Dear Reader, Unless you are a slug, a sea anemone, or mildew, you probably prefer not to be damp. You might also prefer not to read this book, in which the Baudelaire siblings encounter an unpleasant amount of dampness as they descend into the ...
d into the depths of despair, underwater.
In fact, the horrors they encounter are too numerous to list, and you wouldn't want me even to mention the worst of it, which includes mushrooms, a desperate search for something lost, a mechanical monster, a distressing message from a lost friend, and tap dancing.
As a dedicated author who has pledged to keep recording the depressing story of the Baudelaires, I must continue to delve deep into the cavernous depths of the orphans' lives. You, on the other hand, may delve into some happier book in order to keep your eyes and your spirits from being dampened.
This was always my least favourite of the books, and I don't think that opinion has changed with a second reading. It's not that it's a bad book or that the story isn't interesting; it's that the repetition issue is utterly overwhelming in this
..." book. I want to slap Captain Widdershins everytime he opens his mouth. I want to punch Lemony Snicket/Daniel Handler every time he mentions the water cycle. If the repetitious bits were removed, I'm quite sure the book would be 20 pages shorter, and a much better book for it.
Still, I think this book does a lot to remind the reader just how much you don't know about what is going on, and just how much you want to know. There are no answers here, but it makes you want to push onward to find the answers.