|
|
Post by Esmé's meme is meh on Dec 6, 2016 9:23:30 GMT -5
 ******************************** From December 5th to December 17th, 667 Dark Avenue invites all the fans of A Series of Unfortunate Events to do a re-reading of The Wide Window while we get ourselves ready for the show.
The main idea is to share interesting facts and phrases, stuff we would like to see in the Netflix show, analyse the plot, mention details about the characters and the story, etc.
It would be particularly interesting to have international readers talking about how they translated stuff in their respective languages: words definitions, linguistic games, phrases, intertextualities, etc. We know the ASOUE fanbase is big and vast, and it includes Spanish, French, Portuguese and German readers at the very least.
We'll have a Special Penthouse Day on December 18th to do a live chat session about the book and discuss the most interesting stuff mentioned during these two weeks. |
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Dec 8, 2016 11:36:54 GMT -5
We do tend to look at the book's Josephine with somewhat rose-tinted glasses, but she's really quite a badly fallen figure. One thing that I think is interesting about the Netflix version is that she appears to have a kind of manic energy, and that may well fit better with the Josephine who snuck halfway around the lake to hide in a sea cave, which never quite sat easily with the character's timidity and terrors.
|
|
|
|
Post by theplague on Dec 8, 2016 11:47:06 GMT -5
When I was younger, the first time I ever heard of leeches was this book, and I therefore assumed that all leeches were like this (I guess I forgot the section where it describe how these leeches are different than usual.) I was terrified of leeches for a while after, and I was astonished when I learned that people found them to be really just a nuisance.
|
|
|
|
Post by mortinson51 on Dec 8, 2016 12:34:40 GMT -5
It's interesting people always give TMM a lot of hate but personally I prefer it over TWW. In TMM they try to mess with what we expect where this book presents the same structure.
I always find it odd when the Children remember Aunt Josephine in later books they look back on her with love as if she was a good guardian with Faults. I feel the only nice thing she ever did for them was give them presents in their first meeting. Everything else she did was selfish. Even though she was scared of things she used that as an excuse to just look after herself and her own interests. Where other Gaurdians who maybe scared still tried to help the Childden has much as they could (hector and Jerome)
For me the leeches are my favorite part about this book and the discription of her house on the ledge. The movie leech s were pretty good I just hope the scene in the TV show is truest terrifying
|
|
|
|
Post by Esmé's meme is meh on Dec 8, 2016 15:19:10 GMT -5
Well, now I'm done with my classes, I can focus on this! Too bad I don't have the Spanish translation though, this is the most interesting one for that considering all the grammar references  I think the kids missed her and remembered her with love because, as most of them, she had good intentions. She was a mess as a person, yes, she was a damaged woman, probably mentally ill ("You mus be as frightened of burglars as I am", p. 22), and the Baudelaires probably saw that. Even so she still decided to become their tutor, she still tried to be good with them (probably cleaning and arranging the big bedroom for them, getting two beds and a crib, trunks full of things for them, a big wardrobe and also giving them gifts and teaching them grammar), she even attempted to get over her fears (answering the phone), and most important of all she didin't want them to be alone/on their own (although you can say she did it so she wouldn't be alone, yes). I think she did the best she could, and that's something. Violet herself says that in p. 24. What we should really consider is how Mr. Poe just gives the children away to anyone who accepts to take care of them, not even talking with them first. In this case he just sent Aunt Jo a letter and when she said yes he just dropped the kids at her door; if he had talked with her before he'd have seen she was a very conflicted woman who could barely take care of herself. Okay, now abot my re-reading: -I'm interested in the taxi driver. It's like 80% probable he took the picture of the Baudelaires that's mentioned later in the story, and he's also pretty much confirmed to be the same person who picked up the sugar bowl in TPP and who offered the Baudelaires a ride. It is also possible the same taxi driver from TRR. I find interesting the mention of money in all of those moments (Olaf refuses to tip him because he talked too much and showed him pictures of his babies, Mr. Poe pays him before he takes the kids to Aunt Jo's house and in TPP he says "money is not a problem". A lot of people thinks he's Lemony Snicket himself, but I find it weird that in this book (TWW) he is surprised that Aunt Jo is afraid of the lake and still lives there. If he is Lemony then he should know about Jo's fear of everything; if he's Snicket, why would he pretend to not know her instead of saying something to the children? The description of him as someon "in between" villanous and noble makes me think he's a character we don't know, not Lemony. -The taxi driver makes another temporality mark, saying it's the off-season. -The introduction of Aunt Josephine is awkward too. The moment is awkward. She only says hello and immediately shows them the house or we're missing some dialogue in between? I didn't remember she was described as a pale woman with white hair, I thought there was something more making it clear she's an old woman. Considering her fear of everything, I can see her as a young woman whose hair became white because of stress. I wonder why they decided to skip that in the show; Alfre would look great with white hair. Maybe her hair will turn white during the show? Maybe Jacquelyn will describe her as an old, white-haired and pale woman and that's why the kids are surprised when they meet her? -I think it says a lot of Josephine as a person that she tells Klaus "You can't believe everything you read" (p. 16) and then she ignores her own advice because she wants Captain Sham to be real. The dinner scene also helps to show how forced the kids' relationship with Jo was; even when she wasn't the best, she was decent enough, and they tried to deal with it. -It surprised me some of Jo's statements about Ike. Before starting my re-reading now I thought she become afraid of everything after Ike's death, but she makes it clear they both were. -If Ike was the only person she knew who could whistle with crackers in his mouth, then that confirms Ike was Beatrice's cousin? Is either that or there's no blood relationship at all between the kids and either Jo or Ike. The thing is, she never got to meet Beatrice, then? But she DID meet Lemony. That's weird. -If Jo grew up in the valley of Lake Lachrymose (p. 28), then how did she end up being part of VFD? Wasn't she taken away when she was little like most of them to complete her training? -Aunt Josephine affirms she doesn't know Olaf in page 41, and she decides to ignore the mention of his tattoo and focus on grammar instead. Was that intentional, Jo? -"My mother-in-law had not only one eyebrow, but also only one ear". I find this particularly interesting. Olaf had only one eyebrow, Ike's mom had only one eyebrow, Ike was Beatrice's cousin, Jacques Snicket had only one eyebrow, Olaf and Kit had something, Lemony and Beatrice had something... what kind of incestuous big family is VFD? -If Josephine really didn't know Olaf before, then how VFD really worked? Do we know for sure that the tattoo was something both sides of the schism had? I can't remember now other cases now, but we know Jacques also had it, and he was in the fire-fighting side (unless he played a Snape). Also they mention the tattoos in ATWQ, so Jo should know what it means at the very least. But if all the volunteers had it, how is it possible that the Baudelaires never saw Beatrice's and Bertrand's, or even Monty's? |
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Dec 8, 2016 15:56:49 GMT -5
-I'm interested in the taxi driver. It's like 80% probable he took the picture of the Baudelaires that's mentioned later in the story, and he's also pretty much confirmed to be the same person who picked up the sugar bowl in TPP and who offered the Baudelaires a ride. It is also possible the same taxi driver from TRR. I find interesting the mention of money in all of those moments (Olaf refuses to tip him because he talked too much and showed him pictures of his babies, Mr. Poe pays him before he takes the kids to Aunt Jo's house and in TPP he says "money is not a problem". A lot of people thinks he's Lemony Snicket himself, but I find it weird that in this book (TWW) he is surprised that Aunt Jo is afraid of the lake and still lives there. If he is Lemony then he should know about Jo's fear of everything; if he's Snicket, why would he pretend to not know her instead of saying something to the children? The description of him as someon "in between" villanous and noble makes me think he's a character we don't know, not Lemony. The main reason people think the TPP taxi driver is Lemony is because Lemony subsequently shows a detailed and intimate knowledge of the contents of that taxi. His motive for remaining incognito to the Baudelaires in TWW, blatant retcon aside, would probably be because this is still very early in the story and we have no idea what he knew about them at that point or what the V.F.D. line was on interfering with their lives. I suspect Josephine was simply meant to be old; Count Olaf later makes a remark to this effect, I think. If she is no longer old in the adaptation, there's no longer any urgent need for her to have white hair. I agree that it would make an interesting point of characterisation, though, but it's not one that's already there. Quite possibly a lie, of course - or at least, retroactively a lie. But it is interesting that Josephine's fears weren't prompted by Ike's death; it would be more than natural for her mental state to take a turn for the worse. V.F.D. is a big organisation; that, and Josephine might simply have never known about Beatrice's unusual talent. Lots of characters were never taken away for V.F.D. training; the Baudelaires and Quagmires are the most notable, but it also seems that Fiona and Fernald always lived and worked with their family, too. I would suggest that, where family are already volunteers and possibly directly involved with secret volunteer work, there would be no reason to take the children away for extra training. Well, there's always the possibility that Josephine, or any character, was lying about not having met or heard of Olaf before - because explaining how they did know about him would require them to then lie in turn about V.F.D. It is meant to be a secret organisation, after all. As for the tattoos, the Baudelaires weren't intimate enough with Monty to have necessarily seen his ankle, and with the Baudelaire parents I can only presume they rigorously disguised their tattoos with socks, make-up, whatever options they had available. |
|
|
|
Post by gliquey on Dec 8, 2016 17:08:06 GMT -5
This book is interesting, because it's the weakest book of the first four, in my opinion, but it turned out to be the strongest part of the movie. It's interesting people always give TMM a lot of hate but personally I prefer it over TWW. In TMM they try to mess with what we expect where this book presents the same structure. I agree with both of you. There are parts of TWW I think are great, such as the recurring grammar idea, the hidden message in Josephine's note, Snicket's ramblings (e.g. US Postal Service) and small details (Damocles Dock is a great name), but overall the plot just doesn't intrigue me, and I think it's the weakest of the first four and nearly the weakest in the series (perhaps controversial but I think I'd put TGG last). What we should really consider is how Mr. Poe just gives the children away to anyone who accepts to take care of them, not even talking with them first. In this case he just sent Aunt Jo a letter and when she said yes he just dropped the kids at her door; if he had talked with her before he'd have seen she was a very conflicted woman who could barely take care of herself. This reminds me of Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (and to a lesser extent other HP books) because Dumbledore hires a blatantly incompetent Defence Against the Dark Arts teacher (Lockhart) since no-one else was willing to take on the job after the reputation it had. ASOUE parallels this with guardianship of the Baudelaires - the role might as well be cursed, since no-one manages to keep them for very long, and Mr. Poe gets very desperate for guardians even quite early on in the series. So your interpretation is certainly valid, but I think another suggestion is that there is no-one competent who wants the Baudelaires, so Mr. Poe has to settle for well-intentioned but mentally ill. -I'm interested in the taxi driver. It's like 80% probable he took the picture of the Baudelaires that's mentioned later in the story, and he's also pretty much confirmed to be the same person who picked up the sugar bowl in TPP and who offered the Baudelaires a ride. It is also possible the same taxi driver from TRR. I find interesting the mention of money in all of those moments (Olaf refuses to tip him because he talked too much and showed him pictures of his babies, Mr. Poe pays him before he takes the kids to Aunt Jo's house and in TPP he says "money is not a problem". A lot of people thinks he's Lemony Snicket himself, but I find it weird that in this book (TWW) he is surprised that Aunt Jo is afraid of the lake and still lives there. If he is Lemony then he should know about Jo's fear of everything; if he's Snicket, why would he pretend to not know her instead of saying something to the children? The description of him as someon "in between" villanous and noble makes me think he's a character we don't know, not Lemony. I'm feeling quite conflicted about whole the taxi driver business now. Here's what we know: - The taxi driver in TRR shows pictures of babies to Olaf, and this is an item in the V.F.D. disguise kit.
- The taxi driver in TWW seems to know quite a lot about the town of Lake Lachrymose, but doesn't know Josephine.
- In TCC, the children discover a picture showing them on Damocles Dock with Mr. Poe hailing a taxi. The town seemed empty to the Baudelaires so there weren't many people around at that time. I think it's fair to surmise that the taxi driver in TWW took the picture (and then suggest that they are associated with V.F.D.).
- The taxi driver in TPP has a woman hiding in the back seat, a musical instrument in the back seat, a sandwich in the glove compartment and a small item "damp from its hiding place" [the sugar bowl, almost certainly]. The middle two certainly point to Lemony, who plays the accordion and mentions a coded sandwich of his in TSS.
- Both the taxi driver in TWW and the one in TPP are described as skinny, and smoking.
The last thing points to the taxi driver in TWW and TPP being one and the same, and the penultimate thing points to the TPP driver being Lemony, but from ATWQ we know with certainty that Lemony knows Josephine well so this seems to be a contradiction. It is still my opinion that the taxi driver in TRR is definitely not Lemony, and of little importance (I doubt it's the same as the TWW taxi driver as why would a taxi driver living by Lake Lachrymose be driving around Lousy Lane?). But although I think that the neatest solution is that the taxi driver in TWW is different to the one in TPP, who is Lemony, I admit this still doesn't tie everything together very nicely (it's not a major coincidence for two people to both be male, skinny and smokers, but still...). It seems like your opinion is that the taxi driver in TWW and TPP are the same person, but not Lemony, which I think is slightly less neat (what about the instrument and the sandwich?) but still a valid inference. In my interpretation, taxi drivers are still important, as all of the ones we see in the series (including Kit) seem to be V.F.D. members (but then again who isn't?), I suppose because the disguise kit has a taxi driver disguise. But they are three different people, and the last one is Lemony, but the others are not characters we have seen elsewhere. -"My mother-in-law had not only one eyebrow, but also only one ear". I find this particularly interesting. Olaf had only one eyebrow, Ike's mom had only one eyebrow, Ike was Beatrice's cousin, Jacques Snicket had only one eyebrow, Olaf and Kit had something, Lemony and Beatrice had something... what kind of incestuous big family is VFD? Aha! Maybe this was blatantly obvious to everyone else but I've only just realised the connection between this and Ishmael's story in TE: "I remember one child in particular, who had scraggly dark hair and just one eyebrow. [...] She had one eyebrow and, thanks to an accident in her grandfather's laboratory, only one ear." But back to your original point, yes, there are some strange family connections between members of V.F.D. -If Josephine really didn't know Olaf before, then how VFD really worked? Do we know for sure that the tattoo was something both sides of the schism had? I can't remember now other cases now, but we know Jacques also had it, and he was in the fire-fighting side (unless he played a Snape). Also they mention the tattoos in ATWQ, so Jo should know what it means at the very least. But if all the volunteers had it, how is it possible that the Baudelaires never saw Beatrice's and Bertrand's, or even Monty's? Hmm... Josephine could have easily had hers removed, and decided she wanted nothing more to do with V.F.D., at around the time she became terrified of everything, whenever that was. But that doesn't really make sense for Monty. To be honest, though, they were only with him for 10 days and there's no reason they should have seen him sock-less. As for Beatrice and Bertrand, I have no compelling solution, other than the one Dante has already suggested. |
|
|
|
Post by mortinson51 on Dec 8, 2016 17:54:29 GMT -5
-I'm interested in the taxi driver. It's like 80% probable he took the picture of the Baudelaires that's mentioned later in the story, and he's also pretty much confirmed to be the same person who picked up the sugar bowl in TPP and who offered the Baudelaires a ride. It is also possible the same taxi driver from TRR. I find interesting the mention of money in all of those moments (Olaf refuses to tip him because he talked too much and showed him pictures of his babies, Mr. Poe pays him before he takes the kids to Aunt Jo's house and in TPP he says "money is not a problem". A lot of people thinks he's Lemony Snicket himself, but I find it weird that in this book (TWW) he is surprised that Aunt Jo is afraid of the lake and still lives there. If he is Lemony then he should know about Jo's fear of everything; if he's Snicket, why would he pretend to not know her instead of saying something to the children? The description of him as someon "in between" villanous and noble makes me think he's a character we don't know, not Lemony. -The taxi driver makes another temporality mark, saying it's the off-season. -If Josephine really didn't know Olaf before, then how VFD really worked? Do we know for sure that the tattoo was something both sides of the schism had? I can't remember now other cases now, but we know Jacques also had it, and he was in the fire-fighting side (unless he played a Snape). Also they mention the tattoos in ATWQ, so Jo should know what it means at the very least. But if all the volunteers had it, how is it possible that the Baudelaires never saw Beatrice's and Bertrand's, or even Monty's? The Taxi Driver is an interesting one. I do feel that all Taxi drivers in this universe are definatly part of VFD. Whats interesting is the the description of TWW Taxi Driver and TPP Taxi driver are pretty much identical. It feels like Lemony wants us to make the connection that they are the same. And then Lemony pretty much spells out for us (as much as he ever will) that he is the TPP taxi driver. So i feel like its a safe leap to make. There is no evidence that taxi driver in TRR is the same as TWW/TPP. the only clue we get is the reference to the VFD decuise kit which isnt much to go on. I will be interested to see how the show deals with the taxi driver. i feel like it will be more obovously lemony in the show. The hints to this are in the first lemony teaser he is walking around and a taxi is in the background. but if this is the case its more show canon then book canon so take it or leave it. As for TWW taxi driver not knowing Josephine i think that goes into the adult not telling the children all the truth. in the begin the Baudliare are still children they havent proven them selves to VFD yet. VFD doesn't spoon feed answers to its members it lets you solve the puzzles and figure out the code. so i think its a bit of both trying to keep the children inocent but also see if they could make it as VFD Members. i don't think Monty and josephine are telling them everything. i think this even in later books when the children are apart of the VFD world Captian Widdershed wont tell them things because "they are too terrable" |
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Dec 9, 2016 3:41:21 GMT -5
I'm actually looking again at the taxi driver section in TWW, and in my opinion it fits surprisingly well with the idea that it's Lemony, cigarette and dead cat aside. As a volunteer and a man on the run, it makes a lot of sense that he can't give much away, but the taxi driver's questions to the Baudelaires can read very much like he's trying to gauge how much they know, and he never actually directly states that he doesn't know Josephine; his dialogue fits nicely with the idea that Lemony had lost touch with her and had no idea of the sad direction her life had taken. It retroactively becomes quite poignant.
|
|
|
|
Post by lorelai on Dec 9, 2016 22:08:29 GMT -5
Dante's point, and Zort's early poinss, about Jo have always been how I've seen the character.
I feel like Josephine may have realized deep down how crippling her fear was, because of the "Oh no, and I mean it this time." line, and her comment to the Baudelaires not to throw her overboard when the leeches arrive. Both of these "fears" break the pattern of her usual statements, and hint that she realized how hard she was making things on the kids.
This may be the only book we get it in, but we DO have a spyglass in this book. in fact, Violet's fire device is where the film got its answer to how the Baudelaire fire was started, and according to the DVD commentary Handler did intend for them to feature more (scrapped the idea, I guess).
I love that in the audiobook, which Handler narrates, Larry emphasizes the "sad occasion" phrase. Since there was a two year gap between the audiobooks and the literal ones until TGG, it's an interesting peak into how much Handler might have had planned.
Another possibility for why the Baudelaires have only seen Olaf's tattoo is that their parents could have gotten theirs removed, if they didn't just hide them constantly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Esmé's meme is meh on Dec 10, 2016 1:30:07 GMT -5
Oh yes, I wanted to mention the spyglass! I had to do a re-read during my re-read to understand it was actually in the boat and not in Violet's pocket or something. Btw I still find that scene where she uses the moonlight to make a fire absurd on the level of the sword vs teeth fight.
Also is in this picture we can appreciate why some people is bothered when it comes to the androgynous henchperson. It actually is stated that they lack of gender is scary. I can understand that Handler refers to them as "he/she/it" considering the year, but the scary part... yeah, not cool.
I didn't remember how violent they'd get: "Without a word, the mountanious person grabbed Violet by the hair, and with one swing of its arm lifted her up over its smelly shoulder the way you might carry a backpack"
I'm still surprised Josephine didn't admit she knew Count Olaf when she tells the kids he forced her to do the note thing. At leas one mentio would have make sense.
Is it remotely possible that Josephine survived? I'm thinking it took a while for the children to arrive to the cave (it's the "dim light of the late afternoon" when they leave the dock, and then "just when the evening turned to night [...] the Baudelaires saw a blinking light of pale purple"), so if Aunt Jo ate the banana before leaving the cave, it might have been a while until they got to the middle of the lake and she announces what she did, especially considering the hurricane/storm broke by then and the water/wind seemeed to be calm. Then the whole fight against the leeches seems to take a while, and when they finally get in Sham's boat (especially considering the moon and all) they talk for a good while. During that time the leeches behavior is totally different: even when they're guided by the food smell, they keep insisting on the other boat for a while. The mention of "the scent of banana still lingering on Aunt Josephine" makes me doubt on how much time passed by then. It's pretty improbable, I know, but considering how good swimmer she was (after all, there's not a confirmation she's dead, the only thing they found are her life jackets, and makes sense if she took them off to swim) I thought maybe she is, after all, alive, and maybe she even is the swimmer who retrieved the sugar bowl in TPP.
Finally, I still don't understand completely how Olaf's peg leg worked. In the illustration of Sham in the complete wreck you can see it depicted as a thin, normal peg leg. Was it then supposed to be a massive peg leg with the shape of his actual leg? How can that be believable?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Dec 10, 2016 11:28:11 GMT -5
The possiblity of Aunt Josephine still being alive was a theory bandied about during the latter years of the series, but if it had come true it would've been a fairly huge twist and it's hard to see how it could fit into the series as written. It would've been a good twist, but I can't say that I regret that it didn't happen, because if it did the series would have had to be quite different. I suppose you could argue that she's the swimming woman from TGG (and possibly TPP) and that she was actively avoiding the Baudelaires for fear of Olaf, but that doesn't make her much of a better person.
As for the peg leg, I would rationalise it as Olaf's foot being stuck in it in tip-toe position to allow it to maintain a kind of narrow, tapering shape (and thus requiring Olaf to angle his peg-legged leg awkwardly to hide the fact that it's a foot longer than his ordinary leg, which he could probably get away with), but it would still be a far thicker peg leg than the illustrations ever show it being.
|
|
Timmixxa
Catastrophic Captain
how's life
Posts: 63 
Likes: 34
|
Post by Timmixxa on Dec 10, 2016 12:00:05 GMT -5
Regarding his peg leg, how is it possible that Sunny can take it off by biting it so easily? Maybe she pulled it down because Olaf would've just put his leg on to the fake peg leg like you wear pants everyday. I don't know!
|
|
|
|
Post by lorelai on Dec 10, 2016 12:11:23 GMT -5
A lot of costume peg legs, and even real ones, unhinge at the knee, so Sunny would just have to bite the wood at that level, and not very hard because the clamp is doing much of the work.
|
|
|
|
Post by benjamin1799 on Dec 10, 2016 14:32:19 GMT -5
What I find interesting is everything happens so fast which does make this book a weaker one.
In TRR it seems that it a bit past halfway until Uncle Monty dies, In TWW Aunt Jo gets "pushed out the window" towards the beginning.
But because it happens so soon I read this book as a mystery book. Like Nancy Drew or the Hardy Boys. It had that same sleuth feel as Klaus figured out the note.
Also we have been talking about Sunny and how she is used more as the books move on and such. She definitely grew up again as she was the one to steal the keys and to hold a bucket full of water.
Aunt Jo never gave the children the love and care they got from Uncle Monty. As a reader we notice that which makes her death...not so sad.
|
|
