[EVA] Progression of my Evangelion interpretations, theories, etc

[Kari Lehikoinen]

> >>Although the literature of EVA gives a lot of information, all of which
> could have been picked up from the show, it doesn't really conclude
> anything.<< 
> 1) All of which could have been picked up? Not really. There's multiple
> instances where the book states as facts things we the viewers could only
> roughly guess (with a great deal of perception). 

Well, yes, that's what I meant. The truth was in there. But it was confusing
and hard to understand, and I think it was purposefully made so. I, for one,
thought something like "I'm not sure, but it might be like this...". The show
really, in any point, doesn't say: "It's like this,...". The book clarifies 
something, but leaves many things unclear.

> Did you, by any chance,
> know the definition of the Tantai before viewing the RCB?

Actually, yes, sort of. I had read something about Kabbalah after viewing 
the Tv-series, and I sort of roughly quessed :).

> 2) I never said it concluded anything, did I? The "completeness of the
> framework" implies having all the facts on file.

Right, you didn't, and I'm not blaming you for it. I just took the opportunity
to express my opinion, that all the things in Eva about NERV, SEELE, Angels,
EVA, and souls was made purposefully hard to understand.