Shounen Y - Vol. 4 Ch. 13 - Undressing
- Thread starter MangaDex
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2020
- Messages
- 223
It's been said before. The author's/drawer's choice of separating chapters is weird. We have it go from the stay of execution game to multiple types of word games (shiratori/word chain and then the skeleton cross-word puzzle). Easily could've been two chapters. I get that there are issues with how this is published in a magazine that requires a certain length. It's still a weird way to do things here.
Starting from the top, what the hell kind of law is that, where fraud only occurs when the victim realizes that they've been deceived? I don't know if that's an accurate description of the law in Japan, but that's absolute shit if true. Pathetic if true. I've read analyses on how Japan's overall legal system is not very good considering its wealth, but that's taking it to a new low if true.
Finally, I'm sorry, but it looks like these two are never going to learn. They've been through how many supernatural events that endanger their lives at this point? And yet they're still going around approaching random suspicious people. That's not even that bad. The worst part here is that they continue to accept these games without even asking for the rules to be explained. Oh, it's a crossword puzzle? Oh, I know exactly how it's played. Doesn't matter that I just saw a cat missing its body and my friend's face missing. I'm not going to ask for any rules like what happens if I guess wrong. Nope.
And lastly, 2013 and a collapsible chalkboard? With a built-in timer? Okay. Rule of cool only gets you so far.
Starting from the top, what the hell kind of law is that, where fraud only occurs when the victim realizes that they've been deceived? I don't know if that's an accurate description of the law in Japan, but that's absolute shit if true. Pathetic if true. I've read analyses on how Japan's overall legal system is not very good considering its wealth, but that's taking it to a new low if true.
Finally, I'm sorry, but it looks like these two are never going to learn. They've been through how many supernatural events that endanger their lives at this point? And yet they're still going around approaching random suspicious people. That's not even that bad. The worst part here is that they continue to accept these games without even asking for the rules to be explained. Oh, it's a crossword puzzle? Oh, I know exactly how it's played. Doesn't matter that I just saw a cat missing its body and my friend's face missing. I'm not going to ask for any rules like what happens if I guess wrong. Nope.
And lastly, 2013 and a collapsible chalkboard? With a built-in timer? Okay. Rule of cool only gets you so far.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2018
- Messages
- 5,206
>star trek
This guy, he went there for the -su.
This guy, he went there for the -su.
Kendama
Power Uploader
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2018
- Messages
- 927
I think the criticism is unwarranted, at least some of it.
In the previous games, they asked plenty of questions. In this one, they didn't know it would be a game of choices because for the first time, the player wasn't someone directly implicated in the classroom soul-slipping incident. Up to now, they didn't have a reason to believe anyone could be a "god", so it makes sense for them not to be on their guard with people who aren't connected with class 2-B or the school.
There's also the fact that Kurose was pretty detailed in outlining the rules before beginning, and afterwards the matter of what happens if a word is guessed wrong is moot, because without his own kidneys and Yuzuru's face also missing, Tasuku has no choice but to play, come what may.
As for the crime of fraud… I actually thought about that and I think the question is similar to the philosophical question of "does a falling tree in the forest make a sound if there's nobody to listen to it?". I think direct experience is a component of some crimes, like murder or property damage (when the victim is the experiencer) and crossing on the red (when the criminal is the experiencer). But in others, the direct experience is linked to awareness, like the crime of fraud. A crime implies an untoward consequence and entrenchment on someone else's rights (to life, to property etc.), but in the case of fraud, consequences have to be acknowledged as untoward, or the victim won't experience the injustice. If you cheat someone out of their house, the consequence is pretty obvious, but if you tell a white lie to your mother about spending lunch money on flowers for your girlfriend, then the cheated party may never experience any consequence unless they become aware they were cheated. It seems to me that Tasuku's gamble wasn't a far-fetched one.
In the previous games, they asked plenty of questions. In this one, they didn't know it would be a game of choices because for the first time, the player wasn't someone directly implicated in the classroom soul-slipping incident. Up to now, they didn't have a reason to believe anyone could be a "god", so it makes sense for them not to be on their guard with people who aren't connected with class 2-B or the school.
There's also the fact that Kurose was pretty detailed in outlining the rules before beginning, and afterwards the matter of what happens if a word is guessed wrong is moot, because without his own kidneys and Yuzuru's face also missing, Tasuku has no choice but to play, come what may.
As for the crime of fraud… I actually thought about that and I think the question is similar to the philosophical question of "does a falling tree in the forest make a sound if there's nobody to listen to it?". I think direct experience is a component of some crimes, like murder or property damage (when the victim is the experiencer) and crossing on the red (when the criminal is the experiencer). But in others, the direct experience is linked to awareness, like the crime of fraud. A crime implies an untoward consequence and entrenchment on someone else's rights (to life, to property etc.), but in the case of fraud, consequences have to be acknowledged as untoward, or the victim won't experience the injustice. If you cheat someone out of their house, the consequence is pretty obvious, but if you tell a white lie to your mother about spending lunch money on flowers for your girlfriend, then the cheated party may never experience any consequence unless they become aware they were cheated. It seems to me that Tasuku's gamble wasn't a far-fetched one.
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2020
- Messages
- 1,244
@Kendama I'm the same person who made the previous statements. I know I'm eight months late, but I hadn't seen your comment before, and I know your the translator, so you'd likely be around.
I'll start with the easy issue of fraud. To be perfectly frank, the real-world implications of such a law, where fraud only exists once the deceived person realizes the deceit, is absolutely horrible. It would be broken as hell in real life. Here's a very basic thing. Imagine I tricked an elderly person out of their life savings in some kind of investment scheme. The elderly person dies, none the wiser. The elderly person's estate administrator finds out after doing due diligence. No crime because the person who was actually tricked never found out. You can't just say that the victim is now the administrator because the administrator doesn't have an interest in the estate (not necessarily). Imagine the administrator is just a friend of the deceased who is carrying out the will but isn't a beneficiary. Maybe the will was supposed to be that all the deceased person's belongings go to the state/government. Then the government is the victim here? Where the government has an interest in preventing something, it should just be a straight crime.
Okay, that was a lot of wordiness to get at the conclusion that there are actually real-world, legal implications to such an absolutely stupid law. Yeah, there's a philosophical component, but it goes beyond that.
As far as the other part, I stand by at least some of it. Yeah, they didn't know that it was a game to start with, but once they realized, they (well, Yamazaki, since only he could speak) should've asked more questions. Yes, he has no choice but to play. The best choice, then, would be to play WELL. Gathering information is necessary. You say that Kurose was pretty detailed? This is literally a guessing game. It's a perfectly reasonable and straightforward question to ask "what happens if I guess wrong?" Like, I get that nothing came of that issue, but it's a very logical thing to ask. It's just showing that they're not asking a lot of questions. They're being kind of passive.
I'll start with the easy issue of fraud. To be perfectly frank, the real-world implications of such a law, where fraud only exists once the deceived person realizes the deceit, is absolutely horrible. It would be broken as hell in real life. Here's a very basic thing. Imagine I tricked an elderly person out of their life savings in some kind of investment scheme. The elderly person dies, none the wiser. The elderly person's estate administrator finds out after doing due diligence. No crime because the person who was actually tricked never found out. You can't just say that the victim is now the administrator because the administrator doesn't have an interest in the estate (not necessarily). Imagine the administrator is just a friend of the deceased who is carrying out the will but isn't a beneficiary. Maybe the will was supposed to be that all the deceased person's belongings go to the state/government. Then the government is the victim here? Where the government has an interest in preventing something, it should just be a straight crime.
Okay, that was a lot of wordiness to get at the conclusion that there are actually real-world, legal implications to such an absolutely stupid law. Yeah, there's a philosophical component, but it goes beyond that.
As far as the other part, I stand by at least some of it. Yeah, they didn't know that it was a game to start with, but once they realized, they (well, Yamazaki, since only he could speak) should've asked more questions. Yes, he has no choice but to play. The best choice, then, would be to play WELL. Gathering information is necessary. You say that Kurose was pretty detailed? This is literally a guessing game. It's a perfectly reasonable and straightforward question to ask "what happens if I guess wrong?" Like, I get that nothing came of that issue, but it's a very logical thing to ask. It's just showing that they're not asking a lot of questions. They're being kind of passive.
