At the end ATWQ, *SPOILERS* do you have any thoughts on why, in-story and writing/meaning reasons, the Associates reject Lemony at the end? Is it because he became an adult or was becoming an adult as conceptualized in the story? Or was it something else?
Whether or not Snicket became an adult is a complex question. His âapprenticeship [is] overâ (4.291), but the last thing he tells anyone before disappearing is that heâs ânot old enoughâ (4.288), an assertion laden with irony and a callback to the Bombinating Beast not attacking him in SYBIS because itâs ânot old enoughâ (3.221) to harm anyone. By the end of ATWQ both the Beast and Snicket have aged out of this inability and Snicket has fulfilled his destiny of becoming Hangfireâs disciple. Hangfire, ATWQâs largest-looming embodiment of adulthood, may look âpeacefulâ and âas if something at last was hisâ (4.252) during the Beastâs siege because heâs completed his true objective of passing on his legacy. In SYBIS, the âbox of matches in [Snicketâs] pocketâ implied his potential to turn into an adult arsonist like Hangfire, and heâs held back only by childish beliefs like âadults should[nât] be encouraged to smokeâ (3.27). In the climax of WITNDFAON, Snicket now likens Hangfire to his âteacherâ (4.245) and credits him for instruction on how to âplayâ (4.248) the Beast statue and unleash his potential for destruction.Â
Iâve always held it as a weak deus ex machina that ATWQâs master of treachery could be defeated with a deception as plain as âwhatâs that behind youâ. I can only justify it as the metaphorical gateway into Snicketâs âwild, lawlessâ place, that he commits a sort of ur-deception or âvery old trickâ so archetypal that, like âthe old myths and superstitionsâ (4.246), its recounting requires the Association of Associates to recite it like a Greek chorus outside the derailed train. Snicketâs apprenticeship in Stainâd-by-the-Sea ends not just because he murders Hangfire, but because he tricks Hangfire with malicious intent, because he summons the Beast, and because he reveals previously suppressing Hangfireâs identity. Eveâs original sin wasnât a magicked apple but the indelible knowledge that she had the ability to disobey and, whatâs more, to lie about it and to implicate others.Â
After Snicketâs misdeeds culminate in a literal trainwreck (in the shape of âa dead serpentâ [4.259] that recalls Edenâs lech), Snicket finds that âfriend or enemy, associate or stranger, [everyone shrinks] from [him]â (4.258) like heâs âa moving shadow, casting darkness over everyoneâ (4.286). In essence, heâs like Armstrong Feint. Note the lone cross in Sethâs opening illustration to chapter thirteen, after Snicket reflects that Hangfire was the only person âbrave enough to face the beast directlyâ and who Snicket classifies among âheroes [and] villainsâ (4.252). Itâs uncertain whether Snicket views himself as more âlike Armstrong Feint, someone once kind and gentle who lowered himself into treachery, or more like a mysterious beast, hidden in the depths and summoned to wickednessâ (4.290), but he now empathizes with both figures. Daniel Handler and I are technically Jewish, but feel free to interpret Hangfire as a Christ figure martyred by his inability to overcome humanityâs disbelief in his message, and Snicket as his reluctant disciple as he records the manâs story in a tetralogy mirroring the four gospels.Â
The series ends with Snicketâs coat housing the Beast statue (and presumably the same box of matches) even as Snicket muses that âlong ago, [he] had made a promise to return the statue to its rightful ownerâ (4.289). Snicket told Theodora in WCTBATH that the Beast âhas been associated with the Mallahan family for generationsâ and that theyâre likely the statueâs ârightful ownersâ (1.93-94). But Snicket doesnât give the statue to Lady Mallahanâs only competent descendant, nor would Moxie likely want something she now knows brings with it only destruction and covetous frenzy reminiscent of the Maltese Falcon. Despite his misgivings about alienating his friends, Snicket never offers up the totem of chaos, and alongside his warped notion that he âthink[s he] kept [his] promiseâ (4.277) to help Ellington find her father by unmasking and killing him, itâs quite possible Snicket also believes heâs fulfilled his promise to find the statueâs rightful owner: Himself. A statue only capable of chaos would ârightfullyâ belong to someone capable of chaos, and by tricking Hangfire with malevolent intent, Snicket has wrested ownership of the statue from Hangfire like Malfoy wrested ownership of the Elder Wand from Dumbledore. Even the Beast, raised and nourished by Hangfire, recognizes Snicketâs authority over the hand that fed him; Hangfire points uselessly at Snicket when he speaks his last words, but the Beast only obeys Snicketâs wordless pointing to leave, after looking over â[Snicket and] the statue in [his] handsâ (4.254).Â
As discussed in my earlier essay, Snicket never shakes the feeling that he, like Ellington, will always be an outsider to the residents of Stainâd, Associates included. Snicketâs not surprised in the climax that âthe Mitchums of the world just bickerâ while ignoring evil, or that Gifford and Ghede think it's ânot [their] jobâ to intervene in a wrongful arrest. What ultimately drives Snicket from Stainâd is alienation from his friends. The Association is horrified by Hangfireâs murder because, unlike Snicket, they had only learned his identity moments before his deathâAnd his identity is that of the absent parent, a specter that haunts each Associate. The Association relies on hope, but Snicket quietly believes that âMoxieâs mother [will] never send for herâ and âPip and Squeak's father [is] gone foreverâ (4.288). That said, the Associationâs schism isnât about Snicketâs deviation from the groupâs strict moral code. Moxie laments that Snicket âdidnât have to feed [Hangfire] to that creatureâ (4.270) while simultaneously dismissing Feintâs orphaned daughter as âdeserv[ing] to be in a prison cellâ (4.279) for a murder Ellington didnât commit. Snicket is ultimately as repulsed by the Associatesâ hypocrisy as they are by his.
This brings Snicket to his second epiphany, that not only has his apprenticeship ended, but itâs now his responsibility to document its events. This is a postmodern concept of penance, to make amends not to the man Armstrong Feint (by, for example, rescuing his daughter) but to Feintâs story, lest he be erased a second time. Handler distinguishes between signifier and signified several times in the denouement: The townâs ink becoming âweaker and fainterâ made the facts it represented appear âless certainâ (4.263); Moxie equates Snicket âdestroy[ing]â Hangfire to destroying a book and its âimportant secretsâ (4.269); the Beastâs and Snicketâs actions have erased Hangfireâs meaning like âspilled ink across paperâ voids the meaning of the words (4.249). Feint and his words âhave vanished,â and though Snicket âwish[es]â his actions would too (4.254), he knows these actions obligate him to record his wrongdoing. Snicket ends WCTBATHÂ with âpractically none ofâ its events entering his official report (1.252), and this pattern persists through the second and third books. Itâs only after âdestroyingâ a man that Snicket pledges to revive Feint and his story in a fragmentary plot for the librarians. After all, âpaper will put up with anything thatâs written on itâ (4.272), whether itâs spilled ink that destroys important secrets or words that resurrect a dead man âthe way an idea moves from a book to your mindâ (4.248).