View Full Version : Does anyone else feel a bit alienated by the various analysis of the game?(Spoilers)

Nova Prospekt
02-18-2012, 06:17 AM
So i've been reading up alot of these dear esther analysis threads, just to see what other people got out of it.

And man, some of those analysis' - seem a bit over thought.There are so many theories about the boats, the seagulls and the figures that i feel a bit lost.Let me try to explain what i feel.


Theories i've read - Narrator's Wife

What i Think - Her father

While it is only suggested in one paragraph, but it is a strong one.The dialogue near the start where he says "When you were born, hush fell over the delivery room.You were born with a red birth,mark over your face.The birthmark faded by the time you were six."This implies that he witnessed her birth and her growing up aswell,and further strengthens my belief that he could very well be writing a letter to his daughter.


Theories i've read - Esther's husband

W.I.T - Her Father

As said above.


Theories I've read - Esther's husband;some sort of explorer who died on the island

W.I.T - A writer who wrote a book about the island, which the narrator read/is reading and is influenced by

Again, suggested a few times but very strongly.He says "This diary; the bed with the broken springs – once asleep, you have to remember not to dream. A change of clothes. Donnelly’s book, stolen from Edinburgh library on the way here. I will burn them all on the last morning and make an aerial of my own."


"When the oil lamps ran out I didn’t pick up a torch but used the moonlight to read by. When I have pulled the last shreds of sense from it, I will throw Donnelly’s book from the cliffs and perhaps myself with it."


Theories i've read - Him being the narrator, recalling the event of the accident before he died

W.I.T - The driver, who crashed into esther's and the narrator's car

This is the one that alienates me the most.How could he be the one who is narrating?He talks about himself a lot in the standard first person, why would he arbitrarily refer to himself in the third person? The narrator says "There were chemical stains on the tarmac: the leak of air conditioning, brake fluid and petrol. He kept sniffing at his fingers as he sat by the roadside waiting as if he couldn’t quite understand or recognise their smell. He said he’d been travelling back from a sales conference in Exeter; he’d stopped for farewell drinks earlier, but had kept a careful eye on his intake. You could hear the sirens above the idling traffic."And

"They had stopped the traffic back as far as the Sandford junction and come up the hard shoulder like radio signals from another star. It took twenty-one minutes for them to arrive. I watched Paul time it, to the second, on his watch."

"He still maintains he wasn’t drunk but tired. I can’t make the judgement or the distinction anymore. I was drunk when I landed here, and tired too."

This heavily suggests Paul crashed into their car, had some alcohol but not above the legal limit.It also suggest that Paul said he was tired and not drunk (since he hadn't had enough to be drunk).


Theories i've read - The hermit himself

W.I.T - Sheperd

He was a sheperd who's mentioned in Donnelly's book and therefore, is known by the narrator.It is possible that his tale was told to donnelly when he visited the island, and who thereafter mentioned him in his book, and therefore is quoted by the narrator.Therefore, Donnelly had to have explored the island in the 1700's when Jakbson existed.

The ghost figures

Theories - Shadows of you in the past playthroughs, spirit guides

W.I.T - Shadow of the hermit

I cannot accept that they are 'guiding' the player, since most of them are in areas which cannot be reached.It couldn't be you when you visited the island in the past because - How?Explain this?:confused:It could very well be the hermit, or atleast a shadow of him, that had triggered the whole legend about him on the island.

The number 21

Theories i've read - Strange random theories that i couldn't comprehend

W.I.T - Absolutely Nothing

I'm fairly confident that the narrator is only making a forced connection between these, because he is desperately trying to find a connection, a reason for esther's death.We do this so many times aswell, when something bad happens to us or when a video of Valve releases, we desperately try to find any relation to Half Life 3."3 spokes?EPISODE 3 CONFIRMED!!""3 strands of hair?EPISODE 3 CONFIRMED".Especially near the end, where he says "this cannot, will not be co incidence" reflects that he knows that they are not related, but cannot accept it.


Theories i've read - Nil

W.I.T - The spirits of those who die on this island

This i think is the case because in the end, when you jump off, you don't crash like a normal body would, but you almost take flight, that is turn into a seagull.It would also help solidify the theory of why the still inhabit this island, because they cannot let go of their death and choose to live there.The narrator also says "I will look to my left and see Esther Donnelly, flying beside me. I will look to my right and see Paul Jacobson, flying beside me".I have no idea why he mixes up names, but it's impossible for these four names to be names and surnames.Sounds crazy, yes, but it's all i got.

So what do you think about my analysis?

Billy Stinkwate
02-18-2012, 06:57 AM
The "Esther-Daughter"/"Narrator-Father"-Theory sounds very unlikely to me.

I actually think, you quoted the narrator wrong.
The dialogue near the start says: "When you were born, your mother told me a hush fell over the delivery room.You were born with a red birth,mark over your face.The birthmark faded by the time you were six and had gone completely by the time we met."
I don't think your interpretation can bear up against the inserted words. I also came across these lines and thought about the father-daughter-possibility.

And how do you explain the different appearances of the "ghosts" (male, female, robe dude) if this shadow is supposed to be the hermit?

The rest of your analysis sounds rather common and makes sense, a lot of those thinks were already mentioned in the forum.

02-18-2012, 07:35 AM
Alienated by the various analyses? Personally speaking, no. I love seeing the different interpretations, plus they often add to and enhance my own thoughts on Dear Esther.