*tbl

josabethincorporation  asked:

Hi ! I just read your "Did Lemony stalk the Baudelaire orphans from his taxi" article and it reminded me of an old theory of mine. As you said, we can see the Duchess' signature evolves quite a lot between her youth and the Masked Ball. However, her second signature has always seemed, to me, to mix two letters: a cursive S and a cursive L. Could she be an alias of LS? Not from the beginning but starting a certain point. It would explain why Kit adresses her letters for Lemony. What do you think?

An alias? I don’t think so. There are other characters than Lemony who acknowledge the Duchess’ existence: Esme, for example. Lemony himself describes her as an actual person in “The Beatrice Letters”. So unless “Duchess of Winnipeg” is Lemony’s drag name and he suffers from a SEVERE case of multiple personality disorder, I’m pretty sure she’s real.

“Lemony! Did you set the library on fire?”
— “No. When the cops comme for me, I’m gonna tell them it was my alter ego, Duchess Rootie Flagrante.”

I would call your idea outlandish, but… Daniel Handler DID use the “X was actually the narrator’s alter-ego all along” twist in one of his adult novels. And he does seem to imply that the elusive J.S. is actually Lemony. So it’s not outlandish, just… unlikely?

If you like theories about Lemony’s mental instability, this article (Link) I wrote might interest you.

The End of Daddy-Gate is Near

This appears to be the last hurrah for the Daddy-Gaters. TPTB said they will definitively answer the “Who is Lizzie’s Father” question early in Season 4. Many casual fans who don’t watch the show in depth still think that Red is Lizzie’s father. And TBL wants to leverage the casual audience as much as possible by creating a season 4 promo that makes it sound like there is still a possibility that Red is Lizzie’s father. So they inserted this little clip into the promo making some folks think that Red is going to tell Lizzie that Kirk is not her father, he is.  Well NOT!

Now let’s assume that this is not spliced or taken out of context (a big assumption since TBL has been doing this exact thing with their promos forever, and boy it sure sounds spliced). Red says “Alexander Kirk lied to you Lizzie”. Did he?

Well yeah. I believe Alexander Kirk is going to try to turn Elizabeth against Red. He knows about the night of the fire and a whole lot more. He is going to make it sound like Red did something terrible (like saying Red killed Katarina, even if it is not true) or make it sound like Red was only using Lizzie for his own gain and does not really care for her after all. So he will outright lie or at least embellish the truth to make Red sound like a monster. He wants Liz to hate Red. Kirk is probably Red’s biggest enemy and vice-versa. And Kirk wants to hit him where it hurts the most - which is Red’s relationship with Lizzie.

And right now I do think Kirk is actually Lizzie’s father. I believe that Lizzie shot him and both she and Red thought he died the night of the fire. But he didn’t. My theory is that Red did not find out about Kirk until he received the Glasnost file on Rostova from the KGB agent in the Lady Ambrosia episode.

When he looked at the file Red said, “It just keeps getting worse”.  I believe he discovered at this moment that Constantin Rostov did not die in that fire and took on the identity of Alexander Kirk.

At the church on the day of the wedding, Lizzie assumed that her mother was after her. Red reiterated that her mother was dead. But he did tell her he would let her know who was after her after he got her out safely. 

But that never happened. So he never had the chance to tell her that her father was alive in the guise of Alexander Kirk and he was the one who was after her.

Sure it is also possible that Lizzie’s father did die in the fire and Kirk is lying about being her father. In that case he must really need something from her. Maybe he related to Lizzie’s father. That focus on his blood type must mean something. And Lizzie’s father will be proven out by a blood or DNA test, finally.

No matter what, we will find out who is really Lizzie’s father this season.  And let’s revisit again why there is no way Red is her father.

1) Statements from TPTB and the writers that Red is not Lizzie’s father:

First Jon Bokenkmap says this in The Wall Street Journal interview

The whole season felt like we were leading up to meeting Liz’s mom, Katerina. Instead we met her father. Will you say if this finally closes the book on any question as to whether Red is Liz’s dad? 

I thought we answered that question back in season 1. (Note: In season 1, Red tells Liz he will never lie to her and then immediately says he is not her father, though many fans refused to believe him.)

Then we have tweets from Executive Producers Daniel Cerone and Kat Goodson, and Associate Producer Zee Hatley:

2) Red does not lie to Lizzie is a key tenant of the show:

Below are 3 direct quotes between Red and Lizzie:

Episode 01 x 10: Lizzie to Red: “Are you my father?” Red “No”

Episode 01 x 22  Red to Lizzie: “Lizzie look at me.  I’m telling you with no uncertainty, your father is dead.  He died in that fire.”

Episode 02 x 22  Lizzie to Red: “I remember. I remember everything. The night of the fire, I know what happened.  And I understand why you didn’t want me to find out. When I pulled the trigger, when I shot Connolly, it came back to me. it was like I was there.  I could hear them arguing. He was hurting her. And I know why my father died that night. I shot him”.


So did Red lie to Lizzie about her father being dead? No. He thought he did die in the fire. Here are comments from Jon Bokenkamp and Daniel Cerone on this:

End of Season 1 interview with Jon Bokenkamp (from TVGuide.com - link to entire article HERE:)

Tom said that Liz’s father is still alive, but Red insists he’s dead. Is Red part of a cover up or does Red really think he’s dead?

Bokenkamp: What I do not believe is that Red is lying to Liz. The things he’s told her about her father he believes to be true and thus are true, but that doesn’t necessarily mean those in the writers’ room believe them to be true. It’s safe to believe that what he told her on the steps was the truth so far as he knows.


And the below tweet from Daniel Cerone:


And honestly, if Red was lying about him not being Liz’s father this key tenant is destroyed. And the majority of the audience would never trust the show again.

Keep reading

detectivefernald  asked:

How is it possible that Count Olaf was one of the leaders of the schism? In his letter to Jerome, Jacques says that "O" (Most likely Olaf) started it. However, if the schism started when Kit Snicket was 4, and she and Olaf are roughly around the same age, it means that Olaf started the schism when he was a toddler, before he might have been recruited by V.F.D. Do you have an explanation or a theory? Is it possible that "O" in Jacques' letter meant some one else? Thank You!!!

For reference, @detectivefernald is refering to this passage from one of Jacques Snicket’s letters. It’s pretty obvious he’s speaking about Olaf, who goes by Shirley at the time:

For years this organization has behaved in ways that were as noble as they were secret, but recently this organization has experienced a schism, a word which here means “a member suddenly behaving in a greedy and violent manner and thus dividing the organization into two arguing groups.” The member I am speaking of - I will call him O, though currently he prefers S - has recently done great deal of vicious, unfair, and impolite acts that I shudder to describe.
[Lemony Snicket’s un-Authorized Autobiography, p.123]

This has confused the fans for years as it directly seems to contradict Kit’s and Dewey’s assumption that the Schism happened while they were very young. Since Olaf belongs to their generation (he was Lemony’s classmate in “The Beatrice Letters” and “Why Is This Night Different From All Other Nights?” seems to support that), this makes it seem as if Olaf caused the Schism when he was… a toddler.

“So I’m told,” Kit said. “I was four years old when everything changed. Our organization shattered, and it was as if the world shattered, too, and one by one the safe places were destroyed.”
[The Penultimate Peril, Chapter Two]

I was four years old when the schism began. I was scarcely tall enough to reach my favorite shelf in the family library-the books labeled 020.
[Dewey Denouement - The Penultimate Peril, Chapter Eight]

So who’s got the truth of it? The fact that the Schism is never mentioned in “All The Wrong Questions” despite the fact that Lemony is thirteen years old and knee-deep in the VFD conspiracy doesn’t really help in this matter.

The only clue we have to solve this discrepancy is this famous line from Dewey Denouement:

With each generation, the schism gets worse.
[The Penultimate Peril, Chapter Eight]

So my theory goes that the original Schism did happen during Olaf’s childhood, but that it only escalated into a full-scale war when he became an adult. What I understand is that prior to Olaf’s betrayal, volunteers from different sides competed and mostly did their own things, but never actively fought against each other. We see that Gifford and Ghede compete with Theodora and Qwerty for control over Lemony but that their struggle is only sneaky. They don”t harm each other, they don’t frame each other. And at the end of “All The Wrong Questions”, they even collaborate to help the survivors of the trainwreck.

This all changed when Olaf framed Lemony for his own crimes, an action which effectively ended the two sides’ neutrality pact:

Your review of Funcoot’s play has changed everything. O is more dastardly than we ever could have imagined.
[Lemony Snicket’s un-Authorized Autobiography, p.96]

So I would think that Jacques was simplifying things in layman’s terms in his letter to Jerome, and that Olaf was responsible for turning the Schism into a war, not actually causing it. Or maybe he’s lying to Jerome to make sure he doesn’t trust Olaf.

But there is however a case for Olaf causing the Schism when he was VERY young. There’s a seemingly important line about his childhood and arson:

”“I have a few errands to run,” Olaf said. “Ha! First I’m going down to the basement, to retrieve the sugar bowl. Ha! Then I’m going up to the roof, to retrieve the Medusoid Mycelium. Ha! Then I’m going down to the lobby, to expose the fungus to everyone in the lobby. Ha! And then, finally, I’m going up to the roof, to escape without being seen by the authorities.”
“You’ll fail,” Sunny said, and Olaf glared down at the youngest Baudelaire.
“Your mother told me the same thing,” he said. “Ha! But one day, when I was seven years old-”

[The Penultimate Peril, Chapter Twelve]

This passage is incredibly vague but something important clearly happened in Olaf’s childhood to warp his mind that way. Maybe it’s related to the Schism?