Let's talk again about The Great Unknown

[Optimism is my Phil-osophy]

I would love to hear from the new members about the Great Unknown.




I can say that one of the theories I am most proud of at the moment (after the Great Hiatus theory) and that I really believe is not only canonical but I think it is the author's intention (as well as the Great Hiatus theory until publication of LSTUA) is my theory about the Great Unknown. Well ... I need to improve it, because when I originally wrote it I was committed to another theory ... A theory that I myself no longer agree with. So, I intend to polish the Great Unknown theory so that it is a pure theory in itself, without having to be part of a house of cards. (I love house of cards).


But before producing the text itself, which I intend to submit to Conflicting Conjectures, I want to hear your opinion. It would be good to hear your own ideas ... If by chance there is no way to destroy my theory, and there is real reason to believe that my ideas have canonical support with positive evidence I will submit.



First of all, in order to make the theory more professional (and more difficult to destroy) we are not going to talk about what fact is The Great Unknown. In a story where all the people who say something about the Great Unknown are characters, it is impossible to determine with 100% certainty what the Great Unknown is. After all, all characters can be wrong. It is something like determining what is in the SB. It is impossible to determine this with 100% certainty.



The aim of the theory is to determine precisely what Captain Widdershins believes is the Great Unknown.



But why would his opinion be so relevant? For two reasons. Captain W appears to believe that he knows many of the secrets not revealed in ASOUE. He is one of the few "guardians" who is really sincere with the Baudelaires. He is different from Hector who tells intentional lies to hide the truths about VFD. He is different from Kit and Quigley, who hide important information by making the Baudelaires understand that they also don't know the things they don't tell, when it is evident later on that they know more than they are willing to tell. He is different from Josephine and Uncle Monty (who have not yet in practice talked about VFD because Daniel Handler had not yet thought about the details in this regard). He is different from Esmé, who was of the arson side of the schism. He is different from Nero and Sr., who were not members of VFD. Captain W is sincere. He says, "Look, I know things, but I'm not going to tell you because you are not ready for this." (Although I know he lied about some things, too, like Fiona's past, and the fact that the telegram device is broken.) Even though he is capable of lying, he is also sincere in saying "I'm hiding something from you ". And he says he's hiding something about the Great Unknown. So he admittedly believes he knows what the Great Unknown is, and just doesn't want to tell.

It is different from Kit. Kit claims not to know what the Great Unknown is. She may not really know or she may be lying for some unknown reason. (Although I think she doesn't really know). In any case, her opinion of what the Great Unknown is useless: either she is telling the truth and really knows that she doesn't know what the Great Unknown is, or she is lying, and she knows what the Great Unknown is, but being lying about it doesn't help at all.

Nevertheless, Kit and Lemony's observations about the Great Unknown may help us to understand what was the common sense of the people of VFD about the Great Unknown. Of course, the observations that she, Olaf, and Lemony made about TGU should be taken into account to help us understand what Captain W thought about the matter.



And the other reason why Captain W's opinion is very important to me, is the fact that he is the only character to present contradictory behavior about TGU. While in TGG, Captain W showed great fear of the entity in the form of a question mark, in TE he preferred to go towards that entity. This is a psychological incongruence, and if there is one thing I learn from reading Agatha Cristie's novels (especially Miss Murple who is a much nicer person than Poirot), it is that good investigations should focus on pisciological incongruities.



So the real question I intend to answer is that my theory is "Why did Captain W show that he was afraid of the question mark-shaped entity in TGG and then preferred to go towards it in TE?"

Edit: I like this conclusion very much because it is counterintuitive. Most readers see that if the question mark-shaped entity is an animal, it means that the Quagmires died. When in fact I believe it is just the opposite. But I will refrain from talking about it in theory itself, because that would be reassembling my house of cards. I need to focus on TGU only.

Summing up my theory, without citing the sources in the books, I can say that I believe that Captain W believes that there is an entity in the form of a question mark that is a deadly submarine and he also believes that there is an entity in the form of a question mark which is a benevolent animal (or perhaps a controlled animal). When he showed fear, he believed that that entity was probably a deadly submarine. And when he went towards the entity, he believed that at that time he was the benevolent animal.





What do you think about that? (Older members are also invited to participate, of course).

[Dante]

Nov 30, 2020 16:07:13 GMT -5 Optimism is my Phil-osophy said:

And the other reason why Captain W's opinion is very important to me, is the fact that he is the only character to present contradictory behavior about TGU. While in TGG, Captain W showed great fear of the entity in the form of a question mark, in TE he preferred to go towards that entity. This is a psychological incongruence, and if there is one thing I learn from reading Agatha Cristie's novels (especially Miss Murple who is a much nicer person than Poirot), it is that good investigations should focus on pisciological incongruities.

There's something I'd like to pick up on here: Does Captain Widdershins, in fact, show fear of the question mark? The only appearance it makes in which Captain Widdershins is also present is when the submarine has already gone silent to avoid detection from Count Olaf; it's an extension of that silence to remain stealthy while the question mark chases Olaf off. All Widdershins has to say on the subject of what the question mark is is that it's "Something very bad [...] Even worse than Olaf, probably." (TGG p. 87) Probably. In other words, to the extent that we can trust Widdershins's statements (which is not much), he too is just guessing. It doesn't seem to me that there's enough here to deduce Widdershins's true feelings, much less his personal interpretation of the question mark.

This then brings us to the scene in The End, as reported by Kit - which I take as something approaching pure symbolism; Handler wanted these characters' fates to remain poetically unclear, so he ruled that, as Kit says, "everyone else wanted to take their chances with the great unknown." (The End, p. 304) It's worth pausing for a moment to remember their options here: Sink and die in the ocean, join Kit on her vaporetto and risk an uncertain future tossed upon the waves with no land in sight, or risk the great unknown. It's also worth pausing for a moment to remember that the sinister duo and their eagles were still directly overhead and there was every chance of further detection. It's not as if joining Kit was an easy choice; the fact is, they were all the unknown. But even characters like Fiona and Fernald, who really had no grounds to have any positive opinion of a giant sea shadow at all, still think it's worth risking. Frankly, I think that Handler put his finger on the scales here so far as character motivation goes. The choices made don't necessarily make psychological sense but have to make thematic sense for the sake of the story.

[Optimism is my Phil-osophy]

I have to agree with reservations. I also know that you are aware of what I am going to say, and I thank you for participating in the discussion again.



In TGG, Captain W does not just make the inference you mentioned about the entity in the form of a question mark.



He also says the following (I highlighted parts that I consider important in my argument):


"The amount of treachery in this world is enormous!" he cried. "Aye!
 Think of the crafts we saw on the sonar screen! Think of Count Olaf's
 enormous submarine, and the even more enormous one that chased it
 away! Aye! "There's always something more enormous and more
 terrifying on our tails! Aye! And so many of the noble submarines are
 gone! Aye! You think the Herman Melville suits are the only noble
 uniforms in the world? There used to be volunteers with P G. Wodehouse
 on their uniforms, and Carl Van Vechten. There was Comyns and Cleary
and Archy and Mehitabel. But now volunteers are scarce! So the best we
 can do is one small noble thing! Aye! Like retrieving the sugar bowl from
 the Gorgonian Grotto, no matter how grim it sounds! Aye! Remember my
personal philosophy! He who hesitates is lost!" - TGG 5

So, when saying "probably" it is evident to me that Captain W had a mental picture of what that entity was probably. And his mental image is well described in his words here: a submarine bigger than Count Olaf's submarine and which represented a greater danger than Count Olaf's submarine. By putting adjectives like "more terrifying" he clearly indicates that he was afraid of that.

Daniel Handler put Captain W to think that entity was a submarine, and made him afraid of that submarine.



In TE we got to where I can agree with reservations. There is all the apparent symbolism in TE, and I can agree with that. But all this symbolism seems to fall into disrepute when Lemony claims that the Quagmires were in a dark and damp place at the same time that the Baudelaires were on the island at night. Daniel Handler had a literal view of where the Quagmires were. If Daniel Handler had a literal view, I think it is unlikely that the whole scene was metaphorical. The Quagmires were in fact swallowed or saved by an entity in the form of a question mark. Captain W actually decided to head towards that entity that had literally emerged from the water. It would be normal for him to remain silent or to flee. If he still believed that probably (and not "possibly") that entity was worse than Olaf, that would be his natural reaction.

And I have been thinking, (this is more personal and not exactly an argument) from Daniel Handler's point of view, from his point of view as the creator of the story, Captain W's existence is really unnecessary here, unless there is the purpose of provide us with a hint about the nature of the creature. Do you know what you said about TEE? That the purpose of the book seems to be to develop the plot about the B mansion fire? It's the same here. It seems that Captain W's existence seems to be necessary to develop the TGU mystery.

The mystery was launched in TGG explicitly and not metaphorically: Lemony Snicket says he would never say whether that entity that the Baudelaires had partial eye contact with was a submarine or an animal. And the mystery, having only those two variables, was again put on the air by the way Kit described the scene. So to move on to a purely metaphorical interpretation would be cheating. You know "the entity is not one thing or the other ... it's just a symbol". And back to my theory, as I am putting it together ... Captain W did not think he was fleeing towards a symbol. It is true that they preferred to take risks with the TGU. They were not sure they would be saved. But they thought they would be saved. Among the dangers mentioned, Captain W thought that his chances would be greater going towards the TGU. And that decision led them to literally stay in a dark, damp place.

[Dante]

Dec 1, 2020 11:24:35 GMT -5 Optimism is my Phil-osophy said:

In TGG, Captain W does not just make the inference you mentioned about the entity in the form of a question mark.

He also says the following (I highlighted parts that I consider important in my argument):

"The amount of treachery in this world is enormous!" he cried. "Aye!
 Think of the crafts we saw on the sonar screen! Think of Count Olaf's
 enormous submarine, and the even more enormous one that chased it
 away! Aye! "There's always something more enormous and more
 terrifying on our tails! Aye! And so many of the noble submarines are
 gone! Aye! You think the Herman Melville suits are the only noble
 uniforms in the world? There used to be volunteers with P G. Wodehouse
 on their uniforms, and Carl Van Vechten. There was Comyns and Cleary
and Archy and Mehitabel. But now volunteers are scarce! So the best we
 can do is one small noble thing! Aye! Like retrieving the sugar bowl from
 the Gorgonian Grotto, no matter how grim it sounds! Aye! Remember my
personal philosophy! He who hesitates is lost!" - TGG 5

So, when saying "probably" it is evident to me that Captain W had a mental picture of what that entity was probably. And his mental image is well described in his words here: a submarine bigger than Count Olaf's submarine and which represented a greater danger than Count Olaf's submarine. By putting adjectives like "more terrifying" he clearly indicates that he was afraid of that.

Daniel Handler put Captain W to think that entity was a submarine, and made him afraid of that submarine.

I agree that TGG is very clearly pushing the view that the question mark is a submarine; the idea that it might be "some ghastly creature of the sea" is introduced offhand at the very end, as a kind of what-if (TGG p. 311). (I'll develop this view below.) What I would say is that acknowledging that something is terrifying isn't necessarily acknowledging that it is evil or antagonistic to your interests; in this case, precisely because we're dealing with the unknown, it's more that people generally won't risk it if they think there's a better alternative. That the characters make a different calculation in The End indicates that they did not regard the presented alternative as better. Conversely, a part of your argument is that Widdershins's statements aren't necessarily reliable.

In TE we got to where I can agree with reservations. There is all the apparent symbolism in TE, and I can agree with that. But all this symbolism seems to fall into disrepute when Lemony claims that the Quagmires were in a dark and damp place at the same time that the Baudelaires were on the island at night. Daniel Handler had a literal view of where the Quagmires were. If Daniel Handler had a literal view, I think it is unlikely that the whole scene was metaphorical. The Quagmires were in fact swallowed or saved by an entity in the form of a question mark. Captain W actually decided to head towards that entity that had literally emerged from the water. It would be normal for him to remain silent or to flee. If he still believed that probably (and not "possibly") that entity was worse than Olaf, that would be his natural reaction.

And I have been thinking, (this is more personal and not exactly an argument) from Daniel Handler's point of view, from his point of view as the creator of the story, Captain W's existence is really unnecessary here, unless there is the purpose of provide us with a hint about the nature of the creature. Do you know what you said about TEE? That the purpose of the book seems to be to develop the plot about the B mansion fire? It's the same here. It seems that Captain W's existence seems to be necessary to develop the TGU mystery.

The mystery was launched in TGG explicitly and not metaphorically: Lemony Snicket says he would never say whether that entity that the Baudelaires had partial eye contact with was a submarine or an animal. And the mystery, having only those two variables, was again put on the air by the way Kit described the scene. So to move on to a purely metaphorical interpretation would be cheating. You know "the entity is not one thing or the other ... it's just a symbol". And back to my theory, as I am putting it together ... Captain W did not think he was fleeing towards a symbol. It is true that they preferred to take risks with the TGU. They were not sure they would be saved. But they thought they would be saved. Among the dangers mentioned, Captain W thought that his chances would be greater going towards the TGU. And that decision led them to literally stay in a dark, damp place.

As a side-note, it's worth remembering that being in "circumstances just as dark although quite a bit damper" (The End, p. 187) doesn't preclude the Quagmires et al. having been eaten. If anything, it might even be a better fit than them having been rescued. Some days after being swallowed up by the Great Unknown, why is it still so dark and wet? The fact that the word "circumstances" is used might also indicate that the darkness is metaphorical, i.e. their circumstances aren't necessarily literal dark but deeply grim and haunting. (Another part of me wonders if Handler simply flubbed the timeline, though. Chronology has never been his strong point.)

I take issue, though, with the construction you put upon Widdershins's statements as being clues to the question mark's true nature. That's because it rests on the assumption that the nature of the question mark was meant to be an ongoing plot point and mystery, which I frankly don't agree is the case. If we look at the BBRE, which was published simultaneously with the previous book, it clearly indicates that Handler's plan around that time involved Violet running into the Female Finnish Pirates and ending up back at Briny Beach. This points to the finale he was anticipating at the time being more interwoven with ongoing continuity, and therefore less likely to section everything off to an isolated island and to leave much of the remaining cast in the unknown. (TGG itself has multiple instances of foreshadowing which never come off.) Put simply, my reading of TGG, at the time and now, is that the question mark plot point is already complete and not intended to return; everything that needs to be or can be said about it has already been said, and no further embellishment is necessary. Its subsequent return in The End is unnecessary to it as an idea, it's merely necessary to external things, like the plotlines of certain characters and the themes of the series as a whole. Handler chose to make his finale far less conclusive than he originally intended, and that invited the return of the question mark both as an expansion of his theme and as a thematically and narratively appropriate way of tidying up certain loose-end characters.

I would also suggest that the very fact that the narrative and the characters who have the best impression of the question mark being unable to define its true nature is a very direct indication that its true nature is symbolic, given that it is a question mark - literally a gigantic symbol of the unknown. I've been saying it since 2004: You can't introduce a giant question mark and have the narrator refuse to tell you what it is, and then turn around and explain exactly what it is. That ATWQ appears to do so is one of the biggest thematic failings of the entire canon, and if I believed that Handler legitimately intended the Bombinating Beast to be the qeustion mark and the Great Unknown's "explanation" then I would instantly abandon him as an author and this fandom as a whole.

[Optimism is my Phil-osophy]

I understand your feelings about the open ending, and in no way do I believe they need to be abandoned in order for my theory to become valid. Captain W is an old sea wolf. Stories of evil sea monsters or submarines are very common. I always had the impression that TGG was a tribute to the book by Jules Verne 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea. So that question mark in TGG is a literary reference, nothing more, just like the shape of submarine C. And I enjoyed phenomenally your explanation of the author's intentions in TE ... In fact, it greatly increases my concept of The End. Still, my theory is a character study. I realize that I need to abandon my arguments involving the author's intention in The End. But I can still stay with that in TGG. As you said very well, Lemony Snicket's claim that the entity could be an animal or a submarine was made in an improvised way in the end. And improvised in the end, Daniel Handler made the entity that appeared to the Baudelaires behave with an animal. The matter was already closed, as you say. And it came back in an improvised way in TE. So in an improvised way, I believe that Daneil Handler may have put the entity's last appearance to be the appearance of an animal. And Captain W might as well know (or think he did) that an entity could probably be a submarine and possibly an animal.