Yamanaka didnt need to smack on the DID label on Mikoto if he really wanted to push that his killings were on the basis of stress, lack of emotional regulation accompanied with an ego dystonic state. Mikoto's story can still be done and follow the vision of MV3 if Yamanaka didnt build up supporting details towards Mikoto's DID.
As a DID system myself, I found Mikoto relatable and accurate in relation to my personal experiance. Trial2 was my favourite as it really tackled the interpersonal relationships alters have with eachother and downfalls of persecutor alters before they get the help the need. This set up, accuracies and relatability is what made Mikoto a runner up to being one of the top contenders of an accurate depictions of DID. Which many have agreed.
When crimes happen in Japan, their "quality rates" tend to be on the heavier side despite the low quantity rates. Mikoto's story could have just been a critique about Japanese work culture and its toxicity without using supporting evidence of DID and throwing an already stigmatized disorder under the bus.
Under extreme stress a person can experaince a switch going off in their head, throwing all ethics and morals to the side and go on a rampage to solve and sooth multitudes of problems thats been bottled up and melding for a while. This is an outcome that can happen regardless if mental illness is involved or not and it has correlations with extreme emotions such as anger. Anger itself is not an illness, but the failure to regulate it can become one. It can be similar to an alternate state of consiousness, but lies short of the predisposed fragmented psyche.
Blind rage is the closest to singlets can experiance to DID amnesiac blackout without the need of a dissociative disorder. When the frontal lobe is completely shut off and the lizard brain (fight or flight) is active, cognitive processes, voluntary control, emotional regulation and aspects of personality (main functions of the frontal lobe) are null and can there fore pass as a dissconnected state from their original consious. This is parallel but not one to one to how amnesia works between alters in DID. Yes, an alter can be knocked out and experiance black outs, but the difference between that and rage blackouts is the fact that an alter's whole neurological network is deactivated while another alter's is online. Alters within themselves can also experiance said blind rage states as well; this is a normal human brian response that operates on a spectrum.
Repressesion and compartmetalization (and sometimes accompanied by other mental processees) are normal human function which spectrum can run into the trauma spectrum, which later spits into Cluster B personalies or OSDD/DDNOS/PDID and then DID under certain requirements.
Japan's culture is different from the west and from my understanding a common coping mechanism is to bottle up negative feelings and actions due to the lack of mental health saftey net, care, acceptability and understanding. The problem comes from the lack of coping and dealing with the jar in a healthy manner. Many will let steam off through bullying or through reinforced black company practices for example which is why the toxicity is potent nomarlized in their culture.
The ratio of bottled up emotions, especially anger and the release they feel from letting off steam is not enough to completely empty the jar. More stressors and expectations through everyday life can pile up and become a heavier burden that the only way for it to be released through a periodic pressurized valve. The main problem is when there is heavy concentrated pressure in a vessel that it bursts through the pressure release valve and unleashes all those concentrated problems. Therefore leading to an all at once a mental break acommpanied by an ego dystonic state that allowes a person to commit heinous crimes past the "acceptable amount" carrying over into desecration of a corpse or multiple victims. The more they feed into the jar and reject it, it can become dissociative, but not DID level of dissociation.
In Mikoto's case there was predisposed mental fragmentation with he failure to cope leading to 12 bodies over time. Some being committed inbetween rejected revisions. He couldnt go back after his first kill since killing unfortunately gave him the needed pressure release in relation to his stress level. Regardless, his kills released an amount of pressure that he was addicted to to help regulate that vessel. You dont need fo have DID to experiance this.
Stating that Mikoto has DID in the enviroment such as milgram made him a golden goose for expectations, complexity curiosity amongst singlets who haven't experianced such. It was unfortunate that it also brought in the wrong audiance to help miscontrude Mikoto as a chatacter. In the west it is further pushed as a spectacle due to it acting like a glorified jury rerun for a Billy Milligan like trial.
Mikoto might as well already have a degree of fragmentation in addition to the aforementioned bottling up coping mechanism. Kotoko may have over diagnosed a disorder not knowing about the rest of the spectrum including OSDD/DDNOS/UDD.
I can not comment on whether this is actually a case of "the characters are as smart as their author" or if it was a creative choice from Takuya Yamanaka himself who has a majored psychology in university. Considering his involvement with the video game The Calligula Effect (a discounted Persona game), which mental health is part of its core concepts. He, in my opinion, has improved on how he focuses on mental health and psychology.
I've played but dropped Calligula Effect Overdose and have found the subject around mental health to be shallow as the mechanic it surrounded was around interacting with 524 student each with a shallow storyline (sidequest quest) related to their traumas. These links: Steam and GameFAQ show the extent use of traumas. As you can see it was an ambitious game due to the the amount of traumas featured. DID is listed under Multiple Personality, but the specifics of the quest is vague and can only be truly explained with a detailed runthough of the sidequest.
Yamanaka has then came out with Milgram where he has a set cast of 10 characters to focus on and showcase his understanding of psychology and their relationships. I love the addition of Commencement updates to show the humanity and faults of the prisoners based on their prior judgement. It was a fresh concept and unique to show the vulnerabilites in the human psych.
The dipictions of Mikoto's DID felt very deliberate. I was able to make up reasonings and understand the differences in Blue, Green and Red. Requiem felt like a beta story plot point that they brought back in after they fleshed Mikoto out with DID. There were parts of the T3 Interrogation where it actually corroborated him having DID and would make more sense if they stuck with it.
I made a theory that I posted a while back that you can see here. My MV3 expectations and theory were based on the Innocent verdict where Green would have a power trip similar to Muu's and sing about all the times that he helped Blue in the past. Below is pictures of my theory as I do want to highlight another route Yamanaka could have taken but not.
Yamanaka didnt need to smack on the DID label on Mikoto if he really wanted to push that his killings were on the basis of stress, lack of emotional regulation accompanied with an ego dystonic state. Mikoto's story can still be done and follow the vision of MV3 if Yamanaka didnt build up supporting details towards Mikoto's DID.
As a DID system myself, I found Mikoto relatable and accurate in relation to my personal experiance. Trial2 was my favourite as it really tackled the interpersonal relationships alters have with eachother and downfalls of persecutor alters before they get the help the need. This set up, accuracies and relatability is what made Mikoto a runner up to being one of the top contenders of an accurate depictions of DID. Which many have agreed.
When crimes happen in Japan, their "quality rates" tend to be on the heavier side despite the low quantity rates. Mikoto's story could have just been a critique about Japanese work culture and its toxicity without using supporting evidence of DID and throwing an already stigmatized disorder under the bus.
Under extreme stress a person can experaince a switch going off in their head, throwing all ethics and morals to the side and go on a rampage to solve and sooth multitudes of problems thats been bottled up and melding for a while. This is an outcome that can happen regardless if mental illness is involved or not and it has correlations with extreme emotions such as anger. Anger itself is not an illness, but the failure to regulate it can become one. It can be similar to an alternate state of consiousness, but lies short of the predisposed fragmented psyche.
Blind rage is the closest to singlets can experiance to DID amnesiac blackout without the need of a dissociative disorder. When the frontal lobe is completely shut off and the lizard brain (fight or flight) is active, cognitive processes, voluntary control, emotional regulation and aspects of personality (main functions of the frontal lobe) are null and can there fore pass as a dissconnected state from their original consious. This is parallel but not one to one to how amnesia works between alters in DID. Yes, an alter can be knocked out and experiance black outs, but the difference between that and rage blackouts is the fact that an alter's whole neurological network is deactivated while another alter's is online. Alters within themselves can also experiance said blind rage states as well; this is a normal human brian response that operates on a spectrum.
Repressesion and compartmetalization (and sometimes accompanied by other mental processees) are normal human function which spectrum can run into the trauma spectrum, which later spits into Cluster B personalies or OSDD/DDNOS/PDID and then DID under certain requirements.
Japan's culture is different from the west and from my understanding a common coping mechanism is to bottle up negative feelings and actions due to the lack of mental health saftey net, care, acceptability and understanding. The problem comes from the lack of coping and dealing with the jar in a healthy manner. Many will let steam off through bullying or through reinforced black company practices for example which is why the toxicity is potent nomarlized in their culture.
The ratio of bottled up emotions, especially anger and the release they feel from letting off steam is not enough to completely empty the jar. More stressors and expectations through everyday life can pile up and become a heavier burden that the only way for it to be released through a periodic pressurized valve. The main problem is when there is heavy concentrated pressure in a vessel that it bursts through the pressure release valve and unleashes all those concentrated problems. Therefore leading to an all at once a mental break acommpanied by an ego dystonic state that allowes a person to commit heinous crimes past the "acceptable amount" carrying over into desecration of a corpse or multiple victims. The more they feed into the jar and reject it, it can become dissociative, but not DID level of dissociation.
In Mikoto's case there was predisposed mental fragmentation with he failure to cope leading to 12 bodies over time. Some being committed inbetween rejected revisions. He couldnt go back after his first kill since killing unfortunately gave him the needed pressure release in relation to his stress level. Regardless, his kills released an amount of pressure that he was addicted to to help regulate that vessel. You dont need fo have DID to experiance this.
Stating that Mikoto has DID in the enviroment such as milgram made him a golden goose for expectations, complexity curiosity amongst singlets who haven't experianced such. It was unfortunate that it also brought in the wrong audiance to help miscontrude Mikoto as a chatacter. In the west it is further pushed as a spectacle due to it acting like a glorified jury rerun for a Billy Milligan like trial.
Mikoto might as well already have a degree of fragmentation in addition to the aforementioned bottling up coping mechanism. Kotoko may have over diagnosed a disorder not knowing about the rest of the spectrum including OSDD/DDNOS/UDD.
I can not comment on whether this is actually a case of "the characters are as smart as their author" or if it was a creative choice from Takuya Yamanaka himself who has a majored psychology in university. Considering his involvement with the video game The Calligula Effect (a discounted Persona game), which mental health is part of its core concepts. He, in my opinion, has improved on how he focuses on mental health and psychology.
I've played but dropped Calligula Effect Overdose and have found the subject around mental health to be shallow as the mechanic it surrounded was around interacting with 524 student each with a shallow storyline (sidequest quest) related to their traumas. These links: Steam and GameFAQ show the extent use of traumas. As you can see it was an ambitious game due to the the amount of traumas featured. DID is listed under Multiple Personality, but the specifics of the quest is vague and can only be truly explained with a detailed runthough of the sidequest.
Yamanaka has then came out with Milgram where he has a set cast of 10 characters to focus on and showcase his understanding of psychology and their relationships. I love the addition of Commencement updates to show the humanity and faults of the prisoners based on their prior judgement. It was a fresh concept and unique to show the vulnerabilites in the human psych.
The dipictions of Mikoto's DID felt very deliberate. I was able to make up reasonings and understand the differences in Blue, Green and Red. Requiem felt like a beta story plot point that they brought back in after they fleshed Mikoto out with DID. There were parts of the T3 Interrogation where it actually corroborated him having DID and would make more sense if they stuck with it.
I made a theory that I posted a while back that you can see here. My MV3 expectations and theories were based on the Innocent verdict where Green would have a power trip similar to Muu's and sing about all the times that he helped Blue in the past, and why it was acceptable for him to backstab the person he once protected. Below are pictures of my theory as I do want to highlight a route Yamanaka could have taken but not and how it would have enhanced Mikoto's stuggles with DID.
I'm hoping writers would learn from Yamanaka's shortfallings on Mikoto's DID. It became a dilapidated chekov's gun in the end. But I guess the curtains were just blue in the end.
My favourite scene if you believe that Green is real and the murderer. Due to colour theory the garbage bag is very similar to how Mikoto's hair looks like in this type of light scheme. The highlight of the garbage bag being the dyed parts of his hair.
Green is abusing his powers as a Gatekeeper to lobotomize the murder from Blue's memories (symbolized by the top knot being kept above and sperate from his head); it's looming over his head but he can not recall or access the memory.
(No Will, we won't listen to your cover of ROKI. Maybe later)
Yuno's scene in Undercover wasn't where she died, but when the crime took place. Or, more specifically, when the report ended. because while the fetus died, but Yuno survived, her report ended with "Save data from the point where the subject resumes normal life post regaining consciousness". Meaning there was a gap between her crime, and when she was sent to Milgram
Her VD translation, as said in my previous post, is a bit janky. She says that after she was hospitalized, she resumed studying/going abt daily life. But she also said that her last memory was being discharged, hence why she thought Milgram was the afterlife. Someone on twitter said that she has 'hazy memories' of studying after being hospitalized, but being discharged is what she ultimately remembers before Milgram. Either way, Yuno had memories after her crime. The report doesn't go into detail abt it because that's when the crime ended
The report doesn't care abt the prisoners. It cares abt the build up + the crime itself
HOWEVER
As said in my "Purgatory still holds up" theory, there is a chance that Yuno still killed herself after she resumed normal life. Now, this is ultimately the staircase that she fell off of, thus killing the fetus. BUT, there is a possibility she went back here and committed suicide. And that is what ultimately brought her to Milgram
We don't know what she did when she resumed her daily life until she was placed in Milgram. But it is noteworthy that she got a 'gap', while Haruka didn't, since his data was saved to the following day
This is Haruka's scene in Undercover. If he parallel's Yuno, this is where his crime took place. The report states that he killed the girl in a fireworks festival. Sure, he took her far away enough to hide her body, but I highly doubt he took her to his bedroom. That is his bedroom, right? It matches the one in Weakness. That is his bunny plushie. If we are made to believe
The scenes in undercover represent where the crime took place
Haruka's scene is his own bedroom
The reports end when the crime is done
Haruka's report ends with saying he was strangling a second kid
Haruka doesn't have siblings, and I highly doubt his parents invited another kid to his house (and, on the off chance they did, why didn't the report mention this? The same report that gave build up to his crime). Either he was truly strangling himself, or that 'second kid' is his fucking stuffed rabbit
And just more evidence for the scenes in undercover being where the crimes occurred
Fuuta is taking a picture of a house. There is a lantern outside, specifically a lantern used in Japanese funerals. Probably leaked too much personal info abt the girl, which was the post that ultimately led her to kill herself
Kotoko walking in an alleyway. Simple enough, she is most likely going to kill her next criminal
Mikoto is crashed out on his desk, with work scattered. His case is still tricky, there are theories that he was the actual murderer, not John. But this could've ultimately been the breaking point that lead to him killing his boss. This could be his work desk during a late night at the company and NOT his own house
I assume this when Amane killed her mother. Not much to say, since it's just a body on the ground. But it is raining, same weather during parts of TPM. So there's that. Amane's mother is dead, not Amane, so could their victim's bodies also be blacked out?
A girl on the ground at Muu's school. Again, this is where/when the crime occurs, and not necessarily the prisoners' death. But again, the victim's bodies could be blacked out too. This could be Rei herself, as this doesn't show the face/hair silhouette. Though, Muu was seen killing Rei outside of school, so who knows
Shidou with medical equipment. Could be ready to dissect another braindead patient. I assume he's feeling a little distraught
Ah, the double suicide theory. How romantic for Mahiru. In I Love You, her bf was shown hanging, but we don't know exactly where. However, they were walking in a forest before the bf collapsed to his knees. We see some plant shadows on the side, so perhaps he took his life in a forest?
And yeah, I didn't include Kazui, cause I honestly had nothing/no idea for his scene. Cause I doubt Hinako just...fell over and died as soon as he came out to her
For Mikoto, I do believe this is at his desk at work. Assuming his apartment layout is this standard looking apartment floor plan, we see his whole living room in MEME without one.
Having a work station at work helps continue the dissociation as its common to experiance a seperate box for workplace related stuff vs home/outside related stuff. I feel it all the time and can't remember what happens at work when I come home even when I'm the one fronting; I remember what happens at work when I'm physically at work so it's possible he can experience this too
That scene in Undercover could be Blue's final thought of suicidal Ideation and his accidental Homocidal ideation that Green takes as a green flag to continue that feeling into homocidal intent and plan the murder delicately.
Green takes action the following night, cleans up and gets away with the murder. The next day Blue is having an emotional flashbacks on the train about the feelings he's felt while he witnessed Green murder. His work probably called for an emergency meeting and disclosed the death of the coworker and from there Blue most likely had experianced more flashbacks till made him look suspicous and apprehended and sent to Milgram
Hello! Welcome to my first post! As a small introduction, I am a diagnosed DID system who has been in active therapy for 5 years and counting. I had 3.5 major alters and was able to reduce the count to 2. I will not disclose my alters name but we'll call them Alter B, C and D.5 (D.5 since I don't count her as a fleshed out Alter compared to the others but more of a fragment)
There will be at least 2 parts to my theory; Autopsy and Timeline. The first one is to layout a foundation as well as my suspected content MV3 could have. The second will be the over arching timeline which will also be broken down into smaller post based on each alter's perspective for alter perspective ease. At the beginning of these posts are links to each part of the theory when they release for streamlined navigation.
DISCLAIMER: Although I have the experience of being a DID system, please note that every system varies from one another in order to suit their needs for survival. I am also not Japanese nor their civilian, therefore I do not know the culture or experiences of living in Japan as a system. I know nothing about how DID is treated both medically and seen in the eyes of their public. Therefore I can not speak concretely about Mikoto's cultural experience in confidence.
Every system is unique and anything I say should be considered as information and not a reference as I am not a DID specialist or a medical practitioner who specializes in trauma research.
This is my perspective on Mikoto Kayano based on my lived experience and additional research. I will communicate if any of my evidence is shotty or unlikely. If not, I am certain my detective skills are on to something.
Greatest apologies in advance if I leave out other information. I am mostly focused on Mikoto's case and do not have much interest in the other prisoners which means I am not getting most of my information outside of the Commencements, Es’s Interrogations and the MVs. If there are pieces of information that you’d like to bring my attention to, please feel free to comment or DM me and I will see where it could possibly fit in. I will probably add it to a retrospective after Milgram conclused.
I am also open to any questions related to DID. I will choose to be vague for privacy reasons if they are personal questions.
My theories will follow what I believe to be the most accurate and believed timeline from each of the alter's perspective with wiggle room for what I believe will be depicted in MV3.
Make note that an alter's reality is accurate to their understanding of the world and their relationship with it. It is important to understand each one of their experiences while tying all loose ends together; this is something I've come to learn and cope my own DID system. So far it helps makes my life more functional as I am able to understand and forgive all parts of myself.
NOTE: Mikoto related pronouns and such in white refers to him overall and/or as a system. Alters will be named based on their colour and coded as such for clarity.
TLDR:
Blue has Suicidal Ideation and his mind accidentally wanders to killing his abuser out of habit or because his mind wandered too far. Green thought that it was a good idea and he can end his suffering by premeditating and committing murder. The killing was so traumatic to Blue (he witnessed parts of the murder against his will) and Green (Killing, attacking Blue to knock him unconscious and doubting his actions as he goes from protector to persecutor) that Red splits from both, isolating certain details and characteristics. Blue hears the news about his co worker's death and he's in disbelief and shock, later apprehended and sent to Milgram.
In T2, Green tries to gain the upper hand and manipulate Es and the audience using their lack of knowledge and mechanisms of DID to get away with murder using Red as his perfect scapegoat and Blue as emotional hostage. He wants to avoid accountability due to wanting to feel that his actions are just. But instead it severed his relationship and trust with Blue, which is why he is hellbent on having someone side with him after Red leaves his side for Blue. Red and Blue get along and build a stronger relationship and confront Green.
MV 3 could contain scenes of Green's relationship with Blue and how he's always been there for him in a glorified manner after vicariously given the Innocent vote. These scenes can also double for how Green helped Red navigate the world after he was born. The MV could also feature the turning point of Green and Red's relationship growing sour after Red develops his own opinions and understanding of the situation. This doubles as a metaphor for how Green ruined his relationship with Blue with the murder.
If Mikoto survives T3, which he most likely will if Green played his cards right, his after story will be determined by the Innocent or Guilty Verdict, which provides one piece for Green's Dilemma. The other half requires Blue's innocent or guilty judgement towards Green. To which it completes the prisoner's Dilemma:
In the end, Mikoto has to live with the reality that a part of his brain has premeditated and committed murder. He is going to have to live with that fact and make amends with himself if he wants to heal as a system and live healthily with DID.
I believe this is the narrative Yamanaka Takuya wants to tell with Mikoto’s DID. A story of a deep understanding of how DID deeply affects a person and their fragmented parts. From my experience so far and seeing how Mikoto is being delicately handled, I applaud both Yamanaka and DECO*27 for conveying the struggles and hardships I and many other Dissociative systems face when it comes to Dissociative Identity Disorder and Other Specified Dissociative Disorder. Through accurate music and visuals representation, I give Mikoto my DID seal of approval.
Let's get started with the Foundations!
Relevant Information
Please browse this website as I found it very helpful explaining DID as a whole. It will have all the terminology and definitions associated with DID, more information and is a great baseline to build your understanding off of. Any words that have links will bring you to the part of the website with more information relating to it.
Learn more about the terms, phrases, diagnoses, and treatments associated with trauma, dissociation, and dissociative disorders.
I am an avid believer of the Trikoto Theory and recommend this video as a quick summary. I will be expanding on it further as having the condition and years of therapy is important to fully grasping the validity of there being 3 alters as well as understanding their interpersonal relationships with each other.
Trikoto System Structure
I have drawn a diagram to encapsulate how I visualize the Kayano system. Black and white is mostly for symbolism and imagery mainly in Double. As more information unveils, I believe that you will further understand as to why I believe that "John" is the assumed identity of both Red and Green. It takes time to know the differences and subtleties between each alter to know them best and identify.
[Correction: Symbolized as Red Symbolized by Red*]
There is a common occurrence where alters will mask as other alters, more notably the host to help blend in and be undetectable. MultiplicityAndMe has a great video on her alters impersonating her here:
Theory Tiers, Plot Diagrams and Perspectives
There are multitudes of motifs and Tiers of understanding when it comes to understanding a complex disorder. Below are charts to help describe the different motifs. Given that T3 and MV3 haven’t been released yet, these motifs are flexible enough to fit in and fill most gaps before Mikoto’s MV3 releases. I believe MV3 is about the internal struggles within alter relationships, more notably Green’s relationship with Blue prior to the murder and how he has damaged their relationship by using Green’s current conflict with Red as a metaphor.
Primary Perspective - MEME : DID stigmas, stereotypes and misunderstandings; Internalized by Blue
Secondary Perspective - DOUBLE : Understanding of concepts, Alter differences and how they interact with one another; Characterized as Red's conflicts
Tertiary Perspective - MV3 TITLE : Deeper understanding of interpersonal relationships affected by alter roles and how it can cause conflicts between the alters themselves; Green's relationships with the others as well as the internal DID mechanisms.
The overall goal with Mikoto's story is to help singlet's further their progress to understand and empathize with someone with DID.
Blue's perspective (not believing/disbelief of DID) → Blue/Red relationship (understanding conflicts between DID alters and their ideologies) → Introduction of Green (understanding complex DID’s mechanisms) → Green's perspective (killer’s motives and solution) → Green's Internal Struggles (Splitting from Stress) → Internal conflicts between alters (Interpersonal relationship difficulties) → Red understanding Blue and helping him → Blue wanting to help Green (beginnings of acceptance and healing) → Blue / Red confronting Green (Alter co-operation) → Mikoto as a whole heals and forgives Green's actions based on if we vote him Guilty (Deeming innocent EXSCUSES his actions and gives off the impression that there will be no punishment if wrongdoings repeated)
Each MV's themes are the based on the therapy process to help live with DID in a healthy and manageable manner. Start from Stage 1 MeMe, DOUBLE, MV3 then back up to Stage2 MeMe, DOUBLE, MV3 and lastly Stage 3
There are a few motifs and different perspectives for each character in each MV. P 1-3 being the order of events for each alter.
Each MV have a 3 main focuses on alter Parings or conflicts
Every scene, lyric or metaphor can be used and applied to each alter to help describe different scenarios that they face. This will further explained when my timeline post comes out. There would likely not be an in depth lyric analysis since that is not something I would like to prioritize with a dedicated and detailed post.
Inner World / Headspace Structure
It is common for DID systems to have Inner Worlds with varying degrees of access, structures and designs.
A video game that goes by the name, Omori, is a great example of Dissociative Amnesia and Inner Worlds/headspaces. It may not be about DID, but OSDD, specifically OSDD1A. Give it a watch or a play, I highly recommend it. I haven't played it myself due to triggers so be warned. I know it is a masterpiece though.
Mikoto's inner world consists of 2 places. The more his alters know, the higher the level of detail as well as the ease of access.
His apartment, which Blue, Green and Red can access at varying degrees. This is most likely where Blue goes when he is "sleeping" as we witness him first gained access to the inner world. Since Green is at the top due to being the gatekeeper, he would have access to the lower version of the apartment where both Red and Blue reside. But those 2 won't be seen in the higher level detailed apartment as they have limited access to information and memories.
Blue waking in Inner World commonplace/waiting room modeled after his home
Green invading and tampering with Blue's surveillance cameras (further explained later and in Timeline post)
Green in Apartment Headquarters, decked out like Mikoto's normal house. As gatekeeper, he oversees everything, it would make sense for his access to the inner worlds are not limited or less detailed.
Green commanding a switch from headquarters
Green surveying Blue. It is also common for alters to see their body move in third person. This is a common symptom for heavy dissociation, which is more notable when one alter recalls a memory where another alter is controlling body. As gatekeeper Green has the privlige of keeping tabs on others
Red protecting Green from Blue
Mikoto's inner world based off of his real apartment layout.
Inner Worlds aren't always one to one with reality as it is more based on symbolism and meanings as a way to obscure truth and reality in a maladaptive nature. The apartment headspace is structured differently and has the bathroom wall where the balcony should be. Green's chair being in the way can also symbolize him not wanting Blue to see the real word in full; his life being overabundantly abusive and not survivable.
Because the right wall is intact with the bottom wall, the small open passageway behind the single green chair can symbolize Green's guard on the real world. For Blue, the headspace is condensed with his bathroom wall which is the furthest he will get to knowing the truth. Green locks any relevant information past the bathroom scenes. It also makes a great parallel to what Blue will see from inside his headspace through the mirror into a reflection of Green in the real world.
The second headspace can only be accessed by Green at first, then Red, followed by Blue who probably gains access to this part of the Headspace through Red.
As described in the DOUBLE's main focus, Green's internal struggle for his actions as he's split between feeling innocent or guilty takes place on the train.
Green breaking down from stress over his actions
GuMi (Guilty Midokoto/Green or Guilty Mikoto) running from accountability. The post added affects share the story of how Red and Blue are working together to corner and confront Green.
InoMi (Innocent Midokoto/Green or Innocent Mikoto) trying to gain control, manipulate and stay in power over GuMi / his guilty conscious. Post affects describing the how Green reacts towards Blue and Red's attack.
Red’s first access to the Train Headspace, can also be him fronting by himself IRL after gaining independence from Green. The white background is from early morning or showing how he has no ill intentions.
Red waking up in the inner world. Background changing from white to black as Green paints him as the culprit and the scape goat. Blood stains the ground due to Green suppressing/killing GuMi and Green pushing blame and accountability onto Red.
This scene can also double(heh)for Blue waking up in the Train headspace for the first time. Blood can be from the InoMi/GuMi battle or symbolic how Green is tainted from the murder and Blue sees the toll it had on him
As described in the Trikoto System Structure and through the light colour wheel, Magenta is the colour for Blue and Red cooperating together. The balance of Blue with the Magenta show's how much Blue has grown due to cooperation and help from Red. With Red's assertiveness by his side; Blue is able to make his first stand against the overall threat, Green
I'd like to debunk a scene where Blue takes the train being mistaken for him being a part of the Headspace. The gif below can be the day after Green committed homicide and or after Blue got the breaking news of his coworker's death at a work meeting. He can be reexperiencing emotional flashbacks of distress, anxiety and dreadfulness he felt while witnessing Green's murder as he is close to the trigger site irl. As mentioned in the System chart, Blue can also be the symbol for his innocent side; therefore this can also be InoMi struggling.
There are times when the host, or other parts amnesiac to the traumas reenter the toxic environment on accident not knowing the significance and emotional toll it has on those alters who are connected. Emotional flashbacks usually tend to bleed through depending on how weak the amnesiac barriers are and / or how strong the emotional flashback is. Emotional flashbacks are just the emotional experience relived and is one one of the types of PTSD flashbacks that can happen (Visual Flashbacks are heavily used in media, stereotypical and very surface level.) It can happen alone or with other types of flashbacks but it really depends on the alter, trigger, severity, amnesia as well as how another alter can experience it second hand.
Perceived Timeline
Time is weird when it comes to DID. There's regular forgetfulness, amnesia and then dissociative amnesia from alters on top along with their levels of forgetfulness.
Here's an example of what my day would look like when I was in highschool.
Mikoto could definitely have different friend groups depending on who was attending school. There's the popular theory where Mikoto, or who I believe, Green, was part of a gang due to Mikoto's hair being dyed in addition to smoking (Blue vapes) ((I'm also not familiar with the theory itself so correct me if I'm wrong)). This I feel can be viable because of how I perceive Green as a person. I also would like to add that Blue could have no opinion on having his hair dyed and thought it was cool or Green kept redying it after Blue fixes it.
Alters have the right to dress and appear how they would like, but it requires communication for bigger or more permanent changes.
As for Mikoto, it is unknown who actually was the one attending school, but if the gang theory is true, then school would also be a stressful environment Green would front for. I will refer back to this theory when I get into the Timeline.
What is imperative to the scenes in the MVs is the actual order and who is the fronting alter in each, but what’s important is how does each scene apply to each alter as there tends to be reoccurring actions that can be interpreted differently depending on your perspective.
Within each MV, most pertinent in MEME, the scenes are not in order. This is also true if we bring all scenes in each MV into consideration. They are flexible enough to be used outside of the original MV’s context. Basically "think outside of the box" type of inception.
Now on to the concrete Facts to help prove that Green does exist using information from Es' Interrogations and Jackelopes Commencements.
John Doe Facts:
Blue doesn't believe and has no memory of murdering anybody
Es stresses Blue out to the point where Red switches in and physically protects Blue from Es who is as a threat
Circumstances for the switch: Blue is emotionally triggered by Es (fact), Red fronts to protect him on his own accord (possible) or because Green pushed him to the front (possible), Green is on standby and does not takeaway Red’s access to the front to give the illusion that he is in control (possible)
Red successfully lands hits on Es and knows that he is freely able to protect the body
Second Commencement Facts:
Magical restraints are used on prisoners who were deemed guilty after pollings
Jackalope believes Milgram's restraints don't work on Mikoto
Claims his MPD is real, specifically using Multiple Personality Disorder instead of DID
"The Mikoto Kayano that Milgram brought in as a prisoner is just his Primary Identity. Milgram was not able to account for the soul of his other identity as a separate prisoner, so has not been able to administer the proper punishment [targeting the guilty alter] as it should have"
There are a few outdated terms and facts that Jackelope uses before MPD was further researched got relabeled as DID. This supports him working at Milgram for a long time when compared to Es, who is more up to date with DID and its name change in Neoplasm.
Now as for Jackelopes last sentence, Milgram HAS to take Mikoto's body as a whole as they can not physically extract Green’s personality from their brain and punish him as a separate entity. They do not have the technology or like Jackalope said, "they were not prepared for this scenario and will improve in the future"; unsure of the logistics when referring to an anomaly. Which is false because I do believe that Milgram's punishment is only activated when it senses the switch into Green and NOT Red.
As for Mikoto's MeMe extraction showing Green’s murder through Blue's eyes, the machine should extract information from the brain as a whole. It should disregard the amnesiac barriers since those are psychosomatic symptoms to the disorder and the alters involved, not physical brain structure. Unless the neurons and synapses are physically degraded and no longer exist, it would tell a different story than an alter’s neurons not activating or connecting another alter's neurons. This is the reason why alters have their own memories and neurobiology and psychopathology. The brain as a whole is 100% and consists of all the alter’s neurobiology, but alters have their own neural pathways that can only be accessed by them or others depending on their communication and cooperativeness level. Milgram's machines are not limited by amnesiac barriers.
To help explain the neurobiology between alters, here's a video of something I call “Synapses”. In the video, B really wanted to front because he likes adventures and nature. My friend and I were walking through the forest to get to a cranberry bog, but I felt that it was too dangerous for B to front at the moment. B wanted to front badly when I didn't want him to caused our brain to have these dizzy spells where my vision fazed slightly and almost made me faint.
My theory was that because I prevented B from fronting (I’m not the gatekeeper, I just have great communication with B and he listens to me since I'm his caretaker), my brain wanted to have a hard reset by deactivating me to have him front because that's how badly he wanted to front. This explains the dizzy spells, almost fainting and why after each synapse, B hijacks me and has a burst of control for a second. The reason why I called them synapses is because a certain percentage of my neurons are connected to B's neurons due to similarities in our personality and because I didn't let him front, his neurons misfired and delayed till he got control after the dizzy spells. My brain will always have B’s neurons even when I can't fully access or use them myself without him as “my” brain doesn't have clearance to "run it".
As for shared talents such as Art, the art neural network is accessed to both B and I. Some skill and knowledge can become universal like art fundamentals, but how the alter expresses those neural pathways is uniquely their own which can explain why there's different degrees of skills and or styles. I'm not sure what researchers and professionals say about the neural connection between alters, but this is my best bet with what I know.
I will have to continue this essay in a new post as I have run out of image slots! Here is the link to PART 2 of the Autopsy where I touch upon Neoplasm.
milgram analysis: the orekoto (オレ) of Neoplasm is not the orekoto (俺) of John Doe
analysing both orekotos and then some, how mikoto's dissociation misdirects us, and how mikoto's DID operates to help him function, to express what he needs but cannot tolerate, and to cope with shame.
will be referring both to milgram-en's (John Doe, Neoplasm) and Maristelina's (timeline) translations. thank you for your work!
note on names: for the purposes of this post:
mikoto refers to the person/system, all parts included
'mikoto' refers to any normative mikoto, ie. not either ore. i'm not going to assume the normative mikoto from John Doe is the same alter as the normative mikoto in Neoplasm, because i don't think they are, but that's for another time. for now, I am grouping them together, because, functionally, mikoto's normal parts serve the same purpose and role for this discussion.
ore (俺) and mikoto (俺) refer to the mikoto that appears in the John Doe (Trial 1) voice drama and attacks es.
ore (オレ) and mikoto (オレ) refer to the mikoto that appears in the Neoplasm (Trial 2) voice drama and claims to be the alter who commit murder.
if you can't read japanese, just remember that any name with one japanese character (俺) refers to the ore of trial 1, and any name with two characters (オレ) refers to the ore of trial 2. these are how both ores' personal pronouns are spelled according to the official scriptbooks, respectively.
i also use the word 'unacceptable' 'intolerable' etc. a lot in this analysis. please note i don't use this word in a judgemental way. i will always mean it in the sense that whatever i am referring to 'cannot be accepted/tolerated by mikoto/the world he comes from'.
i'm working with translations and mikoto is a complicated character, so please forgive any slip ups!
thank you for reading.
introduction: there's two orekotos?
mikoto's case, as i've criticised in my last major essay, is often reduced to a conflict between how one votes a system of one 'innocent' personality and one 'guilty'.
as part of the reducing of his character to a split personality trope, it is popular and easy to assume that mikoto only has two major alters: 'mikoto' (who appears normative, uses the boku personal pronoun, and has a confused, sociable demeanour) and 'the other one' (who appears more aggressive, uses the ore personal pronoun, and noticeably switches in at some point during both VDs).
i'm also guilty of this assumption. despite having a sense that things were not that simple, i have assumed, for convenience, that both ores were the same alter, mostly because the ore (オレ) of Neoplasm expresses familiarity with ore's (俺) actions in John Doe (in that he references the event immediately after switching in, amongst other things), and i had no major reason to question that continuity.
at the end of the day, mikoto is mikoto, and since i had (and still have) no interest in attributing guilt to any specific alter, i didn't have a major reason to deduce which alter 'did what'.
(it's also more important to me to dissect what alters think they did and identify with than literally did, because its in how alters psychologically divide up their life and actions once they've happened that their purposes for existing and dissociative functions shine. my last essay was also almost entirely focused on Neoplasm in isolation, so i stand by most of what i said — just replace any assumptions that ore (オレ) is ore (俺) with their new relationship that i'm about to identify.)
all this said, despite surface-level similarities (seeming to use the same personal pronoun, both speaking roughly, existing as a protective force, and identifying as/presenting themselves as the archetypal 'monster'), the way these two alters — ore (俺) and ore (オレ) — function and think are also very distinct from one another. despite the intentional misdirection that would have you assume they are the same part, both ores display very different approaches to responding to and coping with mikoto's life and traumas, and we have seen them emerge respectively based on mikoto's different, changing circumstances within Milgram and the triggers he encounters.
after the extent of this fully dawned on me the other day, it also occured to me that distinguishing them could be very clarifying for how mikoto has grown to function and cope with his life and actions, and also, maybe, finally shatter the illusory binary that surface-level fanon is so attached to.
so. enjoy.
main body 1: psychoanalysing the ore (俺) of John Doe
the ore (俺) that appears in John Doe switches in after mikoto begins to have a panic attack at es' ceaseless prodding.
we can analyse what seems to have triggered mikoto (俺) forward as a starting point for deducing this part's purpose and understanding where mikoto's headspace was at to contextualise his behaviour, so let's assess the situation.
normative 'mikoto', who is present for the majority of John Doe, presumably exists as an alter to allow mikoto to function and engage with people. he seems to do this by having no awareness (or at least, identification) with anything shameful and intolerable, including his murders, and identity as a killer.
therefore, es' insistence to 'mikoto' that he has killed pushes mikoto into a situation that this normative alter is fundamentally unable to handle. es' suggestion of dissociative amnesia also directly attacks the plausible deniability and dissociation normative 'mikoto' clings to to cope. in order to protect himself and preserve his dissociative defense mechanisms, mikoto finds himself required to switch into an alter more suited to this situation, and disengage normative 'mikoto' from this psychological attack.
it is also worth pointing out that es is an authority, and an abusive one at that; considering that mikoto has suffered workplace abuse (as seen in the relentless texts from his chief outside of work hours in Double) it is almost certain that mikoto has been belittled, scapegoated, and pushed to his limits by higher-ups at work before. this situation that es is subjecting mikoto to is not only psychologically overwhelming to his normative alter, but also emulates a source of trauma for mikoto, and thus will absolutely trigger his fight/flight/etc.
lingo: fight/flight/freeze/fawn are words used for different areas of common stress and trauma responses. the principle is, when faced with an overwhelming threat, you may become aggressive and combative (fight), may become restless and want to escape (flight), may shut down (freeze), or may try to appease the threat (fawn).
mikoto is currently in an interrogation room, within Milgram: he cannot run. simply shutting down will not stop es from provoking him. and he has tried to appease es, to be friendly, and seem pathetic, and es has not wavered. the only real option left for mikoto's completely fried nervous system is to remove normative mikoto from the scene, and then force/intimidate/beat the threat into submission.
whew, what an adrenaline rush.
mikoto's (俺) initial demeanour is mostly an expression of his fight response that has been triggered and rage at this situation that 'mikoto' could not handle. mikoto (俺) lashes out at es, yells, curses, and loudly expresses that es' prodding has been far too much for him. he's pissed, and honestly, i don't think he's overreacting. he's far from the first prisoner to attempt to attack es, and he only does it when pushed to his absolute emotional limit, on multiple accounts.
as the scene progresses, mikoto's (俺) rhetoric becomes reminiscent of abusive people of power. a friend i have has pointed out that these lines in particular sound a lot like what a shitty, ageist boss would yell at a young new recruit to verbally abuse them into submission and impose their authority. it's likely ore (俺) is emulating the kinds of things people have said to mikoto, that have forced him into submission, to protect himself, in the hopes that he can turn the tables on es and reap the benefits of becoming the abuser, so to speak. he refuses to engage with whatever es is saying, and focuses on establishing his power through force and verbal abuse.
this bit is speculation, but i do think the fact that es is on the smaller side definitely helps mikoto, triggered into fight response, feel like he should be able to hold power over him. mikoto may see himself in es and feel incredibly angry that es, while small, is in a position of power that he himself never had, with mikoto therefore wanting to put them in their place.
ore (俺) also projects a demeanour of being somewhat sadistic, likely because of just how fucking angry he is at this moment, and especially because es is not easily slipping into the fawning role that mikoto would in his position. he also may be enjoying the high of not being the victim for once, and now that he's in this position, wants to make the most of it, and really prove his point.
essentially, mikoto's (俺) demeanour communicates, don't mess with me, i'm bigger than you. i won't lie down and take this shit, and you have no business hurting or challenging me.
i know this is from neoplasm and is ore (オレ) speaking. i'm using it to illustrate what 'mikoto' does not not do (ie. not cry himself to sleep, not suffer in silence, fight back).
when applying ore (俺)'s demeanour back to how mikoto typically presents and conceptualises himself, it becomes very obvious that everything about mikoto (俺) is intolerable and unacceptable to mikoto as a whole.
being angry, to mikoto, is not acceptable. expressing anger and fighting back against injustice is not acceptable. challenging your place in the social hierarchy and acting outside of socially acceptable behaviour is not acceptable, because all of these are expressions that would lead to dire consequences in his life and within his culture, despite being natural human emotions and expressions.
if these rudimentary and necessary human emotions and rights are unacceptable to mikoto, it can help, psychologically, for the part that handles/contains/expresses them to present themselves as a different sort of person. by wholly dissociating himself from this side of himself — such as this episode, or any other instances of standing up for himself or feeling unacceptable feelings — mikoto can protect himself, and have these unacceptable parts, without compromising his self image; 'mikoto' remains unchanged, unrelated, untainted, because it was absolutely 'not mikoto' that did or felt those things.
what a lovely dissociative contradiction.
the further mikoto (俺) is from how mikoto typically presents, the easier it may be for mikoto to reassure himself that anything they do was 'not him' or 'not real' and entirely cut himself off from identifying with or processing that memory or act. therefore, appearing sadistic when expressing his anger at injustice is not only practical for successfully intimidating es, but may also be part of ore's (俺) (and many of mikoto's parts') presentation as the archetypal 'monster', and clearly 'not mikoto', that helps to reassure mikoto of their estrangement.
this estrangement also helps ore (俺) to protect himself from everything 'mikoto' is associated with (namely, having to be friendly and conscious of his social position, and being a person who tolerates abuse). while the change in accent, personal pronoun, sense of status, the abusive rhetoric he regurgitates, and overall departure from mikoto's typical presenting personality all add to the prior point and to 'mikoto's benefit, it also helps ore (俺) feel like a different person, who is not constrained by having to tolerate things and acting according to his social position. this helps ore (俺) emotionally remove himself from the fact 'mikoto' was trapped and overwhelmed, and allows him to express the intolerable things he does.
unfortunately, emulating the tactics of his abusers and portraying himself as a rough-speaking tough guy who is sadistic and cruel did not go over well with the audience. you might say that this mask was a little too convincing.
we can be almost certain ore (俺) did not fully grasp the position he was in, and the extent of the scrutiny that would go into his behaviour. we can also be certain ore (俺) had no idea he would be unique in being able to attack es, and the ramifications of such.
despite not being uniquely violent as a prisoner, because mikoto was successful in the attack due to the alters loophole, mikoto seems more violent than the others. it also doesn't help mikoto was put under severe psychological pressure, by es being incredibly careless with his dissociative barriers, leading to a sudden and extreme trauma-triggered switch.
it also doesn't help that there is a lot of social stigma in the real world around the mentally ill being unpredictable, violent, and senselessly volatile, and mikoto seemed to align with that, and thus the audience came to conclusions about what this outburst 'meant' about mikoto and the circumstances of his crime.
the audience at large did not like his vibe, and mikoto was deemed unforgiven.
in summary, John Doe ore (俺):
emerges when mikoto is overwhelmed and has his fight response triggered, exhausted of all other options to combatting an overwhelming psychological attack.
presents himself as the archetypal 'monster' (using rough speak, threats, and becoming violent) to intimidate es, stop their prodding at his dissociative barriers that keep him functional and stable, and hopefully prevent further abuse.
main body 2: defining the ore (オレ) of Neoplasm (quick section)
before i dig into Neoplasm, ore (オレ), and ore's (オレ) relationship to ore (俺), i have actually already written an essay and a half analysing ore's (オレ) presentation and motivations in Neoplasm here.
i'm not going to repeat all of my analysis, but i'll summarise the relevant bits, so we are on the same page going forward:
essentially, in Neoplasm, ore (オレ):
emerges coming into trial 2 to be interrogated by es, makes a point to identify 'himself' and only 'himself' as the killer, and spends almost all of his time negotiating mikoto's innocence accordingly.
claims his purpose is to "take it all - bear it all (...) [and] be rid of it."
presents himself as the archetypal 'monster' (using rough speak, threats, dehumanising himself, and making no effort to provide motive or explanation for his murders) to make himself appear unsympathetic and mikoto, in contrast, purely a victim.
you'll see already that the way the two ores function are pretty distinct. despite both having rough demeanours, functioning to protect himself, and evoking the archetypal 'monster', the circumstances in which they come forward and their specific goals in the moment and with their presentations are very different.
despite this distinction, ore (オレ) does intentionally seem to imply that he and ore (俺) are the same, and definitely does not correct this assumption on es' part. so what gives?
main body 3: psychoanalysing the ore (オレ) of Neoplasm
well, let's analyse the circumstances of ore's (オレ) appearance and callbacks, consider ore's (オレ) self-proclaimed purpose and role, and deduce the practical advantages of misleading es and the audience in this specific way.
very importantly, coming into trial 2 and the opening of Neoplasm, the situation for mikoto has changed, a lot.
firstly, mikoto has been voted guilty once. that is to say, whatever mikoto did in John Doe, did not work in his favour. he's also familiarised himself with Milgram by now, and is more aware of his position. so, he's not going to try what he did in John Doe again.
secondly, despite his 'odd case' meaning he has been free to roam the prison, he is chained and restrained for the events of Neoplasm. this also essentially eliminates the chance of any fight or flight response should he be triggered again, doubly.
differently to what brings ore (俺) out, the ore (オレ) of Neoplasm switches in with little fanfare, after a short period of a very dissociated mikoto expressing that he doesn't understand what's going on.
the specific note that he switches in on is on the note of being accused of things — mid sentence, he goes from passively laughing about his hopeless situation, to expressing irritation at it. before the switch, this 'mikoto' expresses that laughing things off comes naturally to him; it's likely this 'mikoto' is unable to feel or identify with frustration as 'himself', hence, the switch.
i also think, due to ore's (オレ) role (as the scapegoat alter who identifies with acts, takes blame and singular responsibility, and may already be planing to lean into his disconnect from 'mikoto' to absolve him), it was very necessary for him to come forward and negotiate with es at some point. hence, the situation of being interrogated by es (and specifically, the topic of blame) brings ore (オレ) forward.
after es immediately verbally takes note of the switch, ore (オレ) makes himself known; he does not pretend nothing has happened or continue with his train of thought. he immediately calls back to ore's (俺) actions in John Doe, implying that this is the same alter that perpetrated them, and generally associates himself with these parts of mikoto that are typically intolerable to him.
(note that while in the original text no specific personal pronoun is used, the obvious implication of bringing up the attack on es immediately after switching in is to create a connection between 'that' ore and 'this' ore. also, assuming the audience has a rudimentary understanding of DID, this alter not having amnesia for the event would also imply that it must be the same alter that perpetrated it.)
in my opinion, and the reason i was typically reluctant to interrogate which of mikoto's alters 'did what', the only reason for calling back to an alter's continuity like this is to establish blame. this goes double when the continuity involves associating yourself with typically intolerable (and socially unacceptable) acts, and triple when, as we have seen as Neoplasm progresses, this alter is generally entirely concerned with taking blame for 'mikoto' to relieve him of culpability and negotiate his physical and psychological freedom.
assuming ore (オレ) is associating and aligning himself with ore's (俺) actions as a way to take the blame for them, there are a few ways we can make sense of this decision.
1: in light of what we know about ore (オレ) as a scapegoat alter who clearly hates himself, who has taken responsibility for their murders to protect 'mikoto's self-image, one likely answer as to why he takes responsibility for ore's (俺) outburst is because he is an alter that handles shame.
even towards the beginning of Neoplasm, ore (オレ) expresses a desire to be dehumanised, and implies that typically, he is not considered human, likely because that would make matters of shame simpler: he is irredeemable, he is a monster, he is everything wrong, this is simply who he is.
this makes it likely to me that whenever mikoto expresses intolerable things or feels shame/is shamed for acting inappropriately, it would be the job of this alter to internalise the emotional fallout, reinforcing this self-image, all slightly away from normative 'mikoto', to protect 'mikoto's self esteem and ability to function. this existence would require ore (オレ) to be aware of any shameful things mikoto has done, including any standing up for himself as mikoto (俺).
mikoto essentially disowns and vilifies anything he does or expresses he considers socially unacceptable through having mikoto (オレ), who sees himself as a 'monster', take responsibility for all his shameful acts. ore (オレ) also handles and makes sense of the overwhelming shame mikoto feels for these acts, expressions, and abuse he has suffered through this way of seeing himself.
this implied long-term vilification of and 'inherent badness' to ore (オレ) could also tie in to a possibility of ore (オレ) existing before the events of milgram, as a part of mikoto that handled shame in his daily life and due to his everyday traumas.
it is also very common for other alters to reinforce introjected abusive rhetoric and lash out at parts that contain and handle shame.
when the person, as a whole, has been made shameful, but most alters cannot handle that level of shame, a typical response is for most alters to dissociate from it, and instead emulate the abuse they have suffered and inner critic they have developed onto only a part of them. this dissociative scapegoating protects the majority of the system from the feeling and experience of being shamed and belittled by themselves, and contains the overwhelming shame in one extreme, but often repressed part.
the fact the majority of mikoto's alters' seem psychologically unable to handle being or acting shamefully, instead blaming and verbally abusing a part who takes responsibility and is scapegoated for everything, and feels shame for everything, is textbook.
i find it likely that to protect himself from abuse at work, mikoto subconsciously separated himself from the 'him' that felt shame, and this alter grew to develop the belief that he must be, and may deserve to be made, responsible for everything.
2: in light of what we know about ore (オレ) as a scapegoat alter who intends to sacrifice himself while bearing all mikoto's sins, one likely answer as to why he takes responsibility for ore's (俺) outburst is also because mikoto's (俺) acts have put him into deep trouble.
towards the beginning of Neoplasm, ore (オレ) comments that one reason he feels he has been out a lot, as opposed to normative 'mikoto', is because of their guilty verdict. i find this makes sense. because 'mikoto' was labelled as culpable for his actions and the audience did not buy the alter excuse, mikoto has been forced from normalcy and forced to reside in a shame part more suited to this reality, where 'mikoto' is unforgiven, socially unacceptable, and labelled as 'dangerous' and otherwise ostracised.
mikoto, in general, does not seem very happy about this. after all, it's in his best interest to remain normative and functional and socially accepted. therefore, mikoto needs to work out how to be forgiven, and overcome the social predicament he has found himself in (both in terms of being a murderer, and being considered a 'volatile' mentally ill man due to his outburst).
the strategy mikoto lands on in Neoplasm comes in the form of ore (オレ) scapegoating himself for the murders, claiming to es that he perpetrated them without mikoto's consent or control, yada yada, as explored in my last essay.
considering the predicament mikoto is in is not only about being a murderer however, and ore (オレ) considers his role to "take it all - bear it all (…) [and] be rid of it," it would also make sense that for his attempted crucifixion, ore (オレ) would take on the responsibility of everything that has rubbed the audience the wrong way, before promising to vanish.
this includes his murders, but it also includes mikoto's (俺) intolerable and socially unacceptable outburst in John Doe, and mikoto's general being considered 'a man with alters, that make him dangerous'.
ore (オレ) wants the audience (and also, probably, himself) to think that after he has 'disappeared', everything unacceptable about mikoto will be gone; the 'alter that murdered', is ore (オレ), and will be gone, the 'alter that lashed out in John Doe', is ore (オレ), and will be gone, and perhaps even 'mikoto's alters in their entirety, that frighten people', are only ore (オレ), and will be gone.
hence, ore (オレ) takes responsibility for everything, before promising to vanquish it, accumulating every symbol and act and demeanour that may have made mikoto unforgiven, and promising to be rid of it, in the desperate attempt to return normalcy and forgiveness to themselves.
(in fact, he even may have implied he and ore (俺) are one and the same, and thus leaned into the presumption that there are only two alters, to make his (オレ) decision to vanish seem like a 'cure' for mikoto's DID (in leaving only the 'normative alter' in existence), and therefore free mikoto from the socially unacceptable status of being an 'othered' mentally ill man with alters, a status that has become apparent as Milgram has progressed and mikoto has been scrutinised. i hope i don't have to explain that you don't 'cure' DID by lobotomising yourself, and mikoto is currently learning this the hard way, based on his T3 lines, but as long as the audience is swayed to this way of thinking, and it is possible ore (オレ) genuinely believed removing all trace of mikoto's mental illness in 'vanishing' 'his alter, who is responsible for everything unacceptable' could help, is all that matters.)
this, actually, brings me into the third element, that i'm going to make a nice little title for, despite being a continuation of the ore (オレ) psychoanalysis, and another possible reason for why he gives us the impression he and ore (俺) are the same.
main body 4: mikoto's convenient false binary
as i said when i opened this essay, mikoto's case is often reduced to a conflict between how one votes a system of one 'innocent' personality and one 'guilty'.
when it comes to approaching and attempting to understand mikoto's crime, many people abstract him, and reduce him to a stock, hollywood, split-personality stereotype. this model, while simplistic and reductive, is easy for a lot of people to understand.
compared to real DID, in which a person is so conflicted on themselves and their actions that it sometimes feels as if they are possessed, and may not understand what they do or who they are, with a lot of muddy middle ground between self-states, identity and memory discontinuation, and blurring, split personality trope provides clearly defined boundaries.
clearly defined boundaries are an illusion in DID. they are also something a person with DID may attempt to reinforce when something a part of them handles or represents is intolerable to them. drawing a firm boundary in their mind helps them feel that they are separate from this part of themselves, and may help to explain the feeling of separatedness: 'if i feel it, it must be true'.
often, it is easiest for a person with DID to make sense of themselves to see themselves as multiple distinct entities, reflecting the different parts of self they have and the barriers between them. and yet, even so, most people with DID struggle with blurriness and existing beyond the confines they've drawn in the sand to make sense of themselves. at the end of the day, a model for understanding one's self is only a model.
that is to say, DID is messy, contradictory, and muddy.
mikoto, with no real coping mechanisms to overcome his symptoms, at the end of his psychological rope, and on the chopping block in Milgram, with already one guilty verdict under his belt, is not in a position to be messy, contradictory, and muddy.
he needs to be easy to understand. he needs to have clearly defined boundaries.
not only is it personally important for ore (オレ) to take the blame alone for all of his shameful actions, and then disappear, but if ore (オレ) can sell to the audience that there are only two alters, clearly defined, one innocent and one guilty, and play along with how the audience stereotypes and abstracts him into a conventional split-personality trope, ore (オレ) can sway the vote to his favour, and attain a forgiven vote, providing (relative) normalcy and social acceptance within Milgram for 'mikoto'.
by leaning into the false binary, creating false continuation between different normative mikotos and between different scapegoated and unacceptable mikotos, and make it seem as if there is no middle ground between them, mikoto creates a 'good' and an 'evil', a 'guilty' and an 'innocent'. he can compartmentalise everything in him that he feels has caused him abuse, blame all his outbursts and crimes on it, and then promise to vanquish it.
and if, 'without' his unacceptable, parts (who are clearly 'monsters', killers, and act out without reason) he is only his normative selves, who have 'done nothing wrong' and were 'helpless to their other side', and will never cause any issues again, the question of what Milgram's audience should do with mikoto becomes simple.
you vote to forgive mikoto.
and wow, it really worked. well done, mikoto. well done, ore (オレ). well done leaning into your own complex dissociation, the illusion of defined boundaries, and the audience's own pop-culture understanding of DID.
conclusion / tl;dr:
the ore (俺) that appears in John Doe and ore (オレ) that appears in Neoplasm are two separate alters. despite appearing on a surface level to have similar demeanours, and both portraying themselves as 'different kinds of people' to mikoto to help mikoto reassure himself they are 'not him, their triggers, actions, reasons, and motivations are distinct.
while ore's (俺) demeanour, aggression, and rhetoric serves to intimidate and challenge an overwhelming threat and escape from the confines of 'mikoto's identity to allow him to protect himself, ore (オレ) emulates a similar demeanour to portray himself as a shameful 'monster' who does not conform to socially acceptable behaviour and represents everything unacceptable about mikoto, to serve as a scapegoat.
despite the fact they are different, ore (オレ) intentionally leads the audience to believe that he is responsible for mikoto's outburst in John Doe, likely due to his role as an alter who handles mikoto's shame and takes the blame for everything mikoto deems unacceptable about himself, as well this claim being convenient for his ultimate plan to be crucified while bearing every unacceptable part of mikoto, in the pursuit of mikoto's forgiveness.
ore (オレ)'s misdirection also ties into the illusion of alter separatedness and mikoto's false binary, that he both utilises to cope, and to navigate the Milgram audience's expectations, as a strategy for securing his forgiveness, as well.
epilogue / reflection
i accidentally strayed into another essay i'm working on towards the end there. i am fascinated by how mikoto responds to the label of DID and conforms to the audience's stigmas and models they apply to him. a full essay on that train of thought is in the works. hang in there. that end bit was just a taste, i guess.
as always, please let me know if any of this is incomprehensible. i can be wordy, and i may accidentally use inaccessible DID jargon. if i have, please let me know and i will correct it. it is very important to me that my analysis can be understood and discussed (and even challenged!) by a wide audience.
anyway, pat yourself on the back, because, even not including text in images, you've officially read 5k words of nonstop mikoto analysis. this is longer than my 'john didn't do it' essay. holy fuck.
i hope you enjoyed. & thank you for sticking with me
Why Mikoto would be found guilty irl and how the law/laypeople on juries justify imprisoning a host for the crime of an alter (as a lawyer) (cliffsnotes version bc I could go on for a long time about any of the prisoners)
Before I start, please dont take what I say as me agreeing with certain things or expressing a personal view on the crime itself. I’m strictly talking about how his case would be objectively viewed under the law, and i’m only doing it because I see everyone else’s opinions and i find the contrast interesting.
TW because I talk about murder (obviously) and bring in some examples to highlight principles with other crimes that might be offputting- im not accusing him of those or comparing the actual offenses, Im just highlighting different things with them. (robbery, felony murder, sex crime)
The basics/general applicable law
All crimes require 1) actus reus (physical criminal act) and 2) mens rea (guilty mind). One must commit the actual act proscribed by law, and must do so with the requisite intent, for them to be found guilty of an offense. Murder is broadly defined as the intentional killing of another.
Actus reus is pretty simple. Intentionally killing someone else. Intent to do the act that winds up killing someone else or intent to cause great bodily harm is sufficient. “I only meant to beat him up, not kill him” — the intent to beat him up is enough for murder.
The mens rea usually makes all the difference in charging and conviction. Thats why you could see someone who totally murdered someone else actually get manslaughter because you couldn’t prove willfulness or purposeful action, only recklessness or negligence, etc.
Defenses tend to target the mens rea. Self defense is acting under the reasonable belief youre in danger of death or GBI. imperfect self defense is when that belief is unreasonable (and will still get you with a manslaughter charge because its an incomplete defense).
Insanity is another technical defense but it is unimaginably difficult to succeed on it. Theres four tests for legal insanity under US law:
1- M’Naughten test- a defendant is deemed to be legally insane if he or she was unaware of what he or she was doing when the offense was committed or, even if the defendant knew what he or she was doing, that defendant was incapable of understanding that what they were doing was wrong. It also tends to require a sincerely held belief or delusion that the conduct was morally justified.
2- “Irresistible impulse” test- allows for a defendant to be found not guilty by reason of insanity if his or her mental illness meant that, although recognizing the wrongness of the offense, he or she was compelled to commit the offense anyway. The focus is on volition.
3- Durham rule (Only used in NH)- juries follow the diagnoses made by trained professionals in determining whether the accused is guilty. This test fell out of favor because it diminishes the jury’s role as finder of fact and places decision making in the hands of psychologists, who may- and often do- disagree among each other about the diagnoses at issue.
4- Model Penal Code (MPC) test- A little broader than M’Naughten. Psychiatrist diagnoses mental illness; The defendant must prove they lacked the substantial capacity to (1) understand the criminality of the conduct or (2) conform their conduct to the law. This test prohibits psychopaths and sociopaths from using the insanity defense.
The most commonly used tests are M’Naughten and MPC.
Mikoto satisfies actus reus for murder
When someone with DID commits a crime, it is their corporal form that commits that crime, ergo, under the law, that corporal form committed the actus reus, regardless of who was fronting at the time. While unfortunate, the offending alter is an inextricable part of that person’s physical and mental state of being, and as a matter of public policy, the law treats them as one as it relates to physical conduct.
Mikoto cannot satisfy the standard of self defense
To act in legal self defense, the defendant must actually and reasonably believe in the need to defend against an imminent threat of death or GBI. If the belief subjectively exists but is objectively unreasonable, there is “imperfect self-defense,” i.e., “the defendant is deemed to have acted without malice and cannot be convicted of murder,” but can be convicted of manslaughter. Self-defense “is limited to the use of such force as is reasonable under the circumstances.” Only force that is necessary to repel an attack may be used in self-defense, and force exceeding that necessity is not justified.
So view that as 1) reasonable belief 2) of imminent danger and GBI and 3) use of no greater force than reasonably necessary to defend against it.
Theres 0 evidence of it, but let’s assume the guy he smacked with the bat in MeMe hit Mikoto first. In that scene the victim appears entirely unarmed and has no gun, he’s flat on the ground, he’s not moving towards Mikoto. Mikoto walking towards him and beating him down with a bat is not self defense at that point even if he hit him first. It actually wouldnt be self defense even if the guy had a gun in his pocket and Mikoto knew that, because if the gun isnt out and in the dude’s hand, theres not IMMINENT threat under the law.
He fails on self defense.
Mikoto would not succeed on the insanity defense
Take the two most common tests for insanity, M’Naughten and MPC.
Mikoto fails M’Naughten because he did not act under a delusion. The alter is not itself a delusion. And absent any evidence to the contrary, Mikoto and John both appeared aware that the conduct was morally and legally wrong.
Mikoto fails the MPC because, again, it seems both he and John would know the criminality of murder and failed to conform their conduct to the law for a reason other than a delusion or lack of understanding.
I’ll add that in 100% of cases i’ve seen a successful lodging of the insanity defense, the defendant suffered a disorder that caused delusions and hallucinations. It’s still not even a guarantee but schizophrenia or hallucinatory disorders- most commonly where the defendant demonstrates violent hyperreligiosity outside of judeochristian norms- make it much easier to argue that you truly acted under a moral belief that you were behaving properly. For instance, a paranoid schizophrenic man who suffers delusions of demons surrounding his mother and hallucinates that she, too, is a demon, sent to kill him and everyone else, who he then kills because he believed he was saving the world, assuming he gets that diagnosis and has experts testify as to his mental state, is fairly likely to lodge a successful insanity defense… maybe.
DID doesnt fit the typical mold of disorders encompassed by the insanity defense because unless some other illness is present, both the alter and the host know that the conduct is criminal, they arent acting under a delusion, and they arent under a sincere belief that murder is moral and just. Mikoto would not be found legally insane.
Mikoto would be found to have the requisite Mens Rea because as a matter of public policy, the alter is treated as one with the host
Having negated any defenses, Mikoto is likely to be found guilty of murder as he would have the actus reus and mens rea necessary for a conviction. An inextricable part of the host did in fact intend to kill someone, or intended to commit the act that killed someone, or intended to cause great bodily harm, so theres someone here who undeniably satisfies the legal elements for murder, hiding within someone who had no clue.
The law views a guilty alter as a guilty host. The alter is inseparable from the host, they would not exist without the host, and they would not be punished without simultaneously punishing the host. And because John is guilty, Mikoto is guilty under the law. This means Mikoto must be punished as well. Even the rehabilitative approach to punishment for crimes, which I’d say is most defendant-friendly, would require the full and complete “removal” of the offending alter, which means punishing the host to some degree.
And the evaluation of it is ultimately left up to the jury, and I dont think there’d be a jury that acquits him. Mind you, juries inherently doubt both the victim and the defendant when they provide testimony if there’s no corroboration. Be it by physical evidence or an expert witness. With DID, it would be expert witness testimony that kind of makes or breaks it. Right now, viewing what we have as the evidence, we only have Mikoto’s words as evidence of his DID. Without an expert, there’s virtually 0 chance that the jury would accept it as true. And because of Mikoto’s shock, I don’t believe he’s diagnosed, so there’s no expert possibility there either (usually they do bring the diagnosing physician along with several others appointed by the court and both parties).
And juries have the power to simply ignore a defendant’s mental illness in most cases when coming to a decision, if that mental illness did not CAUSE the crime, but only contributed or maybe explains a mental state. but thats a complicated topic with a lot of moving parts. When it comes to most any evidence or testimony, a jury can disregard whatever they believe is incredible, insubstantial, unconvincing. They can rule out a defendant’s (or victim’s) entire testimony as untruthful, they’re allowed to ignore literally any experts that testify if they find them incredible, they’re allowed to cherrypick parts of someone’s testimony to believe or not. They actually have an insane amount of power, so because DID isnt insanity under the law, if even one expert says “No, he doesnt have DID,” they can ignore 2, 3, 4 other experts saying “This guy has DID for real” and conclude that he’s lying. There’s nuances here and there but this will generally hold true. When it’s not the insanity defense or some other way of establishing an element of a defense, mental illness or trauma only holds weight as a mitigating factor in sentencing. And even then, it’s only if you can still somehow try to connect it to the offense. But this is paradoxical, because there has to be a balance between using evidence of mental illness as mitigation and not offputting a jury, as bad as that sounds.
More than anything in some cases, jurors are driven by their sympathy for the parties. And here, a jury is unlikely to be sympathetic to Mikoto, and much more likely to sympathize with the victims’ grieving families. Usually, DID or any other mental illness only garners juror sympathy insofar as they feel bad for the trauma that gave rise to it. It’s like “i hate what you did but i also hate what happened to you that made you this way.” It wont get someone off, but it’ll likely lower their sentence. Perhaps dramatically if the original trauma is particularly gruesome. Juries are unpredictable, but one constant seems to be mercy in the face of objectively undeserved hardship. If what we have now is our entire wealth of evidence, there is a sincere lack of sympathetic material for the jury to draw from wrt why Mikoto fractured in the first place, and for that reason, it’s honestly a very likely scenario that they simply don’t believe he has it at all.
And I don’t want to start any arguments so please dont take this as me putting my opinion out, but there is a common belief among the public, which does not evade the potential jury pool, that people fake all sorts of mental illnesses to avoid accountability. So absent an expert to corroborate the existence of a mental illness and how it impacted your conduct, that belief also likely leaks in.
Again, I’m not presenting opinion, just trying to tell you all everything from where I’m standing to give you the whole picture. All of my colleagues and opposing counsel have discussed the relationship between “identity politics” and increased use of labels to describe oneself off the bat, and juror sympathy, because convincing a jury is almost like a game. You can have all the evidence you need to make an irrefutable case, but how its presented to the jury ultimately makes a significant difference in the outcome. From what I’m told, overreliance on a mental disorder that does not fall within the umbrella of insanity when testifying to describe your offense makes a jury less sympathetic and less likely to believe you. And oddly it seems that keeping self-description of the hardships caused by your mental illness to a minimum has the inverse effect of increasing credibility with the jury, likely because they see it as trying to accept some form of accountability.
I’ll give a few examples. My boss has had a case where a defendant brought up an entirely different mental disorder, not DID. I won’t give out what disorder it was, but it was one my boss described as becoming somewhat “trendy” in the earlier 2000s. No experts testified on the defendant’s behalf, but both the prosecutor and defense attorney did believe the defendant truly suffered from it. The jury did not, in part because it was “trendy” and also because there was no evidence other than the defendant’s word. Given his crime, they believed there was reason to lie about having it, and there was nothing for them to find mitigating because nothing other than his word suggested the mental illness exacerbated the crime. It wasnt even a disorder that wouldve gotten him off on an insanity defense, it was just one for mitigation of sentence, and it was completely rejected- he got something in the realm of 20 years. He succeeded on an appeal for reconsideration of it, and brought in a few experts, but the prosecution also brought in an expert, and the new jury believed the prosecution’s one expert more- who still said the defendant had this disorder, but just that it didn’t contribute to or negate from the commission of the offense. This was an aggravated rape case.
Another example, there was a defendant who kept her description of his mental illnesses extremely short, it had to be coaxed out during testimony. Honestly, he had a pretty shitty go of it from the sound of his childhood and testimony. In a surprise move after originally agreeing to the mental illnesses angle of defense, when he testified, he himself went against his own experts and said his mental illnesses did not make him do what he did, and defended himself in a different way. So his testimony on his mental illnesses mirrored the prosecution’s expert witnesses’ views, but he just tried to justify it another way. Why, I don’t know. But he acted ashamed of what happened to him and what he suffered from mentally and was very clearly uncomfortable discussing it at all. The jury ended up finding that the mental illnesses in fact did mitigate his offense. He had committed multiple murder.
I’m not saying its right or wrong, but juries have little sympathy for mental illnesses that hold no weight in the crime you committed. And if im honest, juries do not want to be there. They have jobs and families and lives, and i wouldnt be surprised if some animus comes in when a defendant puts up evidence of a mental illness or gives long testimony about it when the mental illness did not functionally contribute to the offense/has only a tenuous connection, because it just means the jury has to be there longer. I dont know for sure, but ive seen them get irritated over the prosecution putting up more evidence than they need to, even though thats kind of the whole point- guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and all the evidence eliminates any doubt. So in the same way, introducing repetitive testimony about a mental illness that doesn’t negate any element of the crime could also be seen as a waste of time to them because it doesnt actually modify the verdict itself.
So the odds are stacked against Mikoto under US law at least. Based on what we have, his DID does not negate mens rea.
I’d like to briefly just discuss the public policy goal behind this, as courts have viewed it and explained. There are five main goals of criminal law- retribution (ensuring consequences are dealt), deterrence (discouraging defendant and other similarly situated people from committing this offense), incapacitation (keeping the defendant away from the public and ensuring they cannot hurt anyone further), rehabilitation (reforming the defendant for safe reentry into society), and restoration (providing the victim or their family with restitution for the specific offense committed, attempting to remedy their harm). Sentences are catered to meet these goals as they relate to different offenses. Taken together, the biggest theme is to give justice to the specific victim, and make sure it doesnt happen to anyone else.
You cant force an alter to front or control their decision to front, so there’s no way to truly tell if that alter will front and do it again if the same stressors causing the front arise, even if you put the host in therapy. Because its not like a bit of therapy will make the DID go poof, I’m gone now, it’s a long and intense process that takes years because you have to target that incredible amount of trauma that comes with the formation of the alter in the first place. There’s concerns on the other end about how therapy to cure or get rid of DID is harmful to the host or simply impossible, and if that’s so, then clearly putting the host in therapy will do nothing to protect the public or bring justice to the victims.
Ultimately, the law prioritizes the rights of the victim and the potential for recidivism. Although it was an alter and not the host, the alter cant be punished without also punishing the host. So being left with the option of letting the host walk free with no relief to the victim because the murdering alter is also free, or imprisoning the host for the sake of imprisoning the alter, which is the proper choice? There is no “fair” option. But where there is no guarantee that this will not happen again, it is in the interest of avoiding recidivism and preserving public safety to isolate and imprison the host so the alter can be addressed.
There’s no direct example, but its kind of like if you took conjoined twins, and one commits a murder while the other had no control over the body parts used to murder that person, didn’t want to, and didn’t plan it or conspire to do it. There’s one conscious being that committed a murder, and imprisoning them means we must imprison the other conscious being of the same body who had no part in it or control over it. Is it more justiciable to let them go, knowing that the other twin may offend again and that the innocent twin cannot control the body enough to stop it? Or do we imprison them both, knowing one of them is innocent?
Likewise, how do we ensure deterrence, justice, rehabilitation, restoration, or incapacitation in the case of an alter committing murder?
The short answer is we really can’t without simultaneously imprisoning the host.
So under the law, he satisfies the actus reus, and he satisfies the mens rea. I’d think there’d be some mitigation because he seemed to genuinely not know, but you never know with a jury (which is why I think it’s wise to submit the factfinding for factors in aggravation/mitigation to the judge instead of a jury but that would be waiving your right to a jury trial on those matters). For these reasons, he’d be imprisoned notwithstanding whether an alter committed the offense.
CW Violent murder, blood, mention of dismemberment
Hello members of the jury! I'm currently writing a few posts regarding the prisoners' murders and forgiveness and all that, so I decided I would explain my full theory on what the Kayanos' murders are, since while it's nothing out of the norm (I think), my exact interpretation gets a bit specific. And thus, I want to put all the evidence I have for my claims in one post so I don't sound insane when discussing these two.
(Yes despite what my previous posts may imply I actually believe Twokoto now lol. I still think Trikoto is perfectly fine, I just think Twokoto makes a bit more sense currently)
Again, it's nothing too wild; I believe Mikoto killed someone on the side of the road, the trauma from that caused John to be 'born', and then John killed at least two other people because he knew they were causing Mikoto trouble.
Claim 1: John killed people
A big part of this post is going to rely on the windows in Double. In case you're not aware, it's generally agreed that white windows are related to Mikoto while black windows are related to John. It's easy to tell from the first chorus, the start of the second verse, and the second chorus. Mikoto to the left, John to the right.
Additionally, when the windows are white, the train seems to be moving to Mikoto's left to the right (perspective from the first chorus), while when the windows are dark it moves from John's right to his left. This gives the impression that Mikoto and John are sitting across from each other, with Mikoto on the left side of the train and John on the right side. Here, I made a graph to help with the perspective because it is a bit mindfucky.
(Clarification: when I say "Mikoto's perspective" I actually mean our perspective while looking at Mikoto. Same with John. Apologies for the confusion)
Of course, that's assuming they actually are on the same train, going in the same direction, but I don't think that's too wild an assumption to make.
It's important to note this doesn't have anything to do with the window colors, which are exclusively used to differentiate alters, with the exception of the very end where John is seen with white windows long story. Rather, this perspective thing is a surprise tool which will help us later.
Anyways, now that we know the window thing, it's not hard to see how John has killed at least one person.
I mean, yeah. He sure do be killing in that shot. Black windows, so this is John. There's also this:
Although the kill itself has white windows in the background, the train compartment it happens in has dark windows.
Plus there's the whole "I saved you, right?" in the past tense. It can't be referring to John taking the fall for Mikoto's murder (we'll get there), since Mikoto hasn't been saved from that yet. Instead, it sorta has to be about John previously killing people that were stressing Mikoto out. Especially when looking at other lines like:
[Double]
You’re overdoing it, you’re already broken
But if you persist, I guess it’s my job to keep things on an even keel
Me, the other you
I’ll take it all on
The use of present tense in "you're overdoing it" implies this is being sung at a time when Mikoto is overworking, and it's now that John will "keep things on an even keel." Combined with him picking up the metal bat here, it seems he's talking about killing to ease Mikoto's issues.
Which, speaking of, I should probably say why John would kill anyone.
Claim 2: John's Motivations
[Neoplasm]
Es: Can I ask… why you killed them?
John: They annoyed me.
Es: Who did you kill?
John: Just someone who was walking around nearby.
Es: … How many did you kill?
John: Can't remember. I was first born back then, you know. It's kinda fuzzy.
Now, these claims aren't the most trust-worthy, but we'll get there when we get there. For now, all we have as a stated motive is "they annoyed [me]" (no pronoun used, it's ambiguous who they actually annoyed) and "to save Mikoto." The good news is that we actually did sorta see a situation where John tried to kill someone, meaning we can get an idea of what his modus operandi is.
I'm referring to the point in John Doe where John attacks Es.
[John Doe]
Mikoto: I became a murderer… without even knowing it…?
There's no way, no way…
Es: Let's give it some time. The threads of your memory might untangle themselves eventually.
Mikoto:*Gasping*
Es: A murderer without memory of killing… in which case, how should I think of you…
Hey, Mikoto–
John: AAAAAAAARGH!!!!!!
Es does absolutely nothing between the time John starts fronting and when John attacks them. And if you look further, Es doesn't do much else. That means either John has some idea of what was going on before he started fronting, or he can feel Mikoto's resentment even though he isn't the one fronting.
This is where I acknowledge I am not an expert in DID, I'm not a system, and because of that there is a high chance I get stuff wrong, please correct me if I say anything stupid!
Although I unfortunately can't find any better sources for this than some Reddit threads, from what I understand it's possible for one alter to feel the emotions of a different alter who isn't fronting. This means John could have known Mikoto was getting really frustrated with Es, and decided Es had to die for that. However, it's unclear how much John knew about the situation, since he never says anything too specific.
As a result, it's possible John is willing to attack people because he can feel Mikoto hates them, even if he isn't fully sure why Mikoto might be frustrated at them. On the other hand, perhaps John does retain memory of what Mikoto goes through even when Mikoto is fronting. Again, I can't find good sources on how this works, but from what I've seen some systems do have alters which can share memories to an extent. I really hope I'm not saying anything horrendously stupid lol.
Anyways, the point I'm trying to make is that regardless of how it happens, John's desire to kill his victim(s) comes from Mikoto's frustrations with those people.
[Neoplasm]
John: …! … I think… I might be the person Mikoto wishes he was.
The person who stubbornly stands his ground, who doesn't cry himself to sleep from stress, who gives people their payback.
The fact he's represented by the Devil card, which is associated with people's darkest desires, supports the idea his actions are an extension of Mikoto's wishes.
This can also be inferred from the "neuron" scene in Double. You know the one, the one that goes "Doesn't matter if you didn't wish for it, can't get rid of me now". I interpret those silver star things to be representative of neurons, and it's animated in the way it is to represent Mikoto's thoughts (the words in blue) reaching John's conscious at the bottom (the red). I hope that makes sense.
So in short, I believe John found out Mikoto was getting bothered by certain people, and that's why he killed them.
Claim 3: Mikoto killed a guy
Alright so now the harder one to prove. Let me add up all the evidence.
Point #1: Mikoto is the Milgram prisoner, not John
This one is pretty straightforward. Since Milgram doesn't gather every single murderer in the world, John not being a prisoner doesn't mean he didn't kill. But the inverse is potentially true; if Mikoto is a prisoner, then he must have killed someone. Unless there's more alters and one of them is the prisoner, this makes some sense.
The counter-argument is that Milgram is very clearly not designed for systems, so it's possible Mikoto is only the prisoner because he's the host and no other reason. Still, it's worth keeping in mind.
Point #2: A murder on light windows
Take a look at this scene from Double.
As you can see, the way this is framed, it looks as if Mikoto is running away from John. Down to the horror movie motifs of "victim running - persecutor walking." This time, the windows on both sides of Mikoto are white, while the windows on both sides of John are black, instead of there being white and black across from each other.
Looking at the scene, which I can't really show you with still images and will need you to confirm yourself, is that John and Mikoto are moving in the same direction as the train. You can tell based on the relative speed of the objects outside. And yet, there's body parts outside of the train, which move from the front to the back. On the white windows. Which represent Mikoto. And there's an entire window between the left of the screen (where for all we know the windows could change) and where the blood appears. Here's a diagram.
So, uh, Mikoto? Who the hell killed that guy? It certainly wasn't John, especially because the body parts are outside. John was the one who got onto the train (see: cigarette), so I would argue a murder outside could imply it was performed by Mikoto, who notably doesn't usually ride trains. Although I'm not sure that reasoning makes sense to anyone but me.
However, the body being outside presents a much bigger issue for Mikoto's innocence. When John swings, and apparently causes something similar to happen, he's inside. We don't see the mannequin he supposedly hits, and God knows how the pieces ended up outside. Not to mention he for some reason swings at where the legs would be, instead of at the head like all the other attacks we see.
My point here is that this murder makes very little sense if John is supposed to have caused it. Because of all that, to me, this represents John taking the fall for Mikoto's one kill. Unlike the other John murders, which show the "victim" and make physical sense, this one doesn't show the victim and has inconsistencies because John didn't do it. The murder was originally in the white windows, and John is scrambling to make it look like it happened on the black windows, even though that doesn't really work as shown by the diagram above.
Am I taking these scenes too literally? Maybe, but even symbolically, what does it mean if blood appears when the windows are white? Surely there's at least a chance it's Mikoto doing this murder.
Point #3: 3rd Anniversary artwork
Let's first establish what the 3rd anniversary art usually represents. It's been pointed out by many before me that these pieces are closely connected to the prisoners' murders. This is clearest with Muu, Amane and Kotoko.
Muu is wearing her school outfit, but she has a shoe off, just like she did when she killed Rei.
Amane is wearing her Magic outfit, but she's holding her thunder wand, which places this image near her murder. Specifically right before her murder, as she's still wearing her black bow tie instead of her cloud medal thing.
Kotoko is holding her Jacques Roulet cap, a hat she usually only uses alongside her blue and yellow jacket. The only exception is during her murder, where she's wearing the outfit we see in the anniversary artwork while the cap rests on the floor.
The others all hold up with this hypothesis. Yuno is wearing her yellow shirt, the one she's wearing in Tear Drop near the end when she lets out a tear, presumably representative of her murder. Fuuta is wearing the hoodie and mask he wears throughout Bring it On, and he's holding his phone, which does fit doxxing Killcheroy even though it's more generic. Kazui and Mahiru are wearing the outfits they wear in the scenes of their respective lovers' death. Haruka wears his Weakness plain white outfit, which could point to any moment of his narrative, including the murder. And the only times we see Shidou physically kill (cutting off flowers), he's wearing the floral jacket he wears in the artwork.
I want to be clear. For most of them, the relation to the murder could just be because they don't have many outfits in their MVs. However, Muu's, Amane's and Kotoko's feel extremely intentional, and the fact none of the other ones contradict this trend makes it feel like it could be universal.
Which gets us to Mikoto's artwork. And in his artwork, he's holding (what looks to be) a vape pen. John smokes cigarettes, so that's definitely Mikoto. In the murder artwork. So, uh. Yeah. That certainly feels like he must have killed at least one person.
The only small contradiction is that his beanie is nowhere to be found, which is why I don't consider this definitive. However, the fact they specifically chose to make Mikoto hold a vape pen when every other prisoner can easily be connected to the murder feels... intentional.
Point #4: Swing and a hit
More Double screenshots.
So a few weird things. For starters, let's get something straight: there's two murders depicted here. Notice how the first image shows a Kayano swinging with a right-handed swing, then the second shows John (black windows) doing a left-handed swing. The important thing isn't the type of swing, but the fact they're different.
(I know I made some posts at one point about dominant hands, but as my beloved and extremely smart mutual accirax pointed out a lot of the time Milgram characters switch hands because it looks better for the animation, so they're sorta ambidextrous by default lol)
It's not hard to realize if you try to follow the motion yourself. The only way this works is if he swings one way, then the other, which doesn't fit the fact all mannequins are usually destroyed after just one hit. And it's not like it's an animation issue: you can literally fix this by flipping the image.
... Okay it does look a bit awkward but I think it works well enough. It's less weird than the swing changing mid-way through.
To me, this is similar to what I talked about before with the white window murder. John's subconscious trying to convince itself this was John by thinking back to a different murder that has nothing to do with this one. I have no idea if that makes sense.
And then there's the fact the background in the first image is pure white. This doesn't have to mean the one fronting is Mikoto, but why leave it ambiguous if it would have worked perfectly fine with black windows in the background?
Hell, actually, who says we're on the train? This is the only scene in the entirety of Double (apart from the mom phone call) where it's unclear whether we're on the train or not. And as we established, if there is a murder outside the train, it would probably be Mikoto murdering.
And don't get me started on the blood, the eye, and the noise in the background.
First, the background noise in this scene famously has baby crying noises. Could it be we're witnessing John's "birth"? Because if that's the case, then either John was born during the phone call with the mother, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense if you think about it, or John was born during or after the murder on screen.
This actually fits with the close-up of the eye. Despite the fact that "right-hand swing Kayano" seems pretty chill as he attacks the mannequin, right as the scene end, his pupils become smaller as if he's surprised by something. But what would he be surprised about? To me, it feels like "right-hand swing Kayano" was perhaps dissociating (I think that's the right term, please correct me if I'm wrong), and then John is born. Naturally, John gets surprised by the fact the first thing he sees is a dead person, explaining the odd reaction.
Funnily enough, this is actually supported by the very strange blood behavior. It's hard to describe, so bear with me. You see how there's one big orb at the center of the screen? And it starts with one small drop, which enters the orb, and then three small droplets come out the other side? Uh... Diagram?
This isn't normal blood behavior, of course (<- not that I know what normal blood behavior actually is, but I know how liquids work and this ain't it). It's imagery of something splitting, which in the context of alters, fits alongside the baby noises and the weird reaction to murder. Although I fully acknowledge the blood thing falls into the territory of "am I reading too much into this or is Milgram just insane?", so you know. Take it with a few metric tons of salt.
(Funnily enough, it does split into three things. Trikoto win? It doesn't convince me, but the interpretation is valid)
To recap, we have a strange murder with a white background, possible misdirection by showing a completely unrelated murder performed by John, baby noises, imagery of something splitting, and a reaction to the murder which could support an alter being born in that very moment. All of this could imply this "right-hand swing murder" is the moment John is born, which would mean the actual murderer is Mikoto.
Point #5: The tarot spreads in MeMe
This one is very abstract, but it can definitely point to Mikoto murdering someone. Take a look at the two different spreads we see in the first chorus (the first one flashes twice but it's the same).
These things are really complicated, and I should probably do a post about them at some point, but I'm gonna focus on the main things, that being the changes between the two spreads.
For starters, we see that the "querent" card, the one in the middle of The Wheel, is the reversed Hanged Man. Since this is the portrait besides The Fool in the water world thing, it can be assumed the reversed Hanged Man represents Mikoto. Thus, these are his spreads.
Then, the Outcome card of the first spread is the Devil. Since the Devil card on its own also flashes after the second spread, it can be assumed the Devil is also the Outcome of the second spread, as that's the only card which is not visible. Then, as stated before, the Devil card is related to John. This means the Outcome of the situation depicted in these spreads is John. In other words, this is the situation which led to John appearing.
Now we have to establish how we're supposed to read these things. I've explained it in another post, but basically, the only way we can tell how we're supposed to read the cards in The Wheel is by knowing the order they're drawn, so we can determine if the meaning is based on position or draw order (long story). We can do this by looking at the final spread, where it appears the cards are drawn Bottom->Right->Left->Top. This doesn't exactly fit any common way of drawing them, so we read based on position. Aditionally, since this is Japanese media and the card to the right is drawn before the card on the left, middle row of The Wheel is Future<-Present<;-Past. And based on the way the upright Page of Pentacles is placed in the final spread, if the name of the card is to the left the horizontal card is upright, if not it's reversed. If that doesn't make any sense to you, don't worry too much about it, I'll walk you through the important parts. You want a diagram? No? Well, you're gonna get one so-
After clarifying that, we can see that in these two spreads, while most of everything remains consistent, the Future and the Conscious change, the Challenge flips, and the Attitude is revealed. Let's take it one step at a time.
Let's start with the first spread. In the Challenge position (horizontal middle), we have the upright Queen of Swords. This card can represent anything you want tarot reading is so annoying a couple of things, including an authority figure. In the Challenge position, it could indicate there is a lack of communication, that the querent is being too "cold", in the sense they're not expressing their emotions correctly.
Then, in the Conscious position, the thing Mikoto is actively working towards, we have the Ace of Cups. This card can represent new beginnings, new relationships, good fortune, basically "good new things are coming your way." However, there is a slight change between MeMe's Ace of Cups and the IRL version, which could change the meaning a bit.
(No I don't know why MeMe calls it "Cup of Ace" that's just wrong lol)
As you can see, the IRL version has the water from the cup spilling on its own, while the MeMe version has the cup being intentionally spilt on top of a few mannequins. What I think this could mean: if you take the water spilling as a good thing (which is how it's usually interpreted, the idea is that spirituality is overflowing or something like that), the IRL version shows that new good things are coming no matter what, while the MeMe version has the water spilling intentionally because Mikoto is actively trying to cause new, good developments, such as new relationships (we'll get there). That's also why it's in the Conscious position, Mikoto is consciously trying to build a good new relationship.
After that, in the Future position, we have the reversed Wheel of Fortune. This can mean a lot of things, but it mainly has to do with a negative cycle in someone's life. In the Future position, then, this could mean a perpetuation of a negative cycle in Mikoto's life. Thus, in the first spread, if things continue as they are in that moment, the cycle of abuse Mikoto suffers at work will continue.
The Attitude card is obscured. I should note that this card can actually be read in a few different ways, but I think "Attitude" fits best here.
I'll also note the Subconscious card at the bottom of the Wheel ("so below") is the reversed Ten of Wands, which can represent Mikoto is feeling overburdened. Which we know certainly applies to his work.
Let's see here. Mikoto has a problem, possibly with someone in a position of authority, and feels overburdened. This could point to the Queen of Swords being a boss or a manager or something like that. It's upright because Mikoto isn't being direct enough in his desires; he's trying to 'play nice' and build up his relationship with the "Queen", that's what the Ace of Cups could represent. Not like I think his situation would actually improve if he told this "Queen" that he felt overworked, but still, the idea that Mikoto is bottling up his emotions definitely fits what we see of him. If he keeps it up, the cycle of (workplace) abuse will continue, represented by the reversed Wheel of Fortune. This would lead to Mikoto's darkest desires exploding; the Devil is the Outcome.
Let's move to the second spread. The Challenge is still the Queen of Swords, but reversed. This could imply the person giving Mikoto problems is still the same, but now the issue is that Mikoto is being too emotional. Again, there are a lot of ways to read these things, but I think that works.
The Conscious card is now the reversed Wheel of Fortune, which could mean Mikoto is actively aware of and possibly trying to break the negative cycle he's in.
The Future is now the Ace of Cups, which could imply there is a new relationship in Mikoto's future. This is where we acknowledge that the water can also represent consciousness, and in the MeMe version, it is being spilt over mannequins. And...
*sigh* The Ace of Cups can be associated with pregnancy, which fits the whole "newborn" thing John's got going on.
Indeed, I believe the new relationship in Mikoto's future is John, a "mannequin" receiving "consciousness." There is no other thing this could really allude to besides Milgram, which I don't think these spreads reference. However, if this really is about John, that would mean this spread is showing a situation before John's birth.
The Attitude card, which (according to most sources, there are conflicting reports on what the first card of The Wand is) represents how the querent is trying to achieve their Conscious goal, is the reversed King of Cups. This is most often associated with emotional repression, but it can also be connected to violence. Which is very interesting, because John has the same Attitude card in his spread. And we know how he approaches his issues (violence).
So all in all, Mikoto is having issues with an authority figure, and he's (possibly) being emotional about it. He's trying to break out of a negative cycle, and he's doing this either by repressing his emotions or by pulling a John (violence). In the future, this will lead to John's birth, which is why the Outcome is still implied to be the Devil.
This, by itself, doesn't necessarily imply murder. Again, the Attitude could be emotional repression and not violence. The weird thing is that the spread changed. And that means something had to happen to get the Future to change. The change can't have been John being born; that's still in the Future. And the thing we know happened is that the Conscious goal Mikoto was working towards changed, from wanting a prosperous new beginning or relationship to destroying an existing cycle.
Because of that, to me, it feels like the change between the first spread and the second is that Mikoto decided to let his emotions take over (reversing the Queen of Swords) and killed (reversed King of Cups) the authority figure who was causing him trouble, and this caused John to be born.
The final thing to note is that John's Past card is the Wheel of Fortune (upright). This could be read to mean the situation leading up to John's current situation is the destruction of a cycle, which fits the idea that Mikoto tried to destroy it before John was born.
Is this definitive evidence? Hell no! Tarot readings are so ambiguous that I'm pretty sure you can read these to mean whatever the hell you want them to mean. This is just my take on it, I don't even necessarily consider it good evidence because again, if you just take different meanings from the cards you can get whatever. But it's still something.
Point #6: John's insistence
Let's see what John says about the murders again.
[Neoplasm]
Es: Can I ask… why you killed them?
John: They annoyed me.
Es: Who did you kill?
John: Just someone who was walking around nearby.
Es: … How many did you kill?
John: Can't remember. I was first born back then, you know. It's kinda fuzzy.
So, as stated, John may have killed people without fully knowing why Mikoto was angry at them, but that doesn't mean this makes perfect sense. We know their victims weren't just "someone who was walking around nearby". Unless Mikoto regularly carries around a metal baseball bat for some god-forsaken reason, there must have been some kind of premeditation at play. John has to at least be hiding the real reasons for the murders, possibly because Mikoto might consider them shameful (more on that in a bit). This opens the door to the possibility he's hiding more than just that, and that makes a lot of his other claims seem a bit... desperate.
[Neoplasm]
John: From [Mikoto's] point of view, he's being blamed for a crime he can't even remember.
Es: If that's the truth, then… you're the one who committed the murder?
John: Yeah, it's me. I killed them off.
Es: …
John: So Mikoto really didn't do it.
Es: Is this really something that works that conveniently?
John: Just put yourself in Mikoto's shoes for a moment!
He was bottling up all his stress! He kept dealing with it all by himself the whole time, until it exploded!
It's not like he just decided that he wanted to hurt somebody!
Es: …
John: He's not the type of person who could do stuff like that! He always looks out for others, always reads the room, always tries to get along with people around him! He can't do stuff like that… He was on the verge of exploding!
That's why I was born. It's terrible, isn't it? My other self didn't do anything!
Es: Even if that's true… Even if it wasn't what Mikoto wanted – someone's life was still lost.
[...]
John: I'm the one who did it! Mikoto didn't do it! You know that because of MILGRAM! I don't care about the law, I want to know what you think!
Es: …
John: Please… forgive Mikoto. I'm the one who did it.
The amount of times John tries to take the fall for every single murder is so insane it makes it sound suspicious. Why does he say it so much?
Still, I'll be honest, this might just be confirmation bias, as a lot of these lines can still absolutely be read with the interpretation that John is the only killer.
John: If I, the "John" personality, hadn't been born, I'm sure Mikoto would have reached his limit and fallen apart.
Es: John… you…
John: It's true that I was the one who wanted to destroy everything… and the weakness of Mikoto, who couldn't stand up for himself all alone, might have been the origin of that.
But… that's all there is to it. Is that a sin?
So I don't consider this evidence at all, frankly. In fact, Neoplasm is one of the things which make me doubt the Mikoto-killer theory a bit, but I don't think it outright deconfirms it or anything. I'm just including this because I know some people think he's extremely suspicious here.
Point #7: Small visual stuff
1- The first time we see victims in Double, John's bat doesn't have any blood on it, which could imply the one who killed the mannequin(s) beside him was Mikoto.
2- The mannequin standing in for Death in the Death card is blue, a color most associated with Mikoto.
This one isn't great because you can read it more symbolically, with Mikoto being the main force of change in the system's life instead of someone who brings death. Though I'd argue the mace thing sort of implies something more violent.
3- At the start of Double, we see this:
The guy is shown as a blue and red mannequin, but what's interesting is that the blue part has a skull and the red part has a map thing. I don't consider this very important, but the blue with the skull could be indication of Mikoto having killed someone.
4- In Double, Mikoto is represented by antlers (I think that's what they are) in the same way John is represented by a crown of thorns ("savior", etc).
Antlers mainly represent strength, which feels a bit weird for Mikoto. I'm gonna be honest, I'm not confident on what these represent. But one possible interpretation comes from the fact they are always paired with the lyric (written on screen) "All I did was dream, so you find me INNOCENT, it’s that simple right?". The connection of the antlers with Mikoto's dream could imply Mikoto tried to use strength to fulfill a dream, which could imply he murdered someone to achieve something. Additionally...
*sigh* Antlers fall off after mating season, which could be connected to Mikoto "losing his antlers" after John is born, since Mikoto doesn't have to kill anymore.
I'm sure there are other interpretations, but I don't think this one is too bad.
So, all of this, is it conclusive evidence of anything? I wouldn't say so, it's all still pretty vague. However, I believe all of it together points to Mikoto having killed one person, and this is what explains all this in the best way. Thus, I presume Mikoto did kill someone.
Claim #4: Mikoto's Motivations
CW for this section: potential stalking
I've sorta alluded to it in the tarot section, but I believe Mikoto killed someone in a position of authority over him as a result of workplace abuse. In particular, Mikoto was heavily overworked, possibly to the point this authority figure was somehow monitoring his home life and possibly even stalking him.
Let's start by the workplace abuse thing. This is an extremely important point in Mikoto's narrative; it's referenced in his Undercover silhouette shot, it's shown in the messages from "Chief" at the start of Double, the neuron scene from Double, his interrogation questions, etc. Mikoto is being overworked, to the point his boss/manager/whatever talks to him about work past midnight. It would be very strange, narratively speaking, if all of this didn't have anything to do with the murder. Also the whole "Queen of Swords is the Challenge/problem" could allude to an authority figure, which also fits this idea.
So then, what about the monitoring/stalking? Well, there's a lot of camera imagery in MeMe, for one. Most notably in the scene when Mikoto comes home and leaves his bag to the side as he breaks down, relating his stress to the idea of being watched. There's also an abundance of eye imagery in Double, especially in relation to Mikoto. This is also included in the MVs version of the Hanged Man card, which has a bunch of eyes around the mannequin. This alludes to some form of judgement or pressure, (<- Fuuta reference?) which could be connected to either societal pressure or, what I find a bit more likely, the judgement of Mikoto's higher-up(s) in his workplace.
Because of this, I believe one of Mikoto's higher-ups was heavily monitoring Mikoto's life even outside of work, which drove him to the point he felt he had to get rid of them. All he did was dream... of a better life.
This could also be why John hides the reasons for the murders. Even if he is actually aware of the full situation, he could be trying to hide that Mikoto felt tired from work, because in a way it's possible Mikoto would consider that shameful. I hope that makes sense.
Claim #5: Which is Mikoto's kill?
Assuming Mikoto only killed one person before John started taking over murder duties-
(I think that's a fair assumption, I think it would be weird if John only split after like three murders. Like, oh the first two weren't stressful enough to cause a split, but the third one is too much? What? There's something else that makes me think John split after just the first one, we'll get there)
-that begs the question: which one was Mikoto's? Well, since Double isn't exactly reliable for what the murders looked like, I'll only take MeMe's versions into account. There are at least three murders in MeMe: the Subway Murder, the Streetside Murder, and the Trash Bag Murder.
We know the Trash Bag Murder is different from the other two because the murderer isn't wearing a hoodie in that one, a fact which took me an embarrassing amount of time to notice. Unless he went home, changed, went back to dispose of evidence and still had the beanie for some reason (since he throws it away), it has to be different. And probably on a different day, too. Because of that, I'll henceforth call it the No Hoodie Murder.
Let's run through what we have. We see the Subway murder almost in full at the beginning of MeMe, where Kayano swings around his bat flippantly before killing a blonde dude with a simple overhead swing. However, right in the middle of that scene, we quickly cut to the Streetside murder, where we see Kayano hitting the victim with a right-handed swing.
After that we have a scene of John (because at this point it would be John) coming home and taking off his shirt. Since there is a Fool card portrait in the background, I'll call this the Fool Portrait scene. Notably, we never see John take off a hoodie or a beanie, meaning this is probably related to the No Hoodie Murder.
Then we have Kayano doing... something to the Streetside victim. It's unclear exactly what that is; I've seen some people say he's burying the victim, but to me that always looked like he's dismembering them to put them in trash bags. It's not too important, though.
An important fact is that in this scene we see his left cheek is blood-stained. This is consistent with the following bath scene, where we see John brushing his teeth with blood trailing down from his left cheek.
In the middle of those scenes, we see the clean-up for the No Hoodie murder. Trash bags and the beanie are disposed of in an illegal dumping ground.
Finally there's the bathtub scene, but frankly it's not very relevant to this discussion.
So, which one is Mikoto's? I'll start by ruling out the No Hoodie murder. There is an argument for it, though. It's definitely the most hidden of the murders, which makes it suspicious. Since the Fool represents new beginnings, you could argue the Fool Portrait scene shows John's "beginning". And since I said it's probably related to this murder, you could argue that means the No Hoodie murder is the first one.
However, that doesn't really convince me. Unless the Kayanos have multiple beanies (which is possible, but I'd find it weird narratively speaking), this would have to be the last murder in the sequence, while Mikoto's would have to be the first. The fact it was done without a hoodie also contradicts the 3rd Anniversary artwork reasoning, since Mikoto wears a hoodie there, but to be fair the lack of beanie makes the outfit somewhat inconsistent anyways.
Meanwhile, you could argue there's a symbolic implication that John and Mikoto have already split by the time the Subway murder happens, in the way the towers close and behind Kayano have lighting split down the middle between red and blue light.
(Yes this is one of the reasons I'm keeping the red and blue color scheme despite no longer believing RGBkoto)
No, I believe the Streetside murder is Mikoto's. It's technically the first one we see, but more importantly, the location matches Mikoto's prisoner card image, and the swing fits the Undercover kill-shot.
Since Mikoto is the Milgram prisoner, these two things would probably be related to his murder, not Johns'.
Funnily enough, you can also argue that this murder is too expressionless for John. Which sounds odd, considering John is usually the less expressive of the two, but funnily enough, the only times we see John express emotion is when he goes to do a violence, either because he's frustrated at the person who hurt Mikoto or because he's happy to protect him.
[John Doe]
John: SHUT YOUR MOUTH!!!
Es: *Gasp*
John: YOU KEEP BLABBERING ON AND ON...
I'M GONNA FUCKING KILL YOU, YOU PIECE OF SHIT!
*John continues to beat Es*
John: GOING ON, AND ON, AND ON...
ALL HIGH AND MIGHTY... LIKE YOU AREN'T JUST A KID!
SERVES YOU FUCKING RIGHT!
Es: …emember…
John: HUH-!? I CAN'T HEAR YOU!
YOU'RE NO MORE THAN JUST A KID. YOU UNIMPORTANT BRAT!
Es: .........I'll remember you… you murderer…!
John: HUH?! *Laughter*
YOU PREFER IT WHEN IT HURTS MORE, HUH?
Es: ......!
John: THAT'S FINE... I'LL CRUSH YOUR FUCKING FACE.
Es: Go ahead… and try…
John: YOU DON'T NEED TO TELL ME TWICE! *Screams*
[...]
Kotoko: His technique is definitely that of an amateur…
John: SHUDDUP!!!
Kotoko: ...! *Sighs* I can't imagine that power from his muscle mass.
John: ANNOYING... YOU'RE ANNOYING...! ARGH...!
This even fits the lackadaisical twirling of the bat in the Subway murder. It's one of the reasons I believe that one's John's.
Meanwhile, the one time we see a Kayano swing a bat without emotion on his face is the right-hand swing in Double, which as we established is probably Mikoto. Thus, the idea that John shows more expression than Mikoto when it comes to murdering holds up. The punch at the end of MeMe doesn't count because that's John attacking Mikoto, which is only metaphorical.
Still, this isn't exactly great evidence of anything, since John is still usually less expressive than Mikoto in general.
Anyways, which murder is Mikoto's isn't too important anyways, this section was more to satisfy curiosity than anything else.
And that's it! Again, this is just my interpretation and theories, it's perfectly fine if you believe something else. I know it isn't anything new, but I wanted to put it all in one place so I can reference back to it if, say, I'm answering an ask about whether or not I forgive the prisoners' murders (I swear I'm working on it lol). Anyways, take care!
CW Violent murder, blood, mention of dismemberment
Hello members of the jury! I'm currently writing a few posts regarding the prisoners' murders and forgiveness and all that, so I decided I would explain my full theory on what the Kayanos' murders are, since while it's nothing out of the norm (I think), my exact interpretation gets a bit specific. And thus, I want to put all the evidence I have for my claims in one post so I don't sound insane when discussing these two.
(Yes despite what my previous posts may imply I actually believe Twokoto now lol. I still think Trikoto is perfectly fine, I just think Twokoto makes a bit more sense currently)
Again, it's nothing too wild; I believe Mikoto killed someone on the side of the road, the trauma from that caused John to be 'born', and then John killed at least two other people because he knew they were causing Mikoto trouble.
Claim 1: John killed people
A big part of this post is going to rely on the windows in Double. In case you're not aware, it's generally agreed that white windows are related to Mikoto while black windows are related to John. It's easy to tell from the first chorus, the start of the second verse, and the second chorus. Mikoto to the left, John to the right.
Additionally, when the windows are white, the train seems to be moving to Mikoto's left to the right (perspective from the first chorus), while when the windows are dark it moves from John's right to his left. This gives the impression that Mikoto and John are sitting across from each other, with Mikoto on the left side of the train and John on the right side. Here, I made a graph to help with the perspective because it is a bit mindfucky.
(Clarification: when I say "Mikoto's perspective" I actually mean our perspective while looking at Mikoto. Same with John. Apologies for the confusion)
Of course, that's assuming they actually are on the same train, going in the same direction, but I don't think that's too wild an assumption to make.
It's important to note this doesn't have anything to do with the window colors, which are exclusively used to differentiate alters, with the exception of the very end where John is seen with white windows long story. Rather, this perspective thing is a surprise tool which will help us later.
Anyways, now that we know the window thing, it's not hard to see how John has killed at least one person.
I mean, yeah. He sure do be killing in that shot. Black windows, so this is John. There's also this:
Although the kill itself has white windows in the background, the train compartment it happens in has dark windows.
Plus there's the whole "I saved you, right?" in the past tense. It can't be referring to John taking the fall for Mikoto's murder (we'll get there), since Mikoto hasn't been saved from that yet. Instead, it sorta has to be about John previously killing people that were stressing Mikoto out. Especially when looking at other lines like:
[Double]
You’re overdoing it, you’re already broken
But if you persist, I guess it’s my job to keep things on an even keel
Me, the other you
I’ll take it all on
The use of present tense in "you're overdoing it" implies this is being sung at a time when Mikoto is overworking, and it's now that John will "keep things on an even keel." Combined with him picking up the metal bat here, it seems he's talking about killing to ease Mikoto's issues.
Which, speaking of, I should probably say why John would kill anyone.
Claim 2: John's Motivations
[Neoplasm]
Es: Can I ask… why you killed them?
John: They annoyed me.
Es: Who did you kill?
John: Just someone who was walking around nearby.
Es: … How many did you kill?
John: Can't remember. I was first born back then, you know. It's kinda fuzzy.
Now, these claims aren't the most trust-worthy, but we'll get there when we get there. For now, all we have as a stated motive is "they annoyed [me]" (no pronoun used, it's ambiguous who they actually annoyed) and "to save Mikoto." The good news is that we actually did sorta see a situation where John tried to kill someone, meaning we can get an idea of what his modus operandi is.
I'm referring to the point in John Doe where John attacks Es.
[John Doe]
Mikoto: I became a murderer… without even knowing it…?
There's no way, no way…
Es: Let's give it some time. The threads of your memory might untangle themselves eventually.
Mikoto:*Gasping*
Es: A murderer without memory of killing… in which case, how should I think of you…
Hey, Mikoto–
John: AAAAAAAARGH!!!!!!
Es does absolutely nothing between the time John starts fronting and when John attacks them. And if you look further, Es doesn't do much else. That means either John has some idea of what was going on before he started fronting, or he can feel Mikoto's resentment even though he isn't the one fronting.
This is where I acknowledge I am not an expert in DID, I'm not a system, and because of that there is a high chance I get stuff wrong, please correct me if I say anything stupid!
Although I unfortunately can't find any better sources for this than some Reddit threads, from what I understand it's possible for one alter to feel the emotions of a different alter who isn't fronting. This means John could have known Mikoto was getting really frustrated with Es, and decided Es had to die for that. However, it's unclear how much John knew about the situation, since he never says anything too specific.
As a result, it's possible John is willing to attack people because he can feel Mikoto hates them, even if he isn't fully sure why Mikoto might be frustrated at them. On the other hand, perhaps John does retain memory of what Mikoto goes through even when Mikoto is fronting. Again, I can't find good sources on how this works, but from what I've seen some systems do have alters which can share memories to an extent. I really hope I'm not saying anything horrendously stupid lol.
Anyways, the point I'm trying to make is that regardless of how it happens, John's desire to kill his victim(s) comes from Mikoto's frustrations with those people.
[Neoplasm]
John: …! … I think… I might be the person Mikoto wishes he was.
The person who stubbornly stands his ground, who doesn't cry himself to sleep from stress, who gives people their payback.
The fact he's represented by the Devil card, which is associated with people's darkest desires, supports the idea his actions are an extension of Mikoto's wishes.
This can also be inferred from the "neuron" scene in Double. You know the one, the one that goes "Doesn't matter if you didn't wish for it, can't get rid of me now". I interpret those silver star things to be representative of neurons, and it's animated in the way it is to represent Mikoto's thoughts (the words in blue) reaching John's conscious at the bottom (the red). I hope that makes sense.
So in short, I believe John found out Mikoto was getting bothered by certain people, and that's why he killed them.
Claim 3: Mikoto killed a guy
Alright so now the harder one to prove. Let me add up all the evidence.
Point #1: Mikoto is the Milgram prisoner, not John
This one is pretty straightforward. Since Milgram doesn't gather every single murderer in the world, John not being a prisoner doesn't mean he didn't kill. But the inverse is potentially true; if Mikoto is a prisoner, then he must have killed someone. Unless there's more alters and one of them is the prisoner, this makes some sense.
The counter-argument is that Milgram is very clearly not designed for systems, so it's possible Mikoto is only the prisoner because he's the host and no other reason. Still, it's worth keeping in mind.
Point #2: A murder on light windows
Take a look at this scene from Double.
As you can see, the way this is framed, it looks as if Mikoto is running away from John. Down to the horror movie motifs of "victim running - persecutor walking." This time, the windows on both sides of Mikoto are white, while the windows on both sides of John are black, instead of there being white and black across from each other.
Looking at the scene, which I can't really show you with still images and will need you to confirm yourself, is that John and Mikoto are moving in the same direction as the train. You can tell based on the relative speed of the objects outside. And yet, there's body parts outside of the train, which move from the front to the back. On the white windows. Which represent Mikoto. And there's an entire window between the left of the screen (where for all we know the windows could change) and where the blood appears. Here's a diagram.
So, uh, Mikoto? Who the hell killed that guy? It certainly wasn't John, especially because the body parts are outside. John was the one who got onto the train (see: cigarette), so I would argue a murder outside could imply it was performed by Mikoto, who notably doesn't usually ride trains. Although I'm not sure that reasoning makes sense to anyone but me.
However, the body being outside presents a much bigger issue for Mikoto's innocence. When John swings, and apparently causes something similar to happen, he's inside. We don't see the mannequin he supposedly hits, and God knows how the pieces ended up outside. Not to mention he for some reason swings at where the legs would be, instead of at the head like all the other attacks we see.
My point here is that this murder makes very little sense if John is supposed to have caused it. Because of all that, to me, this represents John taking the fall for Mikoto's one kill. Unlike the other John murders, which show the "victim" and make physical sense, this one doesn't show the victim and has inconsistencies because John didn't do it. The murder was originally in the white windows, and John is scrambling to make it look like it happened on the black windows, even though that doesn't really work as shown by the diagram above.
Am I taking these scenes too literally? Maybe, but even symbolically, what does it mean if blood appears when the windows are white? Surely there's at least a chance it's Mikoto doing this murder.
Point #3: 3rd Anniversary artwork
Let's first establish what the 3rd anniversary art usually represents. It's been pointed out by many before me that these pieces are closely connected to the prisoners' murders. This is clearest with Muu, Amane and Kotoko.
Muu is wearing her school outfit, but she has a shoe off, just like she did when she killed Rei.
Amane is wearing her Magic outfit, but she's holding her thunder wand, which places this image near her murder. Specifically right before her murder, as she's still wearing her black bow tie instead of her cloud medal thing.
Kotoko is holding her Jacques Roulet cap, a hat she usually only uses alongside her blue and yellow jacket. The only exception is during her murder, where she's wearing the outfit we see in the anniversary artwork while the cap rests on the floor.
The others all hold up with this hypothesis. Yuno is wearing her yellow shirt, the one she's wearing in Tear Drop near the end when she lets out a tear, presumably representative of her murder. Fuuta is wearing the hoodie and mask he wears throughout Bring it On, and he's holding his phone, which does fit doxxing Killcheroy even though it's more generic. Kazui and Mahiru are wearing the outfits they wear in the scenes of their respective lovers' death. Haruka wears his Weakness plain white outfit, which could point to any moment of his narrative, including the murder. And the only times we see Shidou physically kill (cutting off flowers), he's wearing the floral jacket he wears in the artwork.
I want to be clear. For most of them, the relation to the murder could just be because they don't have many outfits in their MVs. However, Muu's, Amane's and Kotoko's feel extremely intentional, and the fact none of the other ones contradict this trend makes it feel like it could be universal.
Which gets us to Mikoto's artwork. And in his artwork, he's holding (what looks to be) a vape pen. John smokes cigarettes, so that's definitely Mikoto. In the murder artwork. So, uh. Yeah. That certainly feels like he must have killed at least one person.
The only small contradiction is that his beanie is nowhere to be found, which is why I don't consider this definitive. However, the fact they specifically chose to make Mikoto hold a vape pen when every other prisoner can easily be connected to the murder feels... intentional.
Point #4: Swing and a hit
More Double screenshots.
So a few weird things. For starters, let's get something straight: there's two murders depicted here. Notice how the first image shows a Kayano swinging with a right-handed swing, then the second shows John (black windows) doing a left-handed swing. The important thing isn't the type of swing, but the fact they're different.
(I know I made some posts at one point about dominant hands, but as my beloved and extremely smart mutual accirax pointed out a lot of the time Milgram characters switch hands because it looks better for the animation, so they're sorta ambidextrous by default lol)
It's not hard to realize if you try to follow the motion yourself. The only way this works is if he swings one way, then the other, which doesn't fit the fact all mannequins are usually destroyed after just one hit. And it's not like it's an animation issue: you can literally fix this by flipping the image.
... Okay it does look a bit awkward but I think it works well enough. It's less weird than the swing changing mid-way through.
To me, this is similar to what I talked about before with the white window murder. John's subconscious trying to convince itself this was John by thinking back to a different murder that has nothing to do with this one. I have no idea if that makes sense.
And then there's the fact the background in the first image is pure white. This doesn't have to mean the one fronting is Mikoto, but why leave it ambiguous if it would have worked perfectly fine with black windows in the background?
Hell, actually, who says we're on the train? This is the only scene in the entirety of Double (apart from the mom phone call) where it's unclear whether we're on the train or not. And as we established, if there is a murder outside the train, it would probably be Mikoto murdering.
And don't get me started on the blood, the eye, and the noise in the background.
First, the background noise in this scene famously has baby crying noises. Could it be we're witnessing John's "birth"? Because if that's the case, then either John was born during the phone call with the mother, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense if you think about it, or John was born during or after the murder on screen.
This actually fits with the close-up of the eye. Despite the fact that "right-hand swing Kayano" seems pretty chill as he attacks the mannequin, right as the scene end, his pupils become smaller as if he's surprised by something. But what would he be surprised about? To me, it feels like "right-hand swing Kayano" was perhaps dissociating (I think that's the right term, please correct me if I'm wrong), and then John is born. Naturally, John gets surprised by the fact the first thing he sees is a dead person, explaining the odd reaction.
Funnily enough, this is actually supported by the very strange blood behavior. It's hard to describe, so bear with me. You see how there's one big orb at the center of the screen? And it starts with one small drop, which enters the orb, and then three small droplets come out the other side? Uh... Diagram?
This isn't normal blood behavior, of course (<- not that I know what normal blood behavior actually is, but I know how liquids work and this ain't it). It's imagery of something splitting, which in the context of alters, fits alongside the baby noises and the weird reaction to murder. Although I fully acknowledge the blood thing falls into the territory of "am I reading too much into this or is Milgram just insane?", so you know. Take it with a few metric tons of salt.
(Funnily enough, it does split into three things. Trikoto win? It doesn't convince me, but the interpretation is valid)
To recap, we have a strange murder with a white background, possible misdirection by showing a completely unrelated murder performed by John, baby noises, imagery of something splitting, and a reaction to the murder which could support an alter being born in that very moment. All of this could imply this "right-hand swing murder" is the moment John is born, which would mean the actual murderer is Mikoto.
Point #5: The tarot spreads in MeMe
This one is very abstract, but it can definitely point to Mikoto murdering someone. Take a look at the two different spreads we see in the first chorus (the first one flashes twice but it's the same).
These things are really complicated, and I should probably do a post about them at some point, but I'm gonna focus on the main things, that being the changes between the two spreads.
For starters, we see that the "querent" card, the one in the middle of The Wheel, is the reversed Hanged Man. Since this is the portrait besides The Fool in the water world thing, it can be assumed the reversed Hanged Man represents Mikoto. Thus, these are his spreads.
Then, the Outcome card of the first spread is the Devil. Since the Devil card on its own also flashes after the second spread, it can be assumed the Devil is also the Outcome of the second spread, as that's the only card which is not visible. Then, as stated before, the Devil card is related to John. This means the Outcome of the situation depicted in these spreads is John. In other words, this is the situation which led to John appearing.
Now we have to establish how we're supposed to read these things. I've explained it in another post, but basically, the only way we can tell how we're supposed to read the cards in The Wheel is by knowing the order they're drawn, so we can determine if the meaning is based on position or draw order (long story). We can do this by looking at the final spread, where it appears the cards are drawn Bottom->Right->Left->Top. This doesn't exactly fit any common way of drawing them, so we read based on position. Aditionally, since this is Japanese media and the card to the right is drawn before the card on the left, middle row of The Wheel is Future<-Present<;-Past. And based on the way the upright Page of Pentacles is placed in the final spread, if the name of the card is to the left the horizontal card is upright, if not it's reversed. If that doesn't make any sense to you, don't worry too much about it, I'll walk you through the important parts. You want a diagram? No? Well, you're gonna get one so-
After clarifying that, we can see that in these two spreads, while most of everything remains consistent, the Future and the Conscious change, the Challenge flips, and the Attitude is revealed. Let's take it one step at a time.
Let's start with the first spread. In the Challenge position (horizontal middle), we have the upright Queen of Swords. This card can represent anything you want tarot reading is so annoying a couple of things, including an authority figure. In the Challenge position, it could indicate there is a lack of communication, that the querent is being too "cold", in the sense they're not expressing their emotions correctly.
Then, in the Conscious position, the thing Mikoto is actively working towards, we have the Ace of Cups. This card can represent new beginnings, new relationships, good fortune, basically "good new things are coming your way." However, there is a slight change between MeMe's Ace of Cups and the IRL version, which could change the meaning a bit.
(No I don't know why MeMe calls it "Cup of Ace" that's just wrong lol)
As you can see, the IRL version has the water from the cup spilling on its own, while the MeMe version has the cup being intentionally spilt on top of a few mannequins. What I think this could mean: if you take the water spilling as a good thing (which is how it's usually interpreted, the idea is that spirituality is overflowing or something like that), the IRL version shows that new good things are coming no matter what, while the MeMe version has the water spilling intentionally because Mikoto is actively trying to cause new, good developments, such as new relationships (we'll get there). That's also why it's in the Conscious position, Mikoto is consciously trying to build a good new relationship.
After that, in the Future position, we have the reversed Wheel of Fortune. This can mean a lot of things, but it mainly has to do with a negative cycle in someone's life. In the Future position, then, this could mean a perpetuation of a negative cycle in Mikoto's life. Thus, in the first spread, if things continue as they are in that moment, the cycle of abuse Mikoto suffers at work will continue.
The Attitude card is obscured. I should note that this card can actually be read in a few different ways, but I think "Attitude" fits best here.
I'll also note the Subconscious card at the bottom of the Wheel ("so below") is the reversed Ten of Wands, which can represent Mikoto is feeling overburdened. Which we know certainly applies to his work.
Let's see here. Mikoto has a problem, possibly with someone in a position of authority, and feels overburdened. This could point to the Queen of Swords being a boss or a manager or something like that. It's upright because Mikoto isn't being direct enough in his desires; he's trying to 'play nice' and build up his relationship with the "Queen", that's what the Ace of Cups could represent. Not like I think his situation would actually improve if he told this "Queen" that he felt overworked, but still, the idea that Mikoto is bottling up his emotions definitely fits what we see of him. If he keeps it up, the cycle of (workplace) abuse will continue, represented by the reversed Wheel of Fortune. This would lead to Mikoto's darkest desires exploding; the Devil is the Outcome.
Let's move to the second spread. The Challenge is still the Queen of Swords, but reversed. This could imply the person giving Mikoto problems is still the same, but now the issue is that Mikoto is being too emotional. Again, there are a lot of ways to read these things, but I think that works.
The Conscious card is now the reversed Wheel of Fortune, which could mean Mikoto is actively aware of and possibly trying to break the negative cycle he's in.
The Future is now the Ace of Cups, which could imply there is a new relationship in Mikoto's future. This is where we acknowledge that the water can also represent consciousness, and in the MeMe version, it is being spilt over mannequins. And...
*sigh* The Ace of Cups can be associated with pregnancy, which fits the whole "newborn" thing John's got going on.
Indeed, I believe the new relationship in Mikoto's future is John, a "mannequin" receiving "consciousness." There is no other thing this could really allude to besides Milgram, which I don't think these spreads reference. However, if this really is about John, that would mean this spread is showing a situation before John's birth.
The Attitude card, which (according to most sources, there are conflicting reports on what the first card of The Wand is) represents how the querent is trying to achieve their Conscious goal, is the reversed King of Cups. This is most often associated with emotional repression, but it can also be connected to violence. Which is very interesting, because John has the same Attitude card in his spread. And we know how he approaches his issues (violence).
So all in all, Mikoto is having issues with an authority figure, and he's (possibly) being emotional about it. He's trying to break out of a negative cycle, and he's doing this either by repressing his emotions or by pulling a John (violence). In the future, this will lead to John's birth, which is why the Outcome is still implied to be the Devil.
This, by itself, doesn't necessarily imply murder. Again, the Attitude could be emotional repression and not violence. The weird thing is that the spread changed. And that means something had to happen to get the Future to change. The change can't have been John being born; that's still in the Future. And the thing we know happened is that the Conscious goal Mikoto was working towards changed, from wanting a prosperous new beginning or relationship to destroying an existing cycle.
Because of that, to me, it feels like the change between the first spread and the second is that Mikoto decided to let his emotions take over (reversing the Queen of Swords) and killed (reversed King of Cups) the authority figure who was causing him trouble, and this caused John to be born.
The final thing to note is that John's Past card is the Wheel of Fortune (upright). This could be read to mean the situation leading up to John's current situation is the destruction of a cycle, which fits the idea that Mikoto tried to destroy it before John was born.
Is this definitive evidence? Hell no! Tarot readings are so ambiguous that I'm pretty sure you can read these to mean whatever the hell you want them to mean. This is just my take on it, I don't even necessarily consider it good evidence because again, if you just take different meanings from the cards you can get whatever. But it's still something.
Point #6: John's insistence
Let's see what John says about the murders again.
[Neoplasm]
Es: Can I ask… why you killed them?
John: They annoyed me.
Es: Who did you kill?
John: Just someone who was walking around nearby.
Es: … How many did you kill?
John: Can't remember. I was first born back then, you know. It's kinda fuzzy.
So, as stated, John may have killed people without fully knowing why Mikoto was angry at them, but that doesn't mean this makes perfect sense. We know their victims weren't just "someone who was walking around nearby". Unless Mikoto regularly carries around a metal baseball bat for some god-forsaken reason, there must have been some kind of premeditation at play. John has to at least be hiding the real reasons for the murders, possibly because Mikoto might consider them shameful (more on that in a bit). This opens the door to the possibility he's hiding more than just that, and that makes a lot of his other claims seem a bit... desperate.
[Neoplasm]
John: From [Mikoto's] point of view, he's being blamed for a crime he can't even remember.
Es: If that's the truth, then… you're the one who committed the murder?
John: Yeah, it's me. I killed them off.
Es: …
John: So Mikoto really didn't do it.
Es: Is this really something that works that conveniently?
John: Just put yourself in Mikoto's shoes for a moment!
He was bottling up all his stress! He kept dealing with it all by himself the whole time, until it exploded!
It's not like he just decided that he wanted to hurt somebody!
Es: …
John: He's not the type of person who could do stuff like that! He always looks out for others, always reads the room, always tries to get along with people around him! He can't do stuff like that… He was on the verge of exploding!
That's why I was born. It's terrible, isn't it? My other self didn't do anything!
Es: Even if that's true… Even if it wasn't what Mikoto wanted – someone's life was still lost.
[...]
John: I'm the one who did it! Mikoto didn't do it! You know that because of MILGRAM! I don't care about the law, I want to know what you think!
Es: …
John: Please… forgive Mikoto. I'm the one who did it.
The amount of times John tries to take the fall for every single murder is so insane it makes it sound suspicious. Why does he say it so much?
Still, I'll be honest, this might just be confirmation bias, as a lot of these lines can still absolutely be read with the interpretation that John is the only killer.
John: If I, the "John" personality, hadn't been born, I'm sure Mikoto would have reached his limit and fallen apart.
Es: John… you…
John: It's true that I was the one who wanted to destroy everything… and the weakness of Mikoto, who couldn't stand up for himself all alone, might have been the origin of that.
But… that's all there is to it. Is that a sin?
So I don't consider this evidence at all, frankly. In fact, Neoplasm is one of the things which make me doubt the Mikoto-killer theory a bit, but I don't think it outright deconfirms it or anything. I'm just including this because I know some people think he's extremely suspicious here.
Point #7: Small visual stuff
1- The first time we see victims in Double, John's bat doesn't have any blood on it, which could imply the one who killed the mannequin(s) beside him was Mikoto.
2- The mannequin standing in for Death in the Death card is blue, a color most associated with Mikoto.
This one isn't great because you can read it more symbolically, with Mikoto being the main force of change in the system's life instead of someone who brings death. Though I'd argue the mace thing sort of implies something more violent.
3- At the start of Double, we see this:
The guy is shown as a blue and red mannequin, but what's interesting is that the blue part has a skull and the red part has a map thing. I don't consider this very important, but the blue with the skull could be indication of Mikoto having killed someone.
4- In Double, Mikoto is represented by antlers (I think that's what they are) in the same way John is represented by a crown of thorns ("savior", etc).
Antlers mainly represent strength, which feels a bit weird for Mikoto. I'm gonna be honest, I'm not confident on what these represent. But one possible interpretation comes from the fact they are always paired with the lyric (written on screen) "All I did was dream, so you find me INNOCENT, it’s that simple right?". The connection of the antlers with Mikoto's dream could imply Mikoto tried to use strength to fulfill a dream, which could imply he murdered someone to achieve something. Additionally...
*sigh* Antlers fall off after mating season, which could be connected to Mikoto "losing his antlers" after John is born, since Mikoto doesn't have to kill anymore.
I'm sure there are other interpretations, but I don't think this one is too bad.
So, all of this, is it conclusive evidence of anything? I wouldn't say so, it's all still pretty vague. However, I believe all of it together points to Mikoto having killed one person, and this is what explains all this in the best way. Thus, I presume Mikoto did kill someone.
Claim #4: Mikoto's Motivations
CW for this section: potential stalking
I've sorta alluded to it in the tarot section, but I believe Mikoto killed someone in a position of authority over him as a result of workplace abuse. In particular, Mikoto was heavily overworked, possibly to the point this authority figure was somehow monitoring his home life and possibly even stalking him.
Let's start by the workplace abuse thing. This is an extremely important point in Mikoto's narrative; it's referenced in his Undercover silhouette shot, it's shown in the messages from "Chief" at the start of Double, the neuron scene from Double, his interrogation questions, etc. Mikoto is being overworked, to the point his boss/manager/whatever talks to him about work past midnight. It would be very strange, narratively speaking, if all of this didn't have anything to do with the murder. Also the whole "Queen of Swords is the Challenge/problem" could allude to an authority figure, which also fits this idea.
So then, what about the monitoring/stalking? Well, there's a lot of camera imagery in MeMe, for one. Most notably in the scene when Mikoto comes home and leaves his bag to the side as he breaks down, relating his stress to the idea of being watched. There's also an abundance of eye imagery in Double, especially in relation to Mikoto. This is also included in the MVs version of the Hanged Man card, which has a bunch of eyes around the mannequin. This alludes to some form of judgement or pressure, (<- Fuuta reference?) which could be connected to either societal pressure or, what I find a bit more likely, the judgement of Mikoto's higher-up(s) in his workplace.
Because of this, I believe one of Mikoto's higher-ups was heavily monitoring Mikoto's life even outside of work, which drove him to the point he felt he had to get rid of them. All he did was dream... of a better life.
This could also be why John hides the reasons for the murders. Even if he is actually aware of the full situation, he could be trying to hide that Mikoto felt tired from work, because in a way it's possible Mikoto would consider that shameful. I hope that makes sense.
Claim #5: Which is Mikoto's kill?
Assuming Mikoto only killed one person before John started taking over murder duties-
(I think that's a fair assumption, I think it would be weird if John only split after like three murders. Like, oh the first two weren't stressful enough to cause a split, but the third one is too much? What? There's something else that makes me think John split after just the first one, we'll get there)
-that begs the question: which one was Mikoto's? Well, since Double isn't exactly reliable for what the murders looked like, I'll only take MeMe's versions into account. There are at least three murders in MeMe: the Subway Murder, the Streetside Murder, and the Trash Bag Murder.
We know the Trash Bag Murder is different from the other two because the murderer isn't wearing a hoodie in that one, a fact which took me an embarrassing amount of time to notice. Unless he went home, changed, went back to dispose of evidence and still had the beanie for some reason (since he throws it away), it has to be different. And probably on a different day, too. Because of that, I'll henceforth call it the No Hoodie Murder.
Let's run through what we have. We see the Subway murder almost in full at the beginning of MeMe, where Kayano swings around his bat flippantly before killing a blonde dude with a simple overhead swing. However, right in the middle of that scene, we quickly cut to the Streetside murder, where we see Kayano hitting the victim with a right-handed swing.
After that we have a scene of John (because at this point it would be John) coming home and taking off his shirt. Since there is a Fool card portrait in the background, I'll call this the Fool Portrait scene. Notably, we never see John take off a hoodie or a beanie, meaning this is probably related to the No Hoodie Murder.
Then we have Kayano doing... something to the Streetside victim. It's unclear exactly what that is; I've seen some people say he's burying the victim, but to me that always looked like he's dismembering them to put them in trash bags. It's not too important, though.
An important fact is that in this scene we see his left cheek is blood-stained. This is consistent with the following bath scene, where we see John brushing his teeth with blood trailing down from his left cheek.
In the middle of those scenes, we see the clean-up for the No Hoodie murder. Trash bags and the beanie are disposed of in an illegal dumping ground.
Finally there's the bathtub scene, but frankly it's not very relevant to this discussion.
So, which one is Mikoto's? I'll start by ruling out the No Hoodie murder. There is an argument for it, though. It's definitely the most hidden of the murders, which makes it suspicious. Since the Fool represents new beginnings, you could argue the Fool Portrait scene shows John's "beginning". And since I said it's probably related to this murder, you could argue that means the No Hoodie murder is the first one.
However, that doesn't really convince me. Unless the Kayanos have multiple beanies (which is possible, but I'd find it weird narratively speaking), this would have to be the last murder in the sequence, while Mikoto's would have to be the first. The fact it was done without a hoodie also contradicts the 3rd Anniversary artwork reasoning, since Mikoto wears a hoodie there, but to be fair the lack of beanie makes the outfit somewhat inconsistent anyways.
Meanwhile, you could argue there's a symbolic implication that John and Mikoto have already split by the time the Subway murder happens, in the way the towers close and behind Kayano have lighting split down the middle between red and blue light.
(Yes this is one of the reasons I'm keeping the red and blue color scheme despite no longer believing RGBkoto)
No, I believe the Streetside murder is Mikoto's. It's technically the first one we see, but more importantly, the location matches Mikoto's prisoner card image, and the swing fits the Undercover kill-shot.
Since Mikoto is the Milgram prisoner, these two things would probably be related to his murder, not Johns'.
Funnily enough, you can also argue that this murder is too expressionless for John. Which sounds odd, considering John is usually the less expressive of the two, but funnily enough, the only times we see John express emotion is when he goes to do a violence, either because he's frustrated at the person who hurt Mikoto or because he's happy to protect him.
[John Doe]
John: SHUT YOUR MOUTH!!!
Es: *Gasp*
John: YOU KEEP BLABBERING ON AND ON...
I'M GONNA FUCKING KILL YOU, YOU PIECE OF SHIT!
*John continues to beat Es*
John: GOING ON, AND ON, AND ON...
ALL HIGH AND MIGHTY... LIKE YOU AREN'T JUST A KID!
SERVES YOU FUCKING RIGHT!
Es: …emember…
John: HUH-!? I CAN'T HEAR YOU!
YOU'RE NO MORE THAN JUST A KID. YOU UNIMPORTANT BRAT!
Es: .........I'll remember you… you murderer…!
John: HUH?! *Laughter*
YOU PREFER IT WHEN IT HURTS MORE, HUH?
Es: ......!
John: THAT'S FINE... I'LL CRUSH YOUR FUCKING FACE.
Es: Go ahead… and try…
John: YOU DON'T NEED TO TELL ME TWICE! *Screams*
[...]
Kotoko: His technique is definitely that of an amateur…
John: SHUDDUP!!!
Kotoko: ...! *Sighs* I can't imagine that power from his muscle mass.
John: ANNOYING... YOU'RE ANNOYING...! ARGH...!
This even fits the lackadaisical twirling of the bat in the Subway murder. It's one of the reasons I believe that one's John's.
Meanwhile, the one time we see a Kayano swing a bat without emotion on his face is the right-hand swing in Double, which as we established is probably Mikoto. Thus, the idea that John shows more expression than Mikoto when it comes to murdering holds up. The punch at the end of MeMe doesn't count because that's John attacking Mikoto, which is only metaphorical.
Still, this isn't exactly great evidence of anything, since John is still usually less expressive than Mikoto in general.
Anyways, which murder is Mikoto's isn't too important anyways, this section was more to satisfy curiosity than anything else.
And that's it! Again, this is just my interpretation and theories, it's perfectly fine if you believe something else. I know it isn't anything new, but I wanted to put it all in one place so I can reference back to it if, say, I'm answering an ask about whether or not I forgive the prisoners' murders (I swear I'm working on it lol). Anyways, take care!
Considering the day, I'm going to talk about how I perceive Mikoto and Mikoto (John's) dynamic. Because I was looking for an excuse to.
With Mikoto (John) I imagine him to be the less forward of the two.
Given how he's been depicted in canon. Plus, how much more standoffish and guarded Mikoto got after the first verdict. Despite being less sociable, he wasn't really going around causing a fuss or issues for everyone. He just wasn't as sociable.
The cast complains about this change in demeanor mostly due to the fact that before then, Mikoto was noticeably way more sociable and easier to approach. Talking to various other prisoners and having cordial relationships with most of them except for Kotoko. However, that's due to Kotoko's demeanor not his.
After the verdict, when Mikoto (John) is stated to be the one out the most (during the intermission). He becomes more closed off, less talkative, and difficult for others to approach.
I and most people speculated that this is because he got violent or aggressive.
Yet the only person anyone states he attacks during the intermission is Kotoko. Even Kotoko states such in her voice drama, claiming he attacked her in the middle of her handing out punishments.
Basically just when she was attacking Mahiru.
So outside of that instance, Mikoto wasn't doing anything. He doesn't even have timelines alluding to him doing anything. He was kind of just not engaging with others as much as he usually would. Hence, Shidou saying since he became like that in his trial two written interrogation.
Mikoto implies he picked up smoking to socialize with others in this timeline,
20/06/20
Mikoto: ……oh, so you are here after all. Shidou-san, are you free? Let’s chat~
Shidou: ! Ah, just give me a moment…… Um…… I don’t mind talking, but you didn’t need to come over while I was smoking. Are you sure it isn’t too smoky for you? You’re not a smoker, right, Kayano-kun?
Mikoto: Ah, you don’t need to put it out! That’d be such a waste! I smoke too occasionally. Though just vape. Like, the smoking room is a really good spot for communication, right? So I thought now might be a good opportunity to talk with you. Not like I have anything else to do. By the way, I’ve been wondering for a while, but do you always wear those gloves?
Shidou: I don’t…… How to put it…… I suppose…… since I have my hands covered all the time, then when I take them off, it feels as though the feeling in my fingertips is even greater…… I know it’s probably all in my head…… but that’s how it feels.
However, the only time we see smoking in MeMe and Double is when Mikoto is off on his own. Plus, we've yet to see him vape at all in either of his videos despite him saying that's predominantly what he does. As well as the vape pen being shown in his after crime anniversary image. So more than likely, by "like that," Shidou meant standoffishly monopolizing the smoking area, bringing down the atmosphere with his change in attitude resulting in making smoking awkward for Shidou.
The prisoners in the timeline don't complain about Mikoto's loud outbursts at night either despite them being noted in his description and joked about through the minigrams. However, since it's noted in his character description as something all the characters know about since Milgram started Mikoto being loud or getting violent in his cell on his own or at all would not surprise them. It'd be something that would be common place by the end of trial two.
Know what wouldn't be, though?
Him being quiet and the first allusion to that is here,
21/10/06 (Mikoto’s Birthday)
Mikoto: ……ah, Futa? What’s up? Did you come to celebrate my birthday?
Futa: Hah!? Like I care about your birthday. ……what’s up with you, though, you’re usually a lot more excited. I thought you were the sort of idiot who’d make a big deal over your birthday.
Mikoto: Yeah, usually that’d be the case. ……I think I must be getting tired. It’s like I’m anxious over something, but I can’t really explain what it is…… Like, the feeling that I’ve been totally wrong about something. Haha, but it’s not like talking to you about it is gonna do anything.
Futa: Yeah, yeah, just like you say. Talking to me about it isn’t gonna help. ……but, it’s not like I don’t get what you’re saying. Or rather, I understand exactly what you mean. And if it’s the same thing as I’ve been feeling, then it will just get stronger as time goes on…… probably. But anyway, rather than talking to someone like me you should go and bother the others. Go and get showered with their stupid birthday wishes.
So I'd always imagined Mikoto (John) to be the less social of the two. There's also the implication when it comes to smiling here,
20/07/08
Yuno: Hey, Mikoto-san. Don’t you get tired being so conscious of others all the time? I mean, you’re free to do what you want, though.
Mikoto: Eh…… Aha, what are you talking about? I’m not being conscious or anything. It’s normal to make sure to get along with everyone, right? I mean, when you put it like that, aren’t you the same, Yun-chan? You’re always smiling and getting on with everyone, too.
Yuno: I don’t smile unless I actually want to. But with you, when you’re talking with other people it’s more like you only smile deliberately. So I kept thinking, don’t your cheeks get tired? Ah, is this just what happens when you become a working adult? ……you see people like that sometimes.
Mikoto: Haha, you don’t mince your words, do you. …….that was never my intention, but now that you mention it, yeah, I guess I do. This might’ve been since I started my job too…… But like, if I was rude to everyone I met, all my efforts would come to nothing, right?
This implies that Mikoto is smiling deliberately to make socializing with others easier. So when Mikoto (John) is out, he may smile less and have a more neutral expression that could lean towards being interpreted as disinterested, irritated, dazed, or tired.
The main type of expression work that's shown throughout Double.
This may also be why, in Double, we don't see the faces or other people. They're just represented as blank puppets. Since Mikoto (John) isn't one for socializing he may not pay that much attention to the features of those around them, and that visual choice could have been made to display that. This also ties into him saying he didn't know the person he killed as well. Because honestly, why would he at that point?
In MeMe, the person attacked has a good few more identifying traits than the ones attacked in Double. As we see one of the victims' hair color and clothing as he's getting attacked.
In contrast to everyone being represented as featureless puppets and most stating Mikoto has been difficult to approach and scary later. I want to specifically focus on Haruka stating he was a bit scared of Mikoto, and that's why he was avoiding him,
22/10/06 (Mikoto’s Birthday)
Haruka: Mikoto-san. Um, are you ok……?
Mikoto: Ah, Haru-kun. It’s been a while since we last talked, huh. Yeah, I’m fine. Are you doing ok……?
Haruka: Ah, I’m fine. I’ve been enjoying myself, a lot. Um, I’m sorry, for avoiding you. I was a bit scared. Of you, honestly……
Mikoto: Ahhh, yeah. I’ve been lashing out whenever I go to sleep, right? ……it’s fine. Even I think you’re right to be scared. You know, I kinda just hate that I don’t even know what’s going on myself…… haha. Ah, but despite all that you still came and talked to me because it’s my birthday, right? Thank you, you’ve grown into a good man.
I want to focus on that scared and avoiding you part since we know Haruka engaged with Kotoko the exact same way for the same reason. Because he found her standoffish and neutral expression scary and Mu did as well. It wouldn't be surprising if this was a case of the same mannerisms garnering the same response. Especially given how Haruka would have grown used to Mikoto valuing/viewing communication as important as well as him being more personable and helpful when it came to talking,
20/06/05
Haruka: Ah…… ah, u-um, Mikoto-san. The c-communication……? thing, that you were saying was important. I-I thought, I’d give it my best…… Um, so, Mikoto-san, what’s your favourite food……?
Mikoto: Ooh? Nice going, Haru-kun~ Yeah, we still have no idea how long this lifestyle will go on for, so it’s best if we all get along together here. My favourite food…… I like pasta and horse-meat sashimi. Also bubble tea, and recently I’ve been big on custard puddings. What about you?
Haruka: ……ah, I, I wonder…… H-hamburg steak, and omurice, a-and also…… what else? Ah. Cotton candy……
Mikoto: C-cotton candy!? That’s the first time I’ve met someone who has that in their top three favourites!? ……man, Haru-kun, you really are hilarious.
Just for him to suddenly change his entire demeanor when it comes to talking with others and have no interest in doing it all. Very similar to how Kotoko was trial one would be jarring and scary for Haruka. A person who doesn't like that sort of change and would feel on some level responsible and confused by it.
Hence, the apology for avoiding him.
So I think what most explained through the idea of Mikoto (John) being volatile or aggressive was literally him just not wanting to talk to anyone here. Similarly to how Amane's behavior changed from her verdict. She became more closed off and focused on her religious practices.
Outside of that, Mikoto is consistently shown to do most things related to communication and coordination. As well as being stated to view and discuss the importance of communication throughout the portal timeline. He also states he travels by bike to work, which takes a fair bit of balance and coordination, but we only see Mikoto (John) travel by train in Double.
We've yet to see this bike, either.
Plus, Mikoto is able to neatly tie his shoes while Mikoto (John) is shown to have difficulty with that even in the trial two character art. As well as being shown in Double wearing boots without laces.
Despite in MeMe Mikoto predominantly wearing shoes with laces,
I talk about those other things a lot, though.
Right now, I just wanted to talk about how I viewed Mikoto (John) when it came to socializing more based on the information we have from trial two.
- John memories are blurry, he doesn't know the specifics (also shown in Double with vague imagery and talked about in Neoplasm)
-MeMe has a live murder footage and very clearly too
- If John planned the murders and carried them out by himself, point 2 & 3 contradicts each other
- Lastly, it is heavily implied there are 3 alters involved in 09's crime
=> By eliminating Mikoto from the list (no memory), and John also from the list (too vague to represent MeMe), we can conclude that MeMe's murder isn't part of Mikoto's or John's memory, which leaves the final option being the remaining alter involved in their crime
Translated excerpts from 解離性同一性障害における内的世界の構造と場所の機能 (Inner System and Function of Place in the Patients with Dissociative Identity Disorder)
Van der Hart （2006）は解離を、あたかも正常に見える人格部分（Apparently Normal Personality: ANP）と情動的な人格部分（Emotional Personality: EP）の共存と交代現象として記述した。あたかも正常にみえる人格部分（ANP）とは正常な生活を続けることに固着し、外傷記憶を回避している人格部分である。もう一方の情動的な人格部分（EP）とは、外傷を受けたときのシステムに固着し、活動範囲、機能、自己感が極めて制限されている人格部分である。たいてい EP は人生における辛い記憶や感情を抱えており、ANP はそれらを回避している。人格部分によって状態は異なり、それぞれが日常生活のふるまい方や耐え難い感情への対処法について対立する考えをしばしば持っている。
Van der Hart (2006) described dissociation as the coexistence and alternation of the Apparently Normal Personality (ANP) and the Emotional Personality (EP). The Apparently Normal Part (ANP) is part of the individual that is fixated on continuing a normal life and avoids traumatic memories. The other part of the individual is the Emotional Part (EP) that is stuck in the system when trauma occurred and has a restricted range of activities, function, and sense of self. EPs tend to carry painful memories and emotions from their lives, while ANPs avoid them. Different parts have different states, and, often, each have conflicting ideas about how to behave in daily life and how to cope with unbearable feelings.
Although alternate identities are parts with variously dissociated and separate entities, they are interrelated and contain all aspects of one person. Therefore, it is necessary to be aware that all parts are of one overall haecceitic system as they share one body, even if their experiences may be different.
Howell （2011）は、DID を有する人たちの内的世界に共通したパターンが、「カープマンのドラマ三角形（Karpman drama triangle）」（Karpman,1968）とおおよそ一致しており、苦悩する犠牲者、加害者、救済者といった部分によって構成されていると指摘している。
犠牲者人格とは、たいていは虐待などに苦しんでいる子どもたちである。加害者人格は、発達早期における迫害者が内在化されものであり、救済者人格は人生において重要で好ましいとされた現実の人物をもとに形成されることが多いと考えられている。
Howell (2011) notes that a common pattern in the inner world of people with DID roughly corresponds to the "Karpman drama triangle" (Karpman, 1968), which consists of a distressed victim, perpetrator, and savior.
Victim parts are usually children who have suffered abused. The perpetrator part is thought to be an internalization of the persecutor(s) early in development, and the savior part is often considered to be formed based on real people who were considered important and desirable in life.
Kluft (1998) states that DID clients are involved in three realities.
The first reality is the historical reality that the client can recall. The second reality is of reproduced or reconstructed memories, influenced by various information. And the third reality is the place in the DID patient's mental world where alternate identities interact and are perceived as if real. By inquiring about the third reality, it is possible to understand the problems of each of the alternate identities, the significance of their existence, and to understand the subjective reality of the patient or alters. Kluft (2000) describes the essence of DID as a "multiple reality disorder" in which alternate identities are actualized and personified.
Haven’t really seen anyone do this since Double just released, so I tried to decipher the text in this scene. It seems like it’s heavily blurred english text so I tried to make sense of it as best as I could (stitch together by me)
it seems like thoughts either Mikoto and or John have and it seems to be about the work environment if what I deciphered is right, interestingly having multiple references to sleeping and dreams among this.
also there’s more English text in double I managed to decipher, but it’s just the lyrics albeit in a very hard to read font
Although interestingly enough the lyrics that appear with Mikoto are with a larger font, but a lot of the letters are missing making it very incoherent to read. And with the font that John has when he appears it’s a smaller font but all the letters are there, which to overanalyse stuff could perhaps mean something like Mikoto’s thoughts being messy and incoherent while John has a clearer thought process? Perhaps this could be what John meant by saying that Mikoto is “disappearing” and maybe that could be why his thoughts are getting more incoherent? Idk correct me I don’t know the logistics of this
And although I can’t really read what the glitching signs on the train say and would probably need someone to translate them. It’s interesting how they’re different with each of them with John having significant more distortion and glitching on the screens when he appears which is kind of the opposite of Mikoto’s text being distorted. Idk just thoight this was interesting
The little things in MeMe and Double and why they confuse me
This is not an analysis of Mikoto or his MVs. I may love reading analyses and interpretations, but God am I not good at writing them. So, what is this then?
Essentially, this will be a collection of smaller (and bigger) details I've noticed but haven't really seen many people talk about. This is kind of meant to invite open discussion about these details because I myself am largely unsure of their meaning of if I maybe got things wrong completely.
Alright! Let's start from the top then.
Time is weird:
Time in both of these MVs is kind of messed up in a way I hadn't really noticed on my initial watch. It makes the experience kind of disorienting and also makes piecing together a coherent timeline of events difficult.
Mikoto's and John's experiences in both MVs are shown in fragments and displaced, time-wise.
in MeMe, when Mikoto comes home from work he's wearing the jacket that John (?) throws in the trash after the murder.
So presumably these events happen in a different chronology than the MV shows to us. Mikoto comes home from work. Has a breakdown. Goes out. Murder happens.
We see a similar thing in Double as well. Mikoto and John's timelines are shown to us as of they're happening somewhat simultaneously, but there are a few instances where this MV actually shows us what time it is.
Right after Mikoto runs away from the carnage around him (and right before we see mannequin parts flying outside of the train for the first time, but we'll get to that), the train displays show it is 05:03.
In the scene following directly after this, as John is making his way down the train and he swings at the mannequin parts that fly outside of the train, it is 00:39
In the end as they both stand opposite each other, it is once again 05:03. Though it may be important to note that only Mikoto's side actually has the time displayed on it.
Breaking Glass:
What intitially tipped me off about the timeline was this:
There's the sound of glass breaking exactly twice in MeMe. Once at the very beginning, before we're shown what is presumably the murder and then again during the sequence where we see Mikoto come home (I'm just going to assume this is after work) and hear him hyperventilate in the background. Presumably this is Mikoto reaching some sort of breaking point. We also see this as a visual metaphor in the beginning of Double.
Now what I'm wondering is whether it really is two instances of the glass breaking, or just one that just shows us where these events are supposed to overlap.
Now this is admittedly a stretch, but that might also connect Mikoto(?) directly acknowledging the grainy camera in the beginning of MeMe with the camera footage we get during the after-work breakdown.
What's up with the train?:
The train and train tracks are a recurring motif in both MVs. The murder happens by the tracks as a train goes by (the train itself even seems to be the same one as we see Mikoto board in Double).
In the beginning of Double, Mikoto is visually fractured only after the train passes in front of him and the rest of the MV takes place inside of it.
We know from the Trial Interrogation Questions that Mikoto doesn't use the train to go to work. Is the train metaphorical, then? Is he going somewhere else? Where?
I'm assuming at this point that what we see inside the train isn't happening like this. Mikoto doesn't seem to be carrying a baseball bat before entering the train, yet John has one anyways.
We can see mannequin parts flying outside the train with blood staining the inside twice. I believe these are the actual murder(s). As mentioned before we actually get specific times for both of these which marks those two instances of mannequin violence as especially significant. Now, this would imply there are 2 separate murders. One that happens at 00:39 and one that happens at 05:03.
Also one on John's side where we actually see him swing and one on Mikoto's side -where we specifically do not see Mikoto's involvement btw. We just see him run off the screen and then blood splatter from there after a good while.
This is fascinating, because John seems to know everything else that's going on with Mikoto. Outside of this MV the timeline conversations also seem to confirm that John is at least somewhat aware of what Mikoto is saying/hearing. In Double specifically he shows us his phone call with his mother, his shitty work place calling him, his frantic fear at the carnage surrounding him.
But not this.
I guess it could be argued that this is Mikoto's part and he doesn't remember, hence why we can't see it either. Hm.
Now this might absolutely just be inconsistencies in the animation, but when taking into account the time (John's parts coming chronologically first, then Mikoto's until they meet up right after the first mannequin death outside of the train) it's especially interesting to see that Mikoto does not have any of the bloodstains on him that John did. In this train, they seem to be separate. Even Mikoto's shoes only get bloodstained as he's running through the various pools of blood on the train himself.
But when they meet again at the end, both of their hands are stained with blood.
Now if we're really getting into over-analyzing, we can see that initially, only their left hands are blood stained. We specifically see John swing pretty exclusively with his right hand, but now he's holding the bat in his left hand that is now also bloodstained.
This changes to both of them having blood on both hands at the very last scene as the view shifts back to Mikoto though.
Good morning/ Good night:
In Double we get these as a visual and audio cue to understand who's currently fronting (I think). The visual ones are even colored in what I'm assuming is whoever is currently handing over control. Meaning 'Good morning' is usually blue (and also mirrored) and shows a switch to John and 'Good night' or anything related to dreams is usually red and shows a switch to Mikoto.
Interestingly, some of the visual backgrounds for these are black and some are white, but I haven't really been able to make heads or tails off of when we get to see which color.
However. They stop about halfway through the MV after switching to John.
I'm sorry.:
I've seen some confusion about whether Mikoto or John apologizes in the end of Double. I'm pretty sure they both say it at the same time. Probably for different reasons and to different people, but they both say it nonetheless.
Yes, we see Mikoto say it, but before this, we see that John is completely mirroring his movements. Just song-wise it's also one of his lines in the call and response here. Oh and as we see pretty often with Mikoto, he's displying two expressions split in the middle again here.
Also. It's interesting that we're seeing this from John's POV.
So... Who did it, then?:
So this is where we're left. Personally, I have a ton of questions and pretty much a nonexistant idea of what exactly happened.
Are Double and MeMe two separate instances of murders or are they the same but from different perspectives?
Why is Mikoto's/John's expression hidden during the killing swing? For that matter, who actually took the final swing? Who is the victim? How many murders were there? Why exactly did they kill? Where does the voiceline from Trial 2's Voice Trailer come in? All of the potential murders we see on screen seem comparatively calm especially in direct contrast to the intensity of that specific line.
John's short, vague answers when asked about the murders that specifically only implicate himself in Neoplasm made me very suspicious. Having both Mikoto and John say they don't remember/only vaguely recall the murders at all makes me think John does in fact remember but may be hiding the specifics to obscure Mikoto's potential involvement. But at the same time he seems to feel very genuinely guilty for presumably putting Mikoto in this situation so I'm very torn on this.
Assuming Milgram's prisoners do all in some way want to be judged one way or another (to have certainty/to get affirmation for their actions/to get what they think they deserve/etc), I think it would at least make sense for John to not be considered a prisoner by Milgram's standards whether he did commit murder or not. He does not at all seem to care for outside interference. Their words would mean nothing to him in regards to himself.
Well, I guess this is where I'll leave this for now. This has already gotten much longer than I'd anticipated. Whoops
Thank you for reading these (almost) incoherent ramblings! I really would love to hear people's takes on these, especially because I feel like I may be overthinking things massively.
