas the artists go wild with this sort of stuff when drawing Kyoko and the damaged harpies.



I feel very much the same way whenever Mr. Tines makes a post. Hell, even if I understand all of the individual words, I still feel like I'm translating from another language.

If she did only imagined her arm spilting, then how would that kill her? You could argue that when MP's took Eva-02 into the air and ate her, she died then, but that doesn't seem likely, seeing how everyone died a special death of some kind in EoE.;This is why I originaly said that only the SoL could cause Asuka to bleed(for whatever reason), and the reason is I thought is because her guts did not spill out. What if they hit her with one of those large blade things (and it doesn't turn into the spear) and jamed it in Eva-02's face? I don't believe that Asuka would start bleeding, she would just feel that pain. As for her getting hit in the eye only, I think that would have been for ethier one of these two reasons:
1. The spear is HUGE. The space betwteen the holes would not have fit on her head, even as a phsical manifistacion from Eva, therefore she would only get the bottom peicering, which was on her(Asika's) eye.
2. They wanted to prolong Asuka's suffering in order to show Eva going berserk.They wnted her arm to spilt as a way of shocking those who watched.(IMO) I think that is the more artistic choice or maybe Anno wanted it, and the artists did not take into consideration that their was no synch-rate when she was being "guted". I prefer this way rather then seeing her with two holes in her head at the end of movie. I'm gonna draw that some time and see what it looks like. BTW, look at the cover of the EoE box. You see the back of Asuka's head. There is no bandage nor hole there. The spear never went through her head, aparently.
Edit: I doubt it's under her hair, even if the bandage covering her eye is.

Originally posted on: 14-Nov-2004, 17:34 GMT

Reichu wrote:Were it actually there, Asuka should at least have been agonizingly clutching the back of her head.

She does only have a finite number of hands to play with.

Reichu wrote:And, to repeat myself, the massive injuries sustained by Kyoko to the braincase and the brain itself are marvelously ignored by Asuka.

I hadn't considered that maybe the suit was "holding her guts in" -- but I doubt it, personally. That's kind of like saying that her suit would have held her arm together, as well -- isn't it?

Good points. Oh well, time for another go round to try and pose an hypothesis that will fit more of the data.

Originally posted on: 14-Nov-2004, 17:46 GMT

Mr. Tines wrote:She does only have a finite number of hands to play with.

First time she clutches her eye, the other hand is free.



(Too lazy to upload the clean screenshot, since my "use" of it above was already online.)

Magami, regarding some of the point you brought up, I don't see why the Spear damage from Kyoko COULDN'T have been accurately "transposed" onto Asuka's head. After doodling with my light pen, here's what I get:



(The Spear perspective isn't supposed to be accurate, BTW. I'm "teh sux0rz" at perspective.)

Originally posted on: 14-Nov-2004, 18:45 GMT

Hmm, why didn't anyone mention A.T. Fields in the first place? I suppose that makes allowances for the body receiving otherwise impossible types of damage out of nowhere.

I thought I did, but my example of Rei was that of totally different nature.

I thought the difference between her arm splitting and her body remaing entact is probably due to what caused the damage--spear vs eva--or just simply due to her sync rate getting so high after eva 02 going berserk (than again, is it confirmed that her head recieved damage from the initial spear or no?).

Originally posted on: 14-Nov-2004, 19:03 GMT

Well, like I said, they made Asuka's eye bleed, and we'll just have to accept that(I forgot the spear ends kinda came together like that). Nice doodle!

Originally posted on: 14-Nov-2004, 19:17 GMT

Magami No ER wrote:Well, like I said, hey made Asuka's eye bleed, and we'll just have to accept that(I forgot the spear ends kinda came together like that). Nice doodle!

what do you mean when you said "hey" caused the bleeding?

Originally posted on: 14-Nov-2004, 19:22 GMT

I abosoluty suck at proofreading today I'm fixing it.

Originally posted on: 14-Nov-2004, 19:51 GMT

Soluzar wrote:That is quite ridiculous. In the first place, there's no need for such a metaphor, that facet of his personality is explored thoroughly through other narrative devices. In the second place, there's no reason at all to suppose that he is not wearing some variety of spectacles.

... "That is quite ridiculous"
That's what I was getting at.
The thought is ridiculous.
"There's no need for such a metaphor."
I can say the same in regards to your argument. Everything you stated in this quoted text is exactly my response to this so-called "theory" of "visual-representation."

Soluzar wrote:If you intend to discredit the theory, I suggest you do better than that.

I'll be the first to admit (exaggerating) that it's difficult to "discredit" a "theory" that based entirely on personal speculation in regards to a fictional character's stamina.
Since it's based solely on how you and others feel about how much the pilot can handle, and based not on any scientific, series-specific or otherwise measurable evidence, then there's no way to "discredit" it because it's all based in imagination, personal preference and blind-eyes to what's being shown.

Soluzar wrote:Your view is predicated upon the assumption that what we see on screen is a literal representation of what is 'really' happening.

When did I say that?
Oh, that's right. I didn't .

Soluzar wrote:My recommendations would be #20 and #26 in particular.

The difference between these episodes (the scenes therein) and the scenes under particular discussion, is that it's clear what we're looking at is either reality or "unreality" (whatever you want to call it). Point to a scene in which it is clear that these two lines cross (that is to say, where the "unreality" crosses into the reality).

If you want to argue that the distinct differences between "unreality" and reality aren't present, then we can examine that (though it would take a lot of effort). Simply put "unreality" is often (if not always) commented as being such by one of the characters (usually by Shinji). And so the distinction between the two is clear.

I argue the distinction in the case of this scene is a clear case of reality.
If you wish to argue that the lines between unreality and reality cross here, you'll have to provide some damn good evidence.

Soluzar wrote:Very well, I am no longer asking for anything, proof or otherwise. I'm relatively satisfied with the theory that explains these scenes for me . . . I merely happen to agree with it.

... Talk about "in the interests of accuracy" (quoted Soluzar) ...
I can be satisfied with theories that the earth is flat ... doesn't mean it's right.
And beyond that, when evidence starts coming my way to prove it may be otherwise, I have two options:
A.) Listen to it (in the interests of accuracy and understanding).
B.) Ignore it (in the interests of being relatively satisfied).
>EDIT
In the sense that what I'm hearing is you feel that were there to be real physical consequences to the pain felt by the mind (which again, does happen in reality) makes things complicated.
Similarly, in regards to this example of the flat earth:
Adding a third dimension makes it complicated (2D is so much easier), but that doesn't make it wrong.
>End EDIT

Soluzar wrote:I believe that the non-literal representations that I have pointed out to you in #20 & #26, to name but two relevant episodes, thoroughly demolish the concept that what we see on screen must always be taken literally.

And I agree with you. But again, those scenes which are not to be taken literally are always clear and distinct as "unreality."

Soluzar wrote:but don't expect me to believe that everything seen on screen is the literal representation of reality. Not in the light of things like the instrumentality sequence, and the mind-trip Shinji experiences during his hyper-synchronisation with Shogouki.

Again .. simply put, I never said this. But this scene is clear as reality.

Soluzar wrote:Knives, I believe this is what is called an impasse. I can't convince you, and you can't convince me.

It's only an impasse if one of us is too close-minded to the other's defense.

But as you stated:

Soluzar wrote:I have admitted that there is no conclusive proof

It will be hard to convince me if you have no defense.
I, on the other hand, have a defense.
Again, it's only an impasse if one of us is close-minded to the other.
I'm open to hearing a defense.
You have none.
I presented my defense.
You reply you can't be convinced, while offering nothing in return except claiming I said things I didn't say.
I won't spell it out any further.

Originally posted on: 14-Nov-2004, 22:33 GMT

[spooky voice]Kniiiivesss.... Post #47 calls your name[/spooky voice]

And, hey, that "transposition of damage" doodle took away 30 minutes of my life! And no one besides Magami so much as noticed it!

Originally posted on: 14-Nov-2004, 22:42 GMT

Reichu wrote:[spooky voice]Kniiiivesss.... Post #47 calls your name[/spooky voice]

I was going to respond to a couple points, but completely forgot in my rant with Soluzar

Reichu wrote:Hmm, why didn't anyone mention A.T. Fields in the first place? I suppose that makes allowances for the body receiving otherwise impossible types of damage out of nowhere.

I like this little system we have, Reichu.
I state what I take as being obvious, and you point out good solid support for it. While I'm not sure you're convinced either way, this does help the argument that physical damage can indeed be occurring.

Reichu wrote:And, hey, that "transposition of damage" doodle took away 30 minutes of my life! And no one besides Magami so much as noticed it!

It's a beautiful doodle and much appreciated. But still, the blade is awfully close to her eye region.

And in regards to that:

Reichu wrote:For those in doubt about whether it is her actual eye or just the eye region, the script seems to be pretty implicit about it: "Clutching her left eye", "Blood is flowing from her left eye", etc.

I don't know the language, but didn't we say in other posts that the Japanese have issue with, for instance, foot and leg, and hand and arm ... could it be the case here too?
Or would you rather the script have said "clutching her left-forehead region" ... a little wordy if you ask me .

Originally posted on: 14-Nov-2004, 23:08 GMT

Knives wrote:... "That is quite ridiculous"
That's what I was getting at.
The thought is ridiculous.

I meant that the comparison is ridiculous, not the suggestion. I'm more than willing to consider Gendo's spectacles as the vehicle for a metaphor, and I'm even willing to consider that they might not exist, assuming of course that there is a compelling reason to do so.

Knives wrote:"There's no need for such a metaphor."
I can say the same in regards to your argument. Everything you stated in this quoted text is exactly my response to this so-called "theory" of "visual-representation."

You could say that there's no need for such a metaphor, but I would say that to do so is to ignore the mult-layered nature of NGE. Also, I would take issue with your use of the phrase 'so-called "theory"'. It is a theory, nothing more. If I can prove it, then it becomes accepted. If it is disproved, it becomes discredited. But it is still a theory.

Knives wrote:I'll be the first to admit (exaggerating) that it's difficult to "discredit" a "theory" that based entirely on personal speculation in regards to a fictional character's stamina.
Since it's based solely on how you and others feel about how much the pilot can handle, and based not on any scientific, series-specific or otherwise measurable evidence, then there's no way to "discredit" it because it's all based in imagination, personal preference and blind-eyes to what's being shown.

To my mind, it is your eyes which are blind to the fact that visual media presentations often use non-literal representation of a subjective reality, in order to add an extra narrative dimension to a show. Hence, why should we blindly trust what is shown upon the screen, without examination. I appreciate that some of the indicators in this matter are subjective in nature, and cannot be proved, but the primary test of a theory is that it take all the evidence into account. It does, whether you agree with it or not.

Knives wrote: When did I say that?
Oh, that's right. I didn't .

Knives wrote:My "view" is based on what we see in the show

Knives wrote:I don't think you should be one to start talking about or asking for proof when it's right there in front of your eyes

Oh didn't you? I suppose that you never did say it right out, but your entire argument so far has been predicated on the assumption that in the scenes under discussion are literal visual representation of what is actually happening to the character. Sophistry. You have based your entire argument upon this notion, and I believe those two 'sound bites' above give a fairly clear indication of your general opinion on this matter. They aren't as clear as I'd like, they are the best I can get.

If these two quotes, and the context that surrounds them in the thread do not add up to the summary of your views that I made, then I apologise for misrepresenting you, as it was not my intention.

Knives wrote:The difference between these episodes (the scenes therein) and the scenes under particular discussion, is that it's clear what we're looking at is either reality or "unreality" (whatever you want to call it). Point to a scene in which it is clear that these two lines cross (that is to say, where the "unreality" crosses into the reality).

Well, I would say that any scene where we are presented with the view from the entry plug, but that only works in accordance with the theory.

Knives wrote:If you want to argue that the distinct differences between "unreality" and reality aren't present, then we can examine that (though it would take a lot of effort). Simply put "unreality" is often (if not always) commented as being such by one of the characters (usually by Shinji). And so the distinction between the two is clear.

I'm game if you are. I'm doing a run-through of the DVDs right now, at any rate, so while it might take me a while to find what I need, if anything that prooves my case is there, then I'll find it soon enough.

Knives wrote:I argue the distinction in the case of this scene is a clear case of reality.
If you wish to argue that the lines between unreality and reality cross here, you'll have to provide some damn good evidence.

That's not strictly speaking what I have argued. I merely argue that in any[/u] it is possible to insert non-literal visual representations, in order to smooth the narrative flow. It is a narrative device, commonly used, and it does not mean that the line between 'reality' and 'unreality has been breached. It merely means that sometimes when you see something, what you see is not really there, but it is presented in order to help you understand what is going on in the scene. It's a common enough technique. It's harldy limited to NGE.

Knives wrote:... Talk about "in the interests of accuracy" (quoted Soluzar) ...

Ok, now you're apparently misrepresenting me. That quote of mine is taken out of context, and has been used to give a somewhat false impression of my posts thus far. I was merely attempting to disclaim any authorship of the theory, in the belief that someone else had come up with it. That is all I intended it to mean. Kindly do not misrepresent me.

Knives wrote:I can be satisfied with theories that the earth is flat ... doesn't mean it's right.
And beyond that, when evidence starts coming my way to prove it may be otherwise, I have two options:
A.) Listen to it (in the interests of accuracy and understanding).
B.) Ignore it (in the interests of being relatively satisfied).

You missed C.) Listen, and fail to be convinced. That's the option I'm taking on your interpretations of these scenes.

Knives wrote:And I agree with you. But again, those scenes which are not to be taken literally are always clear and distinct as "unreality."

That's your assumption. That's all it is. An assumption, that there are no scenes not intended to be taken 100% literally that are not clearly and distincly signposted as such. As an assumption, it can have no more validity than the equal and opposite one on my side or the argument.

Knives wrote:Again .. simply put, I never said this. But this scene is clear as reality.

No offence meant, hopefully none taken. I was merely hoping to put you in mind of the types of imagery, and differeng visual representation styles that Anno has employed, in the hope that it might shed some light on what I am trying to get across.

Knives wrote:It's only an impasse if one of us is too close-minded to the other's defense.

Or if both of us are close-minded! I would suggest that in as much as I have rejected your views out of hand, you have equally rejected mine. We each have what we perceive as valid reasons. Is that really close-mindedness?

Knives wrote:I'm open to hearing a defense.

Very well. Assuming you are still open to hearing a defense, then given time to review the relevant information, I will take up the challenge, if you will continue to present the counter-argument. Expect to see more from me later.

Oh, Knives... I don't know which one of us started it, but can we please tune down the personal hostility towards each other a notch, starting with our next posts. I had no intention of misrepresenting you, whatever you might think. I'm passionate about this theory, though, and I won't let it go so easily. You didn't have to call the theory ridiculous, even if it does turn out to be unproveable.

Originally posted on: 14-Nov-2004, 23:48 GMT

For the record, Reichu, whose '"crazy" theory am I attempting to defend? Did you originate this one, or somebody else?

Originally posted on: 15-Nov-2004, 00:00 GMT

Soluzar wrote:Oh, Knives... I don't know which one of us started it, but can we please tune down the personal hostility towards each other a notch, starting with our next posts. I had no intention of misrepresenting you, whatever you might think. I'm passionate about this theory, though, and I won't let it go so easily. You didn't have to call the theory ridiculous, even if it does turn out to be unproveable.

I'm always open to being civil.

But theories are based in evidence.
Your only evidence is that other media (other sources) use visual-representation, so therefore it is not out of the question for Eva to do the same.
While I agree with you (that is to say, that it is not out of the question for Eva to use visual-representation [a la Instrumentality]), I disagree that this is necessarily one of those places.

Furthermore: in regards to the Gendo/no-glasses "theory", you say there's no need for such a visual-representation. I say the same for the scenes under discussion. There is no such need for it and it ignores the basic operation of the Eva<-->Pilot dichotomy.

I'm glad you're at least going to do some looking into the issue, because as I've said, so far your argument is based on nothing more than a feeling that visual-representation is common in other media, therefore must be taking place here (how you come by that logic, I'll never be able to fathom).

Soluzar wrote:For the record, Reichu, whose '"crazy" theory am I attempting to defend? Did you originate this one, or somebody else?

Indeed — whose theory is this? Let him or her come forth and defend it, 'cause poor Soluzar has to deal with Knives' harsh language and demand for solid evidence .

Originally posted on: 15-Nov-2004, 00:58 GMT