What do I think of it?
And what do you think was the best adaptation of it? The movie or the series?
>>25597169Violet was my childhood crush. But why does it have a strange jewish style to its writing?
>>25597169Actually one of the better contemporary children’s series. It feels quite modernist in its themes, its approach to narrative development and the endless cynical deconstruction of popular idioms (“a word which here means…”). Obviously it’s no Alice Through the Looking Glass but it’s still better than that allegedly suicidal nonce David Walliams.>>25597173The Netflix adaption was the closest to the books, but Carey was a superior Olaf. I will say my favourite way to experience it was the audiobooks read by Tim Curry, I have lots of fond memories as a child listening to it during long car rides. RIP the goat Mr Poe
>>25597226I find it really inspiring, reminds me of Gravity Falls but with a more mature tone to it. The closest thing to the level of poetry in the books is The Coffin of Andy and Leyley
>>25597239It was one of the first children’s series I read that didn’t treat kids like idiots. The orphans are incredibly idealistic and intelligent, but also painfully naive. They expect the adult world to be sensible with clearly defined moral parameters, only for them to discover that most adults are self-serving retards with many shades of morally grey sensibilities who usually know less than they do about what’s really going on. Also the fact that so many of the mysteries were left unsolved - most children’s books would tie everything off in a neat bow, but Snicket had enough respect for his young audience that he didn’t need to spoonfeed us an easy narrative resolution.
>>25597258How would it compare with Artemis Fowl?
>>25597239if you want "mature gravity falls", check out "le college noir". season two starts this halloween.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPxju-tqRoIwhat kind of poetry is there in the incest game? i haven't played it.
>>25597169It's what got me into reading as a kid. I think I got burned out and stopped by the time I got to the seventh (I think the one about the village). Some time in my 20s I had decided to start over and finish the series; the first few definitely feel geared to younger readers but I imagine the author was going for a gradual increase in maturity as the reader aged. I remember the penultimate book being especially good.I agree with >>25597258 as well. I was a little disappointed with how the Netflix series handled the mysteries.
>>25597467How does it compare with Cirque du Freak?
>>25597467>what kind of poetry is there in the incest game? i haven't played it.That's where most people are wrong, its not just an "incest game". Its a character analysis on abusive families and dystopian worlds that just happens to have incest in one of its many routes. It should be better known for the cannibalism, wanton murder or great writing.
>>25597169Just remembered that the old guy tried to marry the teenage girl. Holy based.
These books were too sad for me.
>>25598077Agreed, also I think movie Violet was my first childhood crush. How do you compare her with book violet?
>>25598095She seemed dead inside. A product of Hollywood Sabbatian-Frankist programming. Her character was not supposed to make you think this. Carry was the best part, but it all looked like Tim Burton slop
>>25598095perfect lips for sucking black dick
>>25597169a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing. the puzzles and wordplay is cute, but thematically it's like a nihilistic godless version of Narnia.>struggle all you want you will only die meaninglesslybah>>25597173Emily Browning and Jim Carrey are the only reasons to bother with any adaptations
> Handler and his wife have also donated $1,000,000 to Planned Parenthood,[17] and he has supported the Occupy Wall Street movement.[18][19]>Handler describes himself as a secular humanist[20] and "pretty much" an atheist.[21] He describes himself as having developed a "feminist consciousness" while in college.[22]> In February 2018, Handler signed an online pledge to boycott conferences that do not have and enforce harassment policies. Underneath his comment, author Kate Messner recounted an incident in which she said Handler had made inappropriate jokes directed at her, such as "Are you a virgin, too?!" and "These children's book events always turn into orgies!"[61] This led to many other women accusing Handler of verbal sexual harassment at book conferences; among the public accusations are stories of Handler telling a woman he had just met to kiss a random stranger; making crass comments to a teenage girl and walking off without apology when confronted; and calling a stranger a "hot blonde" and making a "uni-ball" double entendre in front of young children. The incident occurred during the larger Me Too movement.[61][62]Yikes, nope, thought I should reread them as an adult, but I'm not even gonna bother now that I know who this author truly is.
>>25598399You failed to include the fact that he made a watermelon joke about a black author at the 2014 book awards. So he’s come around to being based again
>>25598467Why are those "secular humanists" all sex pests and closeted racist? Do they even believe what they preach?
>>25598491but that IS what they preachsecular humanism is about self-gratification and a self-determined moral compass. humanism totally rejects the key criticism of consequentialist ethics: that you cannot create your own ethical framework to decide for yourself if your actions will result in good consequences or bad, because you lack information about the consequences of your actions.at best, every secular humanist believes their actions are moral and ethical, whether they really are or not. in this case, Handler thought it was acceptable to make such jokes; other secular humanists no doubt thought otherwise, by their own self-derived moral frameworks.at worst, secular humanists are the supreme hypocrites as they violate even their own ethical frameworks.as for why they tend to be sex pests, well secular humanism has few overarching aims other than the pursuit of pleasure and sex is one of if not the greatest pleasure.
>>25598499>secular humanism is about self-gratificationGive me one self-professed secular humanist who believes this. Egoists/hedonists =/= secular humanists. The latter believes the human is the site of moral worth and value, not the self. Thus what is morally good is good for humanity in its broadest generality, not for individual selves. That doesn’t mean these people aren’t capable of self-serving behaviours, just that it isn’t implicitly justified by secular humanism. People can have their own self-constructed ethical frameworks as long as those frameworks don’t impede on the rights and freedoms of another human to live according to their own beliefs, that’s the whole point of secularism, it’s not a carte blanch to do whatever you want.
>>25597169It's fun enough. One of the better kid's series, and I personally love the snarky, sardonic tone the books take. I enjoyed them growing up. That being said, it's deconstructionist swill at heart that derives much literary power from tearing down idealisms at an age when kids should really be building those up. Good so long as current year conditions exist, but in an ideal society books like this should be thrown on a fire or better yet forgotten entirely
>>25598592I think you’re being pretty dramatic, the point is that it’s the encounter with the adult world that forces the children to relinquish their naive idealisms, as noble as they might be. It’s a critique of the modern world with all of its senseless bureaucracies and moral ambivalencies that perpetuates the disillusionment of its subjects, not a criticism of idealism per se.
>>25598123>She seemed dead inside. A product of Hollywood Sabbatian-Frankist programming.Well those were different times, anyone remembers the casting couch?
>>25598399Why does anyone filter what they read by the author? What matters is the content of the book, or what do you verify if an author is kosher too before bothering to read his work?
>>25597169>>25597173>Long nose, money obsession, focused on symbols and secret conspiraciesHmmmm....
>>25598583>Give me one self-professed secular humanist who believes thisGo look up what they claim to be the purpose of life. It's marketed as "self-actualisation" and "individual fulfilment" but it comes out to the same thing, in different words.>what is morally good is good for humanity in its broadest generality, not for individual selvesBut how do secular humanists determine what is morally good?By what each one thinks, that's all. Or in other words, "it is good because I think it is"If you have even an ounce of self-awareness you would know how little we know.>as long as those frameworks don’t impede on the rights and freedoms of another human to live according to their own beliefsAnd again: how would you know the full extent of the consequences of your actions?Secular humanists tend to excuse this criticism away by saying that "if I made my decision with the best of intentions and to the best of my ability, then it's ethical".Or in other words, "if I was wrong it doesn't matter, I'm still right".
>>25599040>Go look up what they claim to be the purpose of life.Still way better than a fairytales book that proposes dumb random rules like "don't eat shrimp" or "pork is evul" and insists on shoving the same rules down everyone's throats. Self actualization is opposite to hedonism.>But how do secular humanists determine what is morally good?There are several methods but the most common is applying the tools of philosophy to figure it out. The stoics figured it a long time ago.>how would you know the full extent of the consequences of your actions?Its impossible, but its better than falsely claiming you do like most religions.
>>25599040>theyAnd who is this “they”? Are they in the room with us right now? I asked for one person and you’re just making sweeping generalisations again.>It's marketed as "self-actualisation" and "individual fulfilment" but it comes out to the same thing, in different words.>in different wordslol so in order to get them to fit your broad definition of secular humanism (so broad that it fails to distinguish between egoism, nihilism, hedonism, etc..), you have to literally rephrase what they’re actually saying. Got you>But how do secular humanists determine what is morally good?Whether or not it minimises human suffering. They are humanists, after all, that’s inevitably going to be the locus of their ethical concern.>how would you know the full extent of the consequences of your actions?We can’t, but that’s precisely it, the entire point of secularism is the rejection of dogmatic thought, including the idea that we can have absolute knowledge of consequence. What we can do however is aim in a general way towards the minimisation of human suffering. That’s not to say it always works out that way, but at the very least as a philosophy it is capable of revising its ethical judgements, to learn from its mistakes. It doesn’t mean that the act is ethical simply because it was done with good intentions, as you’ve assumed below.>Secular humanists tend to excuse this criticism away by saying that "if I made my decision with the best of intentions and to the best of my ability, then it's ethical".Again, who said this? Be concrete. Stop propping up a strawman in a contextless void just so you can knock him down.
>>25599084>We can’t, but that’s precisely it, the entire point of secularism is the rejection of dogmatic thought, including the idea that we can have absolute knowledge of consequence. What we can do however is aim in a general wayin other words,>"if I made my decision with the best of intentions and to the best of my ability, then it's ethical">who said this?you just didall you've done is hide behind demands for citations which you know will never state outright what I didbut you yourself have said as much, thus answering yourself the questions of>who is this “they”? Are they in the room with us right now? I asked for one personYou.
>>25599133Read my post again.>at the very least as a philosophy it is capable of revising its ethical judgements, to learn from its mistakes. It doesn’t mean that the act is ethical simply because it was done with good intentionsIf you’re going to just keep trying to rephrase my comments to say something other than what has actually been said, we can end this discussion here. No point arguing with dishonest people
>>25599171>It doesn’t mean that the act is ethical simply because it was done with good intentionsRead my post again.I carefully specified two conditions.in any case, so what?what practical difference does this disclaimer make? you may well retrospectively look back and agree that the decision you made actually caused unethical consequences without you knowing - how would that change anything? and even if you declare that you are beholden to yourself to repair the damage you now see that you did, you have no idea if what you are doing now is itself causing another kind of damage. therefore by definition you can do no wrong; every decision henceforth is "with the best of intentions and to the best of my ability" and it'd be a real doozy attempting to prove otherwise.that's a real fun ethical system to go by, isn't it? zero consequences, but all the breast-warming inner glow and moral high ground of Ethics™
>>25597169Olaf is a cool villain I admit, might even be a 4channer
>>25597972Very different styles and not nearly as clever as asoue
What the fuck was the ending? All I can remember was a tree house and a submarine
>>25599999Never read it. Seemed stupid to me. Just another Harry Potter clone.
>>25599999OHHHHHHH SHIT NO WAY.Why the fuck don't you read it again?
>>25600041its kinda a slog, and i have a general rule of never reading something a second time
>>25599999Congratulations on your digits. I never read this book.
Yeah, it's very strange to assemble a perspective around two vague ideas that isn't actually real.
>>25597169>book is centered around a (very jewish) secret society >all of its members are powerful people >they develop a bio-weapon capable of killing everyone >ending implies that this weapon is released into the worldjust WHAT did Handler mean by this?
Hell fucking no.Now I know you were pissed off at me on my only date with Corie.And are the only one who said I shouldn't go to Australia.Is she pretty?Hah, yeah.FUCK YOU CUNT.
https://youtu.be/EY9nr4Lkfw0?is=YXTO_zVummUQ_oNl
No, I would not call God a FAGGOT and imply anything about homosexuality.
>>25600211But Syd and I can be gay without being faggots about it.We never are.
>>25600087That's what I wonder too, also they "suicide" anyone who doesn't agree with their views.
Was Count Olaf bbbbbbased?
>>25597217Cultured men liked Esme Squalor
>>25597169It was a pretty unfortunate series. And not all that eventful.
Why do all characters in this book seem to have long noses and be obsessed with conspiracies?>>25601220Still much better than the modern slop they feed children nowadays. This one didn't treat them like idiots, had some very dark concepts and lots of clever mysteries that rewarded curiosity.
How useful was Claus' skill really?
>>25601436Not at all, Violet's was much better. Honestly we should've only had Violet doing stuff
Are there any other similar books but for adults?
>>25602800What about the Da Vinci Code?
>>25602998That's just drivel without the cleverness and wordplay of this one
>>25602998Brown is just ripping off Eco's Foucault's Pendulum and badly.
>>25597169Garbage I wish I'd never touched, felt like some masonic handshake.
>>25603190To be fair you have to be fairly high IQ to appreciate A Series of Unfortunate Events.
Handler is a big fan of 'Would I Lie to You?', so he's doubly-based.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=El6NFH4B168
>>25598399gross. Are there any contemporary authors left that's not a cringe secularist?
>>25602206Violet's best talent was prepping us for Sucker Punch
>>25603218Why does he look like a big chungus?
>>25597226It is no longer contemporary.
>>25605535What would be contemporary now? Also had no idea how good we had it back then, I want to go back!
>>25597169Do you think Olaf lived a good life?
>>25598228>perfect lipsftfyemily browning, i would crawl through a mile of glass to have you
>>25605495prefer not to say
i wish i was an old man who lusted after cutie teen big sister figure and forced her to marry me in exchange for financial security.
>>25606420She is truly so perfect! What is she doing nowadays?
>>25597169Unnecessary mysteries that lead nowhere
>>25607399More like miseries
Would this series be good for a 40+ man to read or its too kiddie coded?
>>25607642Yes, yes it would
>>25607642It is very kiddie-coded. There are a lot of saturday morning cartoon moments, some examples off the top of my head>at one point the kids have to live in a moldy shed with little crabs running around that constantly pinch them with their pincers. Why crabs? Cartoon logic>there is a floating home built with hot air balloons, it is fully self sufficient as far as food, water, and electricity goes. How exactly does it work? Cartoon logic>in one of the later books, the children come across a river that is so contaminated with soot that the water is pitch black. It is so contaminated that the fish occasionally stick their heads out of the water to cough. Cartoon logic>one of the themes of the middle books is that it is okay to be weird, so they meet some circus freaks that turn out to be just normal people. One of them ambidextrous and the crowd of onlookers goes wild when he does stuff with both of his hands>all of the adults are incompetent to the point of stupidity (this is one of the major themes of the entire series)>there is a sword fight where one woman is using her sword and one of the children is using... her teethThe books are short and you can read each of them in just a couple of hours. Each of them has a new setting and new characters, and the orphans are a pretty good depiction of pushing on in the face of adversity. There is a level of Kafkaesque-ness to the whole series as the children are constantly thrown into situations and systems too archaic (and too cartoonish) to understand or make sense of, yet they still have to find a way to get out of their current predicament using their witsI'm 28 and read the whole series about a year ago (including the two spin-off books). I liked it enough for how it treats the reader as a thinking, feeling being that needs to understand that life hardly ever goes their way no matter how hard they may try. Nothing that you haven't already seen in other books for adults before, but in children's literature that is almost non-existent
>>25607795I found it mature in a very dark way like a fairytale
>>25607795Exactly, I think it should be a must read in every child literature class
>>25597169I wish more books like this were released. I don't know what drivel is fed to little boys nowadays to convince them to troon out
I'm >>25607795Went back and read some of the notes I wrote while I was reading the series, here are a few (light spoilers for the lore)>Sunny is named after Bertrand's (the kids' father) mentor>Snicket's parents were killed in a fire>Esme hates the kids and Snicket because she was in love with Bertrand and couldn't cope with the fact that he married Beatrice instead of her>Very light spoilers the entire series may not have been written by Snicket, but by an impersonator>The schism that split the VFD between the good guys and the bad guys was very black and white at first, but by the time the series starts nobody really knows who's allies with who>Bertrand did not kill Olaf's parents in a fire but he was at least aware of it in some way>Snicket is the only one who knew Olaf's real name>The Duncan orphans are most certainly dead and were eaten alive by the sea monster>The VFD may not have disbanded, it is still operational by the time Snicket writes the series and it manufactured the schism just to cull most of its agents out of the organization Most of this is from the two spin off books and the prequel series All the Wrong Questions (which is different in tone and themes, but still pretty good)
>>25607399>>25607576>Unnecessary miseries that lead nowhere/thread
>>25609880Just like real life!
>>25597169Is it the best kid conspiracy based book? Is it redpilled?
>>25597169I was driving on the highway near my town and came across his vehicle; Lemony Snicket's minivan. I knew it was him by the plate, and my wife and I promptly honked like geese at the opportunity. We chased him down the two lane highway, tailgating him closely, until we got to the local beach town where he knew something was off. We followed his circuitious route yelling "Lemony Snicket!" out the window while listening to hard bass so loud it would shake the neighbourhood's windows. Eventually he lost us, or drove past the local police station and scared us off; I dont remember which.Good times. Doesnt look like what you'd expect.
>>25610515Why people seem to prefer Olaf to Lemony Snicket?
>>25598583I think it comes down to a breakdown in the Golden Rule, "Treat others how you would like to be treated." Take calling someone a "hot blonde" for example. One may say such a thing, wishing to see more of such said back to them, while others will be horribly offended and take it like it's an attack on humanity, or at least a woman's dignity. Flirting is another such example. One flirts in the hope of reciprocation, while the other acts like it's harassment and freaks their shit. Sure it's not carte blanche to do whatever they want, but there isn't much consistency in how people will react to the same actions.
>>25607642They're quick reads and they might help improve your vocabulary, even as an adult. I found the stories especially funny when I went back and reread them.
>>25597169As a kid I was such a dweeb I actually took seriously all his "this is a miserable book don't read it find something else" warnings and ended up being like 12 when I finally read them
>>25610832NAYRT, but correct.The Golden Rule did not stand on its own, it was buttressed by a great many other ethical rules to define what "like to be treated" actually means. >there isn't much consistency in how people will reactOr rather, different people have different ethical rules and want to be treated differently, and treat others differently. A vast number of people think that being treated to a pork barbecue is an insult, and the kitchen must be decontaminated forthwith. A vast number of people believe it's okay to kill babies if they're inconvenient, or if you're depressed. A vast number of people think it's okay to murder, kidnap, rape and enslave in the name of "resistance".>in local news: local customers were catigated for ordering alcoholic drinks by deliveroo after the despatch rider complained that they spilled and contaminated the box with That Which Must Not Be Touched.
>>25610841That's what I enjoy, its like a darker more mature Dr. Seuss
>>25597169Any author who writes a more mature version of this?
>>25597328Artemis Fowl is far more kiddie coded
>>25611722The movie had so much soul, its unfair bros! We needed the entire thing animated!
>>25597328Almost nobody dies in Artemis Fowl, but the characters are much more developed and change significantly. AF actually explores morality. That makes it more mature in my view.
>>25611722Why wasn't book violet like this?
>>25612307Its for kids, anon!
>>25597169It's a gateway drug to actual literature. Not guaranteed, yeah, but for children's/YA lit it's pretty radical in a lot of ways that I've never really seen in anything else. Even the other "edgier" kids books (Cirque du Freak, Goosebumps, etc.) don't even rate.
>>25612854Yeah its probably the best YA true literature I've seen. A shame there isn't more
>>25597169I hated the VFD for trying to force DEI down everyone's throatsThey remind me of thishttps://youtu.be/4adL4bMDuL8
>>25613823A crossover would be fun
>>25611722Series Violet seems to lack her charm
>>25613823Oh man imagine Dr Venture dealing with Olaf!
>>25597169Is there something like this but for adults?
As a kid the world building of how every adult is a fucking moron except Count Olaf really strikes something I also felt like I was being treated as more than just a kid intelligence wise with the allusions and stuff he would write in the books. Doubt they are very fun to read as an adult though
>>25597258you explained what i feel better than I just did , i agree
>>25599060>insists on shoving the same rules down everyone's throats.so....secular humanism?
>>25613823The VFD is basically the OSI and GCI all in one. They think they're doing something noble but they're all nasty mofos>>25615475Nah its those abrahamic born religions. At least superior buddhism doesn't try to convert people.
>>25597169Olaf was too ridiculously evil, almost like a cartoon
>>25615751Yeah but their world was kafkeske so he fit
>>25615751>he didn’t make it to The EndNot gonna say he’s a good guy by the end of the series but he’s a much more morally grey character than expected.
>>25597169Defining book series of my childhood, much more than Harry Potter or anything else, and it's still enjoyable as an adult. Even more enjoyable in some cases because there are so many obscure literary allusions and ironic devices that go straight over a young reader's head.
>>25616612Exactly how I feel. It was a good book that still has useful stuff to share even as an adult
>>25616612That one reference to Crying of Lot 49 in the book where they introduced Esme Squalor hit me like a truck when I re-read the series as an adult. After that, I noticed that the entire series has references to a lot of literary works that would go over the heads of most kids
>>25617124What do you think about the character of Esme?
>>25617715hot as fuck
>>25617719More than Violet?
>>25617124When I reread the series I kept putting down the books every time there was a proper noun and scrambling to wikipedia because it was almost certainly going to be a reference to something.
>>25597217The author is literally jewish
>>25615607>Nahbut it literally is. There are no degrees in secular humanism, either you are with it or against it. >At least superior buddhism doesn't try to convert peopleI wouldn't call a nihilistic death cult superior
>>25618228You wouldn't because you're ignorant. At least they don't try to forcibly convert others, abrahamic cultists are as bad as the VFD guys burning other's homes and practicing murder (while conveniently ignoring it goes against their own covenant) for "the greater good"
>>25618239>At least they don't try to forcibly convert othersfalse>abrahamic cultists are as bad asThey *can* be bad, because they are human. >while conveniently ignoring it goes against their own covenant) for "the greater good"just like secular humanists do from time to time
>>25597169book series i have contempt for because it was "stuff they made me read as a kid" core
>>25618262To me it was Bridge to Terabithia
>>25618209Lmao that reads like a shitpost. A jest, if you will
>>25618642And by this jest meansnoun1.A playful or frivolous mood or manner."spoken in jest."2. A playful remark; a witticism or joke. A playful or amusing act; a prank.
>>25618262I guarantee no one made you read Snicket as a kid.
>>25597169Were the VFD the bad guys all along?
>>25619771>Destabilizing nations>Thinking they're the "chosen people">Burning down homes and murdering those who oppose them while taking their riches and natural resourcesYou tell me, anon
>>25598937Evil people cant write good books obviously. You can only know if a book is actually good or not by how much you agree with the authors views
How old were you when you realized The End was the best one?
>>25620064If anything that just limits your viewpoints even further. You're shitposting, right?
Has this author written anything else?
>>25621341Nothing worth talking about
>>25621341The book that put him on the map before Snicket was a teen tragedy satire called The Basic Eight, which I've always been curious to read. Supposedly it was his command of believable youth dialogue in that book that got him the gig that eventually became ASOUE.
>>25619983sounds very much like Jewish people
>>25609696>the spoilersI remember figuring most of it out but not those two. Did the Baudelaire orphans really get eaten? I remember it being very ambiguous to what happened to them
>>25622004They safely made it to land and lived happily ever after, with Beatrice II as their adopted daughter/siblingThis is revealed in the "Beatrice Letters" spin off that came out a month before the last book was out and it's worth reading both before and after the last book as it clears up a few things leading up to and after the finale
>>25622004>>25622155Afaik not all the Baudelaires survived. It could have been 1 of the 3 I hope it was violet
>>25622349They all made it, but something happened to them. Beatrice writes to Snicket in the hopes of reading his research (the book series) on the Baudelaires because they have gone missing and she is trying to find them. Implying that, in a 4th wall sort of way, we the audience play the part of Beatrice II reading the story of the orphans after Snicket gives her his writings
>>25622406Maybe they got recruited into the VHF
>>25622466I'm not sure if after burning people alive that would be what they want
>>25597169Would you consider it mature coded?
>>25623358Not so much given the themes
>>25597169Oh man this brings me back, so many good memories. I want to go back!
>>25597169Is it better than Harry Potter?
>>25624086Much better, it deserved the fame and praise
>>25624521I found it more kiddie coded than book 5, 6 and 7 of HP
>>25625226Still far darker, like the the snails that eat the librarian
>>25597169Was Olaf truly the bad guy?
>>25625995He's such an unapologetic bastard that he's likeable.
>>25625642that's like saying the B.F.G. is darker because giants eat kids on the regular in it
