Lewis Carroll

Yeah, you've all heard of him, but what really is the go with this man? Did he really get into his drugs and Alice in Wonderland was the result of that?

Also what was with him in photographing young girls? Or are we just more dirty minded nowadays? The photos I've seen haven't been overtly erotic, but did he really love the young Alice of 10?

THe main is not around to defend himself, but if anyone knows something, then feel free to post your findings. @ Smoke I know you have studied a bit about him while at school (?); or at least from memory you know what the difference is between a raven and a writing desk?

Interesting - I've not looked into this but my assumption was the work was not drug fueled. Having said that, there was no law against chuffing huge quantities of stuff in England at the time and I can't account for the hooker smoking caterpiller so maybe I'd better read up on this. The drug associations might've been popularised by that Jefferson Airplane song, White Rabbit? They were certainly known to drop a tab or two!

As for him being a pervert, well I don't buy into that unless I see some strong evidence. My late mother in law used to stand and watch the young kids coming out of the school she lived opposite every day and she certainly wasn't into any dubious practises! We get older, we love kids - it's not unhealthy in most cases.

The imagery used in the Alice books was taken from magic tricks and small science experiments.
Painting the roses red comes from the experiment in putting white carnations in red dyed water. The white rabbit is a simple puppet made from a handkerchief.

I don't think he had any weird tendencies towards children, Anymore than that Geddes woman, who dresses up babies as cows. I've seen the photographs, and they are along the line of a Victorian Geddes idea. Remember there was a lot of interest in fairies at the time.

Dodgson was the oldest son of seven(?) children, and had a peculiar stutter. I would suspect he entertained children the same way he entertained his younger brothers and sisters, and probably felt more comfortable around them.
In college, I wrote a small play for a writing class called "Phantasmagoria", yes. It was about the difference between Lewis Carrol and Charles Dodgson. I had to pore over facts to discern which was which.

I'm always one for hoping the best in people and believe that Dodgson had a keen interest in the purity of young girls (as that was the flavour of the Victorian era). Whereas nowadays, things would be totally different! Even if a bloke was innocent we would be quick to denounce him as some cheap pervert (but often they can be round this neck of the woods).

So it was their innocence he was trying to capture. Or at least I am happy to believe that.
I'll post some photos of the young Alice shortly, she was an exquisite looking girl. I'll also post an old photo of one of my relations; only because they look so alike!

As for the drugs --- well maybe --- maybe not. His dad was a reverend so he would have lived possibly in a strict household, but then that's not always the best indicator of reality; sometimes church folk can be the worst.

I'd love for you to share with me anything you have Smoke, even though it does go way back for you.

Here is the young Alice

She looks ever so slightly frightening!

I don't find her frightening at all; but she does have that look of mystery to her; she probably had quite an enigmatic personality.

I can see why Dodgson was fascinated with her .... and imagine her ... this adult man and his attention on her, and stories made for her and with her as the main character. I'm sure when she became an adult she may have been quite bewildered with that attention and why she got it so. No, I'm sure as she got older she got a lot more attention. Who knows?

@Smoke - where are you? Don't worry about getting that Phantasmagoria stuff ... there's no obligation.

I've been doing some anthropology work to pay the bills.
Just now getting some time to work on art.

Still seems a little intimidating to me!



There are several characteristics that tend to unite anthropological work. One of the central characteristics is that anthropology tends to provide a comparatively more holistic account of phenomena and tends to be highly empirical.That's what Wiki says anyway - I am none the wiser! Didn't you mention this research involved The Who? I can sort of see how Keith Moon would fit in, anthropologically speaking.

Yes, in that photo, she'd make a good part as an Auntie in the Addams Family or some other similar film.

Arden wrote:

Still seems a little intimidating to me!



There are several characteristics that tend to unite anthropological work. One of the central characteristics is that anthropology tends to provide a comparatively more holistic account of phenomena and tends to be highly empirical.That's what Wiki says anyway - I am none the wiser! Didn't you mention this research involved The Who? I can sort of see how Keith Moon would fit in, anthropologically speaking.

Moon wasn't there at the time. I don't recall saying it, but yes, the research involves The Who. It involves a lot of virtual pushpins and heavy reading.

If you look at the earlier pics od alice, especially of the trio, you'll see a resemblamce to Carroll. Makes me wonder if she reminded him of a sibling. I have a wedding picture of my great aunt that looks that stern, but she was a doll in life. if you didn't stand stock still back then, you would photograph as a blur, so sometimes smiling wasn't an option.

Indeed: grinning for the camera in a curiously demented fashion is a disgraceful modern contrivance!

Mdme Veronika, I do hope you won't mind my reducing the size of the family group portrait you posted earlier in this thread. Our Victorian servers are of course steam driven and whilst built by the empire's finest craftsmen, for longevity, it is not wise to overburden them.

Smoke wrote:

I've been doing some anthropology work to pay the bills.
Just now getting some time to work on art.

Sounds interesting Smoke, it's not forensic anthropology is it???

Mr. C. Lightfoot wrote:

Indeed: grinning for the camera in a curiously demented fashion is a disgraceful modern contrivance!

Mdme Veronika, I do hope you won't mind my reducing the size of the family group portrait you posted earlier in this thread. Our Victorian servers are of course steam driven and whilst built by the empire's finest craftsmen, for longevity, it is not wise to overburden them.

Not at all boss, I'm just lazy at this end in having to resize those images. Can I still keep my job?

Veronika wrote:

Can I still keep my job?

This establishment, without the benefit of your delightful presence dear lady, would be like a rose without petals: little more than a thorny twig!

I should point out that, among the icons atop the message bar is the Host An Image option, which will allow you to upload an image directly from your own apparatus, specifying it's size with a simple click. A marvel of the modern age to rival any at the Great Exhibition.

Veronika wrote:

Smoke wrote:

I've been doing some anthropology work to pay the bills.
Just now getting some time to work on art.

Sounds interesting Smoke, it's not forensic anthropology is it???

Nah. Behavioral.

^^Ahh now that's the story.^^

Now, Mr Lightfoot I never bothered to experiment with that tool, now I have seen the light and will do so in all future correspondence with yourself.

In the meantime I'm working on a portraiture (sort of).