Psychoanalysis of LS

[thistledown]

Well, not a REAL psychoanalysis, obviously. Couldn't think of an appropriate title. Just some of the opinions I have about the character, Lemony Snicket. Too tired to write everything. Tell me what you guys think...

I have always found his stalking of the Baudelaires to be pretty creepy, no matter how founded/unfounded it is. I mean, it makes no sense that he singled them out...and not, say, the Quagmires. He either prefers the Baudelaires because he was A) in love with their mother and can't let go or B) he has some sort of relationship with one of the characters (ie: Violet is his child) or C) he's just crazy.

I'm leaning toward option A.

Lemony Snicket is paranoid. He is emotionally unstable, and he seems to harbor delusions of grandeur. He has a difficult time coping with life as well. Snicket isn't confident. But he is devious and very intelligent.

And don't you find it strange that the whole point of the series was to point out that people are neither good or evil, but a mixture of both?

We view Snicket as this infallible kind of character. We don't really doubt his nobleness. But I think that we should. He says he isn't an arsonist, but people doubt him. Why? Maybe because they have reason to.

Also, the series is obviously biased, making Olaf out to be worst than he is, I think. I forget where, but I believe somewhere it said that Lemony's accounts weren't all accurate, or something.

Basically, I'm just ranting, but I really do think that we don't know who Lemony is yet. I'm not too sure that he is completely the good guy here. And I hope this question will be resolved in future books, which had better exist. I'm curious to see more glimpses into his past. Because right now, there are still so many loose ends in the series. And if Handler doesn't wrap that up that'll be pretty disappointing.

[Dante]

Jul 20, 2008 4:21:46 GMT -5 thistledown said:

I have always found his stalking of the Baudelaires to be pretty creepy, no matter how founded/unfounded it is. I mean, it makes no sense that he singled them out...and not, say, the Quagmires. He either prefers the Baudelaires because he was A) in love with their mother and can't let go or B) he has some sort of relationship with one of the characters (ie: Violet is his child) or C) he's just crazy.

I'm leaning toward option A.

Of course you're leaning towards option A. That's the explanation given in the books. Lemony fell very deeply in love, but their relationship didn't break out because of their own personal differences - it broke up because of lies and slander from a third party (Count Olaf and The Daily Punctilio). It's understandable that Lemony never let go - it wasn't his fault that everything went wrong. There's unfinished business there, but it's too late for him and Beatrice. Lemony's very much the archetypal courtly lover, adoring an unattainable woman from afar - and there's also the fact that his relationship with Beatrice is based on the poet Dante's relationship with Beatrice (met her twice, I think, and loved her all his life, even when she married someone else and later died). We've learnt that he regards his commitment to chronicle the Baudelaire orphans' history as a sort of matter of honour - paying his debt to Beatrice, I believe, for not being able to protect her. It's also been suggested, although I forget where in the books, that he doesn't want the Baudelaires to end up the way he did - living a life on the run thanks to falsehoods printed in the newspapers. The trouble is, they really did commit some crimes...

Lemony Snicket is paranoid. He is emotionally unstable, and he seems to harbor delusions of grandeur. He has a difficult time coping with life as well. Snicket isn't confident. But he is devious and very intelligent.

Delusions of grandeur? I think you're being a little unfair. Lemony's always very humble, and is quite open about his flaws - admits repeatedly that he's a coward, that he'd run away from some of the problems the Baudelaires had, or throw temper tantrums at some of the situations they have to go through (although that's probably partly to amuse the readers, really). And it's hard to cope with life when you're constantly on the run from the police and personal enemies. It's more accurate to say that he doesn't have a life. He may be paranoid, but they really are out to get him - although he's managed to settle down to a more peaceful life in TBL, until he gets an impossible letter out of the blue from someone he can't possibly have good news for.

We view Snicket as this infallible kind of character. We don't really doubt his nobleness. But I think that we should. He says he isn't an arsonist, but people doubt him. Why? Maybe because they have reason to.

The reason we don't doubt his nobleness is because Lemony's so honest, and because he admits that he's ashamed of some of his actions, like stealing the sugar bowl from Esmé Squalor. As far as any actual arsons go, there's no real evidence to say even what he's supposed to have burnt down (although the U.A. implies he might be suspected of burning down the Baudelaire mansion, and suggests similar allegations were made about his involvement with the Quagmires). It's hardly unreasonable for him to defend himself by saying Count Olaf actually set those fires, though - Olaf loves arson, unashamedly (although on the other hand, he does deny burning down Ishmael's home, but we've no way of knowing if that's the truth or not).

Also, the series is obviously biased, making Olaf out to be worst than he is, I think. I forget where, but I believe somewhere it said that Lemony's accounts weren't all accurate, or something.

Actually, the quote in question was from Young Beatrice, who said that Snicket's accounts differed wildly from what the Baudelaires told her - she thinks they're the ones being slandered, not Olaf. Chapter Fourteen explains that the Baudelaires never told her the whole story, never told her all their secrets - the same as their own parents did to them.

Basically, I'm just ranting, but I really do think that we don't know who Lemony is yet. I'm not too sure that he is completely the good guy here. And I hope this question will be resolved in future books, which had better exist. I'm curious to see more glimpses into his past. Because right now, there are still so many loose ends in the series. And if Handler doesn't wrap that up that'll be pretty disappointing.

I've always taken the opposite view - it's over, and I hope Handler doesn't revisit the series. It's better as it is. Look how deeply it's inspired you to think, for example.

[thistledown]

Good points as always, Dante.

One thing though--the delusions of grandeur could be the fact that he uses his name throughout the series as this great mystery or the key to a secret. I mean, he focused on his issues with VFD more than anything, deviating from other points of view...and what might have actually happened. It is his obsession with his side that has clouded our view of VFD. He isn't impartial...but then again, nobody is.

I don't think that he should revisit the series as much as I believe that he should write something ELSE in the Baudelaire-world. Preferably something that explains VFD and the sugar bowl better.