|
Post by Optimism is my Phil-osophy on Sept 1, 2019 4:59:39 GMT -5
Anything is possible, but you will need something better than this to indicate that it is likely. Remember the great lesson from book 13: Not everything in the world revolves around the Baudelaires. Sometimes coincidences happen in the stories, as shown in the monologue of Ish and Olaf. (And look, I'm one of the ones Dante most complains about finding slightly forced connections, he says)
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Sept 1, 2019 5:10:14 GMT -5
It's reasonably conceivable that Handler didn't think it was important that the initials were the same; indeed, you can argue that the initials shouldn't really be L.S., they should be L.S.M. I think that Handler later noticed and turned this into a red herring by associating the initials L.S. with Sir in TPP. But the simple fact is that Lemony, on TMM page 51, says that he never saw Sir's face - which seems unlikely if that face is his own.
|
|
|
Post by Foxy on Sept 1, 2019 9:48:05 GMT -5
I don't think they are related (they could be, though), but I do think Sir stole Snicket's pajamas and was wearing them in TPP.
I think technically it was be L.S.L. or L.S.L.M. When I was working on TSBD, my word document kept telling me lumber mill was two words.
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Sept 1, 2019 10:54:55 GMT -5
I think technically it was be L.S.L. or L.S.L.M. When I was working on TSBD, my word document kept telling me lumber mill was two words. You're quite right; my brain was abbreviating out the "lumber", probably because of the title of the book. I suppose The Laborious Lumbermill would have been a bit of a mouthful.
|
|
|
Post by Hermes on Sept 1, 2019 11:21:29 GMT -5
If there are several Lucky Smells businesses, run by different members of the family (melons, apparently, and if we follow a clue from FU13, perhaps also socks), it might be economical to have a design of pyjamas that just says LS. But the idea that Sir has stolen L's pyjamas certainly has its attractions.
|
|