|
Post by KlausBaudelaire833 on Apr 14, 2012 6:11:40 GMT -5
I wasn't expecting the first chapter when I was waiting for the e-mail. But I have a theory for the picture. He is most possiblly, not the sole villain, but one of the villains lurking in the town. I think in this stage we don't know how many villains (and villains in disguise, possibly) will there be in the series.
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Apr 19, 2012 16:39:56 GMT -5
I'd be surprised if there weren't several villains in the series, yes. Well, there were several in ASoUE, although Olaf is the only one who really mattered. Maybe Snicket will try something different in this series, with the main villain remaining hidden for a long time and becoming visible only through catspaws like Principal Notro (as I have poorly nicknamed him just now)?
|
|
|
Post by B. on Apr 20, 2012 10:54:02 GMT -5
In the Penultimate Peril didn't Kit hint at the fact that there were many other villains beside Olaf and the sinister duo, which just shows how little we glimpse of everything going on in ASoUE. If the subject line for the villain promotion is a wrong question however, and say the question is actually "How can we not stop him?" does that really make (as said above) "Vice Principal Notro a villain?
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Apr 20, 2012 11:55:29 GMT -5
You're quite right, Brunch; Kit specifically stated in TPP that there were many more villains than Olaf, and worse than him, too. It's for that very reason that some people were expecting the sinister duo. If the subject lines are wrong questions, though, I don't think it's as simple as inverting the meaning of the question. Stopping this character might be less important than stopping the effect of his actions, stopping a plan that's already been set in motion. But I kind of think we shouldn't be placing too much importance on subversive interpretations of promotional subject lines.
|
|
|
Post by Christmas Chief on Apr 20, 2012 14:42:36 GMT -5
Yes, the fact there is "evil out there you cannot even imagine" grows as a theme the farther we get into ASOUE. I agree the questions are probably more complex than just switching them to the negative, though. "How can't we stop him?" doesn't get you very far, or seem more right than the original. On the other hand, if it's true "How can we stop him?" is a wrong question because the inquirer should have been asking something else, we have no way of knowing what that something else could possibly be.
Edit: ...Notro?
|
|
|
Post by B. on Apr 20, 2012 15:04:15 GMT -5
So if the subject lines are wrong questions and they shouldn't be asking about how they can stop him, perhaps there is another more sinister villain behind the scenes, and they should be trying to stop him instead.
Edit: Yes, how did you think up the name "Notro?"
|
|
|
Post by Christmas Chief on Apr 20, 2012 15:06:58 GMT -5
So if the subject lines are wrong questions and they shouldn't be asking about how they can stop him, perhaps there is another more sinister villain behind the scenes, and they should be trying to stop him instead. Yes, those are the lines along which I was thinking.
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Apr 20, 2012 15:08:17 GMT -5
If he's a principal of any kind, there is a temptation to draw a comparison to Nero. But this man is clearly not Nero. He is Notro. It's not a very good nickname, but it's not like he has a real name. ...Or does he? How's this for an idea: The man is Ellington Feint. I can definitely picture him as a Feint, at least, with an Ellington not far behind. You may well ask how his name then relates to the image of the girl and the description of a female smiling in the moonlight. What if she and Lemony had just been discussing EF? What if we can read the subject line and the caption as directly following from one another rather than having a more abstract link?
|
|
|
Post by B. on Apr 20, 2012 15:17:29 GMT -5
Then you can draw the link between the sets of three promotions: "Why would anyone want to steal this statue?" linked to "When does the bell ring?" If "Who is Ellington Feint?" is linked to "How can we stop him?" then can we also assume that "Where has all the ink gone?" is linked to "What?"
|
|
|
Post by Christmas Chief on Apr 20, 2012 15:30:55 GMT -5
Meaning the incorrect nature of the question would be the asking of who Ellington Feint was, because he had nothing to do with the picture that followed? That's a connection I don't find implausible. If it's true, perhaps it is indeed possible to draw parallels between other promotions. Not necessarily in chronological order, but certainly all together.
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Apr 20, 2012 15:36:44 GMT -5
No, that's not quite what I mean; I mean that, if Ellington Feint is anyone other than the girl in the picture, the subject line and the image and the caption may represent a single scene in which a girl in the moonlight is asked about Ellington Feint. The extension from that would be "What?" being asked during the speculative lighthouse scene. To be honest, I don't put much stock in the promotional questions themselves being specifically wrong in any way. I think that's asking a bit much of a promotional campaign which offers us limited enough information to start with.
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Apr 26, 2012 14:29:45 GMT -5
It's been quiet around here recently, but there should be a new LSATWQ e-mail tomorrow! If not, this'll be the first week since the promotion began for there not to be an update.
|
|
|
Post by B. on Apr 26, 2012 15:13:33 GMT -5
We got the "What?" email last Thursday, yes? Looking back through the emails though they seem to arrive in an odd kind of pattern, but roughly every seven or eight days. I don't think there'd be anything major at this stage, but the cycle of promotions ,may repeat. I'm also wondering how they'll set the website up- they could certainly use that in many different ways.
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Apr 26, 2012 15:22:22 GMT -5
My present pattern theory is that it's going Friday-Thursday-Friday(?)-Thursday(?). Of course, since the pattern, not just of days but of times, changes all the time, then there's a sense in which it's pointless to speculate... but it's worth pointing out that we've never had a message on Monday and only one ever on Tuesday. That is a kind of pattern, too.
|
|
|
Post by B. on May 1, 2012 4:01:29 GMT -5
Out of curiosity I tried replying to the "It's for Thee" email. Predicitably this was the response: OUT OF OFFICE: Mr. Snicket is out of the office due to various implausibilities. If this is an emergency contact the authorities. Questions? LSATWQ.com
|
|