Emphasizing the discourses on the event rather than the event itself and showing that they are artifical, the story caricatures that a naked truth cannot be realized.

Poe, in "The Purloined Letter", tells a story of a letter assumed to be a sansational news about the queen if it is revealed, whether it is stolen by Minister, police’s vain attempts to find it and detective Dupin who seems cool and calm but actually not. Emphasizing the discourses on the event rather than the event itself and showing that they are artifical, the story caricatures that a naked truth cannot be realized. Lacan, in “Seminar on the Purloined Letter”, describes the mise-en-scene ,which is somewhere between being and not being, as the text’s cheating its own fictional organisation: a cheat showing the displacement (41). Kind of truth subversion. Thus, he points out that in this subversion, the displacement of the letter hides the truth or reflects it and he adds: “…a letter always arrives at its destination” (70) A similar story of eversion is also seen in the first book of A Series of Unfortunate Events, written  by Lemony Snicket. However, our object is not a letter this time but it is a hand: bewildering hand.

A Series of Unfortunate Events is about a series of disasters happened to Baudelaire orphans (Violet, Klaus and Sunny). But this occurs as the Minister steals the letter and leaves it there as if it was of no importance, wrinkled up; eventually this letter, as a signifier, disappears by breaking into pieces. It undergoes deconstruction, Derrida would say. The narrator places his cards on the table sincethe beginning. He warns the reader, “if you are fond of stories with happy endings, I would recommend you to read another book. We don’t have any happy endings, nor the happy beginnings at all” (Snicket 1). At this point, he goes over the limits of a world where the fairy tales with happy endings had been written down and will be. So, the happy family portraits’ of children captured on a peaceful moment fades out and the new portrait starts to stage the symptomatic features of bourgeois society. These symtoms are seen in the first book in relation with the notions of custody, heritage and marriage, under the mask of laws. That is, three brothers’ guardianship is given to “a relative in the same city”, Count Olaf, by their parents’ will (15). The great legacy for them- until the eldest one, Violet fulfills her eighteen- is handed down to their next door neighbor Mr Poe, working in “Clip-joint Money Management Bank” (62).  Count Olaf, who is a stage actor, thinking about no one but himself, is described in a caricatured way as bad as can be in a narrative. The only thing in his mind is Baudelaire children’s legacy; for this reason, like the Minister who steal the letter in “The Purloined Letter”, he both hides and  reveals the false truth that he establishes.

In the first case, hiding the truth, he takes advantage of a play named “The Marvellous Marriage”. This so-called play tells the events that happen to an “intelligent and brave man”. Olaf gives the role of  “two people in the feast” to Klaus and Sunny (76) and gives the role of bride –girl with marrying him- to Violet. He convinces their neighbor Justice Strauss, working in High Court, to be the judge of play. Violet has just to say ‘I confirm’ for her role. Though children don’t believe Count Olaf, not to gain their guardian’s fury, they pretend to accept this and start to investigate the situation. With this motivation, they go Justice Strauss’ home to borrow a book about law of inheritance from her library (85). Mrs Strauss is so indulged in the excitement of playing her part of the play that she doesn’t even realize this is weird to look for that kind of book, for children at that age. Besides, one of the Olaf’s men threatens them just as he sees them reading this book. Klaus –though not with the same motivation with the Minister, acting like him- steals the book. He reads until the morning with hope to find something. Eventually he finds the law revealing Olaf’s secret plan, as a wedding law. According to this law, in the town they live in “marriage laws are quite simple… these are the necessary rules: A judge needs to be ready, both the bride and the groom should declare, ‘I confirm’, and the bride has to sign the document telling the necessities of marriage” (97). Klaus tells all these to Olaf and adds without really thinking on it: “Your play’s name should be “The Daunting Marriage” rather than “The Marvellous Marriage” (97). At this point the narrator first reverses the play’s name through Klaus’ words and then starts to deconstruct it. In other words, he lets the mask taken off. And we begin to follow the revealing process after finishing the hiding it:  

-You’ll marry Violet not figuratively but literally! This won’t be a so-called "play", it will be real and legally binding.

-Your sister is not aged enough to marry.

-She can marry if her guardian lets her… I’ve read it also, you can’t fool me.

-Why I bother myself to marry your sister literally?

-… A legal husband… has the right to control money which belongs to his legal wife. You’ll marry my sister to gain control over Baudelaire family’s wealth or at least, you’re planing to do it. But when I tell all these to Mr Poe, your play won’t be staged and you’ll be put in jail! (97-98)

Calmness is prevalent in this dialogue. Count Olaf listens Klaus in a similar of Dupin’s, listening the police. He seems non-reacting to his innocence and pure desire to learn the truth; however, he has already taken some steps to establish his own mise-en-scene. When it comes to Klaus, he tells Olaf’s plan to her sister:

-Legal conditions to marriage in this town… your confirmation before the judge like Justice Strauss and signing a sheet with your own hands!

-But it is certain that I am not old enough to marry… I’m fourteen yet.

-Girls under the age eighteen… they can marry with their guardian’s permisson and that person is Count Olaf. (100)

Thus, the singularity of mise-en-scene goes up with “the automation of repetition” (Lacan 56) and becomes the reality itself. A sense of hope is injected into the reader’s blood. Yet, Olaf confesses his plan by not denying it and he will play with his victims like in a cat and mouse game.  

While children plan to speak to Mr Poe, Olaf kidnaps Sunny and hangs her in a cage by his tower’s window. He imprisons children’s hopes and pure feelings by doing this. (Snicket 105) Though Violet attempts to save Sunny’s life, she has to marry Olaf for her. Like queen, she is enslaved by the things written in that letter.

The day when the play is staged comes eventually. Childrens do what they are told to do since they have no other choice. Third act opens and Justice Strauss solemnizes the marriage as in the real way. Violet as bride signs the sheet by saying “I confirm” before the audiences and witnesses (144). While Olaf’s mise-en-scene comes to an end, the author’s begins. Count announces at the stage that he and Violet get married. Mr Poe objects first. Justice Strauss is bewildered.  While both ask questions on this, Olaf answers them cold-bloodedly. Seemingly, signed sheet, the judge and witnesses are real and Violet’s discourse suits the law. When the automation of repetition continues in the narrative, the reality becomes more intense. Strauss’ declaration of this marriage legal situation helps this reality legalize. And Violet waits patiently until this moment, then like Dupin, to Olaf calling her ‘Contes’, she snaps ‘I’m not your contes or something’ (150). When Olaf asks why, she anwers “I didn’t sign the document as it is written on the law”. Then Strauss interrupts “No need to deny. There are lots witness” and yet Violet continues “I use my right hand like many people, however I signed the document with my left hand” (151). Klaus confirms his sister and says that he saw her shaking hands. Olaf says “such a detail doesn’t even matter” (151). Justice Strauss looks at the document carefully and utters “If Violet is right-handed and she signed the document with left hand,  we conclude that this sign is not proper for the wedding. Tha law is certain about it; the bride must sign the document with her ‘own’ hands. Therefore, this marriage is not valid”, saying these she abolishes the marriage (152). Hand is bewildered; oath, broken; mise-en-scene is tore down. The narrator shows the structure of illusion to the reader. In other words, he deconstruct the narrative through the bewildering hand; the law of guardianship, legacy and marriage become irrelevant, losing their conceptual meanings.  In a critical approach derived from “cynicism”, these notions are evaluated symptomatically.“If you are not a lawyer, the fact that Violet invalidated Count Olaf’s plan by just signing the document with her left hand, may sound weird to you. And yet law is weird after all!” (153) Here, the text enters the field of “irony of official culture” (Zizek 43). The letter arriving its destination is the message of text. Things done by Justice Strauss and Mr Poe are signs of their cynicism meaning the answer of ruling culture to this subversion, which legitimizes the symptomatic structure (44).[1] On the other hand, resembling the reader to child in the mirror stage, when we learn the truth, the fact that Violet signs the sheet with her left hand rather than right, becomes truth’s appealing on mirror. Because we know mirror’s symmetrical illusion, though we use our right hand, mirror indicates the otherside, your left hand that is used. The narrator takes advantage of this illusion and makes the reader watch it from the place they stand.

As a matter of fact, though it is written for children, A Series of Unfortunate Events creates new questions on the possibilities of fantastic, using the very illusion of reality and subversion of it. Here, characters’ surnames like Baudelaire, Poe and Strauss can be read as a parable criticising the structuralist analysis. Hand’s bewildering feature reminds us “The Purloined Letter” which is translated into French by Baudelaire.

Bibliography

Lacan, Jacques. “Çalınan Mektup Üzerine Seminer”. Çalınan Poe: Lacan ve Derrida, Psikanalitik Devekuşu

Diyalektiği.  Der. ve Çev. Mukadder Erkan ve Ali Utku. İstanbul: Birey Yayınları, 2005. 33-70.

Snicket, Lemony. Talihsiz Serüvenler Dizisi: Kötü Günler Başlarken. Çev. Nurettin Elhuseyni. Res. Brett Helquist.

İstanbul: Doğan Egmont Yayıncılık, 2002.

Zizek, Slavoj. İdeolojinin Yüce Nesnesi. Çev. Tuncay Birkan. İstanbul: Metis Yayınları, 2008.