|
|
Post by MikeT on Jan 5, 2004 9:41:17 GMT -5
I know because of everything being unfortunate and all..but do you think there is a hidden meaning behind this? Maybe involving the plot?
I was thinking that LS wants us to not read that he mite think they were boring books, so there might be like a hidden code running thruout the books...(not talking bout info from VFD)
maybe..?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rikku on Jan 5, 2004 15:23:13 GMT -5
I seriously never thought of that before. that's interesting.  |
|
|
|
Post by StellaFantasia on Jan 6, 2004 10:43:28 GMT -5
I don't think it has anything to do with the plot. I think it's mostly just an amusing play on the "Don't press that button, whatever you do" mentality...if you're told not to do it, you'll want to even more. At least that might be Daniel Handler and Harper Collins' hope.
And on the fictional side, the story has made Lemony Snicket very sad, and he doesn't want to make us sad too by subjecting us to the books. Because he's caring and sweet like that.
Anyway, I think it mostly just plays into the whole feeling of the series, nothing more.
|
|
|
|
Post by SnicketFires on Jan 6, 2004 22:57:33 GMT -5
crazily, i agree with all of you. I seriously never thought that's why he'd tell us not to read the books, but i had Cyberglam's reasoning for it. Wow.
Still, i can't see any codes. It really doesn't give any clues.
|
|
|
|
Post by MikeT on Jan 7, 2004 14:13:09 GMT -5
Maybe there was a code written in book 10 when Quigley and Klaus were exploring but perhaps it's been used it one of the previous books maybe...
i just think Lemony Snicket is this sorta person and uses past references and stuff..i mean take the thing on his site for instance!
|
|
|
|
Post by E on Jan 7, 2004 21:22:45 GMT -5
Maybe he doesn't want us to read it because
(a) He's trying to communicate and inform VFDers on his side
(b) Recruit intuitive people to become new VFD neophytes- anyone else get that impression?
well, as far as the fiction is concerned anyway. The whole "don't press that button" mentality is probably the reality of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by babygurl on Jan 12, 2004 20:44:36 GMT -5
Well i dont see any thing in the books that give u clues but mab he doesnt want us to read his books cuzz he noes that we will luv them and reasher on them and make website about thme and we iwll find out stuff that he doesnt want us to noe??  |
|
|
|
Post by babygurl on Jan 13, 2004 18:44:47 GMT -5
this doent really go wit this topic but i cant find a folder it will go with so im sayin it here u noe how peoeple think that betrice mite be the mom welllll lemony snicket says in the book (the 6th) that onyl if i didnt letbetrice wit esme squalar that thursdya AFTERNOON but in the other book (1st) he syas that the fire wuzz in the morin so how coult that work out unlessss beterice wuzz int he fire and surved to the thursaday wit esme and then died (esme hurt here and she was weak so she couldnt live mabey  |
|
|
|
Post by Addieor on Jan 13, 2004 18:50:20 GMT -5
It could be that Beatrice is a survivor.
Or Snicket made a mistake.
I thought reverse psychology like Cyberglam.
|
|
|
|
Post by Celinra on Jan 21, 2004 19:51:24 GMT -5
I thought reverse psychology. That's what got me interested in the book in the first place!
|
|
|
|
Post by Jacques the Environmentalist on Jan 26, 2004 16:30:45 GMT -5
Reverse psychology and he's trying to communicate with fellow VFDers. Esme didn't necessarily kill Beatrice that thursday afternoon and Beatrice is Mrs. Baudelaire.
|
|
|
|
Post by Celinra on Jan 27, 2004 10:33:32 GMT -5
Arg! I am getting so sick of the Beatrice/Mrs. Baudelaire argument! And now, it's coming to a topic where it wasn't meant to be discussed... there are probably about 50 million topics devoted to this subject, post it there!
Obviously, neither side has convincing evidence yet, it's just the same arguments over and over, if they even bring up an argument, some just say, "It's her mom, I'm sure of it," and don't back it up. I wish the argument would just stop until someone has good proof and/or something new relating to it. Right now, it's just a lot of redundancies, and is getting very annoying.
I apologize for being so grumpy in this post, but I really am sick of people going back and forth with the same arguments regurgitated over and over, it's getting rather monotonous. I try to avoid those topics, and it sneaks over into the topic I'm interested in...
|
|
|
|
Post by Jacques the Environmentalist on Jan 27, 2004 16:10:31 GMT -5
Just ignore these first couple posts, I took so long to learn how to quote. Sorry, just look at my post on the other page...
|
|
|
|
Post by Jacques the Environmentalist on Jan 27, 2004 16:16:33 GMT -5
Arg! I am getting so sick of the Beatrice/Mrs. Baudelaire argument! And now, it's coming to a topic where it wasn't meant to be discussed... there are probably about 50 million topics devoted to this subject, post it there! Obviously, neither side has convincing evidence yet, it's just the same arguments over and over, if they even bring up an argument, some just say, "It's her mom, I'm sure of it," and don't back it up. I wish the argument would just stop until someone has good proof and/or something new relating to it. Right now, it's just a lot of redundancies, and is getting very annoying. I apologize for being so grumpy in this post, but I really am sick of people going back and forth with the same arguments regurgitated over and over, it's getting rather monotonous. I try to avoid those topics, and it sneaks over into the topic I'm interested in... WHAT DO YOU MEAN WE HAVE NO PROOF? Just look under the crisis concludes on who is beatrice and what do we know about her and u'll find overwhelming evidence of mine on the subject. |
|
|
|
Post by Celinra on Jan 28, 2004 22:19:47 GMT -5
I'm sorry. I was making generalizations, not necessarily talking about everyone here. I read your arguments, and they're the best I've seen so far. As I said, most of the others are just repeating the same few things over and over ("it can't be their mom because she died in the afternoon..." "no, not necessarily, it may be..." "no, it is..." "no it isn't..."), with no further proof.
My other main complaint is that it's in this topic, which isn't meant for that argument. There are other places for it, one doesn't need to post unrelated things.
|
|
