The "Atlantis: The Lost Empire" Book Tag // a dive into the characters and similarities to Stargate (1994)

Hello and good tidings, all you explorers of stories!

This month the movie Atlantis: The Lost Empire (2001) turned 25 years old! And when it comes to this movie, I am a HUGE fan. Let's see, it has:

• Blue being the main design color for the Atlanteans (which I approve of heartily) 
• An original story for Disney in the style of Jules Vernes's work (only maybe copied from something else...stay tuned for my theory on that.)
• One of the best examples of a large cast of characters being done right where they all have their unique personalities and skills to contribute which makes each memorable.
• A self-awareness of the explorer/white savior dynamic that other films (*cough* The Road to El Dorado *cough*) are lacking, and an examination of what it means to interact with other cultures (which they could do with this fictional world in ways that are not disrespectful!) 
• Great quotes and comic relief.

Not to say it doesn't have its fair share issues (and surprises, such as one of the highest body counts in a Disney movie?), but it navigates a new territory in story, characters, and themes that Disney had not explored before. 

All that's to say, it's a delight. And I'm not the only one who thinks so, as Sally Silverscreen at 18 Cinema Lane put together a book tag to celebrate that this movie has been around for a quarter of a century (just multiply that by 340 and we get Kida's age). I'm filling it out today to join in the celebration.

Remember that excellent huge cast of characters I mentioned earlier? Each of the questions based on one of the characters! Because of that, there are SPOILERS for the movie. This movie is super nostalgic for me so I wouldn't recommend revealing the twists to yourself if you haven't seen it.

Questions:

Milo Thatch: 

Throughout the film, Milo never gives up on finding Atlantis, even when he originally faced scrutiny from the Smithsonian Institute’s board of directors. What book series do you see yourself not giving up on?: 

I didn't give up on The Queen's Thief series - by Megan Whalen Turner even though I was super tempted a time or two. But it paid off because the last book was my favorite!

As far as a series that I am still in the midst of reading go, the sequels in the Emily series - by L. M. Montgomery are #1 on my Goodreads list. I read the first book, Emily of New Moon (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4), in 2019 and keep meaning to continue the series. It hasn't happened in the last 7 years but that doesn't mean my resolve is crumbling at all!

Another one would be to read all of Agatha Christie's books. I only read a Hercule Poirot book every few years people might have thought that I've given up, but that's the not the case at all. I'm just savoring them!

Kidagakash "Kida" Nedakh:

While recounting the state of Atlantis, Kida says, “We [Atlanteans] are like a stone the ocean beats against. With each passing year a little more of us is worn away.” Which book would you save from becoming lost to time?:

The Kite Runner - by Khalid Hosseini. This is a hard, hard book. It deals with very horrific things and dark circumstances but has stuck with me even 5 years after I read it. Due to some of the subject material it has been challenged to be a banned book so I would like to save it from being lost in time in that sense. There have been criticisms that certain groups are portrayed in an overly negative light which I have no place to speak about, but aside, it is one of the most stunning works I've ever read and really opened my eyes to perspectives so vastly different from mine.

Audrey: 

As a gifted mechanic, Audrey is tasked with making sure the Ulysses submarine and the team’s vehicles run smoothly throughout the expedition. What book had a pace you thought ran smoothly?: 

Etiquette & Espionage - by Gail Carriger is not your typical "protagonist goes to a new school" book. It's cheeky and fun and has lots of mysteries and lessons for Sophronia to complete. I gobbled it up so quickly and am already working on the second book. And as a bonus that speaks to Audrey's character, there are lots of mechanical goodies as it fits in the steampunk genre.

Also, Audrey is one of my favorite characters EVER and I feel like I forget about her and need to apologize.

Vinny: 

One of Vinny’s most memorable lines is “Hey look, I made a bridge” after creating a pathway using dynamite. What literary worlds would you like to see bridged together?: 

LOVE this question (and a moment to do with "nitroglycerin" takes the cake for my favorite line of the whole film). 

My combination is not going to make a lot of sense, but I just really, really, really want more Lemony Snicket books. Because I've basically read all of them and I want more. Another book series that really reminds me of those books is The Incorrigible Children of Ashton Place - by Maryrose Wood. Lemony Snicket's world is here on earth, but has a timeless quality because no reference to the actual timeframe is made. There are cars and skyscrapers and submarines and movie theaters but it could really be anytime post-1960s? Meanwhile, Miss Penelope Lumley and co. are firmly in Victorian London. 

To combine this world let's say Miss Lumley and the Incorrigibles (and Simon Harley Dickenson) somehow are transported to the future and it's up to Lemony and crew (the cast from the All the Wrong Questions series) to get them back. Because I think it would be cute to see Jake cooking food to coax Alexander, Beowolf, and Cassiopeia to eat. And Penelope being fascinated by Pip and Squeak and their driving. And Moxie trying to get interviews which only Simon takes to heart because he's used to the press as an actor. And meanwhile Lemony is the only one doing any work at the Black Cat Cafe to try to get them home.

OH and each of the characters of the respective worlds being confused about the relationship so they think Penelope is somehow related so they call her Miss Lemony instead of Miss Lumley. 

It would just be fun and cleverness would abound.

Doctor Joshua Sweet: 

According to Disney Wiki, Doctor Sweet was the first character to show Milo kindness during the Atlantis expedition. Which book character would you give kindness to?:

Owen from Becoming Naomi Leon - by Pam Muñoz Ryan. Owen is ADORABLE and PRECIOUS and legit the sweetest kid in the universe but people can be mean to him because he's a FLK (funny looking kid) due to his limp. He's so good natured he doesn't hold the teasing against anyone but that doesn't mean he should have to endure it. I just want to get him ice cream every day and help him practice riding his bike.

And if I'm hanging out with Owen that means I'll be with Naomi, too! I'd tell her she's awesome and brave and I would gush over her soap carvings.

Gaetan "Mole" Molière: 

When Milo meets Mole, he discovers Mole’s dirt collection, with each particle of dirt coming from different parts of the world. If you could collect dirt from a book’s world, where would you go?:

In Between Jobs - by W. R. Gringell there are three worlds: the main world we live in, Behind (where fae, vampires, and many other magical creatures are), and Between (which is how the worlds are bridged). Things from Between are more illusions than anything else. You're not supposed to take things from Between but that doesn't stop Pet and even though I'm a rule follower I would want to take some to see what it could later turn into.

Cookie: 

On Cookie’s chest is a tattoo of “all 38 states.” Which book would you choose out of the states represented in Cookie’s tattoo?:

From the screenshots I can find of him showing off his tattoo it's hard to see what's there, but it looks like at least: Wisconsin, West Virginia, Florida, and Texas? Those are the distinguishable shapes, then the rest of them are a bit blurred together so I'm not sure where the divisors are.

The Last Bus to Wisdom - by Ivan Doig revolves around Montana, but there's also a sizable bit where our main character Donal is on the bus to Wisconsin then when he gets there it's not how he expected it would be.

Mrs. Packard: 

According to Disney Wiki, “Packard is hardly involved during the journey to Atlantis” yet as the Officer of Communications, Mrs. Packard plays a vital role in the Atlantis expedition. Which underrated book character do you wish received more recognition?:

In The Chronicles of Narnia, the Pevensie children and Eustace and Aslan and Caspian are all very well known characters. But as the series goes on even more are introduced yet aren't as talked about as much. For example, Digory and Polly from The Magician's Nephew. I LOVE Polly. I think she's so plucky and down for anything and gets annoyed at Digory at all the right instances. Digory is also a dear. Because it's the 6th book in the series (fight me) maybe people don't get around to it and so these two are just unknown instead of underrated. Maybe with Greta Gerwig's version coming out soon they'll get some more love!

Meanwhile, as far as a character getting more recognition from the author and therefore more "screen/page time" in a book, Margaret's brother in North & South - by Elisabeth Gaskell. His role is so brief that I don't even remember his name (should we guess John? That seems typical of the period). He's only there for a couple of chapters (if that!) and serves the plot point to introduce some misunderstandings and I understand why he can't stick around but I kind of wish he could've been there for Margaret for a little longer because she's going through a time where she really needs some support. Because I'm not there to comfort my girl!

Preston B. Whitmore: 

Because of his funding, Mr. Whitmore is the reason why the Atlantis expedition happens in the first place. If you possessed a large sum of money, what book related purpose would you use the money for?:

Textbooks for students are such a tremendous expense so I would like to set up a way that they could get them for cheaper! With some subjects that are evolving, after a few years textbooks aren't even the most current knowledge so it's painful to buy them for hundreds of dollars when they can't be resold.

(Also, was it just me or did anyone else think Cookie and Mr. Whitmore were the same person for the longest time?  It was only a few years ago that I watched it and realized they were COMPLETELY different characters. They both just seemed like old white guys to me? The rest of the cast are so diverse in race and drawing style and I just associated those two as the same person.)

Kashekim Nedakh and the Queen of Atlantis: 

         

Kashekim and the Queen of Atlantis play important roles in Kida’s story, despite spending most of the movie apart. Which book couple do you wish had gotten to spend more time together?:

I feel like I bring this book up in every tag that I do, but it's gotta be All the Crooked Saints - by Maggie Steifvater. I'm in a particularly celebratory mood when it comes to this book because I finally got my younger sister to read it and then she got one of her friends to read it, too! Daniel and Marisita spend most of the book separated and we hear retroactively about some of the time they'd spent together but I want to see those scenes play out.

This is a perfect book, though, so nothing needs to be changed. I can just imagine it (and maybe make some fan art...).

Helga: 

As one of the villains, Helga is not intended to be a likable character. In your opinion, what book possesses an unlikable female character?:

Leda Fox-Cotton in I Capture the Castle - by Dodie Smith. She's not in it that much but her antagonistic role serves to show what a person looks like who only uses others for themselves (the lesson that Cassandra is learning). She does it well and I really, really, REALLY dislike her for it. Poor Stephen.

Commander Rourke:

In Atlantis: The Lost Empire, Rourke desired to locate a book called the Shepherd’s Journal. Once found, he removes one of the pages from the Shepherd’s Journal in an effort to use that page for bad intentions. Which book would you not want to see fall into a fictional villain’s hands?:

The Count of Monte Cristo - by Alexandre Dumas. Because it's a honking big book and if a villain wanted to use it as a blunt weapon they surely could. 

It's also about revenge and if you don't get through all 1200+ pages you might think that it is encouraging it. I even stalled out part way through, so I imagine a fictional villain who's really busy might not put the effort into finishing it and might be encouraged to poison people and whatnot in imitation of Edmond.

Thanks to Sally for putting those questions together! If you're a fan of Atlantis, feel free to fill it out yourself! For those of you who have seen this (which should be all of you if you made it past my spoiler warning), do any of you remember the sequel? 

I low-key loved the 2nd one growing up. Do I remember the plot? No. Do I remember that it gave me nightmares? Yes. Is it still super nostalgic? Absolutely. All I remember is that they go to a bunch of other climates like a desert and a blizzard and lava? I think I have both films on VHS that I should dig out and coax my player into working. (Editor Chloe here, turns out I don't have the sequel, so it's probably lost to time!)

I'm not sure if the sequel even has continuity or a resemblance to the original, but last year I found another movie that I think is the prototype or inspiration for Disney's work. Do you remember how earlier I said it was maybe copied from something else? My theory is it was inspired by Stargate (1994).

This movie came out 7 years before the animated adventure, but the entire time watching it I kept making connections between the two. Especially through the character archetypes and dynamics. I've only seen Stargate the once while Atlantis has been dozens of times, so I won't go into a huge analysis, just some images to demonstrate my point.

Both are action/adventures films where a group sets out to explore a far away lost culture where they discover new technologies and that the culture isn't lost at all but still alive.

Both promotional posters have pyramids/triangles and beams.

Our protagonist is sandy-blond nerd with round glasses who is the only one who knows the forgotten language.

Army green and ulterior motives? (these characters do veer in different directions but both of strong chins)

Benefactors who give the linguist the benefit of the doubt. (remember how I apparently associate old white men? I guess I associate anyone with white hair who's not an Atlantean.)

Names starting with the same letter aside, it's up to them to protect their people.

Kida is a more developed character than Sha'uri, but they both have conflicts with their fathers about trying something new instead of sticking to the way it has always been done.

sooooooo...what do you guys think?

Do you see the similarities between Stargate and Atlantis: The Lost Empire? Stargate branched off into a TV show and other movies so the first film is most likely where the similarities end, but maybe Atlantis's sequel took notes from those, too!

Do you have an Atlantis character you relate to the most? What worlds would you branch together? Any other beloved direct-to-video sequels you love? Thanks for reading!

Chloe the MovieCritic

Chloe out.

Scaramouche, Scaramouche, will you do the fANNEdango? // how Sabatini's novel and Austen's Persuasion oppose and complement each other

Because a "Bohemian Rhapsody" reference is always fun.

Hello, friends!

Do you ever have where you're reading a book and it reminds you so much of something, that you end up describing it to people as, "It's just like XYZ, but the exact opposite!" 

...How can a story be so much like something if it is the exact opposite? Well, that's what I'm going to explore today as Rafael Sabatini's Scaramouche reminds me of Jane Austen's Persuasion.

I'm looking at how the two main characters in the respective novels--André-Louis Moreau and Anne Elliot--are diametrically opposed, but learn lessons that work well together. In fact, their differences give me a more complete picture of what I think is trying to be said by both authors, and their polarity doesn't make one better than the other, rather complementary. I find them both fascinating in different yet similar ways. Each of them have a foil in their corresponding stories (maybe Aline for André-Louis and Wentworth for Anne?) yet I've decided to do an inter-story analysis.

The most simple way of comparing them is that their names both start with "An," which is why my title is fANNEdango. Hehe. I know, it's a terrible pun, I apologize!

~ This post is going to have mild spoilers for the two works as I'll be discussing the character development and lessons learned. Scaramouche itself has SO MUCH happening in terms of plot that I will not give away, so reading this post there are a few reveals but you'll be safe from the really big plot twists. ~

When I was throwing around ideas of how to articulate myself I was calling Scaramouche the "anti-Persuasion." But that doesn't mean that I am against the work! My freshman year of college I gave a whole persuasive speech about why one should read Jane Austen, if that gives you any indication that I am "pro-Persuasion." I also lay claim on Persuasion for being my second favorite Jane Austen--after Pride and Prejudice because I'm basic--but I have only read it once and that was six years ago, so forgive any of my mistakes about the plot interpretation or quote context as I am not a Persuasion scholar.  

I'm hoping to draw some of you Austen fans in, as most people probably haven't heard of Rafael Sabatini. He was an author in the early 20th century whose work featured pirate stories, such as The Black Swan, The Sea Hawk, and Captain Blood, the last of which was adapted into a movie with Errol Flynn in 1935. While low on the buccaneering, his historical fiction work Scaramouche is not lacking in excitement.

All the swashbuckling for the win! And all the Errol Flynn for the win!

Scaramouche has been adapted into two films--one in 1923 and the other in 1952--but has since, for the most part, fallen out of cultural recognition, with exception of the band Queen making it a catchphrase in their song "Bohemian Rhapsody." I think it's a pity that there hasn't been a more recent film adaptation because I would have a TON of fun with that. Since, though, it is not so well known, I don't expect the majority of my readers to know what I'm talking about, so here is a quick, non-spoilery overview of Scaramouche:

Set on the backdrop of the French Revolution, Sabatini looks at the class disputes and political spats that added to the layers of the revolt. André-Louis is not popular in social standings, but is one of the best lawyers of his age, and all that matters to him is his one friend Phillippe Vilmorin, his godfather, and his cousin, Aline. He's always been on the safe side of the law, but when he gets a close-up view of injustice he swears revenge and uses what talent he has: his own persuasive voice. He rallies the people on a viewpoint he does not believe in purely because he sees it as the means to the end he is pursuing. He himself ends up being the one pursued and while in hiding he exceeds at new skills and makes a name for himself in the theatrical world under the mask of Scaramouche*.

*The archetype of Scaramouche is not a creation of Sabatini's but a character in Italian opera/theatre. The New Oxford American dictionary says the term describes one who is "a boastful but cowardly person," literally "skirmish." This archetype in opera is used to be a bit of a rabble-rouser, or fool. 

To set up our contrast, here is a brief overview of Persuasion:

Anne Elliot is dealing with the aftermath of being persuaded. She was engaged to a poor yet promising lieutenant, but her family peer-pressured her into breaking it off because he was below her station. Now eight years later her family's own finances are poor, which adds to Anne's regret that she's been carrying around since she broke off the engagement. Who happens to show up in her life but her old fiancé, who is now the wealthy Captain Wentworth. Their circumstances have flipped, which adds to Anne's discouragement about being persuaded. Seeing how wrong her family was back then, she's trying to have more control in her own life. Through the book we see how Anne can be calm in times of hysteria and panic, and how she has grown to be a steady presence. Now there are new pressures of whom she should marry and she's trying to only be persuaded by her own heart.

M'kay. So how are these related? Let's introduce our protagonists.

André-Louis Moreau:

"He was born with a gift of laughter and a sense that the world was mad" (Sabatini, Scaramouche). (A pretty dope opening line if I do say so myself.)

André-Louis is annoyingly good at everything. This is to say he's strikingly intelligent in an academic sense, but not that emotionally intelligent. He resists feelings about things he cannot change. Not because he couldn't lean into emotions (as an actor you learn to interpret people to an extent) but because he does not see the benefit in it. In fact, putting on a mask helps him embrace that to a certain degree more than when he started out, however when he leaves acting he also seems to leave any emotions behind.

Yes, this is Sir Percy Blakeney of The Scarlet Pimpernel (1934), but both stories are about the French Revolution or its aftermath so let's go with it, shall we? I couldn't find a good image of him actually...okay

Anne Elliot:

“She had been forced into prudence in her youth, she learned romance as she grew older: the natural sequel of an unnatural beginning” (Austen, Persuasion).

Anne has always been the obedient one (#MiddleSibling) and throughout the course of the book we see how many strengths she has even though she tears herself down for being persuaded of something she didn't want to do. Persuasion comes from her trusting the words of others over her own fortitude. It's a sign of being insecure. Anne learns to be secure both in her characteristics and decisions as she's making them for her own benefit, not for anyone else's.

The way I see these two characters being connected is through elements of persuasion, denial, and emotions. Each of those build upon each other, so let's break those down.

Persuasion (the concept, not the book):

André-Louis's training as a lawyer means he's the one doing the persuading and he knows all the tricks of the trade, so he can spot a con from a mile away and measures everything through logic not emotion, judging others for not doing the same. He tells his friend Phillippe "You must change man, not systems" (Sabatini, Scaramouche), which implies that he is so firmly set in his own beliefs that he doesn't think other people are able to be persuaded in the long run. He ends up discovering how much a mob mentality can affect people.

In the first few chapters we see him using the unrest of the people to his own benefit: “He had wrought them up to a pitch of dangerous passion, and they were ripe for any violence to which he urged them. If he had failed with the windmill, at least he was now master of the wind” (Sabatini, Scaramouche). 

I do love a good Don Quijote reference.

Despite---or possibly because of---being a student of the law, he doesn't actually care that much for the laws itself, yet believes that the only way to find justice is to play that game. The current systems are deeply disturbing to Phillippe, but André-Louis himself has a bit of a nihilistic mindset; whatever replaces this current government will likely have its own flaws.

“I am ready to admit that the present government is execrable, unjust, tyrannical—what you will; but I beg you to look ahead, and to see that the government for which it is aimed at exchanging it may be infinitely worse” (Sabatini, Scaramouche).

André-Louis resists being persuaded: Phillippe tries to persuade him to stand up for justice; his godfather tries to persuade him to not be involved in politics; Le Chapelier and others try to persuade him to be MORE invested in politics. André-Louis ends up doing some of these things, i.e. getting quite involved in politics, but he does it for his own reasons, not what anyone else said.

Footage of Phillippe and André-Louis, courtesy of Enola Holmes (2020).

Let's take the last example from my above list, where Le Chapelier and another show up to André-Louis's dueling studio to ask André-Louis to use his skills and, well, kill the people in the meetings that are killing all of their own.

André-Louis refuses, saying that is a despicable use of the sword and that succumbing to being like their enemies makes them no better than their enemies. He fully lays them out, eloquently and brutally as is his want. Le Chapelier sees it is no use and says, fine, we'll just have to find someone else to deal with La Tour d'Azyr.

Aka André-Louis's archenemesis.

And André-Louis flips on a coin.

But from what we have seen of his character so far, it's not a contradiction to his personality. He's doing it for his own reasons, not for what anyone else is persuading him to do. He voiced opinions that were not his own to spite La Tour d'Azyr. He's given up careers to spite La Tour d'Azyr. Now he'll give up his morals to fight La Tour d'Azyr, but that is his reasoning and no one else's.

Some "sword fighting," for those of you still celebrating Christmas until Jan. 6th.

Persuasion has an after-effect, which is what Austen's whole book is about. To wrap that up in one word (which is not the title), I would say that impacts one's integrity. Once one has been pressured to do something and it doesn't turn out in a desirable way, it makes one feel untrue to oneself and one's own initial wishes. André-Louis maintains his integrity if nothing else while Anne is trying to regain hers.

Austen's works often look at the how strong her characters are, not in a physical sense but in their personality and integrity. Anne was not persuaded because she had a "weak character," it was because she cared about people; “If I was wrong in yielding to persuasion once, remember that it was to persuasion exerted on the side of safety, not of risk” (Austen, Persuasion). 

Not my favorite version, but thought it should get a place in the post still.

Let's get something straight right away: caring for people is not weak (that's what André-Louis needs to learn, but more on that in a minute). What Anne learns is that she cared for the wrong person/people; she chose those so wrapped up in their own vanities that they persuaded her out of fearing how her choice would make society look at them, not the man who cared for her in return.

We can also sympathize with Anne for her time period, as women did not have a lot of choices; economics and wealth are constant subtle themes in Austen's bibliography. What's important in the book is that Anne is already beating herself up for making the wrong decision BEFORE Wentworth reenters the picture with changed fortunes. She's learned from her family's indulgences---what got them to their current state of "near-destitution"---that money is not everything; what matters is being happy with people one trusts. One can only be persuaded by a credible source, so Anne has come to realize she put her trust in the wrong people. It was a risk and she bet on material things instead of intangible things.

Cynicism courtesy of Amy March in Little Women (2019). 

To look briefly at the other side of risk, Sabatini's novel is fraught with more threats than poverty. Andre Louis is always putting himself into danger, choosing risks, not safety, much to the distress of his family. Those things do not weigh into his decisions, but how he feels about it, and he knows his family will feel what they will, but he won't let their feelings persuade him. This leads to our next factor: denial.

Denial:

This is kind of the mushy middle between my points of persuasion and emotions, but it is what gives the story plot. If a character developed instantly, we'd be bored. 

André-Louis is in a bit of denial about his own mortality. He doesn't think of himself as being immortal, but he seems to not worry about his ultimate demise. It is Aline who convinces him early on to run away. It is his godfather who is always worried about the risks. Yet André-Louis repeatedly acts as if no one cares about him, as if he must only look out for himself. There's this whole scene where he gaslights himself into thinking that his adversary is the one who is cared about and it couldn't possibly be him.

“I am just a rascal who tries to be honest—Scaramouche always, in fact; a creature of sophistries" (Sabatini, Scaramouche).

There's also a little bit where André-Louis insists "I am not a man of action." He says this several times, it kind of becomes his MO by the end and is always a pointed remark at one person. That one person is admitted to be honest at all times. The ingredients of "man of action" and honesty/lies, leads me to take the negation of a quote from The Princess Bride (1987); if André-Louis is NOT a man of action, lies do become him? 

What's another word for lies to oneself? Denial.

This is surprising because to be a lawyer and a swordsman means he must have studied, and in studying you must have learned that man is mortal, so you would've put the poison as far away from yourself---hold up, that's still from The Princess Bride (1987).

Jokes aside, André-Louis is in denial because he thinks he is being true to himself. And he is, but he's also very much in denial of certain feelings. The feelings he has categorized as getting him into trouble in the past; the feelings he thinks will cloud his judgement: love, compassion, care, etc..

The thought of being judged by others has made Anne in denial about how others feel. She's sure that her past mistakes are irreparable.

Looking to the past, not the future.

“Soon, however, she began to reason with herself, and try to be feeling less. Eight years, almost eight years had passed, since all had been given up. How absurd to be resuming the agitation which such an interval had banished into distance and indistinctness! What might not eight years do? Events of every description, changes, alienations, removals,--all, all must be comprised in it; and oblivion of the past...

Alas! with all her reasonings, she found, that to retentive feelings eight years may be little more than nothing” (Austen, Persuasion, emphasis mine).

Linguistically, the opposite of denial would probably be approval, but there is a line to walk in the real world. The book laments, “How quick come the reasons for approving what we like” (Austen, Persuasion). Anne is dissimilar to her father and sisters because she doesn't just approve everything that sounds good to her, and that is a strength in and of itself. Her integrity is there, if she will just look beyond what happened in the past.

Denial and regret go hand-in-hand; Anne regrets she did not choose the alternative and is in denial that her life will ever change now. Hope is a huge theme in Austen's book and Anne struggles by denying herself hope. Hope is a commitment, and one can be half hope and half agony, but that's only after there is not denial left. 

Speaking of agony, let's talk about emotions.

 

Emotion:

“We live at home, quiet, confined, and our feelings prey upon us” (Austen, Persuasion).

What goes better (again) with The French Revolution than a story that takes place semi-during the U.S. Civil War?

Part of the reason that Anne is living in this dance of denial is it the only way to escape from her thoughts, when she is so often neglected, left to reflect on what could've been. André-Louis, meanwhile, draws his denial from the fact that he doesn't have time to waste on those feelings. His version of the early 2010s phrase, "Ain't nobody got time for that."

While André-Louis is brilliant in many ways, Sabatini gives us an insider's view on how he is missing out on something.

“You behold him at the age of four-and-twenty stuffed with learning enough to produce an intellectual indigestion in an ordinary mind” (Sabatini, Scaramouche).

André-Louis, like all good protagonists, makes the story longer for himself by going about things the hard way. He gives himself emotional indigestion by not processing things. The story would've been much shorter if he had asked those around him how they felt, instead of trying to sort things out for himself. From being in denial, he assumes much about the people around him. Despite having a genius-level of observation, he cannot know everything about others. That wisdom comes from experience.

As for Anne, “She hoped to be wise and reasonable in time; but alas! Alas! She must confess to herself that she was not wise yet” (Austen, Persuasion). Andre-Louis also acts as if he's wise, but the narrator tells us that he is not emotionally savvy. We just hope that we become that way by the end of our stories.

Life is complicated, Edmond. And anyone who says otherwise is selling something....

Stories have ups and downs, embarrassments and mistakes; “Anne hoped she had outlived the age of blushing; but the age of emotion she certainly had not” (Austen, Persuasion). And that's the thing, emotions ARE good. André-Louis is learning this, and Anne is learning that her emotions are valid, too.

Conclusions:

I've thrown a lot of thoughts out there, so now time to be direct.

What I think Austen is trying to say: Persuasion leads to a denial of one's self, and the only way to counteract that is to reconnect with one's emotions. 

One can make a mistake, but let that be one's own mistake, not a mistake one was persuaded into making.

So many good Austen adaptations came out in 1995 and I have yet to watch this one...

“She felt that she could so much more depend upon the sincerity of those who sometimes looked or said a careless or a hasty thing, than of those whose presence of mind never varied, whose tongue never slipped” (Austen, Persuasion). 

My tongue often slips, which is why I prefer writing to express myself. The above quote reminds me of André-Louis's rigidness vs. his sincere friend, Phillippe, one who sometimes is careless but always with good intentions. André-Louis is a master of words and sees each one as his tool, looking down on those who do not wield them as well. He hasn't become a master of his emotions, yet, though. Which brings us to...

What I think Sabatini is trying to say: To counteract the denial of one's emotions, one needs to persuade oneself that one's emotions are true. 

One's integrity comes from listening to one's heart---yes, one's emotions. They are not a weakness, but a place to find oneself.

Okay, those summaries may be a bit of a stretch to fit my pattern. The gist of it is that mind and heart, decisions and mistakes, are all human things. One does not use solely logic or emotions, but a mix of both, which Scaramouche and Persuasion explore. 

Now I've persuaded myself to reread Persuasion...

Thanks to all of you for reading! I wanted to get one last post in for 2025 and decided to buckle down and get this one done since I've been stewing on it for the entirety of November and December. Thanks to Sarah Seele and Katie Hanna for encouraging me to explain myself after I posted my review on Goodreads!

How many of you are Austen fans? Any Sabatini readers? What do you think of my dissection of persuasion-denial-emotions? What are other characters who oppose and compliment each other? What is your favorite Persuasion adaptation? How do you think integrity and persuasion are related?

Happy end of 2025, friends!

Chloe the MovieCritic

If you guys haven't seen the Muppet's version of "Bohemian Rhapsody", you need to stop what you're doing and go watch it.

Various Family Dynamics // Lemony Snicket’s centrality of siblings in stories

Hello readers! 

via GIPHY

It is the month of talking about what we love. That's what I do every month on this blog, but this has a special focus for talking about the people we love, not just stories. Therefore I'm going to talk about siblings.

As someone with siblings (note, plural), stories that represent that bond are important to me. And often it feels like character either don't have siblings or act around them in a way that is foreign to me. 

There is, however, a storyteller who absolutely nails talking about various family dynamics, especially siblings: Lemony Snicket.

His most famous work is A Series of Unfortunate Events, which doesn't sound promising for families. In fact, "It will wreck your evening, your whole life, and your day." On the surface it is a series about three orphans who are plagued by terrible events. But at its core, it is a series about trials and triumphs of three siblings trying to figure out the world.

I've come to view Lemony Snicket as writing some of the most realistic siblings I've ever read and related to. And I'm going to tell you why.

Note: This is about two series in the same universe for Lemony Snicket: A Series of Unfortunate Events and All the Wrong Questions. I'm going to talk about the relationships between the characters, but will avoid the plot details, so this is spoiler-free. I've written reviews for the first two books in A Series of Unfortunate Events, so you can read book 1 HERE and book 2 HERE.

Let's get started!

via GIPHY

First, I'm going to say that I didn't always think the best of Lemony Snicket's works. In fact, at first I thought "no siblings act like that". That was before I realized that he was portraying some ideal siblings and didn't recognize the special traits he gave each. But not all of this is joy (hello, none of it is joy. It's Lemony Snicket we're talking about). Snicket has a range that I'll talk about today and how that only strengthens the contrasting siblings. I'll give a few examples though I had to cut myself off from talking about EVERY sibling group because or else we'd be here all day.

A Favorite:

The Baudelaires: A Series of Unfortunate Events 

Key characteristic(s): Defense of each other and using each other's strengths.

The three marvelous and brave children are Violet, Klaus, and Sunny. Each of the children is very defined by their skills (inventing, reading, or biting respectively) and the first thing that comes to my mind when I think of them is how they make the most of their bad situations by using their strengths. Klaus is always suggesting materials that Violet can use to invent things, Violet is always asking Klaus about subjects he might have researched, and the two of them are always making sure Sunny is comfortable and has something to bite. And not just, oh, amuse the baby. They truly include her. This support of each other speaks volumes because they don't look down at each other's interests, but rejoice in them being different and able to lend themselves to the situation from different perspectives.

'[Talking about a picked lock]  "Nice girls shouldn't know how to do that sort of thing"

"My sister is a nice girl and she knows how to do all sorts of things."'

- The Reptile Room 

Secondly, even though the whole world is against them, they have each other's backs. Besides already suffering from so many misfortunes, people always judge the Baudelaires for being orphans, for being intelligent, for anything. In the midst of condescension they always celebrate each other's victories and don't let each person be too hard on themselves.

They are also realistic and always make me laugh when one of the adults say "when I was your age" and they say, "but we're all different ages". That's how I always feel, too.

Even though there is such a big age gap, going back to Sunny, the way that Violet and Klaus understand her is so remarkable to me. They go to lengths to listen to her, even though she doesn't speak in real words. They always convey her feelings to the adults with "what my sister is trying to say...". These are brilliant children and part of that is that they treat each other like they are capable to do what needs to happen.

It's been awhile since I read the books ( I mean, 2021 wasn't THAT long ago. But still. My mind is full with too many things) so this might be wrong but I remember the end of The Reptile Room being all about the Baudelaires saying at least we've got each other in the middle of this miserable time. And that's the best things about siblings. So don't fight each other, support each other, and don't let go.

“I think we'll always miss our parents. But I think we can miss them without being miserable all the time. After all, they wouldn't want us to be miserable.” 

- The Reptile Room 

And in The Wide Window?? How they are rearranging their gifts to make everyone happy even though that leaves Klaus the least happy. They are selfless when it comes to each other. And I've written about how Klaus is my darling, but the other two equally are! Which is why, in The Miserable Mill, they knew something was wrong. Other siblings who didn't know each other so thoroughly would be thrown off, but they stepped outside of their comfort zones to help each other. They know their strengths and when to imitate each other.

Source
Fan art is my FAVORITE.

As Opposed to:

The Poes: A Series of Unfortunate Events 

Key characteristic: Selfishness.

Edgar and Albert are characters who only get a fraction of a chapter in the first ASoUE book, as opposed to siblings who get more "screen time", but I'm going to talk about them because they set an important standard to help us get to know the Baudelaires better.

In the midst of grief, the Baudelaires have to stay with the Poes. And Edgar and Albert are quite horrible. They complain about having to share with three children who lost everything in the world. I don't remember everything they say because it is not worth remembering, but it shows us a place of sneering and selfishness that contrasts the comfort the Baudelaires give each other.

via GIPHY

A Favorite:

The Quagmires: A Series of Unfortunate Events 

Source
Everything I said about fan art still holds up because this is glorious.

Key characteristic: Unbreakable bonds. 

I've seen things before that says there's a word for orphan, but no word for losing a child because there isn't a way to express that pain. Same for losing a sibling. The word that adults try to use is "twin", but that's completely wrong. Duncan and Isadora refuse to be called twins, and instead always refer to themselves as "triplets", because that's what they are, whether or not Quigley is there he won't be forgotten. This is a dark introduction to the Quagmires, but shows that they are not their name: they do not "give way underfoot" (the definition I looked up for "quagmire" in the New Oxford American Dictionary. I've lauded Lemony Snicket before about his naming skills.). Isadora and Duncan stand in Quigley's memory.

I love that Duncan and Isadora's strengths are so similar and yet so different. They both like to write, but Duncan is the journalist and Isadora is the poet. 

As rare as it is to see siblings in fiction, I feel like it is rarer still to see groups of siblings who are completely friends with each other. The Quagmires and Baudelaires carry how they interact with their own brother and sisters into their friendship with each other. It's beautiful in such an austere place.

The way they even sit to leave room for Quigley? *cries*

I keep accidentally calling Duncan "Dylan" due to him being played by Dylan Kingwell. I just need to say their name in the opposite order, Isadora and Duncan...

A Favorite:

The Snickets: A Series of Unfortunate Events and All the Wrong Questions

Key characteristic: Fighting for justice.

"...Snicket?" those of you who are unfamiliar with this series might say. "As in Lemony Snicket? The author?" Absolutely.

via GIPHY

This is what sets the tone for these books, Lemony's narration and hints at his life being connected to all of this.

If you read ASoUE and thought, "but I want to know more about Lemony!", then All the Wrong Questions is the series for you. He is literally the main character in addition to the narrator. Does this answer questions about his family and upbringing? Not really. But the hints make me scream and shriek and everything. One of my favorite parts is the code phrase: "Give my regards to Jacques." which Lemony explains to mean one thing...and then also what it says. 

I think there are only one or two times that we see two of the Snickets interact, there is still such a strong bond between these siblings. They all lead such busy lives in their fight for justice and truth and being well read. Being on the run does not give time for family, but they don't forget each other. One tells the tales of woe of the others. A moment in book 7 nearly made me cry the last time because it is one of those sibling connections where the two characters aren't on the page at the same time, but are unbreakably together all the same.

Even though AtWQ does its best to not answer questions, you get little glimpses into Lemony's life because he'll remember waiting at a bus stop and playing Beethoven with his brother. And yes, I agree with his sister, it's inane, but it's also SO STINKING FUN. I love the phone calls, that however short they are, it is Lemony reaching out for comfort. I just realized that I've always assumed that Lemony is the middle child for some reason, but now I'm starting to think that maybe he's the youngest? He might be too elusive to ever say.

“I looked out the window at the dark and racing scenery and I thought of the city, where the train would eventually arrive. I hadn’t seen the city since my apprenticeship began, and for a moment I felt so homesick I had to stop and lean my head against the glass. Dear Kit, I thought. And then I said it out loud.

'I wish you were here.'"

- Why Is This Night Different From All Other Nights? 

As Opposed to:

The Denouements: A Series of Unfortunate Events 

Key characteristic: Conflicting causes.

I LOVE the juxtaposition of the Denouements against the Snickets. The Snickets are all for fighting for the same cause no matter what the price and bearing that heavy burden together, while the Denouements are on different sides and use being identical to keep up the facade. Here it's something that is accepted and fought against at the same time, but you don't really see Frank and Ernest interacting, besides supposedly (aka seen through a telescope) arguing.

And that's reality. Sometimes you aren't on the same side as your siblings. "The schism has turned many siblings into enemies." Sometimes siblings can do terrible things, things that aren't noble. That doesn't mean that you don't love them, but love looks different.

A different set of siblings looks at loyalty despite morals, so Snicket covers a wide range for how families interact.

The whole question of "Are you Frank or Ernest?" is quite poignant.

I'm 100% sure in the show that the "give my regards to" line was inspired by All the Wrong Questions. And even though I hadn't read AtWQ at that point, I flipped out for completely different reasons. It was fabulous.

A Favorite:

The Bellerophons: All the Wrong Questions

Key characteristic: Teamwork

Because I couldn't just mention All the Wrong Questions once because I'm still not sure which series I like better.

The Bellerophons are the sole transportation in Stain'd-by-the-Sea, though neither of them are old enough to be driving a taxi. Their dad, the official driver, is incapable at the moment, so they use what they have: each other. I believe Squeak operates the gas and breaks while Pip steers. They will give you a ride for free if you give them a tip on what to read next. It's not an ideal childhood, working, but they do it with each other. They are champions of the world.

“It's hard when you're missing your family," Pip said, and started the motor. " You wake up every morning like someone took one of your legs.” 

- Shouldn't You Be in School? 

There are more siblings in Lemony Snicket's works, but this list is four of my favorites with two to contrast. My huge theory is that Zada and Zora in All the Wrong Questions are the two White-Faecd Women, but that's a conversation for another day. All together, Lemony Snicket writes about mourning and grief, but also how we shouldn't let go of our siblings because with them we can get through anything.

This is my entry for Hameltte's We Love Siblings Week! There are games and a giveaway and all kinds of fun things, so go check all the other posts out!

Do any of you have siblings? Does anyone else know Lemony Snicket? If you do, then I hope you enjoyed all the references I stuck in there because it was so fun to create! I haven't seen the movie version, only the series and read the books, so does anyone know if the movie represents siblings like this?

Which of the Baudelaires do you feel most like? Which Quagmire? In fact, which of any of these siblings are you most like? How do you act around your siblings?

Thanks for reading!

Chloe the MovieCritic