Yay more conspiracy theories 😁
So about Light’s date of death, it definitely wasn’t in April, that’s a typo in How to Read. The rest of the manga timeline is aligned with Light’s death on Jan 28, including other characters deaths listed in How to Read like Mikami and Takada:
You can see that if we went by an April death for Light, then Mikami died before ever stepping into the warehouse according to HTR. We know that isn’t true from the manga, and also that Takada died just before the confrontation. Dunno why HTR would have that typo but yeah. So I stand by my original statements about the timing of Misa’s death vs Light’s death, and the reunion Near called at the Yellow Box a year later.
Near’s wish “to win like L would have”…but what was L going to do right before he died? Use the death note to kill criminals and test the fake rules. L was certainly not above testing the notebook’s power or sacrificing people, and early on set up Lind L Tailor to test it in a roundabout way before he had the note itself. Neither of us know what Near meant by that statement precisely, but it seems evidence more for my side than against. Also the world would figure out quickly that Kira was dead/inactive/“taking a rest” whether Light was killed or incarcerated because murderers would have stopped dying either way. The cult kept going in the manga after Kira ceased activity, they didn’t know the details but assumed his death because of the very strong convjnctions and tenacity of Kira. Also, Kira was not silent. He communicated with people via the news or Takada, etc. Kira would have been both silent and inactive if jailed by Near.
Can we assume that Near didn’t know how shinigami could die? He might have been banking on that very reason being why Ryuk wouldn’t save Light. Or if he didn’t know before, he could have learned after Light’s death. If Near or the task force/police didn’t ask Ryuk about what happened to Rem during the conversation Ryuk was dishing all the secrets, then it was a missed opportunity. They knew that at one point there was a shinigami Rem and then suddenly…there wasn’t. Didn’t they wonder given that Rem disappeared the moment L died? Near was smart and curious, and I think he would have pumped Ryuk for all the info he could given the opportunity.
Have you read these two excellent metas (by casuistor and mikami) on why Near probably controlled Mikami at the Yellow Box? They provide a lot of great thoughts as to why Near would have done it and how. Certainly makes it a lot more likely that Near wouldn’t care about using the death note again to take care of what he might perceive as a lingering threat. I already mentioned in my last post a theory as to why he might not have written Misa’s name right after Light’s death, and how that played into why Misa might not have killed heraelf right away either.
Your thoughts on Rem and Misa’s motivations are interesting! I do agree that Rem wouldn’t need hard evidence to kill Light (or try to, if she even could) if Misa died. She’s emotional and impulsive, she’d just write it. She would be much more cautious if Misa were alive, because of Misa’s prior statements about not wanting to live without Light. This ties back in to what I was talking about their death days. Misa died over a year after Light which seems odd given the depth of her devotion. I don’t think the day of Feb 14 was anything but a coincidence but I could see how it was chosen due to the differences of how Valentine’s is celebrated in Japan (women give presents to men vs vice versa in a lot of the west). Misa had already given herself to Light every day since they met and this might be seen as her final ‘gift,’ her life which she’d always promised.
Still…a little late and she missed the first Valentines Day after his death. Why not that one?
Thanks for discussing this stuff with me Pasi!
Regarding Near’s proclivity and reasons he might write in the death note (and for evidence he did in fact control Mikami), I think this prior meta by causitor sums it very well. Having a convincing case as to why he would control Mikami using the death note makes it more likely he might do it again. As to following L’s methods— L was going to write in the death note or have someone else do it before he died, to test the fake rules. In fact L was going to use the death note to kill murderers to try and expose Kira. So, which of L’s methodology was Near referring to? L was not above testing the death note himself, although Near claims not to have done so (and I think that’s a lie).
I agree that Rem wouldn’t need solid evidence to kill Light (if she in fact could have), if she believed that Light killed Misa. She would have just written it out of anger/on impulse because she was an emotional shinigami. I do think she would need some evidence to kill Light if Misa was still alive because of what Light meant to Misa. But anyway, I’m not sure how that is related to whether Near killed Misa or not, or at least as to whether it is a plausible theory.
Could Near have deduced how shinigami die? If Ryuk spilled guts about the fake rules and other things to Near, I’d imagine that someone as smart and curious as Near would pump a shinigami for as much intel as possible. Past that, Near and all the police knew that after Higuichi was captured there was a shinigami named Rem…and then suddenly there wasn’t. Near would know that shinigami were tied to human death note users, so what happened to Rem? Do you think Near or any of the task force wouldn’t have asked Ryuk that? Who knows if they did but it would be a large missed opportunity if they didn’t.
I explained why Near might not have written Misa’s name right away in my last post so…I think that’s all I can think to argue about. Thanks for your thoughts Pasi!
origamiaround
germansingergirl
janainaart
kaledo-art
romaincrisis
