Official "And Then? And Then? What Else?" Discussion

[Semblance]

Hello, it's Semblance.
Feel free to discuss Daniel Handler's latest book, And Then? And Then? What Else?
If you talk about anything about the book in depth, meaning anything talking about actual details, then please mark it as a spoiler.
Happy discussing!
MisterM, please mark this as an announcement, or delete it if you so desire.
Rest Pleasantly.

[Christmas Chief]

I finished reading this today. It is my favorite Handler book so far, satisfying many of the questions I had about his life and literary philosophy, while also including fascinating anecdotes I wouldn’t have thought to wonder about.

[Semblance]

Wonderfully said.
Poison For Breakfast is still one of my favorites, but I would put this book high on the list.

[tricky]

Jun 4, 2024 19:22:39 GMT -5 Christmas Chief said:

I finished reading this today. It is my favorite Handler book so far, satisfying many of the questions I had about his life and literary philosophy, while also including fascinating anecdotes I wouldn’t have thought to wonder about.

[Christmas Chief]

These are some of the questions I'm pondering after reading the book, and I'm curious for others' thoughts:

1. What do you think about Handler's position that one's personal canon is the most important canon? More specifically, is it true that we should read whatever we happen to like, or should we also make a deliberate effort to form our tastes against some kind of objective standard?

2. On the censorship passage (which I'm ironically going to censor):

F*** what the author says, and f*** whatever terrible thing may be found in their words. F*** removing the book from view, and f*** snatching it from someone else's hands. F*** separating the art from the artist, and f*** forgiving any author for anything. All these actions, the motivations behind them, are not just improper about literature, but predatory toward it. A book moves in the world. It may meet you, in a bookstore, say, and ask you if you want an adventure. Perhaps this sounds interesting to you, perhaps not, perhaps you are unsure. The decision is yours - no one is forcing you to read anything - and you won't really know why you made the decision anyway. [...] You may love the book; it may thrill you or make you sick [...]. And if you find yourself feeling that the book is problematic, all that means is that you have a problem with it, and that's easily solved. Leave the book behind, put your clothes back on, and go home.

I go back and forth on whether I agree with this stance. Is it true that no book should ever be removed from view from anyone? It seems like there must be exceptions to that, and I'm curious what they are and what they tell us about what our broader approach to censorship should be, if anything.

[Tiran O'Saurus]

I don't think I'll actually touch on your point, but I want to mention the "F*** separating the art from the artist, and f*** forgiving any author for anything" line. I guess what he means is we should disregard the concept of an author, and just take the book on its own terms? Or does he mean the exact opposite? It's a weird line about a phrase that comes up an awful lot nowadays, and although it sounds insightful I'm not sure what the insight is.

[Tiran O'Saurus]

Jun 5, 2024 8:38:30 GMT -5 Semblance said:

Wonderfully said.
Poison For Breakfast is still one of my favorites, but I would put this book high on the list.

PfB is a Snicket book, not a Handler one. It feels much more like a Handler book, but it isn't.

[Christmas Chief]

Jun 7, 2024 21:44:32 GMT -5 Tiran O'Saurus said:

I don't think I'll actually touch on your point, but I want to mention the "F*** separating the art from the artist, and f*** forgiving any author for anything" line. I guess what he means is we should disregard the concept of an author, and just take the book on its own terms? Or does he mean the exact opposite? It's a weird line about a phrase that comes up an awful lot nowadays, and although it sounds insightful I'm not sure what the insight is.

He’s channeling “the punk he’ll never be” in this passage, so perhaps that implies we’re supposed to read it as more of an emotional screed than a serious position. But he clearly also believes it. My best interpretation would be something like “we neither can nor should dissociate an artist from her art, so some measure of accountability for authors is appropriate. However, those measures shouldn’t be so stringent as to remove readers’ access to the art.”

The position seems to assume that all readers are like him: educated, curious, open-minded. But I’m not sure he can hold that literature is a powerful, life-changing force and that everyone should have maximum access to it all the time.

[Semblance]

Jun 7, 2024 21:45:34 GMT -5 Tiran O'Saurus said:

Jun 5, 2024 8:38:30 GMT -5 Semblance said:

Wonderfully said.
Poison For Breakfast is still one of my favorites, but I would put this book high on the list.

PfB is a Snicket book, not a Handler one. It feels much more like a Handler book, but it isn't.

I understand what you're saying, but they're written by the same person, and thus I was putting them on the same overall list.

P.S. I had a small panic when I saw Mr. Saugus had quoted me. I was awaiting my literary execution.

[Tiran O'Saurus]

Worry not. I, "Mr. Saugus" (wait, that's a real word? I guess autocorrect must have gotten you.), am not an executioner. I don't try to silence people, just engage with them. And I see what you meant now. I thought you were ranking Snicket and Handler books separately, because you put PfB so high. I don't want to get too off-topic, but what makes that one rank so highly? It always tends to be rather low on most people's lists, I think because for a Snicket book it has almost as little to do with the Averse as The Hero of The Story.

[Semblance]

Drat...why does it change to Saugus?
Anyways.
One of my favorite aspects of these books are the emotions they invoke. Some of you may know that the illustration paired with Figure In The Fog is my favorite art from ATWQ. It perfectly encapsulates the mystery of Lemony Snicket, and the always present gloom.
In Poison For Breakfast, Mr. Snicket walks around town calmly, despite his life possibly ending soon. He ponders a lot, and it makes me pause and think myself. "What would I do?" "What is my greatest hour?" The book brings me a sort of strange comfort.
Many of my old fanfictions were written in this melancholy and philosophical mindset, such as Lonely Snicket Lad.
While a bit more on topic, I feel this way about this new book too. It deals with serious topics and makes me think. It gives me hope. It shows a new side of Mr. Handler that I hope we continue to see. After every chapter, I sat back for a bit and started breaking it all down.

[bear]

finally got my meathooks on da book. first, a small note-- this is probably the world's most impressive humblebrag:

When I search online for Baudelaire references in Gorey's work, I only find articles about myself.

[bear]

Jun 7, 2024 20:57:57 GMT -5 Christmas Chief said:

What do you think about Handler's position that one's personal canon is the most important canon? More specifically, is it true that we should read whatever we happen to like, or should we also make a deliberate effort to form our tastes against some kind of objective standard?

i don't think the latter question really has much to do with DH's stance about the "personal canon." he made clear that he used the term not in the broadest sense of "a list of one's favorite books" but as a descriptor of the unique accumulation of little fragments from books/art that happen to stick inside each person's mind. his advice to writers about investigating and deconstructing those 'moments' is long-established and very good. as for the question of 'taste', you could interpret his advice as a call to interrogate your own taste... if you ask WHY you like something, you might find out if it's really worth liking, or at least you will develop a more consistent standard of taste according to your own values. there is of course no "objective standard", and anyone who says so is a madman. but again, i don't think DH touches on that much, other than an overarching vague anti-snobbism.

Is it true that no book should ever be removed from view from anyone? It seems like there must be exceptions to that, and I'm curious what they are and what they tell us about what our broader approach to censorship should be, if anything.

there are lots of books that are removed from my view, not because of anything like censorship, but because they are fairly accurately labeled and arranged, so that i don't ever have to see them -- i mean the self-help or business management sections of the library, for example. the isolation of "children's" books should work the same way, ideally. labels obviously all have an underlying absurdity to them, but it's better than censorship.

Jun 7, 2024 21:44:32 GMT -5 Tiran O'Saurus said:

I don't think I'll actually touch on your point, but I want to mention the "F*** separating the art from the artist, and f*** forgiving any author for anything" line. I guess what he means is we should disregard the concept of an author, and just take the book on its own terms? Or does he mean the exact opposite? It's a weird line about a phrase that comes up an awful lot nowadays, and although it sounds insightful I'm not sure what the insight is.

both statements refer to earlier discussions in the chapter. separating the art from the artist is "a tidy and appealing phrase which is of course foolish and impossible", while the idea that someone can forgive an artist is "absurd". the bigger argument is that no one's opinion about an artist or artwork can interfere with the work's existence, because everything is objectionable to someone.