No Harm

[vfds321s]

In TRR, when Uncle Monty tells the Baudelaires that no harm would come to them in the Reptile Room, Lemony stops the story to tell the readers that his words are dramatic irony because Uncle Monty would be dead and the misery of the orphans would resume after that. Except that Uncle Monty was proven correct. The orphans were not harmed in the Reptile Room or anywhere in TRR for that matter. It is Dr. Montgomery himself who would be harmed in the reptile room, murdered in fact, and Olaf/Stephano never actually got to use the long knife, just threatening them with it. Unless Monty was referring to himself, which is unlikely, how is it dramatic irony and how was Monty proven wrong?

[Optimism is my Phil-osophy]

One of the most painful experiences for the minds of children and adolescents is to see the dead body of a loved one in one of the rooms of the house.

[Dante]

The "no harm" line wasn't a great prompt for the discussion on dramatic irony, but this is Snicket's verdict on the situation: 'For no matter how safe and happy the three children felt, no matter how comforting Uncle Monty's words were, you and I know that soon Uncle Monty will be dead and the Baudelaires will be miserable once again.' (TRR, p. 33) It seems Lemony wasn't referring to Uncle Monty's exact wording, but more to the overall impression of security that he was projecting and the comfort the Baudelaires took from those words. As the readers, we know that Uncle Monty's assurances are worthless, and it is poignant to hear his promises to the children. Possibly we should interpret it as not referring specifically to the three Baudelaires, but as a generalised "you"; as in, "no harm will come to anyone in the Reptile Room." (As it happens, I struggle to think of occasions in the entire series in which the orphans are harmed; only a handful come to mind.)