|
Post by lsandthebooks on Sept 10, 2019 19:31:53 GMT -5
So he could recruit them into VFD? I wonder if that's why Olaf was so desperate to kill him. He was already in jail about to be burned at the stake, so Olaf had no real reason to kill him in advance. But, Olaf might have worried that Jacques would try talk to the kids again...
|
|
|
Post by Foxy on Sept 11, 2019 12:13:59 GMT -5
I think Jacques was just there because he was trying to rescue the children at long last. He had been searching for them for a long time, and he had done research to try and find them from the Reptile Room in Uncle Monty's house.
I think the reason Olaf killed Jacques was so he could blame the Baudelaires for the murder, and then he could put them in jail and have them burned at the stake.
|
|
|
Post by Optimism is my Phil-osophy on Sept 11, 2019 12:47:55 GMT -5
Charles said in TPP that J.S had written to him about Baudelaire parents. Quigley said Jacques Snicket went looking for someone in Paltryville. Jacques was probably was communicating with Charles about the Baudelaire parents. And the first thing Jacques said when he saw the Baudelaires had to do with their parents. So I believe Jacques went to the town of VFD to speak a message regarding the Baudelaire parents.
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Sept 11, 2019 15:01:10 GMT -5
Charles said in TPP that J.S had written to him about Baudelaire parents. Quigley said Jacques Snicket went looking for someone in Paltryville. Jacques was probably was communicating with Charles about the Baudelaire parents. And the first thing Jacques said when he saw the Baudelaires had to do with their parents. So I believe Jacques went to the town of VFD to speak a message regarding the Baudelaire parents. This is almost a brilliant idea, but unfortunately Chapter Four also makes it clear that the J.S. who wrote to Charles had post-TVV knowledge; was able to anticipate, for instance, both that the Baudelaires would be at the Hotel Denouement and that they would arrive by submarine.
|
|
|
Post by Optimism is my Phil-osophy on Sept 11, 2019 16:44:47 GMT -5
Ah ... It's because I put here only part of my theory ... The complete theory indicates that JS that Charles was referring to was Jacques (he received a letter), while JS that was behind the plan that was happening in the hotel was another JS.Remember that Charles is the only one who refers to JS as a man.
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Sept 12, 2019 3:00:43 GMT -5
Remember that Charles is the only one who refers to JS as a man. "I want you to tell me something about a certain guest at this hotel. He's been lurking around the basement, plotting to spoil our party. His initials are J.S." -Esmé Squalor, TPP p. 89 "You're not the only one who gets notes from this fellow J.S. I'm invited to a party he's hosting on Thursday night, and he said I should bring all my valuables." -Sir, TPP, p. 113 Charles, meanwhile, doesn't refer to J.S. with gendered terms at all.
|
|
|
Post by Optimism is my Phil-osophy on Sept 12, 2019 4:34:03 GMT -5
Sorry my friend ... I'll check in my Portuguese translation, if it was my mistake or the Portuguese translation mistake.
Edit 1: In Portuguese, the word "he" said by Esmé, seems to agree to the word "guest." Unfortunately all the nouns in Portuguese have gender, which makes no sense. For example, we refer to the word "table" as being a female word, and we use the pronoun "she" to refer to the table. In Portuguese we do not have a personal pronoun without gender, such as the pronoun "It" in English.
Edit 2: What you said about Charles is true, even in Portuguese. I think I got confused in my notes. I should have written something like "Charles didn't disagree with Sir about the JS genre."
|
|