|
|
Post by R. on Mar 30, 2021 0:51:57 GMT -5
This may seem extremely controversial, but I believe Jacques Snicket may have killed Georgina.
In TUA, we see part of an article about Georgina’s death which Jacques Snicket broke into the TDP offices to write. The article states that it was a murder, committed by Count Olaf. On the next page is an article stating that it was an accident. In Jacques’ letters to Jerome, he says once again that Count Olaf killed her, and that he was messing with articles in TDP. However, Lemony’s narration clearly states that it was an accident, and Count Olaf was holding down Violet at the other end of the room when it happened. Around the same time, Esmé began to get angry at Jacques, threatening to ‘give him what he deserves’. This implies that the reason for her anger was something he personally had done. The fact that these things are in the same chapter implies that they are connected. Jacques Snicket looks somewhat like Count Olaf; one eyebrow, same tattoo, which means that they have been mistaken for one another. Maybe Jacques took advantage of this to frame Olaf and get away with his crimes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Optimism is my Phil-osophy on Mar 30, 2021 1:52:18 GMT -5
Well ... I don't think Georgina was murdered. I think it is more likely to be the murder of the previous foreman, who mysteriously disappeared.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Mar 30, 2021 5:12:39 GMT -5
It would have been difficult for Jacques to have murdered Dr. Orwell, given that she died right in front of the Baudelaires; and indeed neither the text of the article nor of the letter ever names the alleged victim. The article remains somewhat mysterious, though, as it doesn't make sense for it to pertain either to Dr. Orwell (see above) or Foreman Firstein (presumably killed off-screen and thus not known to have been murdered); it's possible that Handler misremembered the details of TMM, that it relates to an entirely unknown incident - or that Jacques's intention was to frame Count Olaf for the murder, though this seems frankly redundant.
|
|
|
|
Post by Optimism is my Phil-osophy on Mar 30, 2021 5:55:51 GMT -5
Although the body found was not that of Foreman Firstein, I think it is likely that the presence of Olaf and his henchman there was due to an end to Foreman Firstein. They may have confused themselves and killed someone else, but they certainly killed him after that. Olaf's way of acting should be similar to that found in TRR.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hermes on Mar 30, 2021 7:21:58 GMT -5
'Murder' can inclued killing someone in the course of attempting to kill someone else, or more gernally killing someone by actions which show reckless disregard for human life. Dr Orwell was killed by the machine which was turned on with the intent of killing Charles, and that would be enough to count as murder in many jursidictions.
|
|
|
|
Post by Optimism is my Phil-osophy on Mar 30, 2021 7:41:16 GMT -5
I agree with the concept covered by Hermes. However, the chronology of events points to my conclusion. When Jacques wrote to Jerome, Jacques still believed that Olaf was using Shirley's name. But Olaf was unmasked shortly after Georgina's death. So, everything indicates that Olaf and his henchman were behind the death that was investigated by Jaques, (and also, at the same time for the foreman's death) and soon after that, while Jacques was still on the outskirts of the city, Olaf disguised himself as receptionist. Jacques left the city without witnessing the arrival of the Baudelaires and what happened to them, and then Jacques wrote to Jerome, including information about the murder he investigated and how the fake news was conveyed, and stating that Olaf was called Shirley at the time. (Jacques did not know that Olaf had already been unmasked).
|
|
|
|
Post by carmelita0cheryl on Mar 30, 2021 13:05:45 GMT -5
Cool theory... but 'for when Dr. Orwell stepped backward, she stepped into the
path of the whirring saw, and there was a very ghastly accident indeed. ' it was both in the books and in the series that she died by an accident in front of Olaf, Violet, Klaus, Sunny.
|
|
|
|
Post by R. on Mar 30, 2021 13:06:48 GMT -5
Y’all still think Lemony Snicket’s a reliable narrator??
|
|
|
|
Post by Optimism is my Phil-osophy on Mar 30, 2021 13:41:29 GMT -5
Cool theory... but 'for when Dr. Orwell stepped backward, she stepped into the path of the whirring saw, and there was a very ghastly accident indeed. ' it was both in the books and in the series that she died by an accident in front of Olaf, Violet, Klaus, Sunny. That's right, yet another reason for not believing that the death described in LSTUA was a different death from that described in TMM. It was a death prior to the main events described in TMM. One possibility is that they got rid of a witness to the foreman's murder or kidnapping. The truth is that Olaf had the same way of acting in TRR and in TMM. Olaf anticipated the Baudelaires' movements. As soon as he knew where they were going, Olaf arranged for his henchman to take the foreman's place. What we see in LSTUA are only the side effects of this preparation. Y’all still think Lemony Snicket’s a reliable narrator?? At the moment I believe that Lemony does not intentionally lie to the reader. He may hide information from time to time, he may make erroneous deductions at times, he may have been misled by some people at times. But at no time was he, on writing, deliberately trying to deceive the reader. I think his intentions are that there would be a very small number of readers despite the fact that the books are available to the general public. This contradiction is only possible because he was publishing to fulfill a promise, and he was not interested in fame or money. Quite the contrary: he is a volunteer and was trained not to like money, and he is part of a secret organization, so he was trained not to draw attention to himself. In addition, he began to be pursued by the police and many enemies, during the time of the book's publication, (a fact proven by other characters in LSTUA and TBL) so that fulfilling the promise he made seems to be a strong determination that he has . It makes no sense to me to risk his own freedom and his own life to publish intentional lies with no financial return or fame. There may be errors in asoue, which makes him an unreliable narrator by definition. But not that he would like to be like that, nor that he has purposely lied to his readers. I liked to imagine Lemony as an intentional liar, but that doesn't add anything to the story, it doesn't help solve ASOUE's mysteries, it would be an unnecessary and gratuitous deconstruction of the character. But of course, I am willing to change my opinion on the matter if evidence is shown to me. |
|
|
|
Post by carmelita0cheryl on Mar 30, 2021 15:18:23 GMT -5
Cool theory... but 'for when Dr. Orwell stepped backward, she stepped into the path of the whirring saw, and there was a very ghastly accident indeed. ' it was both in the books and in the series that she died by an accident in front of Olaf, Violet, Klaus, Sunny. That's right, yet another reason for not believing that the death described in LSTUA was a different death from that described in TMM. It was a death prior to the main events described in TMM. One possibility is that they got rid of a witness to the foreman's murder or kidnapping. The truth is that Olaf had the same way of acting in TRR and in TMM. Olaf anticipated the Baudelaires' movements. As soon as he knew where they were going, Olaf arranged for his henchman to take the foreman's place. What we see in LSTUA are only the side effects of this preparation. Y’all still think Lemony Snicket’s a reliable narrator?? At the moment I believe that Lemony does not intentionally lie to the reader. He may hide information from time to time, he may make erroneous deductions at times, he may have been misled by some people at times. But at no time was he, on writing, deliberately trying to deceive the reader. I think his intentions are that there would be a very small number of readers despite the fact that the books are available to the general public. This contradiction is only possible because he was publishing to fulfill a promise, and he was not interested in fame or money. Quite the contrary: he is a volunteer and was trained not to like money, and he is part of a secret organization, so he was trained not to draw attention to himself. In addition, he began to be pursued by the police and many enemies, during the time of the book's publication, (a fact proven by other characters in LSTUA and TBL) so that fulfilling the promise he made seems to be a strong determination that he has . It makes no sense to me to risk his own freedom and his own life to publish intentional lies with no financial return or fame. There may be errors in asoue, which makes him an unreliable narrator by definition. But not that he would like to be like that, nor that he has purposely lied to his readers. I liked to imagine Lemony as an intentional liar, but that doesn't add anything to the story, it doesn't help solve ASOUE's mysteries, it would be an unnecessary and gratuitous deconstruction of the character. But of course, I am willing to change my opinion on the matter if evidence is shown to me. ' It was a death prior to the main events described in TMM' Wait pls, with all due respect I thought that was Goergina's death.  The Daily Punctilio article fits the accident Jacques described in his letter. An in the letter he wrote 'a member suddenly behaving greedy in a violent manner... O, though currently he prefers S-'' that is a clear reference to Shirley. Olaf hasn't changed his identities before, as far as we know. Just because the letter is in the UA doesn't mean it has to take place before ASOUE events. I think R. is right about that the accident described is Georgina's death. As for the article. The fisrt one was popably written by Jacques himself and the second one was 'corrected' by DP staff. Just as Lemony was fired for writing the truth. Esmé could have been angry at hi because of he was one of the noble side who stole the Sugar Bowl, but hard to tell with not enough info. |
|
|
|
Post by Optimism is my Phil-osophy on Mar 30, 2021 15:43:10 GMT -5
Just to be clear: I believe it was a death at the same time, just before the TMM events, not the events of asoue as a whole. Jacques' unequivocal conclusion, according to the letter he sent to Jerome, is that the death was not an accident. In addition, Jacques claimed that Olaf made an effort to hide that he was the killer.
Olaf and his henchman killed someone at the sawmill and they forged an accident and tried to alter the report on the murder, and after that Olaf disguised himself as Shirley. This is the logical conclusion of what is described in LSTUA. The challenge is to try to fit that with what we know happened in TMM.
The equipment used in the murder described by Jacques and seen in the photo and on page 117 of LSTUA is different from the equipment in which Georgina died. In addition, when the Baudelaires started working at the sawmill, Olaf's henchman was already there, as foreman. This is strong evidence that Olaf himself had already arrived in the small town and (most likely) he had already disguised himself as Shirley just before the Baudelaires arrived. After all, if the henchman disguised himself before the Baudelaires arrived, why wouldn't Olaf himself already be disguised? The children had not seen him before because he was already working for Georgina. But for the henchman he is in that position, it was necessary to remove the previous foreman. My theory is that the death investigated by Jacques is a side effect of this preparation for what would unfold (according to what is written in TMM).
|
|
|
|
Post by Hermes on Mar 30, 2021 15:57:42 GMT -5
Lemony's friend and assistant Daniel Handler has said that he is an unreliable narrator; but if I am looking for the truth in his works, I would certainly trust ASOUE over TUA, a work which has 'unreliable' written all over it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Optimism is my Phil-osophy on Mar 30, 2021 16:18:22 GMT -5
Lemony's friend and assistant Daniel Handler has said that he is an unreliable narrator; but if I am looking for the truth in his works, I would certainly trust ASOUE over TUA, a work which has 'unreliable' written all over it. I am very interested in that. Do you know where I can find this statement by Daniel Handler? And as I said, by definition Lemony is an unreliable narrator, because he can be wrong. But is there any evidence that Lemony told intentional lies? And with respect to LSTUA, I can say that that is a compilation of documents, where there are different fictional authors. It is unfair to regard it as a unique work when making judgments. Each document needs to be analyzed individually to make a fair judgment of its credibility. Take as an example the news written by Jacques that we are considering. The author of the document was Jacques. When Jacques wrote that, is there any reason to believe that he was lying? On the other hand, we have the newspaper page written by another journalist: I would say that there is strong evidence that the author of the report was telling an intentional lie when he affirmed that the event was an accident instead of a murder. |
|
|
|
Post by Hermes on Mar 30, 2021 17:27:42 GMT -5
Lemony's friend and assistant Daniel Handler has said that he is an unreliable narrator; but if I am looking for the truth in his works, I would certainly trust ASOUE over TUA, a work which has 'unreliable' written all over it. I am very interested in that. Do you know where I can find this statement by Daniel Handler? You can find it here. |
|
|
|
Post by Optimism is my Phil-osophy on Mar 30, 2021 18:31:33 GMT -5
It is good to realize that Daniel Handler does indeed claim that Lemony Snicket is an unreliable narrator ... This is a relief to me, actually, as it makes it possible to close some gaps (understand this as a victory over the TSS secret letter, finally I can gloat over that letter !!). But it's like I said: Lemony Snicket is an unreliable narrator by definition ... But that doesn't mean he tells intentional lies. Lemony was certainly mistaken at times, and the fact that he did it unintentionally makes it possible to identify those moments.
Also, the fact that Daniel Handler assumed after the publication of book 13 that Lemony Snicket is an unreliable narrator, shows that he did not simply forget the existence of the TSS secret letter. (This is what bothered me the most). Daniel Handler may have intentionally decided to change his point of view despite the secret letter, making Lemony Snicket someone who was wrong about his sister's survival. Of course, this opens a door that is difficult to close ... Even though Lemony did not purposely lie about the death of some characters (I refer specifically to Beatrice here) he may have been mistaken ... Who knows ... Thanks for this interview Hermes.
|
|
