Theory and Analysis Talk:Ritsuko's Interrogation

From EvaWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

I look forward to this; can you give me a link to the original theory thread?--V 19:03, 28 February 2008 (PST)

Yes: [1]

He starts by reviewing everything we know about Ritsuko's personality, so it takes a little while to get to the actual evidence. For some background on what set him on the path to these conclusions, you should also see his thread on Gendo's silent words, where he suggests that Gendo was likely denying complicity in the interrogation. (An idea of mine that I never acted upon.) He links to this thread on the first page of the interrogation thread. -- thewayneiac 19:56 EST. Feb. 29, 2008

Quick comment on Ritsuko's cat figurines

I'm not sure how it fits into this theory and analysis page, but I thought it was worth-noting black cats signify good luck in Japan (and of course, the color white represents death, if that means anything here). Sorry if this isn't what the discussion page is for, I'm new to this forum and new to wikis in general. Anyone have any ideas? ciptochat 5:21 CST. Mar. 6, 2015

That's something I hadn't thought about - although white is associated with death in Japan, it's also associated with brides. Much like in the west, in Japan bridegrooms are traditionally dressed in black and the brides are entirely in white. --UrsusArctos (talk) 12:11, 7 March 2015 (EST)

Started at last

Thank you, Deepak, for starting this very important page; it should have been done long ago. It's going to take quite a bit of cleanup, of course, to meet the Wiki standards. I've got a start on it. It needs to be re-written to remove the informal tone and first person references of the forum thread. thewayneiac 9:05 PM EDT. Aug. 24, 2011

Did anybody finish the analysis to include when Ritsuko took Shinji down to see the Rei clones. Some people have done parts in that thread but is there a definitive one? Deepak 8:29 AM EDT. Aug. 27, 2011

Shin-seiki left it unfinished and after a long while moved on to the "Gendo's Silent Words" thread instead. We'll probably have to wing it, as it's difficult to get him motivated. If he won't finish it himself, I can at least ask him what he had in mind. thewayneiac 11:49 AM EDT. Aug. 27, 2011

O.K., I've done most of the re-writing on what's already here. I'm going to start bugging Shin-seiki to look it over and make suggestions on how to end it. I'll also have to add the opposition case, or two or three people will raise bloody hell on the forum. thewayneiac 4:59 PM EDT. aug. 30, 2011

"Like you did that time"

I just reverted an edit by someguy. IMO it's much more likely that she's refering to her abuse by Seele than some unrelated occasion where Gendo abused her. Also, that possibility is part of the opposition argument; I'm going to address it when I do that section of the article. [[User:The wayneiac|thewayneiac| 12:12 PM EDT. Sept. 01, 2011

"Like you did that time." This line is said to Gendo, which means he is the one who had his way with her. Do you think Gendo is the nameless Seele agent who raped her before the interrogation? I don't think there is even any room for interpretation that Gendo is the one who had his way with her; this the definition of the word "you." Someguy 02:17, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I can't agree. There's no context for her to bring up an unrelated incident here. There's no prior indication that their relationship is anything but consensual. Instead, it's been implied that she's wanted Gendo since high school. She's saying that she holds Gendo responsible for her abuse by Seele because he either knew or should have known what they would do. In her mind he is effectively her abuser. In my view it violates Occam to assume she is refering to some other abusive episode we don't know about rather than the one we already do know about. It also makes more sense from a story telling point of view for her to be refering to an incident we already know about.
Of course, your interpretation is far from out of the question, it's always stated in the counter-argument and I always intended to include it. It just seems the less likely interpretation.
Anyway, a Wiki is a collaborative effort; there's a place for both interpretations. The readers can decide which is valid. --thewayeiac 11:56 A.M. EDT. Sept 02, 2011
This is not a matter of interpretation. You have somehow fundementally misunderstood the context and subject of the sentence. She is speaking to Gendo, in response to a question he asked her. There is no one else in the room. She says "Because I'm no longer happy, even when you make love to me. Why don't you just do whatever you want to my body!? Like you did that time!" You are effectively stating Gendo raped her for Seele's benefit, because it is wrong to conclude "you" is not Gendo. What exactly "whatever you want" is open to interpretation, but the subject is not.
There's no prior indication their relationship is anything. This is the first scene that explicitly states they have a sexual relationship. If she is following in her mother's footsteps, she is almost using herself, forcing herself upon Gendo who passively accepts the relationship but does not share the same feelings. We do not "know" a rape has occured any more than we know Gendo abused her at some point (other than her explicitly stating that he did in this scene). Citing Occam's Razor in this circumstance is completely wrong; you are choosing to ignore the meaning of the word "you" for a considerably more convoluted explanation.
I don't particularly care if you personally choose to "interpret" the sentence in this manner, but to present it as solid evidence which could confuse readers who do not remember the scene is a mistake. It's good to have the counterpoint, but there shouldn't need to be a counterpoint, because this shouldn't be mentioned, because it's wrong. There are other points which arguably support she was raped; you should not bring a false point into the mix. Someguy 19:58, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

But it is a matter of interpretation. Certainly Gendo is the "you" in question, and the you in question has just caused Ritsuko's body to be violated by sending her to Seele. It is certainly valid to believe this is what she is refering to. Here's an exchange from a thread where this point was debated. It illustrates what I'm talking about:

honsou: Your boyfriend might abandon you on the side of the road and a gang of thugs might rape you. But at the end of that ordeal you wouldn't start working for the gang, you'd simply refuse to work with either.

thewayneiac: Suppose he abandons you on the side of the road knowing that there is a dangerous gang of thugs nearby? What would you do then?

Azathoth: A better analogy would be the gang of thugs come up to him and demand his money, and he says, "How about I give you my girlfriend instead."

Azathoth's analogy hits the nail right on the head. All it takes to justify this interpretation is for Ritsuko to think that Gendo deliberately put her in a position where she would be sexually assaulted.

btw It's not just my interpretation, it's a standard part of the argument. The objections have always come from those who adamantly oppose the theory. It's supporters always list it as part of the evidence. The theory should be stated completely and it's weaknessess pointed out in the refutation.

Also, you really shouldn't complain about my logic when you set up straw men and claim that under this interpretation Seele must have summoned Gendo to assault Ritsuko. It plainly means no such thing. Lets keep this debate civil. --thewayneiac 4:44 PM EDT. Sept. 02 2011

If you take her words literally together with your conclusion, it is not a straw man argument, but as you are taking her meaning very liberally, it does appear so. I see what you are thinking, and if she was raped she likely feels Gendo is responsible, but the wording of the dialog does not support this is what she is saying, and they could have worded it any other way. "That time" is admittedly vague, but if Gendo sexually abused her, or was just rough with her, at only one time, why would she bother being more specific about when this occured?
Also, there is the wording "whatever you want", coupled with your analogy to giving one's girlfriend over to a gang to be raped - would Gendo have expected her to be raped? Misato wasn't raped. Why would Ritsuko think Gendo expected or wanted her to be raped and used against him? "Gendo sold me out for interrogation" is a reasonable feeling there, but "Gendo sent me to be raped" is quite the leap, even in an emotionally compromised state. The gang analogy is weak; a more appropriate analogy would be if the police asked to interview your adopted child, but you instead had them interview your wife, and then they raped her.
IIRC this is the only time when we are given any information on their sexual relationship. Thus all of the information we are ever to know about it is given in this scene. As there is a difference between "making love to" and "having one's way with", Anno must have wanted the audience to know their sexual history contains both scenarios; this gives a little more insight into the relationship between them. The fact that Gendo "did what he wanted" with Ritsuko at some point does not necessarily suggest the act was not consensual; she may have offered him the opportunity to do so. This is a concept that appears from time to time in anime; a female character, desparately wanting a male character, offers to let him have his way with her, in hope this blanket offering will make him more likely to accept.
We could even surmise such an offer is how she started their sexual relationship, and Gendo, not having the morals of every male protagonist ever offered this choice, took her literally and was very rough. From that point, he probably kept the sexual relationship going as, with Naoko, it is an effective method of controlling her. If he is only sleeping with her to use her, but she desparately wants him, she might ignore the signs that he is going through the motions and pretending to "make love". When she finds out he sold her out, she must face the realization that his "love-making" lacks love; especially alongside her pattern of self-destructive behavior at this point in the series, she might want him to simply and abusively have his way with her, as this is a more honest action.
Then again, it's also possible, with the translation "do what you want to my body", that she is referring simply to him beating her, which would also be a notable bit of background between their characters.
Furthermore, I don't think this dialog would be necessary to support the conclusion she was raped. Gendo abusing her does not preclude Seele raping her; you could even argue it desensitized her to being sexually abused. Someguy 23:11, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
It's a straw man because you are accusing me of saying something ridiculous that I didn't say. Gendo didn't know she would be raped; his questioning her in Ep. 24 demonstrates that. The point is that he should have known simply because he knew who he was dealing with. He was really naive to think Ritsuko could stand up to a Seele interrogation. Your police analogy doesn't work; the Gestapo would be a better comparison. Also, Misato is a bad comparison; she met with Seele in the same holograph room at Nerv HQ where Gendo and Fuyutsuki regularly meet them. She was never in custody. Fuyutsuki and Ritsuko were. That Fuyutsuki wasn't naked demonstrates that stripping people for interrogation isn't standard operating proceedure.
We're expending a tremendous amount of time on this one line. Wikis opperate by consensus and there's not going to be a consensus that the main article's interpretation should be removed. I certainly can't agree that this interpretation is flawed; you are quite simply mistaken about its validity. Why would she bring up an old incident instead of one that's fresh in her mind anyway? Anyway, both interpretations belong in the article.
Also, remember that you are being the absolutist here. I want both possibilities in the article, even though I disagree with one of them. You are saying "only my interpretation is valid and all others must be removed", not the right attitude on a collaborative Wiki.

--thewayneiac 9:00PM EDT. Sept. 02, 2011

I went over this with Shin-seiki and was reminded of something that I really should have remembered on my own. The translation we've been using has too many "yous" inserted by the translator. According to Sailor Star Dust the line is actually:
"Why not have your way with my body, like that time?"
There's actually no "you did" to designate who had his way with her at that time. Actually, there's no pronouns in the line at all; it just uses the verb for "having one's way". But you need to attach a pronoun to the verb to make a coherent sentence in English. Obviously "your way" is the only thing that makes sense. --thewayneiac 10:48 AM EDT. Sept. 03 2011
Why would she bring up a new incident but phrase it incomprehensibly? On the other hand:
I had looked at translation notes and on one site linked from the article, the translator (Reichu?) asserts that "like you did that time" is a "dead-on" translation, but does note that the previous sentence doesn't contain "you", though the notes were unclear whether it was one or both of the you's in that sentence that were implied. So you are suggesting the most literal translation is "why not have way with my body, like that time?"? (I realize just because this is a mess in English does not mean it is in the original Japanese, as the languages are extremely different).
I think translation difficulties are a more valid rationale (though they need to be addressed in the article instead of just changing the sentence to a translation that better supports your side). You really need to add some of the points you've brought up in this discussion to support that line being used as evidence she was raped, because the way the line is presented in the article at present is serving contrary to your purpose; while others who already know and agree with your interpretation might see that line and nod their heads, it's perhaps unreasonable to think the line will help for those who haven't gone through a similar discussion. Someguy 06:24, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, much to the frustration of translators, in Japanese you can leave out almost any part of speech provided what you're saying can be understood by another Japanese person. Indeed, the actual Japanese line is a mess in English and is unusable: "Why not (have ones way with) my body, like that time?" In English that verb must have a subject, and "have your way with" is obviously correct. Changing "Why not have your way..." to "Why don't you have your way..." is just a wording choice; the extra you is unneeded, but it doesn't change the meeting. Changing " that time" to " you did that time" is a bad choice because it adds more specificity than exists in the original.

This is very similar to the translation woes surrounding Asuka's final line in EOE: "Kimochi warui" just means "sick feeling". There's no subject, object, or verb there. Depending on the context it could mean: "I feel sick." "How disgusting." "You make me (feel) sick." "I have a sick feeling". "This makes me sick." ect. And when even the Japanese don't understand the context...

You're right, the translation issues deserve a mention. I'll add something. --thewayneiac 10:50 AM. EDT. Sept. 05, 2011

Cleaned Up

When I look at this page, I see a ton of valid arguments for both points. I'm not sure how much more we can "clean up" without potentially getting rid of useful data. Yes, there's a lot to wade through here, but all of it looks like information that is necessary to support this kind of two-sided argument that we have going on here. I nominate removal of the cleanup tag. --Nuclear Lunchbox (talk) 16:51, 7 April 2013 (PDT)