Howard
Chang
本文發表於Knight Letter
(Lewis Carroll Society of North America會刊)
第92期
It seems Lewis Carroll’s life will remain a partial mystery. He could have been an ideal subject for biographers because he kept diaries for much of his working life. But four volumes of his diaries disappeared and ten individual pages[1] were removed by unknown hands from the nine surviving volumes after his death. However, a life full of controversial possibilities appears to be more intriguing to some biographers (and some of readers).
Much of the mystery of Lewis Carroll turns upon a single missing diary page, which covers June 27-29, 1863, a page which might involve the subsequent deterioration of the once happy and intimate relationship between Lewis Carroll and the Liddell family into and a colder and remoter one. Some researchers claim that the details and reasons of this change of relationship were recorded in this vital page, and that the sensitivity of the incident had called for a drastic operation by one or more unknown hands in Lewis Carroll’s family. One lingering theory about the contents of the page posits Carroll’s intention to marry Alice Liddell. Edward Wakeling[2] — who himself dismisses all such theories — summarizes the general situation thus:
So
where did the myth that Dodgson wanted to marry Alice Liddell come from?
Alexander Taylor suggested that Dodgson was in love with Alice and contemplated
marriage (The White Knight, pp. 152, 198). Anne Clark carried this
further and concluded that Dodgson did want to marry Alice (Lewis
Carroll: A Biography, pp. 142-144). Morton Cohen is more cautious when he
reported the alleged marriage proposal (Lewis Carroll, A Biography, pp.
100-101). Although at one time supporting the idea, he has since modified his
views. Langford Reed went out on a limb and said that Dodgson was in love with
Ellen Terry, but produced no evidence to substantiate his claim. Newspaper
reports indicated that he was in love with Violet Liddell, Alice’s sister, but
newspaper reports are invariably wrong. Marriage came there none. Dodgson never
discussed marriage in his letters to friends and he made no such feelings known
in his diaries. There simply is no evidence to support the notion that he
wanted to marry Alice, or anyone else if it comes to that.
The Cut Pages in Diary
With
the absence of any further evidence, there the matter remained until Karoline Leach[3],
while researching a book, “came
across a small piece of paper, tucked away among a mass of Dodgson family
records in the archive at Guildford. About five inches by three, torn rather
inaccurately from what appears to be an account book, …written on this
tatty scrap was, apparently, an answer to one of the most haunting of literary
mysteries — the cause of Lewis Carroll’s break with the family of Alice Liddell
in the summer of 1863…” One side of the paper scrap is headed ‘Cut Pages in Diary’ and
summarizes the contents of three pages, the second entry of which concerns Volume Eight, page 92 (should be 91) of the missing page of the crucial days. It reads:
“L.C. learns from Mrs Liddell that he is supposed to be using the
children as a means of paying court to the governess - He is also supposed
[unreadable] to be courting Ina.”
The
unreadable portion probably says “by some” as interpreted by Leach and other researchers. In 1863, Lewis Carroll was thirty-one, Alice eleven, the governess thirty, Ina fourteen, but Mrs.
Liddell was also nicknamed Ina, she was thirty-seven.
Edward Wakeling supplemented the contents of the tatty scrap by noting that “Dodgson
cross-referenced this entry with the rumor about the governess, Miss Prickett,
which had occurred on 17 May 1857
(which was not removed).” And Karoline
Leach notes that “On April 17 1863, Dodgson comments on her [Ina’s]
precocious development (she is growing ‘so tall’), and notes for the first time
that Mrs. Liddell has insisted on a chaperone. Is this a sign that the mother
was becoming suspicious of the exact nature of the relationship between this
man and her daughter?”
[t]his document seems
to have been written out by Lewis Carroll’s niece Violet Dodgson, with
additions by Menella, around the time of the centenary of his birth in 1932,… the
notes were made before the pages were removed. Violet must have gone through
the diary noting the pages to be cut and summarising their most important
contents. Later she changed her mind about one and allowed it to remain.
Other
researchers strongly disagree with Leach’s theories on several critical points:
in particular, the note’s author, motives and timing. While we may assume “The
Cut Pages in Diary” document is authentic, it presents further problems for the
following reasons:
-
Why would “these people” take
the trouble to cut out a page that contains similar information permitted to
survive in other places of the diary? Is it possible that something more
serious was hidden?
-
Was Miss Prickett mature enough
to handle a courtship? Did she need the protective umbrella of the
Liddells? Was it reasonable for a Victorian family to cut ties with a friend, proven to be a happy companion to
the children, just because of a rumor relating to an employee
in the household?
-
Was the supposed break Mrs. Liddell’s decision, who as a mother, had more
reason to protect her daughter than the governess? But the document might suggest
that Ina is a less important cause for the break. Why?
More suspiciously, the scrap paper totally excludes Alice from this incident,
but the belief that Carroll was in love with Alice still hover above the
Carrollean horizon. Since all documents relating to Carroll and Alice have been
exhaustively searched and researched by Carrollean experts, it does not seem
possible that any new evidence will ever come to light, except maybe when we see
them from a new angle.
A Hidden Message
A new evidence may have come in the form of non-verbal. As a result of my
research for the publication of my Chinese translation and annotation of “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland”, I
noticed a message from Lewis Carroll might have been hidden in Chapter III of the
book even before its publication:
‘But she must have a
prize herself, you know,’ said the Mouse.
‘Of course,’ the Dodo
replied very gravely. ‘What else have you got in your pocket?’ he went on, turning
to Alice.
‘Only a thimble,’ said
Alice sadly.
‘Hand it over here,’
said the Dodo.
Then they all crowded
round her once more, while the Dodo solemnly presented the thimble, saying ‘We
beg your acceptance of this elegant thimble’; and, when it had finished this
short speech, they all cheered.
The magic of this episode will
not come into play unless we compare the text with the illustration—in the
text, the speaking roles are the Mouse, the Dodo and Alice, but in the
illustration, the figures in the center are the Duck, the Dodo and Alice. The shifting
of characters indicates a certain maneuvering process might have taken place.
The Mouse, “who seemed to be a
person of some authority” as described in the story, plays a key role in
Chapter III. He told a “driest” story to the queer-looking party at the
beginning of the chapter, and ended the chapter with a “long and sad tale.” In
addition, he was the one who suggested that Alice “must have a prize herself” to
which the Dodo obeyed. On the other hand, Carroll did not seem to intend the
Duck to play any important role than asking a stupid question, “Found what?” to the Mouse. But in the
illustration, which depicts the moment almost immediately following the Mouse’s
suggestion, the Mouse is found having been moved to the background, squeezing
among other animals in the background, seemingly rather out of place, while the
Duck suddenly appears in the center of the stage and assumes the most prominent
position.
It was unlikely that John Tenniel
would venture to initiate a change in the arrangement of the story without the
permission of Lewis Carroll. As a faithful illustrator, his earlier sketch
might have featured the Mouse standing in the middle to chair the ceremony, possibly
in imitation of a school master observing a prize award presentation in a
sports event. But with the sharp eyes of a photographer, Lewis Carroll might
have discovered the layout of the illustration bore striking similarity to the
highlight of a wedding ceremony. And as an adept punster, he may have come up
with a brilliant idea to make the illustration a well-designed pun. So he had possibly
instructed Tenniel to replace the Mouse with the Duck, activating the pun in a
graphic form.
Some
knowledge of
Tenniel’s
practice in producing an illustration
may help us to see how the process started.
According to Edward
Wakeling[5], “Tenniel
probably began with a rough sketch or sketches on paper for each picture[,]” which he showed or mailed to Carroll for approval before proceeding
to the next step. One of the few surviving letters from Sir John Tenniel to
Lewis Carroll on June 1, 1870[6]
in discussion of the train carriage scene in Chapter II of “Through the Looking-Glass” may serve as
a good example of this process. For the benefit of Carroll, Tenneil explained
under his proposed sketch, “Interior of Railway carriage (1st
Class). Alice on seat by herself. Man in white papers reading, & Goat -
very shadowy & indistinct - sitting opposite. Guard (with opera glass)
looking in at windows.”Rearrangement of characters was not unusual for John Tenniel in the course of illustration preparation, which generally takes place after a sketch has been decided:
Then
he would make a drawing on tracing paper of the outline and by moving this
around he could make some alterations to the overall design at this stage,
should this be necessary. For example, a character might be moved into a
different position which probably happened with the ape in the "Dodo and
the Thimble illustration."[7]
But this is more than a pun. This
is a cleverly disguised testimony of his ardent wish to marry Alice, drawn but
not written, expressed not by himself but by Tenniel, who might never be in the
known. An understanding of the duality of the creatures in the story will enable us to see the stunning illusion effect of the illustration. When we see the Duck itself in the illustration,
we see the funny thimble presentation ceremony which so many readers have
enjoyed for the past 150 years; but if we see the Duck as the Reverend Robinson Duckworth in real life, we can see a parson officiating at a
wedding ceremony, with the bride (Alice) on the right, receiving a wedding ring
(the thimble) from the groom (Dodgson the Dodo) on the left, her sisters Lorena and Edith (the Lory and the Eaglet) standing
behind her, and the families from Charles, Fanny and Elizabeth (“several other
curious creatures”) behind the Dodo. The arrangement of the characters perfectly
conforms to what we usually find in a wedding ring exchange ceremony.
The twinkling of the thimble
Reading the Alice books is
much like a treasure hunt experience; the whole journey is full of joy and
surprises. Lewis Carroll is such a genius game master that a never-known number
of objects were hidden, or more frequently transformed, in his books, but not
without leaving some faint clues to the observant eyes and imaginative minds.
When I took to translate and annotate the Chinese Wonderland, this realization became even stronger. I must emphasize
that my annotation is not a direct translation of Martin Gardner’s “The Annotated Alice,” but a combination
of materials from the work of Gardner as well as other annotated Alice books, together with my own
researches and discoveries. As a result, some new discoveries of mine are known
only to the Chinese readers. The topic of “thimble” may be a good example to
illustrate the difference between Gardner’s annotations and mine. His
annotation on thimble did not sound convincing to me when he wrote:
The thimble, taken from Alice and then
returned to her, may symbolize the way government take taxes from the pockets
of citizens, then return the money in the form of political projects. [8]
By instinct or with my understanding of Lewis Carroll, I had a vague
notion that the thimble should have something to do with the life of the
Victorian children. So after some search on internet, I came up with my own
annotation, and the English translation of which is as follows:
Thimbles were not unfamiliar with
the Victorian young girls, as they had to learn needle works at a very early
age, some started when they were only four. Besides, “Find the thimble” is a
parlor game popular in the Victorian era. All players are
requested to leave the room before a thimble is hidden. The thimble should be
so hidden that it is fairly difficult but not impossible to find. Once the
thimble is hidden, all the players are called back into the room to look for it.
The one first to find is the winner. The thimble that Alice finds in her pocket
may be a trophy from a previous game she participated. [9]
Gardner’s annotation on the thimble-presentation illustration did not
interest me either:
In the drawing of this scene Tenniel was
forced to put human hands under the Dodo’s small, degenerate wings. How else
could it hold a thimble?
Struck
by a sudden idea which drew my attention to the similarity between a thimble
and a wedding ring, I wrote down my Chinese annotation and the translated of it
is as follow:
…If we see the thimble as a wedding ring,
the scene will virtually become a wedding ceremony in the form of a playing
house. As a parson in real life, the Duck stands in the middle where the
officiant of a wedding is supposed to be situated, and Carroll (the Dodo) and
Alice stand respectively in the exact position of the groom and the bride. Two
sisters of the bride, the Lory and the Eaglet, unmistakably stand behind her
and those behind the groom are the “queer creatures” that come from Carroll’s
family. The ceremony begins with the Caucus Race, and concludes with the
treatment of comfits, followed with an entertainment of story telling. All the
arrangement and procedures resemble closely a formal wedding.
More
than three years after the publication of my Chinese annotated Wonderland, I ventured to write an
e-mailed to Clare Imholtz,
LCSNA Secretary, on the first day of 2014 when I
was taking a vacation in the US. I was almost immediately informed that the
alleged wedding illusion had never been discussed, to the knowledge of her and
her husband. So I decided to bring my bold assumption to the knowledgeable
judgment of the Carrolleans. As you can see, this article is an elaboration of
my earlier annotations.
Lewis Carroll’s infamous
stanza in The Hunting of the Snark comes almost as a prophetical
hint to this discovery:
“ ‘You may seek it with thimbles — and seek it with care;
You may hunt it with forks and hope;
You may threaten its life with a railway-share;
You may charm it with smiles and soap —’ ”
You may hunt it with forks and hope;
You may threaten its life with a railway-share;
You may charm it with smiles and soap —’ ”
Yes, I think we have found it
with the thimble. The “it” is not a frog or a worm, as known to the Duck, but a
secrete message of Carroll’s that has been carefully laid “where Childhood’s
dreams are twined” by the joint efforts of Lewis Carroll and his illustrator
between 1864-65 when they were working together for the realization of AAIW.
Acknowledgement
My
sincere appreciation to Clare Imholtz,
who encouraged me to write this article and enthusiastically offered help to
look for information that I needed when I am away from Taiwan and are urgently in
want of books for reference. Interested readers can contact me at chahwa@gmail.com.
[1]The
Lewis Carroll Society “Charles Dodgson’s
Diaries: The Missing Pages” http://lewiscarrollsociety.org.uk/pages/aboutcharlesdodgson/diaries/pages.html (Access on Jan 12, 2014)
[2] Wakeling,
Edward (April 2003). "The Real Lewis Carroll / A Talk
given to the Lewis Carroll Society".
http://www.wakeling.demon.co.uk/page3-real-lewiscarroll.htm.
(Access on Jan 12, 2014). A revised print version of this essay can also be
found in The Carrollian Tales of
Inspector Spectre, by Byron Sewell, August Imholtz, Jr. and E. Wakeling,
Evertype, 2011.
[3]Karoline Leach (1996). “The Liddell Riddle” Extract from
Times Literary Supplement. http://www.alice-in-wonderland.net/explain/alice843.html
(Access on Jan 12, 2014)
[4] Karoline Leach “Who Mutilated Lewis Carroll's
Diaries?” (2005)
http://contrariwise.wild-reality.net/articles/Who%20Mutilated%20Lewis%20Carroll's%20Diaries.pd(Access
on Jan 11, 2014)
http://www.lewiscarroll-site.com/
(Access on Jan 11, 2014)
[9] Howard Chang. “Well in the rabbit hole: A new and closer look at Alice’s
Adventures in Wonderland. “Taipei,
Taiwan: Yuan Liu Publishing Company 2010 and Jilin, China: Jilin Publishing
Company 2013. Page 75.
