|
|
Post by cwm on Feb 26, 2009 12:42:19 GMT -5
Random curio:
In my copy (British, first edition), directly before the book begins (with the first illustration), there's an extra page saying 'THE END' and nothing else, in addition to the main title page and the page at the beginning saying 'Book the Thirteenth: THE END'. Is this simply a change in publishing styles at Egmont between TPP and TE? Or something else?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Feb 26, 2009 13:58:50 GMT -5
I'd go with publishing styles; the Egmont first edition of The End does have several curiosities. That is to say, I think it's an artifact left over from the way they put the book together from the U.S. text copy and their own formatting. They have a title plate at the front, and then they copy in the U.S. version which also has a title plate...
|
|
|
|
Post by MasterKlaus247 on Feb 26, 2009 14:14:56 GMT -5
That is true. In fact there is belief that by the way the cover looks from the front, that can be the same material made out of some paper from 1767. Not the book made out of the paper, the imagery of the cover looks like material made out of the paper.
|
|
|
|
Post by liquidladylemony on May 3, 2009 10:48:19 GMT -5
Okay, I think the ? is a submarine with the remainder of Villans left...do you think Violet got the money??? The world may never know.
|
|
hope
Bewildered Beginner
Posts: 2
|
Post by hope on Jun 13, 2009 9:15:00 GMT -5
please handler write a book about the answers to the mysteries ive been trying to figure out!
who is js
what is the great unknown
is the great unknown good or bad
what happened to the quagmires
what happened to the baudelaires
what happened to beatrice bertrand and you
what happened to the white faced woman
what happened to fiona and fernald and captain windershins
and so on and so on
please write a book about the answers i know it sounds like its research
but you made it up please make up the answers to the questions you started
hope
and handler maybe if u wanted to you could start a series about the quagmires!
sincerly
hope
|
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Jun 13, 2009 13:32:01 GMT -5
Hi, hope, you can use the Modify button in the upper-right corner of every post you make to add extra thoughts you've come up with just after posting your reply.
I really like your question, "Is the Great Unknown good or bad?" That's a fine choice.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elle on Jun 23, 2009 12:59:16 GMT -5
Oh yea, that is a really good question. Maybe it's a social commentary on how people assume that something is bad when they don't know what it is.... Because that's what Kit did... Just ran away from it instead of figuring out what it was. But you really can't blame her.. She was in no condition to risk it..
|
|
|
|
Post by korovamilkbar14 on Jul 5, 2010 11:43:23 GMT -5
It's been nearly 4 years since the series ended. I can't believe it.
Reading this thread has brought back a lot of memories for me, of both good and bad (why did I even think to post that ridiculous # of the Beast allusion?). I grew up with these books and think of them as a defining part of my childhood.
I don't have much of a problem with the ambiguity theme. I still don't think the Baudelaires perished at sea. There's enough evidence about all three of them surviving the events throughout the books to satisfy me. By now, nearly everyone remembers. I'm also still convinced the sugar bowl held some sort of recording device. Horseradish wouldn't make sense, as there's a factory devoted to its production. If anything could incriminate Olaf (and possible others) that wasn't a massive stack of papers (like Dewey's), it might work out to be a recorder. It might be ironic that the sugar bowl fell into the pond catalog, like the last major piece of evidence.
I guess my only major regret is that Olaf's past was not elaborated on. The poison darts incident struck me as one of the darkest revelations in the books. After re-reading them, it struck me how much I was saddened by Olaf's death - due to what we found out about him, but more likely due to what we didn't.
On a side note, I now believe it was Lemony as the cab driver (in TPP at least). I don't see any major continuity errors with this theory. It was known L was still in contact with several V.F.D. members throughout the series, and it is plausible he would appear at the hotel during the course of his research (as we know, he had time for other gatherings).
Thank you all for this insightful forum. It helped a lot. Chances are, I might be returning to post some more nonsense on the other threads.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hermes on Jul 5, 2010 12:13:21 GMT -5
I'm also still convinced the sugar bowl held some sort of recording device. Horseradish wouldn't make sense, as there's a factory devoted to its production. I agree that it can't just be horseradish - but I'm gradually coming round to the thought that it may be the seeds of rhe bitter apple. There does seem to be a theme running through The End which links antidotes, hiding-places and the sugar bowl. The point would be that while the horseradish factory might be destroyed, if the seeds of the bitter apple are planted in various places there will always be an antidote somewhere. One might even suggest that it's because of this that the world is not, in fact, destroyed at the end of TE. I'd like to know more, but I wonder if the significance of the poison darts can be exaggerated - it seems that Olaf was a villain before that, if the poison darts incident happened during the Baudelaire kids' lifetime, since he was already doing villainous things while Beatrice was with Lemony. I think the poison darts are important because of what they reveal about the Baudelaire parents - that no one has clean hands - rather than because of their effect on Olaf. |
|
|
|
Post by korovamilkbar14 on Jul 5, 2010 15:03:26 GMT -5
The 'apple seed' theory is much more plausible than many of the previous ones posted (plus I've usually agreed with you, Hermes). Considering how common fires are throughout VFD. On the other hand, the recording device can also fit with the idea that it is dear to the Baudelaires and Snickets (if it revealed who started those fires), or that Olaf would never use the Medusoid Mycelium if it was used against him. I was going to add something else but just forgot. Ultimately though, I feel like neither the seeds nor the recorder are enough to solve the mystery. And I don't think the sugar bowl is a McGuffin for the purely speculative reason that Handler doesn't think his readers are so easily duped.
I agree that Olaf was clearly villainous before the poison darts incident. I just felt that, in combination with Kit and many other hints about his past, it could've been talked about a little more. After all, nearly all of ASOUE occurred thanks to him.
And, I gotta say, it is a freaking brilliant idea to hide the catalog underwater.
I only have a few minor questions. Was Mr. Poe somehow in cahoots with Olaf? I thought he was too oblivious to most of the events. And, was the Gustav Olaf drowned in TRR Mr. Sebald, of movie-directing fame? I can't remember the conclusion you came up with, but I'm thinking it wasn't true (due to timeline issues).
|
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Jul 5, 2010 15:29:52 GMT -5
If Mr. Poe had been in cahoots with Olaf, the second half of TRR would never happen and Olaf would have the Baudelaire fortune by now. I think even Handler's addressed this, saying that if Mr. Poe were competent the story would be a lot shorter. As to whether Gustav from TRR = Dr. Gustav Sebald, that's highly controversial. Timeline issues make it seem unlikely, but the context suggests that we were meant to link the two.
|
|
|
|
Post by korovamilkbar14 on Jul 5, 2010 16:16:17 GMT -5
Oh, damn, that's true. I don't know why the car crash always slips out of my mind.
I see what you mean about Gustav. I just re-read that part of the UA and while it seems like Olaf drowned him (L sitting by the Swarthy Swamp for 19 hours, and then Sally mentioning Orwell's death and her brother's estate), it can't be true because I don't see a way Gustav would've predicted Monty's assistant would not be trustworthy. This might tie in with the 'multiple stories' idea in TE, if anything.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hermes on Jul 6, 2010 11:02:34 GMT -5
Olaf may well have killed Gustav Sebald, but it must have happened after Monty's death, when Lemony had begun to research the matter, rather than before. So I don't think he can be the same person as Gustav the assistant. Perhaps they are called after the same dead person, in line with VFD custom?
|
|
|
|
Post by vksvksvksvks on Jul 18, 2010 12:57:20 GMT -5
I am kind of wondering about kit+olaf vs kit+dewey. What made kit start dating dewey and not olaf? Did olaf become evil because kit didnt like him any more? And (biggest question of all) IS BEATRICE OLAF'S DAUGHTER!!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
OH AND BY THE WAY YOU SHOULD HAVE FIGURED THIS OUT BY NOW BUT JEROME SQUALOR AND JUSTICE STRAUSS WERE JS
okay this is probably a stupid question but did the baudelaire parents kill olafs parents?
|
|
|
|
Post by Christmas Chief on Jul 18, 2010 13:36:11 GMT -5
Did olaf become evil because kit didnt like him any more? Probably not. Olaf's had more trouble than that--his parents being murdered by his enemies, for example--and it might have been his inability to cope with these things that gradually turned him into a villain. It's much more likely that Dewey is the father of Little Beatrice; the connection between them is implied when Dewey says Kit's name towards the end of TPP, and when Kit asks for Dewey in The End. It's implied that the Baudelaire parents (with possible help from Lemony) did indeed kill Olaf's with poison darts at an opera. |
|
