Lewis Carroll and Little Girls (again!)

Charles Ludwidge Dodgson’s biography has been a battlefield in recent years, at least since the publication of Karoline Leach’s In the Shadow of the Dreamchild (London: Peter Owen Ltd, 1999 – extracts at the Victorian Web), in which she maintained that the traditional view of Lewis Carroll’s morbid interest in young girls was mistaken: a passion for children, and especially young girls, was typical of the Victorian age and Dodgson used it as a mask behind which he could court mature women. This view, which Morton N. Cohen brands as ‘revisionist’ has been gaining popularity, not only through the articles Leach has published in the TLS (“Ina in Wonderland”, 3 May 1996 and “The Real Scandal”, 8 February 2002) but thanks to the activism of the Lewis Carroll mailing list and, recently, the Looking for Lewis Carroll web site.

One of the main targets has been Cohen’s Lewis Carroll: a Biography ( London: Macmillan, 1995). His long-awaited reply, “When Love was Young”, TLS, 10 September 2004, sounds convincing to me as long as it simply states known facts: Dodgson’s endless list of child friends and the lengths he went in order to get to know and then privately meet them, the dedications of his works and the number and tenor of the letters he wrote to them and their mothers.

I tend to agree with Cohen’s opinion that much of what the revisionists maintain is the fruit of “conjecture and surmise;” unfortunately he does not resist and proceeds to give us another dose of conjecture. In discussing a letter of 1930 from Lorina to Alice in which the former gives an account of her interview with a biographer, he correctly infers that Lorina concealed the real reason for the break between Carroll and the Liddell family in June 1863 stating that “his [Dodgson’s] manner became too affectionate to you… and that mother spoke to him about it… one had to find some reason for all intercourse ceasing.”

In the final paragraphs of his essay Cohen tries to convince us that Lewis Carroll’s “nieces… would not have wanted posterity to see that their uncle was rebuked by Mrs Liddell,” and so cut a page from his diary in which the incident was presumably recorded: they did not want us to know that she rebuked him, but had no intention of concealing what she rebuked him for, though we still do not know what it was — we do not even know whether she actually “spoke to him about it.”

The only clue comes from a note found by Leach about “Cut Pages in Diary” which summarizes the scandal of June 1963: “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.” It is not clear who wrote this note, Leach attributes it to Violet Dodgson, one of the nieces responsible for cutting the pages, Cohen says that Philip Dodgson Jacques told him (in the 1960s) he had written it himself using details given him by the nieces.

A couple of strange things: if Cohen knew of the note, why did he not use it in his biography? If, as he says, Lorina was concealing the truth in her 193o interview, why did he maintain that the probable cause for the break was his excessive affection for Alice, or even a marriage proposal?

The note, as far as I can see, confirms that in 1930 Lorina was lying to the biographer and might also account for Dodgson’s nieces’ reluctance to spread rumours about their uncle’s conduct. All we can say is that Alice was probably not the cause for the break — Lorina might have been, or perhaps something Mrs Liddell said. Until new documents are found, and Cohen appears to believe that even the missing page was not destroyed, nothing more can be said for sure, I’m afraid.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Lewis Carroll. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Lewis Carroll and Little Girls (again!)

  1. Pingback: A Blog of Bosh » Carroll’s emotional and social life

  2. Mike Leach says:

    I think this is a very fair analysis of the situation to date – except for one thing. Cohen’s claims about the numbers and content of the letters Carroll wrote to children – which you take at face value – are actually not true at all.

    Indeed the numbers of letters to woman friends in the published ‘Letters’ – edited by Cohen himself – outnumber those to pre-pubescent children by 3-2 in volume I and 7-1 in volume II.

    And, despite Cohen’s claim, this is woman*friends* – excluding family, business acquaintances and the mothers of child-friends.

    This supports the suggestion, gleaned as well from other sources, that Carroll’s relationship with the female sex was much more complex than usually portrayed in biographies and the popular media.

    For a more detailed analysis you can go to http://www.lookingforlewiscarroll.com/letterstofemales.html

    BTW I wonder if you’d like a link from ‘LfLC’ to this blog?
    Mike

  3. By applying logic to this idea the so called Revisionists are creating what is no more than Lewis Carroll fiction the same as Richard Wallace who in all seriousness tries to convince readers that Carroll was Jack The Ripper.
    Morton Cohen mentions a belief that Queen Victoria really wrote the books and yet another one claims Alice Liddell did and that she was actually adopted!!!.
    Being a scholar is no excuse as I don’t think Martin Gardner was one yet his Annotated Alice will tell you all you need to know.
    Its also worth noting that no mention is made of the Leach book in The Alice Companion. I’ve never read it nor would want to do -the excerpts on the LFLC together with the Customer Reviews on Amazon were enough
    It just makes you wonder what wacky theory comes up next

  4. Pingback: A Blog of Bosh » Blog Archive » Carroll and Money

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s