The Adults aren't Stupid, most of them, anyway

[lanayru]

Yeah, I think the point was that adults, even the most educated and most well-meaning, will usually dismiss what children say, whether because they don't believe them or because they're too scared to do anything to stand up for the children.

As for people who call all of the adults idiots: it's easy for them to judge the adults considering they're on the outside of a fictional situation and because the books are written from the perspective of the kids (not to mention Snicket's exaggerated writing style emphasizing how much the adults are ignoring). Yet, how often have these people (and people in general) dismissed what kids in their own life have said because they're just kids? It happens all the time.

[Dante]

In fairness, I would suggest that a lot of people probably would equate "oblivious" to "stupid"; the effect is not greatly different. In that regard, I think there's one notable individual who really should have been included on your list: Mr. Poe. I do think it's interesting that you draw a comparison between Hector and Josephine, though, and not wrongly; Hector is usually compared to Jerome and Charles. The self-centred characters are arguably oblivious in another way, of course. But I think it's perhaps a fair criticism that "stupid" is not necessarily the best choice of words.

[lemonymeringuepie]

Sept 22, 2017 14:04:28 GMT -5 Dante said:

In fairness, I would suggest that a lot of people probably would equate "oblivious" to "stupid"; the effect is not greatly different. In that regard, I think there's one notable individual who really should have been included on your list: Mr. Poe. I do think it's interesting that you draw a comparison between Hector and Josephine, though, and not wrongly; Hector is usually compared to Jerome and Charles. The self-centered characters are arguably oblivious in another way, of course. But I think it's perhaps a fair criticism that "stupid" is not necessarily the best choice of words.

Stupid is defined as a lack of intelligence, while oblivious is defined as being unaware of what is happening around oneself. A "stupid" person will likely be oblivious, but being oblivious doesn't make one stupid. Even the most intelligent person is oblivious to something. Which actually makes a different effect, one just has to look beyond the layer of oblivious equals stupid.
I wrote this mostly to talk about the first few "guardians". I use quotes as Nero really wasn't a guardian. I never really thought to compare Hector to Charles and Jerome. While Jerome and Charles are very similar characters, they don't remind me of Hector. Possibly because they're submissive to their partners, and not really afraid to argue, as they do once or twice.
Poe, however, is possibly just dumb, but I do plan to do a deep character study of him very soon. While, yes, he was technically a guardian for a week or two, I can't-do him justice without giving him his own time to shine, so to speak.

[gliquey]

"Stupid", as you say, means "lack of intelligence", but "intelligence" is a very broad word. There is academic intelligence, social intelligence, emotional intelligence, having a great depth of knowledge in a narrow subject or great breadth of knowledge across many fields etc. Many of the characters to have some form of intelligence, but the key thing they all lack is social intelligence - they are not wise enough to properly listen to what the Baudelaires tell them. You're right that "oblivious" and "self-centered" are probably the best adjectives to describe this.

Count Olaf is a very strange character because he mixes intelligence with idiocy. I think his lack of intelligence in some areas arises from his emotional perspective: "I'm the smartest, most handsome and most important person in this room." His obsession with showing off leads him to do stupid things, and his belief of superiority prevents him from ever expending the effort to learn anything. Olaf's plans to catch the Baudelaires are often stupid and ridiculously complicated, but I think sometimes they show signs of intelligence - e.g. his understand of legal loopholes in TBB. So I don't think he's a complete idiot.

Josephine and Hector do show a great depth of intelligence within their fields of interest (the English language and designing/building a house-machine hybrid), but overall I'm not exactly sure it's accurate to say they're very intelligent, because their complete lack of emotional and social intelligence renders them unable to handle basic interactions, such as Hector speaking to the council or Josephine talking to a realtor. Now, I think Josephine has it worse - her problems certainly point to a mental issue - but both are affected very severely by their shyness and fear.

Sir is perhaps the smartest adult you've listed: he has different interests to the Baudelaires, so we don't see him as a protagonist in any way, but he is very effective at getting those interests met. In fact, he's getting very cheap labour from his employees, has Charles to do all his chores for him and seems perfectly content with his life. He's not a good person, but seems intelligent enough to manipulate those around him.

Nero is someone I see as similar to Sir, but in intelligence terms, they're complete opposites. Nero is completely oblivious and idiotic - he doesn't realise that people don't enjoy his violin playing; he can't multiply nine by three etc.

Later, the series requires more adults who are competent to present V.F.D. as a noble organisation - Kit, Dewey etc. Some of these adults do listen to the children, and I think are probably intelligent in most senses of the word.

Sept 23, 2017 23:04:12 GMT -5 lemonymeringuepie said:

While, yes, he was technically a guardian for a week or two, I can't-do him justice without giving him his own time to shine, so to speak.

Interestingly, we don't know how much time passes between the Baudelaires going to guardians. We never see it (other than in TBB), but I have always assumed the children return to live in the Poe household while he finds another guardian, so in total I think he may have looked after them for months, rather than just a week or so. But this is not canon, just my interpretation.

[colette]

Like gliquey stated, "intelligence" is a broad word. I know many people who are educated and well-read but lack logic( you know they have a kind of logic like that "Eating ice cream everyday is not good for kids!" "Do you want are kids to suffer from hunger?"). So it's not weird that Aunt Josephine is very good at Grammar but at the same time too naive. Mr Poe is is also educated and rather well-read but he is a terrible judge of character. I also agree that Sir isn't stupid.

[doetwin]

I hope I'm not replying to this too late. The reason I think the adults, namely Mr. Poe, are so dim-witted, is because of fact that they didn't believe the Baudelaires after having proved themselves right multiple times. I mean, after Mr. Poe had finally realized that Stephano was Count Olaf, he said that he thought that "it just too far-fetched that he would have searched you(the Baudelaire) out" and "disguised himself as a laboratory assistant", which is somewhat understandable. But he did that same thing 4 more times. By TEE, the Baudelaires had proved themselves right 4 times, yet he still thought they were wrong. The Baudelaires' guardians were kind of the same way. Josephine, Sir, Nero, and Jerome, despite knowing that Count Olaf had a history of following the Baudelaires around, didn't believe them either when they said that so-and-so was Count Olaf. And Nero proved himself to be pretty dim-witted in other ways, but that's another story.

[Dante]

One can argue that the adults' disbelief makes more sense if you accept (or at least understand) their premise that it's improbable for Count Olaf to have disguised himself and sought out the Baudelaires. If it was improbable once, imagine how much more improbable it is on each subsequent occasion! Although you also have to bear in mind that Sir, Nero, and the Squalors all took steps to try and keep Count Olaf away - however ineffectual.

[lemonmeringue]

In my opinion, most of the adults are not stupid at all. The problem is not stupidity, it is fear: They don't take the Baudelaires' fear seriously and/or are caught up in their own fears. And, of course, the general lack of respect adults have for children is a very unfortunate, too.

[Dante]

That's an unusual interpretation, but not an unfair one - most obviously in Aunt Josephine's case, of course, but we also have Jerome's timidity when it comes to asserting himself around Esmé, and Charles's similar position with Sir. It's certainly true that the adults disregard the Baudelaires' fear in particular; and by dismissing their fear as irrational, they can point to the Baudelaires' ideas about various new adults in their environment (i.e. the disguised as Count Olaf) as stemming from paranoia, rather than being the source of that fear.