Rule of Rose Mysteries

See this YouTube video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3znGlfjOzo.

This is basically a video remake of my blog-post: What is Hoffman Saying as He Paws Diana?.

There’s voting! Please go and place your vote!

Does Diana sometimes emulate Hoffman?

Comment-maker on this site, Mokgrok, explores this question in her video.

I think it is a very well-made video, and Mokgrok’s observation that Diana’s touching of Amanda resembles Hoffman’s touching of Diana is a new and original observation.

See the video on YouTube here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfeOy8veZm4

(LATER NOTE: Mokgrok shut down her YouTube channel for some undisclosed reason)

Hopefully we’ll see more good videos from Mokgrok analyzing Rule of Rose.
~

Read the rest of this entry »

I wrote, in my Twentythird Month-iversary blog-post, that I expected to make a blog-post this month about the snowman that can be found in the Goat Sisters chapter of Rule of Rose.

The snowman can be found in the Freezing Compartment of the airship, and I decided to make a quick revisit to the Freezing Compartment, before writing up my theory, to make sure that I would describe the details of the scene accurately.

Scanning the scene, I noticed something that I had never noticed before. And suddenly everything that I thought I knew about the snowman changed. How did I miss this before? It is right out in the open in plain sight, and yet I had missed it. Surely somebody else must have seen this before now, I thought to myself. But if so, why has nobody ever made a comment about it on my blog, or on any Rule of Rose forum that I have ever frequented?
Read the rest of this entry »

In the Women’s Lavatory of the orphanage there are five stalls.

Let’s consider the stalls from right to left, from nearer the entrance of the lavatory to furthest away from the entrance of the lavatory.

54321

Nearest to the entrance of the lavatory is (1) a stall without a door, piled high with sacks filled with who-knows-what, and which has boards nailed across its door frame to block access. I’m going to ignore the mystery presented by this blocked-off lavatory stall in this blog-post.

One stall further away from the entrance of the lavatory is (2) the stall in which we see Diana and Meg together in the E3/pregame video (this is the scene during which Diana deliberately presses Meg’s finger into the thorn of a rose that Meg is offering to Diana, after which Diana sucks on Meg’s wounded finger—provided we believe the illustration on the game box showing Diana sucking on a finger: from the just the E3/pregame video itself we cannot see exactly what Diana is doing… she could could just be kissing the wounded finger).

This (2) is also the same lavatory stall in which Diana and Meg are talking to each other—during the “Bird of Happiness” chapter—while Jennifer is listening from (3) the adjacent stall (one stall further from the entrance).

(3) The adjacent lavatory stall from which Jennifer is listening, during the “Bird of Happiness” chapter, is the stall with the drawing of the red bird.

One stall further from the entrance, is (4) the stall into which Gregory pulls Jennifer during the E3/pregame video.

And there is one more stall (5) that is the furthest from the entrance of the lavatory.

I propose a hypothesis that these lavatory stalls are assigned (by the Aristocrat Club) as follows:
(2) The stall of the Duchess, Diana
(3) The stall of the Countess, Eleanor
(4) The stall of the Baroness, Meg
(5) The stall for all of the other girls
Read the rest of this entry »

In the “Bird of Happiness” chapter, when Jennifer has Brown follow the scent of the red feather, the path that Brown takes is marked, at first, by drawings of a red bird. These drawings have been made on corridor walls as if to represent the red bird flying down these corridors. It might be that there is the idea being conveyed that Jennifer is following the flying red bird.

Along the way, Jennifer can encounter Eleanor searching for the red bird. See my previous blog post: Eleanor in the Sector 9 Turbine Area During the “Bird of Happiness” .

Brown eventually comes to a halt shortly after entering the 3rd Passenger Corridor, where a trail of fallen, and falling, red feathers begins.

Is it a coincidence that the place in the corridor where Brown halts and barks is in the vicinity of the door to the Women’s Lavatory, and the end of the trail of feathers will also be a Women’s Lavatory?

The trail of feathers is made up of feathers too large to belong to the red bird, and there are far too many on the floor, and falling from above, to belong to any single bird.

What does it mean that the feathers are continuously falling from above? The impression I get is that it means that whatever happened to the red bird was very recent… the feathers haven’t even had sufficient time to have all hit the floor yet.

Jennifer can follow these feathers up the stairs, through the one-leaf clover door, into the 2nd passenger corridor, and to the door of a Women’s Lavatory.

Once inside the Women’s Lavatory the trail of feathers is much different. More realistic.

The feathers are now small enough to have come from the red bird. And there are only just a few feathers, not so many feathers that they couldn’t have come from a single bird. And there are some dark red drops along the path that look like blood that has dripped down to the floor.

I get the impression from this scene that the previous trail of over-sized and over-many feathers was a dream exaggeration of this trail that we see now, this trail of feathers being the truer and more realistic memory upon which the dream-exaggerated trail was built. (Yes, I know that we will learn in the “Once Upon A Time” chapter that the red bird was a doll and not a living bird… nonetheless, the impression given by this scene—in my opinion—is that we have transitioned from a fantasy exaggeration of a memory to a true—or truer—memory).
Read the rest of this entry »

RevenantChild asked, in the previous blog-post’s comment-thread:

At the pre-game opening, didn’t jennifer say to wendy that ” my name is joshua and i will serve you princess”-thingy? then why is joshua a bear? could he be a stand-in while the real “joshua” is somewhere?

The bear doll might well be a stand-in… but the issue is: for whom?

Wendy began her first letter to Jennifer by addressing it: “To Mr. Joshua, the bear in distress”.

At the end of “The Gingerbread House” chapter, Wendy chose to name the bear doll “Joshua”. Why?

Is the bear doll a stand-in for Jennifer?

Or does Wendy think of both Jennifer (whom she addressed as “my prince” in her letters) and the bear doll as a stand-in for the original Joshua, whom Wendy knew?

Might the original Joshua have been the Prince of the Aristocrat club? And was Joshua the Bear used as a stand-in Prince after the original Joshua died?  Did Wendy thereby keep Joshua’s death a secret from the Aristocrats, making up an excuse of some sort (such as feeling ill) for Joshua’s absence?

Did Wendy ever stand in for the original Prince Joshua (Gregory’s son) herself by pretending to be Prince Joshua? At the beginning of the “Unlucky Clover Field” chapter, Wendy-disguised-as-Joshua said “I am the Prince, and the Prince rules!” If the Prince was never anybody but Joshua the Bear, what is the meaning of that scene, and the scenes of Wendy-disguised as-Joshua sitting on the throne in the first chapter, and during the in-between-chapters times on the airship?  Did Wendy ever deceive the Aristocrats by disguising herself as Prince Joshua?

It seems to me that there are many possibilities to consider.

~

Read the rest of this entry »

The kitchen knife (an equipable weapon) is found, during the “Sir Peter” chapter of Rule of Rose, on the table in the Crew’s Quarters were Diana can often be found sitting. This area of the airship, like the dormitory in the orphanage, can be thought of as Diana’s special area.

The kitchen knife doesn’t look bloody on the table before Jennifer picks it up, nor does it appear bloody as she holds it, but looking at the kitchen knife in the inventory one can see that it is unmistakably very bloody. The blood is thick on the handle and a small area of the blade near the handle. The tip of the blade, and the majority of the blade (except for near the handle), looks shiny and clean. I don’t know how to explain that pattern of blood on the knife. Do you have any suggestions?

Read the rest of this entry »

~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~

~
~
~
~
In the web-page entitled Diana & Actaeon from The Classics Pages, I found some parts of the mythology of Diana (aka Artemis) which seemed to have a resonance with the story of Rule of Rose. Perhaps it is just coincidence, but perhaps there was an influence on the author(s) of Rule of Rose?

Some excerpts:

Diana (aka Artemis) was… virgin goddess… protectress of girls evolving from virgin to mother – and killer of women in childbirth.

If Clara became pregnant by Hoffman, I wonder how Diana felt about it.

~

At her temple at Brauron on the east coast of Attica (Vravrona) – and probably also at her sanctuary on the Acropolis in Athens – young pubescent girls from all over Attica took part in the strange ritual of “being a bear” – precise details are unclear, but there’s some evidence that they played at being men for part of the time

In Rule of Rose, we have, in respect to “Joshua”, both the idea of girl as “bear”, and the idea of girls playing at being male.

Read the rest of this entry »

I constructed a theory, to explain the dolls on the table in the Cell of Bliss, in my blog-posts:

The Cell of Bliss Mystery (part 1)
The Cell of Bliss Mystery (part 2)

By this theory, the dolls on the left side of the table represent Jennifer, Diana, Eleanor, Meg, and Amanda during the event shown to us at the end of “The Little Princess” chapter of Rule of Rose wherein Jennifer has water poured on her and goes into a coffin.

I think that the dolls on the table, because we see them depicted in the “Once Upon A Time” chapter when Jennifer’s memory has returned to her in a clear manner, should be something that actually existed during Jennifer’s forgotten past. Which means that, in my opinion, the water pouring incident in which Jennifer went into a coffin should be more than just a dream-event, it should also be something that occurred in some fashion during her forgotten past. My explanation for the context of this occurrence during Jennifer’s forgotten past is found in my blog-post:

The Mystery of Jennifer in the Coffin

By my theory, the dolls on the right side of the table represent a threat to Jennifer that she will be hanged if she doesn’t do something that is demanded of her by the Aristocrats.

During “The Funeral” chapter, we see a “gift of the month” warrant for Jennifer which shows her being hanged by the neck. The dolls on the right side of the table, showing a figure hanged by the neck, surrounded by “spooky things”, is—according to my theory—a depiction of the threat of that.

But could it be that, like the dolls on the left side of the table, the dolls on the right side of the table depict an event that actually occurred during Jennifer’s forgotten past?

Obviously, Jennifer herself was not hanged by the neck during her forgotten past, so, if it is not Jennifer that is shown hanging, who could it be?

We have recently been discussing the matter of whether or not Hoffman was hanged. See my blog-posts:

Was Mr. Hoffman Hanged? (Part 1)
Was Mr. Hoffman Hanged? (Part 2)

But let’s open up the discussion to include Martha and Clara as well. Could all of them have hanged?

Read the rest of this entry »

The theory that the “Sir Peter” storybook tells a story about Hoffman was introduced at this site by comment-maker RozenMaiden back in June of 2008.  I think RozenMaiden displayed a brilliant insight with that theory, and it deserves its own blog-posts on the subject. The text of the “Sir Peter” storybook is:

Sir Peter, Sir Peter, went out for a stroll. Sir Peter, Sir Peter, put in a cage, had to hold it in. Sir Peter, Sir Peter, needs to go right now, doesn’t want to sin. Sir Peter, Sir Peter, bagged and whisked away, before he found a toilet. Good-bye, Peter. Good-bye.

RozenMaiden commented:

I think that the tale of Hoffman mirrors the tale of Sir Peter. 1. He’s a molester of young girls, and now finds himself in charge of them, trying his best to resist his urges and being a good teacher. “put in a cage, had to hold it in.” 2. It gets harder and harder to resist temptation as time goes on. “needs to go right now, doesn’t want to sin.” 3. He can’t control himself any longer and gives in to his true nature. Then disappears. “bagged and whisked away, before he found a toilet. Good-bye, Peter. Good-bye.” Quote from “Once Upon A Time” chapter:

“That day, Mr. Hoffman disappeared, like he was running away from something. He had tried too hard to be someone he wasn’t. The expectations were too much for him… and he wanted to escape those restrictions. However, children and adults live in the same world, and we must both play by society’s rules.”

I think Hoffman left because he could not control himself among other things.

I think that RozenMaiden has some great insights in her comment. But I also think that she got the ending of the story wrong. Read the rest of this entry »