My kids (ages 10, 12, and 13) recently plowed through about six books by “lemony snicket”. Yesterday I decided to pick one up and see what they were reading (Hell, like any responsible parent, might as well wait until the horse is well out of the barn.)
This seems to be some pretty wierd shit. Not “dangerous”, but definitely different. And I’m trying to figure out if they are well written or not (kinda leaning towards not.)
Whaddayouthink?
I love them. IMO they are written much better then those HP books and I love the art. The books have my type of humor so I really enjoy that but I could see how if say, you don’t find throwning kids down an elevator shaft, amuseing then you may not get into the books.
My wife loves them and thinks they are a riot. I read the first one and I thought it was funny but I didn’t continue on.
I saw the jacket and thought it was funny. But the books themselves were dumb (the parts that I skimmed through). Also, it seems to me that they revel in the agony of the children.
I’ve only read the first one so far, but I thought it was hilarious. I particularly liked the running joke about word definitions. The narrator will say something condescending like, “She was terrified, which in this instance means that she was very frightened.” I can see the children reading the book thinking to themselves, “I know what terrified means.”
Then an adult character will condescendingly say to one of the children, “Your circumstances are dire. ‘Dire’ means very bad.” And the child character will say, “I know what dire means.” It’s very witty.
Do the books revel in the agony of children? The children in this book really do have to deal with a lot of horrible things – they’re orphaned, then given into the custody of a villain who intends to swindle them out of their inheritance – but they defeat him through their own pluck and intelligence.
The narrator keeps up this horrified “you really shouldn’t read this, it’s very bad” tone, which heightens the suspense. But I don’t think there’s any question that the orphans will triumph in the end.
And where’s the fun in reading about perfectly well-adjusted people whose lives were happy and peaceful all the time? My favorite childhood reading was books like “Black Beauty,” about animals who had to go through horrible things. I never feared that Black Beauty would be, say, torn apart by wild dogs. I knew that he would suffer, but would eventually find a nice safe pasture with lots of apples to eat. I think that lots of kids like to read about terrible events, especially in a sort of safe atmosphere where they know everything will be all right in the end.
Lemony Snicket, eh? Sounds about ideal for the Tzeroling. She isn’t too into the Harry Potter stuff (altho’ I admit I went out and bought Books 2, 3, and 4 after reading her copy of Sorcerer’s Stone) but she seemed to get into the Roald Dahl stories - I’ll have to check this one out and see if her twisted little mind can’t handle it.
Thanks for the birthday gift recommendations!
My wife is questioning whether they are “mean”. I’m not sure that is a problem. And I certainly don’t think my kids should read only [brahmin on] fine literatuh[/brahmin off].
I’m only about half way through the second book. Don’t find it too terribly engaging. I admit that I am not the target audience.
I further admit that my kids (apparently smack dab in the middle of the target audience) find it funny when the author does something incredibly clever like write the word “really” 50 or so times in a row. But to me that, and much else in the series, seems like nothing more than a stunt. Sort of the author chuckling, “Can you believe they are publishing this?” I sense that that is somewhat of the appeal oif these books. The reader, especially if a kid, says “Wow, I’ve never read a book before where they did that!”
Something of the books strikes me as smugly self-referential. All right already. I understand the kids are unfortunate and the story will have a bad end. Why is it necessary to keep repeating this every five pages (and, I understand, throughout each of the books)? Am I supposed to keep reading additional books to see if this apparently brain damaged baby ever starts to talk? And am I ever going to find out the deal with the dead chick he dedicates the books to?
I guess what little I have read so far, and what I have heard from my kids and wife, impresses me that these books are not terribly well crafted. I get the impression of the author simply thinking, “What will be incredibly clever for me to do next? Hey, I know! I’ll sip out of the narrative, and pretend I am relating what is happening in my daily life as I write this!” And to me, all these “tricks” do not tie together sufficiently as a whole.
I read the author’s previous “adult” novel, The Basic Eight. Considered it a moderately entertaining quick read. Don’t believe the Lemony Snicket books are anything more. In fact, I don’t believe the concept is strong enough to support the ongoing series.
But what do I know? I’m apparently the only person on the planet who disliked A Confederacy of Dunces!
My wife and I are in the middle of the sixth book. (The series, “A Series of Unfortunate Events” will have thirteen books, each with thirteen chapters, natch.) We’ve been reading them aloud to each other as bedtime stories. When the kids come along and are old enough, we’ll read the books to them.
This series, in my opinion, is one of the best children’s series in recent memory for a number of reasons. First and foremost, the books are fun, enjoyable reading for kids and adults. Parents can read these books to their children without becoming bored. I do not find most of the word definitions condescending at all. Many of the words which Mr. Snicket defines are unlikely to be in a young one’s vocabulary, and are explained quite well through the magic of context. I love his style of writing–rather archaic, without being dry.
Values and morals manage to sneak into the stories as well. For example, in the first book, it is explained that sometimes when there is a death in the family, a person’s friends might feel uncomfortable wih that person, and not want to be arounf him or her. This is a sad truth that many children may face in their lives without understanding it. Mr. Snicket goes on to say, however, that “you and I, of course, would never do anything so inconsiderate” (or words to that effect), thus reinforcing the lesson, and instilling in the child a desire to behave considerately.
Each of the three children contributes to overcoming their conflicts: Violet (the oldest) invents things, Klaus enjoys reading and researching, and Sunny (the baby) has very sharp teeth. They use their skills individually and collectively in ingenious manners to thwart the evil plans of Count Olaf.
While I can’t say enough good things about Lemony Snicket (not to mention Brett Helquist, whose illustrations are perfect for the stories), this is not to say that I would just hand the books to a child and leve it at that. As I said earlier, I intend to read these books to my children, as this will incite discussion about the lessons, and give me the opportunity to explain any of the more troubling occurrences.
I’d recommend checking the author’s site out here:
I like the Lemony Snickett books. I find them both witty and clever, to the point that I think I may be in the target audience. As for the “well-written or trash?” question, yes. Both. I find the books to be engaging for about one read through, which is usually pretty fast. I laugh at the gags. I revel in the horribleness of the orphans’ crazy lives. I am continually stumped at the inanity of the continued adult characters. I look forward to the next book.
Even so, they don’t merit (imo) a re-read, even once. While I can run back through the Harry Potter books and pick up references I missed the first time that have bearing on the plots of later books, there is no such continuity in the Unfortunate Events. Nothing is missed the first time through. The characters and plots are predictable, which is both bad and good. Bad, because I’m going to spend round about 130 bucks on books I know the plots of, but good in that they’re like being read or told a familiar story with a twist. The books read like sitting at someone’s knee, being told it, with interjections, explanations, and “foreshadowing”.
As someone mentioned above, I read them and think “I can’t believe someone published this stuff!” but I’m glad they did.
I am really delighted with these books so far. I would say well written.
Usually I argue that “for children” vs. “for adults” doesn’t have anything to do with well written, in that I am annoyed when someone describes something as “well written, for children, that is” meaning it is not on par with well written books for adults. This relates to how horrified I am that the NY York Times book list now has a separate category for children’s books, in response to Harry Potter hogging all the top slots.
But at the same time, I recognize that well written children’s books sometimes incorportate elements that would not be interesting or appropriate in an adult book. Such as the “really really really really really” example in the OP. I think kids find this funny because it contrasts to the spoken (adult) English that they are surrounded by. Kids I know do tell each other stories and say things like “she was very, very, very, very, very mad at her brother.” I think this is also true of the slips into the authorial voice, with Lemony Snicket making comments about his own life. Breaking down the fourth wall (do you still call it that in a book?) is a device that many adults do not find especially novel, but as a child I remember thinking that it was very clever (ok, as an adult I find I still have a higher tolerance for it than most people) because it sneaks up on you and makes you think about structure and narrative and the process of writing. I also think it’s interesting for kids to think about books not just as something they read, but as something that someone wrote.
*** * * * * The Reptile Room Spoiler!!!*
I was surprised by how moved I was by the conclusion of the The Reptile Room, the second book in the series. There is one of those “brilliant means that something is very bright” comments. Then the passage goes on to talk about how brilliant can also mean something very special and wonderful and unique, like the time the children had with their Uncle Monty. Even though bad things have happened to Uncle Monty and the children, nothing can diminish the time they spent together. I wasn’t expecting it, and I thought it was very effective. It is certainly sappy, but the entire series is a classic melodrama, and a well executed one.
Good grief, I forgot something. I was surprised to read that Dinsdale thinks Sunny is brain damaged – isn’t the joke that she is an infant that makes the usual “goo” and “ga” noises, but that she is actually so intelligent that she trying to say “Don’t be ridiculous, Klaus!” I don’t think she’s old enough to walk yet, so why should she start talking?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by missdavis102 *
I find them both witty and clever…
JC, what do you consider the distinction betw w & c?
As I look in my Websters Collegiate 10th, at least some of the alternative definitions for these words suggest a lack of depth and substance, which may be relevant to my dissatisfaction with these books. Chewing gum for the brain?
delphica, my use of the term brain damaged was a reference to my personal lack of interest in this (or any other) character. I was sufficiently tired of Sunny such that I wouldn’t have minded if the snake had actually poisoned her in the first 20 pages of the book I’m reading. Sunny strikes me as simply another aspect of the author entertaining himself. Sunny is nowhere near as outlandish a character as several by Peter Carey or Harry Crews (not that I’d recommend either of those authors to my kids quite yet.) I feel these books are poor imitations of what has been done better elsewhere. And I do not perceive what holds all of the eccentricities together.
To each his or her own. Good thing there are so many books in the library and bookstore!
MissDavis
Who do you think Beatrice is?
When I read the books I usually imaging Patrick Stewart’s voice reading it.
I think the Series of Unfortunate Events books are brilliant. They’re funny, and clever, and an overall good read. The ways that Violet, Klaus, and Sunny outsmart Olaf are so unconventional, it makes me want to keep reading right through the book. Plus, the way it’s told it sounds more like somebody’s just telling it aloud - a refreshing narrative for me. Lemony incorporates things out of his own life, too, which makes it an even more enjoyable read. Trashy? I don’t know where you got that idea. 