Lewis Carroll's Photographs

[BrianShaw]

A popular modern armchair sport is diagnosing historical figures with modern psychiatric disorders based on their writings, photographs, reclusiveness, etc, without any first hand experience of the person. Why not add posthumous criminal conviction to the sport?

That is the one of the tools historians have to work with. Certainly that has to be tempered with the mind-set of the times, but new tools often provide new understanding. Calling it a "sport" is understandable sarcasm, but what else would you (not you, specifically, but the generic "you") recommend... suspending all academic historical research because of the possibility of doubt? If so... then lets just talk gear.

 

[Aristophanes]

He is very clear about about his interests in his letters (booys are ugly, girls over 12 are not interesting but young girls are) but there is no recorded evidence that he ever turned thoughts into actions.

His letters about Alice are almost extreme in their pleadings and manipulations of convincing her mother to let him see the child. They are manipulative and definitively urge others to take action that would fulfill a desire of his.

 

[Wayne]

That is the one of the tools historians have to work with. Certainly that has to be tempered with the mind-set of the times, but new tools often provide new understanding. Calling it a "sport" is understandable sarcasm, but what else would you (not you, specifically, but the generic "you") recommend... suspending all academic historical research because of the possibility of doubt? If so... then lets just talk gear.

Speculation about so-called mental disorders that have highly dubious validity even today can hardly be considered a "new tool." Neither can speculation about criminal intent. It is conjecture that lacks the most important piece of information-the person in question, who is not present and can say nothing in their own defense. This is not to defend Carroll of anyone else from wrong-doing they might have wrong-done (if any), but to defend him and the Poes, Dickinsons, Woodmans, Maiers and many other creatives from conjectural posthumous psychiatric "diagnosis", criminal accusation.

 

[BrianShaw]

Speculation about so-called mental disorders that have highly dubious validity even today can hardly be considered a "new tool." Neither can speculation about criminal intent. It is conjecture that lacks the most important piece of information-the person in question, who is not present and can say nothing in their own defense. This is not to defend Carroll of anyone else from wrong-doing they might have wrong-done (if any), but to defend him and the Poes, Dickinsons, Woodmans, Maiers and many other creatives from conjectural posthumous psychiatric "diagnosis", criminal accusation.

Forgive me for seeming defensive... but nobody in this thread so far (unless I managed to skip over a posting in my periodic reading of the thread) has accused anyone of anything except being creepy. I find it interesting that there have been two posters who have tried to "head the accusations off at the pass" by implying that acusations have been made, or about to be made. To be perfectly clear: being creepy is not a crime.

 

[Wayne]

Brian-you replied to my response to someone who said "I've personally met and interacted with dozens of pedophiles. This guy's behavior is setting off my alarm bells".

Connect the dots. He is saying he thinks LC was a pedophile.

In other threads and in other places the people I mentioned have been diagnosed or accused of various things in similar fashion-without ever having observed the person or their behaviors.

 

[BrianShaw]

OK, so you disagree with Kent. Understood.

 

[MDR]

The problem is that a lot of people in the 19th century were pedophiles by todays standard most monarchs would be considered pedophiles. Was Carrol attached/attracted to young girls it seems so, was he a child molester I think not. Until the mid 20th century a lot of european aristocrats married very very young women and not only aristocrats farmers an other working class people married very very young women as well. The trend pretty much changed when the infant and mother mortality rate was getting lower. Would I leave my daughter, if I had one, alone with Carrol no certainly not.

Dominik

 

[steven_e007]

I don't want to find myself in a position of defending Dodgson, because I have no idea what he was like, never having met him.
For all I know he was a child molesting paedophile. The point is I DON'T know - and neither does anyone else. There simply isn't enough evidence. He has had a large number of biographers, some of whom can be seen to have written rather a lot based on very little. Some researchers have based decades of their life on Dodgson and still there is no definitive opinion one way or the other - and I strongly suspect we will never know because we can never know.

Unfortunately - a lot of people are happy to base opinions on speculation.

 

[edp]

This tasteless internets what-I-reckonery is about as far from "academic historical research" as it is possible to go.

Let's talk about the man's photography, or not at all.

 

[BrianShaw]

Whats tasteless is telling folks what they can and cannot talk about.

 

[Worker 11811]

The problem is that a lot of people in the 19th century were pedophiles by todays standard most monarchs would be considered pedophiles.

Yes, in the time of Poe, Carroll and many of the others, if the girl's parents consented, it was considered above-board.

The real Alice's parents didn't consent. Nor did the real Annabel Lee's parents.

Annabel Lee's parents went so far as to hide the girl's grave after she died of typhoid. (Or something... I forget, exactly.) Poe wrote the poem "Annabel Lee" to taunt the girl's parents after he found out the location of the grave in Charleston, SC.

As mentioned, we also have Carroll's letters "begging" for permission to see Alice again.

Back in the day, this was considered scandalous but not illegal unless a person violated the parent's wishes.

Today, both Poe and Carroll would probably have to register as sex offenders.

 

[MDR]

No matter his sexual preferences he was a good photographer and knew about light I have to admit I have never seen any of his nudes.

Dominik

 

[BrianShaw]

Today, both Poe and Carroll would probably have to register as sex offenders.

No, not quite. Only a convicted sex offender needs to register. As pointed out very accurately... he was never, to our current knowledge, formally accused or indicted as a offender of any kind.

 

[BrianShaw]

No matter his sexual preferences he was a good photographer and knew about light I have to admit I have never seen any of his nudes.

I have. They are actually rather poorly done. At least the few that remain and have been exhiited/published.

 

[Worker 11811]

No, not quite. Only a convicted sex offender needs to register. As pointed out very accurately... he was never, to our current knowledge, formally accused or indicted as a offender of any kind.

Sorry... Hyperbole.

 

[cliveh]

Maybe it’s just me, but don’t you think threads like this are more interesting than discussing extra drops of sulphuric acid in developer X or why you should wash prints for a given time in pH solution Y?

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Discussing photography is better than breaking out with derogatory, mischeivous and spurious, misplaced assumptions about a person's perceived ills — particularly of somebody who is not able to defend himself.

 

[cliveh]

Discussing photography is better than breaking out with derogatory, mischeivous and spurious, misplaced assumptions about a person's perceived ills — particularly of somebody who is not able to defend himself.

I didn't think I was doing that and apologise if you think I was.

 

[Worker 11811]

Only fifty percent of photography is about cameras, film and chemicals. (Maybe even less.)

At least half of photography is about the mind of the photographer, what he thinks and how he perceives the world he makes photographs of.

Just criticism or not, studying and discussing a photographer's (or a writer's) personal life is just as important as studying his photographs or the methods he uses to make them.

Provided we observe the caveat; the person being discussed is not present to defend himself; discussing his reported behavior is not out of line.

We just need to keep the discussion on an academic level, not a personal level.

 

[BrianShaw]

Here, here, Randy.

 

[BrianShaw]

or is that "hear, hear"?

 

[BrianShaw]

BTW, no historical figure and many current day are not available to "defend themselves" so 90% (if not more) of any discussion about anything except the weather involves talking about people not here to defend themselves. Sad, but true.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Only fifty percent of photography is about cameras, film and chemicals. (Maybe even less.)

At least half of photography is about the mind of the photographer, what he thinks and how he perceives the world he makes photographs of.

Just criticism or not, studying and discussing a photographer's (or a writer's) personal life is just as important as studying his photographs or the methods he uses to make them.

Provided we observe the caveat; the person being discussed is not present to defend himself; discussing his reported behavior is not out of line.

We just need to keep the discussion on an academic level, not a personal level.

I should hope that you mean purported;because I would otherwise like to see the evidence of a reported behaviour!

 

[Sirius Glass]

He is very clear about about his interests in his letters (booys are ugly, girls over 12 are not interesting but young girls are) but there is no recorded evidence that he ever turned thoughts into actions.

There are more than three of his nudes preserved but I don't remember the exact number. He destroyed a lot of them himself as stated above.

A creepy guy without a doubt and he was forbidden to see Alice Liddel for unknown reasons (probably just for being creepy and visiting a lot).
His letters are interesting reading, and you can try some Sylvie and Bruno if you want to know what he wrote apart from the books about Alice (don't be surprised if you don't finish it, it's crap)

Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass make a lot more sense and are more understandable if you read them in the latest version of Annotated Alice. There are many references to personal jokes with Alice and her sisters, politics, and text books that Alice used at schools. Without understanding the background, it is much harder to see the thought and humor in Dodgson's books.

General comment, not aimed at Jesper:
The parents were alway present when he took photographs. If you see that as being a pedifile then look in the mirror to see the root of the problem.

 

[BrianShaw]

The parents were alway present when he took photographs.

That is believed to be so, Steve... but his letters contain some creepy content. No mirror is needed to read his own words in his letters. They are not fictional writings, unlike some of his more popular works.

p.s. Have you (anyone, not just Steve) read any of his mathematical and logic writings. FASCINATING, and very non-contraversial.