Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Anne Thackerays' daughter 's testimony

Expand Messages
  • Karoline Leach
    The trouble is all we have to set against Hester s word are modern opinions; mine, yours, that guy s, this woman s; opinions from people who weren t there and
    Message 1 of 2 , Jul 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      The trouble is all we have to set against Hester's word are modern
      opinions; mine, yours, that guy's, this woman's; opinions from people
      who weren't there and have no clue.

      That's the difference between a putative rejection of Hester Ritchie
      and the 'Contrariwise' rejection of much of Collingwood. Collingwood
      has been shown to be in error; we can illustrate the discrepancy between
      some of his claims and the known facts, and so the reason for rejecting
      him is clear.

      In many ways this present question is far more difficult to get a handle
      on. Whether Hexham was intended to be a mind-picture of Dodgson and the
      impressions he made on her is something present only in Anne Thackeray's
      head; she knew what she was doing and what she intended, we don't. And
      since the connection was one simply in AT's mind it doesn't really
      signify whether all the physical details are correct in our estimation.
      We are talking about the purely subjective; her impression of Dodgson
      (if it is Dodgson), the memories, emotions, insights he inspired, and
      not a faultless biographical outline, so looking for detailed factual
      errors, or indeed non-errors, is missing the point. It doesn't matter
      how like Dodgson we think it is, it only matters how like him Thackeray
      intended it to be and we just can't know about that.

      The question comes down simply to what Anne Thackeray intended to
      portray, and the best access we have to that has to be the word of her
      daughter. It might not be perfect, but it's got to be better than our
      own guesswork. That's why I feel as if washing about in this way is
      missing the point. This isn't really an academic question, and what
      Modern Scholars A B and C say is never going to tell us anything about
      Anne Thackeray's heart and mind.

      K
    • Keith
      Karoline, we don t just have opinions - we have our own research. That indicates that Anne Thakeray and Lewis Carroll did not meet at Farringford. He was
      Message 2 of 2 , Jul 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Karoline,
         
        we don't just have opinions - we have our own research.  That indicates that Anne Thakeray and Lewis Carroll did not meet at Farringford.  He was only photographing there twice and on one occasion this was before Anne's father died and so before she was spending time at Farringford. 
         
        On the other occasion he does not mention meeting Anne Thackeray.
         
        Keith
         
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2006 5:46 PM
        Subject: [lewiscarroll] Anne Thackerays' daughter 's testimony

        The trouble is all we have to set against Hester's word are modern
        opinions; mine, yours, that guy's, this woman's; opinions from people
        who weren't there and have no clue.

        That's the difference between a putative rejection of Hester Ritchie
        and the 'Contrariwise' rejection of much of Collingwood. Collingwood
        has been shown to be in error; we can illustrate the discrepancy between
        some of his claims and the known facts, and so the reason for rejecting
        him is clear.

        In many ways this present question is far more difficult to get a handle
        on. Whether Hexham was intended to be a mind-picture of Dodgson and the
        impressions he made on her is something present only in Anne Thackeray's
        head; she knew what she was doing and what she intended, we don't. And
        since the connection was one simply in AT's mind it doesn't really
        signify whether all the physical details are correct in our estimation.
        We are talking about the purely subjective; her impression of Dodgson
        (if it is Dodgson), the memories, emotions, insights he inspired, and
        not a faultless biographical outline, so looking for detailed factual
        errors, or indeed non-errors, is missing the point. It doesn't matter
        how like Dodgson we think it is, it only matters how like him Thackeray
        intended it to be and we just can't know about that.

        The question comes down simply to what Anne Thackeray intended to
        portray, and the best access we have to that has to be the word of her
        daughter. It might not be perfect, but it's got to be better than our
        own guesswork. That's why I feel as if washing about in this way is
        missing the point. This isn't really an academic question, and what
        Modern Scholars A B and C say is never going to tell us anything about
        Anne Thackeray's heart and mind.

        K


        No virus found in this incoming message.
        Checked by AVG Free Edition.
        Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.7/379 - Release Date: 29/06/2006
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.