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

Chapter 9

Expand Messages
  • Jenny
    And I am glad you like Chapter 9 - thank you.
    Message 1 of 21 , Aug 30, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      And I am glad you like Chapter 9 - thank you.
    • Keith
      Jenny, I was surprised when CLD defended Ch. Ch. in the press when he obviously knew that most of the men there were idiotic. Not like him to be a hypocrite!
      Message 2 of 21 , Aug 30, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Jenny,
         
        I was surprised when CLD defended Ch. Ch. in the press when he obviously knew that most of the men there were idiotic. Not like him to be a hypocrite!
         
        Also, there's no need to tell the tale to the Smithsonian - they know already! However, it is the same with all institutions, once they start to believe in their own infallibility they go downhill.
         
        Keith
         
         

        From: Jenny
        Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 9:30 AM
        Subject: [lewiscarroll] Re: Lewis Carroll and "myths"

         


        Hmm...you might be interested in a glimpse of exactly what a load of dunderheads these aristos were at ChCh when I tell you what I found written in an old book by the Earl of Warwick. He was a great friend of Harcourt (Edith's fiance) and wrote a little bit about the Liddells too. And he describes certain events which pretty well bring the atmosphere to life. Like Prince Leopold coming to his rooms and finding Warwick had some books he disapproved of, so Leopold putting the books in the shower bath and pulling the string, ruining the books. (haw haw very amusing). And how some fellows brought many cages of rats to Lord Gage's rooms and released them so the room was full of rats running everywhere (haw haw, what a rum wheeze!) Followed by returning to Lord Gage's rooms and slitting his mattress and pillows so the whole place was covered in feathers.(Haw, haw, what a jolly lot of chaps!) It must have been torture having to try and teach these men. To be fair, the Earl also th ought he was wasting his own time being there, and felt that universities shouldn't be just a kind of finishing school for hooray henries, although he didn't quite put it like that.

        Wonder if I should tell the Smithsonian people about what you say - they are very proud of their institution, and rightly so of course.

        Jenny

        --- In lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com, "Keith" <keith@...> wrote: A

        >
        > Jenny,
        >
        > it's
        good that you have responded to this idea of myths. I'm not into the ground breaking idea though! Wise to be skeptical about everything until there is proof!
        >
        > My own view is that his relationship with child friends
        was based upon acute observation of the personality of the child but that it was mainly a matter of verbal contact and 'in' jokes etc. When I read some of the letters he wrote to child friends I cringe, but of course what I am missing is the unique understanding that he had with any child which ensured that any particular child would read his letter in the way it was intended. Isa Bowman tried to explain such things in her little book but of course she couldn't get it into the written word as it was special to her alone. The man was a natural born teacher who frankly wasted his talents at Christ Church where the aristocrats who went there were a bunch of dunderheads in the main. Some of them did achieve things in public life but this was more the fact that they belonged to the 'old boy's' network, or the aristocracy, rather that the result of anything they learned academically at Christ Church. There were excepti ons of course but in the main the men he tried to teach there were rich and ineffectual parasites. Alice on the other hand was clever and no doubt nowadays she would achieve academically at the top grades but in those days she had no chance of doing so.
        >
        > I like your chapter 9!
        >
        > The
        Smithsonian is linked to CLD through one of his ancestors, Christopher Dodgson. The Dodgson's Bishop was tutor to the Percy family in Northumberland before he was a bishop. Hugh Smithson, who changed his name to Percy when he married the female heir, was squire of Airmyn where the bishop's father was vicar. As Smithson rose through the ranks he took the vicar's son with him - eventually to Ireland where Dodgson was made a bishop. Hugh Smithson had an affair with his wife's cousin and an illegitimate child resulted, that child inherited a lot of cash as his mother was well off in her own right. When he died he left the money to a relative on the understanding that if he died childless the money would go to the USA to found an institution named after him. This was how the Smithsonian came into being in a country that its benefactor had never visited! Does that make the Smithsonian illegitimate?!!
        >
        > The word I used was
        'denialists' - it was Joe who linked the wrong spelling to nylons! Global warming! A subject best avoided!
        >
        > Best wishes,
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > From: Jenny
        > Sent:
        Monday, August 30, 2010 7:15 AM
        > To:
        href="mailto:lewiscarroll%40yahoogroups.com">lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: [lewiscarroll] Lewis Carroll and "myths"
        >
        >
        >
        > It's amusing how these so called "myths" can build up, Keith.
        I have already read items portraying CLD as first and foremost a charitable philanthropist, which of course he wasn't, but I'm guessing people read a Sunday Times article in February which headlined his charitable donations, then developed ideas from that.
        >
        > No, I definitely don't follow a
        "highly similar" line to Karoline Leach Her hardback book eleven years ago was groundbreaking and highly influential, and I have often acknowledged this, most recently in Smithsonian magazine last April. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/Lewis-Carrolls-Shifting-Reputation.html
        >
        > But some of my own research has made me sceptical about aspects of her
        book and I am no longer interested in the concept of a "Carroll myth." I have found it more useful to consider how Carroll the man tried to fit his unusual personality to his family life, his social and cultural environment, etc.
        >
        > As for Wikipedia, I don't bother with it much but I check it
        sometimes, because as you say, anyone can alter it. When I finally discovered that all Wiki reference to me in connection with Lewis Carroll had disappeared, I had to do something, because it's so widely read and I can't not be on it at all. So yes, it was me who inserted the lines that Karoline has quoted (they're not THAT silly, surely?). But I should have checked with Edward Wakeling before mentioning his views, so I have deleted the reference to him.
        >
        >
        Joe may wish to read "The Deniers" - it's a very good book about the scientists who deny that global warming exists, (sorry - I don't know if any of them wear nylons )
        >
        > Hope this makes sense. It's late!
        >
        >
        Jenny
        >
        > --- In
        href="mailto:lewiscarroll%40yahoogroups.com">lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com, "Keith" <keith@> wrote:
        > >
        > > I guess all that Edward
        Wakeling is saying is that he doesn't believe the myths, neither those from the 'apologists' or those the 'denialists' or anyone else's myths about rabbit holes etc. - that's how I read it.
        > >
        > > Jenny equally found a
        new avenue of research which is well worth pursuing but of course it may lead to more myths if anyone reads too much into his donations and builds a case based upon very little evidence, as often happens.
        > >
        > > I don't
        see that either of them have a need to revise their position, they have views and nothing has come up that needs them to rethink their positions. Perhaps the 'apologists' and the 'denialists' should do a rethink!
        > >
        > > Best wishes,
        > >
        > > Keith
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > From: karoline5667
        > > Sent: Saturday, August 28,
        2010 10:10 AM
        > > To:
        href="mailto:lewiscarroll%40yahoogroups.com">lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
        > > Subject: [lewiscarroll] New Contrariwise blogpost - 'Wiki-weird
        II'
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > About the latest Wiki madness. Anyone have any idea who is going
        about making these kind of ill-informed claims?
        > >
        > > read
        the blog
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > ----------------------------------------------------------
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > No virus found in this incoming
        message.
        > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
        > > Version:
        9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3098 - Release Date: 08/27/10 19:34:00
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        ----------------------------------------------------------
        >
        >
        >
        > No virus found in this incoming message.
        > Checked by
        AVG - www.avg.com
        > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3100 -
        Release Date: 08/29/10 07:34:00
        >



        No virus found in this incoming message.
        Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
        Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3100 - Release Date: 08/29/10 07:34:00


      • Jenny
        I guess he made a distinction between the stupid young clods who come & go, and the institution of Ch.Ch. Christ Church is famous and distinguished and
        Message 3 of 21 , Aug 30, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          I guess he made a distinction between the stupid young clods who come & go, and the institution of Ch.Ch. Christ Church is famous and distinguished and was his dad's alma mata, and his employer. He had quibbles and complaints about it but I don't see any hypocrisy in sticking up for it against the outside world. I think many of us are a bit like this about things we are associated with. We may grumble like anything but if someone else attacks them it is a different story.

          I would absolutely love to go and see the Smithsonian Institution in real life, although I don't know any reason why I would ever go to Washington DC and get the chance

          Jenny.

          >
          > From: Jenny
          > Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 9:30 AM
          > To: lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
          > Subject: [lewiscarroll] Re: Lewis Carroll and "myths"
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Hmm...you might be interested in a glimpse of exactly what a load of dunderheads these aristos were at ChCh when I tell you what I found written in an old book by the Earl of Warwick. He was a great friend of Harcourt (Edith's fiance) and wrote a little bit about the Liddells too. And he describes certain events which pretty well bring the atmosphere to life. Like Prince Leopold coming to his rooms and finding Warwick had some books he disapproved of, so Leopold putting the books in the shower bath and pulling the string, ruining the books. (haw haw very amusing). And how some fellows brought many cages of rats to Lord Gage's rooms and released them so the room was full of rats running everywhere (haw haw, what a rum wheeze!) Followed by returning to Lord Gage's rooms and slitting his mattress and pillows so the whole place was covered in feathers.(Haw, haw, what a jolly lot of chaps!) It must have been torture having to try and teach these men. To be fair, the Earl also th ought he was wasting his own time being there, and felt that universities shouldn't be just a kind of finishing school for hooray henries, although he didn't quite put it like that.
          >
          > Wonder if I should tell the Smithsonian people about what you say - they are very proud of their institution, and rightly so of course.
          >
          > Jenny
          >
          > --- In lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com, "Keith" <keith@> wrote: A
          > >
          > > Jenny,
          > >
          > > it's good that you have responded to this idea of myths. I'm not into the ground breaking idea though! Wise to be skeptical about everything until there is proof!
          > >
          > > My own view is that his relationship with child friends was based upon acute observation of the personality of the child but that it was mainly a matter of verbal contact and 'in' jokes etc. When I read some of the letters he wrote to child friends I cringe, but of course what I am missing is the unique understanding that he had with any child which ensured that any particular child would read his letter in the way it was intended. Isa Bowman tried to explain such things in her little book but of course she couldn't get it into the written word as it was special to her alone. The man was a natural born teacher who frankly wasted his talents at Christ Church where the aristocrats who went there were a bunch of dunderheads in the main. Some of them did achieve things in public life but this was more the fact that they belonged to the 'old boy's' network, or the aristocracy, rather that the result of anything they learned academically at Christ Church. There were excepti ons of course but in the main the men he tried to teach there were rich and ineffectual parasites. Alice on the other hand was clever and no doubt nowadays she would achieve academically at the top grades but in those days she had no chance of doing so.
          > >
          > > I like your chapter 9!
          > >
          > > The Smithsonian is linked to CLD through one of his ancestors, Christopher Dodgson. The Dodgson's Bishop was tutor to the Percy family in Northumberland before he was a bishop. Hugh Smithson, who changed his name to Percy when he married the female heir, was squire of Airmyn where the bishop's father was vicar. As Smithson rose through the ranks he took the vicar's son with him - eventually to Ireland where Dodgson was made a bishop. Hugh Smithson had an affair with his wife's cousin and an illegitimate child resulted, that child inherited a lot of cash as his mother was well off in her own right. When he died he left the money to a relative on the understanding that if he died childless the money would go to the USA to found an institution named after him. This was how the Smithsonian came into being in a country that its benefactor had never visited! Does that make the Smithsonian illegitimate?!!
          > >
          > > The word I used was 'denialists' - it was Joe who linked the wrong spelling to nylons! Global warming! A subject best avoided!
          > >
          > > Best wishes,
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > From: Jenny
          > > Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 7:15 AM
          > > To: lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
          > > Subject: [lewiscarroll] Lewis Carroll and "myths"
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > It's amusing how these so called "myths" can build up, Keith. I have already read items portraying CLD as first and foremost a charitable philanthropist, which of course he wasn't, but I'm guessing people read a Sunday Times article in February which headlined his charitable donations, then developed ideas from that.
          > >
          > > No, I definitely don't follow a "highly similar" line to Karoline Leach Her hardback book eleven years ago was groundbreaking and highly influential, and I have often acknowledged this, most recently in Smithsonian magazine last April. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/Lewis-Carrolls-Shifting-Reputation.html
          > >
          > > But some of my own research has made me sceptical about aspects of her book and I am no longer interested in the concept of a "Carroll myth." I have found it more useful to consider how Carroll the man tried to fit his unusual personality to his family life, his social and cultural environment, etc.
          > >
          > > As for Wikipedia, I don't bother with it much but I check it sometimes, because as you say, anyone can alter it. When I finally discovered that all Wiki reference to me in connection with Lewis Carroll had disappeared, I had to do something, because it's so widely read and I can't not be on it at all. So yes, it was me who inserted the lines that Karoline has quoted (they're not THAT silly, surely?). But I should have checked with Edward Wakeling before mentioning his views, so I have deleted the reference to him.
          > >
          > > Joe may wish to read "The Deniers" - it's a very good book about the scientists who deny that global warming exists, (sorry - I don't know if any of them wear nylons )
          > >
          > > Hope this makes sense. It's late!
          > >
          > > Jenny
          > >
          > > --- In lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com, "Keith" <keith@> wrote:
          > > >
          > > > I guess all that Edward Wakeling is saying is that he doesn't believe the myths, neither those from the 'apologists' or those the 'denialists' or anyone else's myths about rabbit holes etc. - that's how I read it.
          > > >
          > > > Jenny equally found a new avenue of research which is well worth pursuing but of course it may lead to more myths if anyone reads too much into his donations and builds a case based upon very little evidence, as often happens.
          > > >
          > > > I don't see that either of them have a need to revise their position, they have views and nothing has come up that needs them to rethink their positions. Perhaps the 'apologists' and the 'denialists' should do a rethink!
          > > >
          > > > Best wishes,
          > > >
          > > > Keith
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > From: karoline5667
          > > > Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2010 10:10 AM
          > > > To: lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
          > > > Subject: [lewiscarroll] New Contrariwise blogpost - 'Wiki-weird II'
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > About the latest Wiki madness. Anyone have any idea who is going about making these kind of ill-informed claims?
          > > >
          > > > read the blog
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > ----------------------------------------------------------
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
          > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
          > > > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3098 - Release Date: 08/27/10 19:34:00
          > > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > ----------------------------------------------------------
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > No virus found in this incoming message.
          > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
          > > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3100 - Release Date: 08/29/10 07:34:00
          > >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          >
          >
          >
          > No virus found in this incoming message.
          > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
          > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3100 - Release Date: 08/29/10 07:34:00
          >
        • Keith
          Jenny, yes but the point is he was logical and he was also truthful so it is a surprise that he put pen to paper on that issue. I m aware he could be devious
          Message 4 of 21 , Aug 30, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            Jenny,
             
            yes but the point is he was logical and he was also truthful so it is a surprise that he put pen to paper on that issue. I'm aware he could be devious and tell the truth but say it in words which gave the wrong impression but with Ch. ch. he was writing in a straight forward manner.
             
            Keith
             
             

            From: Jenny
            Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 5:30 PM
            Subject: [lewiscarroll] Re: Lewis Carroll and "myths"

             


            I guess he made a distinction between the stupid young clods who come & go, and the institution of Ch.Ch. Christ Church is famous and distinguished and was his dad's alma mata, and his employer. He had quibbles and complaints about it but I don't see any hypocrisy in sticking up for it against the outside world. I think many of us are a bit like this about things we are associated with. We may grumble like anything but if someone else attacks them it is a different story.

            I would absolutely love to go and see the Smithsonian Institution in real life, although I don't know any reason why I would ever go to Washington DC and get the chance

            Jenny.

            >
            > From: Jenny
            > Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 9:30 AM
            > To:
            lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
            > Subject: [lewiscarroll] Re: Lewis Carroll and "myths"
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Hmm...you might be interested in a glimpse of exactly
            what a load of dunderheads these aristos were at ChCh when I tell you what I found written in an old book by the Earl of Warwick. He was a great friend of Harcourt (Edith's fiance) and wrote a little bit about the Liddells too. And he describes certain events which pretty well bring the atmosphere to life. Like Prince Leopold coming to his rooms and finding Warwick had some books he disapproved of, so Leopold putting the books in the shower bath and pulling the string, ruining the books. (haw haw very amusing). And how some fellows brought many cages of rats to Lord Gage's rooms and released them so the room was full of rats running everywhere (haw haw, what a rum wheeze!) Followed by returning to Lord Gage's rooms and slitting his mattress and pillows so the whole place was covered in feathers.(Haw, haw, what a jolly lot of chaps!) It must have been torture having to try and teach these men. To be fair, the Earl also th ought he was wasting his own time being there, and felt that universities shouldn't be just a kind of finishing school for hooray henries, although he didn't quite put it like that.
            >
            > Wonder if I should tell the Smithsonian people
            about what you say - they are very proud of their institution, and rightly so of course.
            >
            > Jenny
            >
            > --- In
            href="mailto:lewiscarroll%40yahoogroups.com">lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com, "Keith" <keith@> wrote: A
            > >
            > > Jenny,
            > >
            > > it's good that you have responded to this idea of myths. I'm not
            into the ground breaking idea though! Wise to be skeptical about everything until there is proof!
            > >
            > > My own view is that his
            relationship with child friends was based upon acute observation of the personality of the child but that it was mainly a matter of verbal contact and 'in' jokes etc. When I read some of the letters he wrote to child friends I cringe, but of course what I am missing is the unique understanding that he had with any child which ensured that any particular child would read his letter in the way it was intended. Isa Bowman tried to explain such things in her little book but of course she couldn't get it into the written word as it was special to her alone. The man was a natural born teacher who frankly wasted his talents at Christ Church where the aristocrats who went there were a bunch of dunderheads in the main. Some of them did achieve things in public life but this was more the fact that they belonged to the 'old boy's' network, or the aristocracy, rather that the result of anything they learned academically at Christ Church. There were excep ti ons of course but in the main the men he tried to teach there were rich and ineffectual parasites. Alice on the other hand was clever and no doubt nowadays she would achieve academically at the top grades but in those days she had no chance of doing so.
            > >
            > > I like your chapter 9!
            > >
            > > The Smithsonian is linked
            to CLD through one of his ancestors, Christopher Dodgson. The Dodgson's Bishop was tutor to the Percy family in Northumberland before he was a bishop. Hugh Smithson, who changed his name to Percy when he married the female heir, was squire of Airmyn where the bishop's father was vicar. As Smithson rose through the ranks he took the vicar's son with him - eventually to Ireland where Dodgson was made a bishop. Hugh Smithson had an affair with his wife's cousin and an illegitimate child resulted, that child inherited a lot of cash as his mother was well off in her own right. When he died he left the money to a relative on the understanding that if he died childless the money would go to the USA to found an institution named after him. This was how the Smithsonian came into being in a country that its benefactor had never visited! Does that make the Smithsonian illegitimate?!!
            > >
            > > The word I used was
            'denialists' - it was Joe who linked the wrong spelling to nylons! Global warming! A subject best avoided!
            > >
            > > Best wishes,
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > From: Jenny
            > > Sent: Monday, August 30,
            2010 7:15 AM
            > > To:
            href="mailto:lewiscarroll%40yahoogroups.com">lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
            > > Subject: [lewiscarroll] Lewis Carroll and "myths"
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > It's amusing how these so called
            "myths" can build up, Keith. I have already read items portraying CLD as first and foremost a charitable philanthropist, which of course he wasn't, but I'm guessing people read a Sunday Times article in February which headlined his charitable donations, then developed ideas from that.
            > >
            > > No, I definitely don't follow a "highly similar" line to Karoline Leach Her
            hardback book eleven years ago was groundbreaking and highly influential, and I have often acknowledged this, most recently in Smithsonian magazine last April. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/Lewis-Carrolls-Shifting-Reputation.html
            > >
            > > But some of my own research has made me sceptical about
            aspects of her book and I am no longer interested in the concept of a "Carroll myth." I have found it more useful to consider how Carroll the man tried to fit his unusual personality to his family life, his social and cultural environment, etc.
            > >
            > > As for Wikipedia, I don't bother with it much
            but I check it sometimes, because as you say, anyone can alter it. When I finally discovered that all Wiki reference to me in connection with Lewis Carroll had disappeared, I had to do something, because it's so widely read and I can't not be on it at all. So yes, it was me who inserted the lines that Karoline has quoted (they're not THAT silly, surely?). But I should have checked with Edward Wakeling before mentioning his views, so I have deleted the reference to him.
            > >
            > > Joe may wish to read "The Deniers"
            - it's a very good book about the scientists who deny that global warming exists, (sorry - I don't know if any of them wear nylons )
            > >
            > > Hope this makes sense. It's late!
            > >
            > > Jenny
            > >
            > > --- In
            href="mailto:lewiscarroll%40yahoogroups.com">lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com, "Keith" <keith@> wrote:
            > > >
            > > > I guess all
            that Edward Wakeling is saying is that he doesn't believe the myths, neither those from the 'apologists' or those the 'denialists' or anyone else's myths about rabbit holes etc. - that's how I read it.
            > > >
            > > > Jenny equally found a new avenue of research which is well worth pursuing
            but of course it may lead to more myths if anyone reads too much into his donations and builds a case based upon very little evidence, as often happens.
            > > >
            > > > I don't see that either of them have a
            need to revise their position, they have views and nothing has come up that needs them to rethink their positions. Perhaps the 'apologists' and the 'denialists' should do a rethink!
            > > >
            > > > Best
            wishes,
            > > >
            > > > Keith
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > From: karoline5667
            > > > Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2010 10:10 AM
            > > >
            To: lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
            > > > Subject: [lewiscarroll] New Contrariwise blogpost -
            'Wiki-weird II'
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > About the latest Wiki madness.
            Anyone have any idea who is going about making these kind of ill-informed claims?
            > > >
            > > > read the blog
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            ----------------------------------------------------------
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > No virus found in this
            incoming message.
            > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
            > > > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3098 - Release Date: 08/27/10
            19:34:00
            > > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            ----------------------------------------------------------
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > No virus found in this incoming
            message.
            > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
            > > Version:
            9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3100 - Release Date: 08/29/10 07:34:00
            > >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            ----------------------------------------------------------
            >
            >
            >
            > No virus found in this incoming message.
            > Checked by
            AVG - www.avg.com
            > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3100 -
            Release Date: 08/29/10 07:34:00
            >



            No virus found in this incoming message.
            Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
            Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3102 - Release Date: 08/30/10 07:35:00


          • Jenny
            Well, I remember him sticking up for Ch.Ch. once but don t have a note of the quote. It didn t strike me as hypocritical. But if you post the actual quote you
            Message 5 of 21 , Aug 30, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              Well, I remember him sticking up for Ch.Ch. once but don't have a note of the quote. It didn't strike me as hypocritical. But if you post the actual quote you have in mind I may be able to make a more relevant comment - or it may be a quote I have not seen.

              J.


              --- In lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com, "Keith" <keith@...> wrote:
              >
              > Jenny,
              >
              > yes but the point is he was logical and he was also truthful so it is a surprise that he put pen to paper on that issue. I'm aware he could be devious and tell the truth but say it in words which gave the wrong impression but with Ch. ch. he was writing in a straight forward manner.
              >
              > Keith
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > From: Jenny
              > Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 5:30 PM
              > To: lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
              > Subject: [lewiscarroll] Re: Lewis Carroll and "myths"
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > I guess he made a distinction between the stupid young clods who come & go, and the institution of Ch.Ch. Christ Church is famous and distinguished and was his dad's alma mata, and his employer. He had quibbles and complaints about it but I don't see any hypocrisy in sticking up for it against the outside world. I think many of us are a bit like this about things we are associated with. We may grumble like anything but if someone else attacks them it is a different story.
              >
              > I would absolutely love to go and see the Smithsonian Institution in real life, although I don't know any reason why I would ever go to Washington DC and get the chance
              >
              > Jenny.
              >
              > >
              > > From: Jenny
              > > Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 9:30 AM
              > > To: lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
              > > Subject: [lewiscarroll] Re: Lewis Carroll and "myths"
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Hmm...you might be interested in a glimpse of exactly what a load of dunderheads these aristos were at ChCh when I tell you what I found written in an old book by the Earl of Warwick. He was a great friend of Harcourt (Edith's fiance) and wrote a little bit about the Liddells too. And he describes certain events which pretty well bring the atmosphere to life. Like Prince Leopold coming to his rooms and finding Warwick had some books he disapproved of, so Leopold putting the books in the shower bath and pulling the string, ruining the books. (haw haw very amusing). And how some fellows brought many cages of rats to Lord Gage's rooms and released them so the room was full of rats running everywhere (haw haw, what a rum wheeze!) Followed by returning to Lord Gage's rooms and slitting his mattress and pillows so the whole place was covered in feathers.(Haw, haw, what a jolly lot of chaps!) It must have been torture having to try and teach these men. To be fair, the Earl also th ought he was wasting his own time being there, and felt that universities shouldn't be just a kind of finishing school for hooray henries, although he didn't quite put it like that.
              > >
              > > Wonder if I should tell the Smithsonian people about what you say - they are very proud of their institution, and rightly so of course.
              > >
              > > Jenny
              > >
              > > --- In lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com, "Keith" <keith@> wrote: A
              > > >
              > > > Jenny,
              > > >
              > > > it's good that you have responded to this idea of myths. I'm not into the ground breaking idea though! Wise to be skeptical about everything until there is proof!
              > > >
              > > > My own view is that his relationship with child friends was based upon acute observation of the personality of the child but that it was mainly a matter of verbal contact and 'in' jokes etc. When I read some of the letters he wrote to child friends I cringe, but of course what I am missing is the unique understanding that he had with any child which ensured that any particular child would read his letter in the way it was intended. Isa Bowman tried to explain such things in her little book but of course she couldn't get it into the written word as it was special to her alone. The man was a natural born teacher who frankly wasted his talents at Christ Church where the aristocrats who went there were a bunch of dunderheads in the main. Some of them did achieve things in public life but this was more the fact that they belonged to the 'old boy's' network, or the aristocracy, rather that the result of anything they learned academically at Christ Church. There were excep ti ons of course but in the main the men he tried to teach there were rich and ineffectual parasites. Alice on the other hand was clever and no doubt nowadays she would achieve academically at the top grades but in those days she had no chance of doing so.
              > > >
              > > > I like your chapter 9!
              > > >
              > > > The Smithsonian is linked to CLD through one of his ancestors, Christopher Dodgson. The Dodgson's Bishop was tutor to the Percy family in Northumberland before he was a bishop. Hugh Smithson, who changed his name to Percy when he married the female heir, was squire of Airmyn where the bishop's father was vicar. As Smithson rose through the ranks he took the vicar's son with him - eventually to Ireland where Dodgson was made a bishop. Hugh Smithson had an affair with his wife's cousin and an illegitimate child resulted, that child inherited a lot of cash as his mother was well off in her own right. When he died he left the money to a relative on the understanding that if he died childless the money would go to the USA to found an institution named after him. This was how the Smithsonian came into being in a country that its benefactor had never visited! Does that make the Smithsonian illegitimate?!!
              > > >
              > > > The word I used was 'denialists' - it was Joe who linked the wrong spelling to nylons! Global warming! A subject best avoided!
              > > >
              > > > Best wishes,
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > From: Jenny
              > > > Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 7:15 AM
              > > > To: lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
              > > > Subject: [lewiscarroll] Lewis Carroll and "myths"
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > It's amusing how these so called "myths" can build up, Keith. I have already read items portraying CLD as first and foremost a charitable philanthropist, which of course he wasn't, but I'm guessing people read a Sunday Times article in February which headlined his charitable donations, then developed ideas from that.
              > > >
              > > > No, I definitely don't follow a "highly similar" line to Karoline Leach Her hardback book eleven years ago was groundbreaking and highly influential, and I have often acknowledged this, most recently in Smithsonian magazine last April. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/Lewis-Carrolls-Shifting-Reputation.html
              > > >
              > > > But some of my own research has made me sceptical about aspects of her book and I am no longer interested in the concept of a "Carroll myth." I have found it more useful to consider how Carroll the man tried to fit his unusual personality to his family life, his social and cultural environment, etc.
              > > >
              > > > As for Wikipedia, I don't bother with it much but I check it sometimes, because as you say, anyone can alter it. When I finally discovered that all Wiki reference to me in connection with Lewis Carroll had disappeared, I had to do something, because it's so widely read and I can't not be on it at all. So yes, it was me who inserted the lines that Karoline has quoted (they're not THAT silly, surely?). But I should have checked with Edward Wakeling before mentioning his views, so I have deleted the reference to him.
              > > >
              > > > Joe may wish to read "The Deniers" - it's a very good book about the scientists who deny that global warming exists, (sorry - I don't know if any of them wear nylons )
              > > >
              > > > Hope this makes sense. It's late!
              > > >
              > > > Jenny
              > > >
              > > > --- In lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com, "Keith" <keith@> wrote:
              > > > >
              > > > > I guess all that Edward Wakeling is saying is that he doesn't believe the myths, neither those from the 'apologists' or those the 'denialists' or anyone else's myths about rabbit holes etc. - that's how I read it.
              > > > >
              > > > > Jenny equally found a new avenue of research which is well worth pursuing but of course it may lead to more myths if anyone reads too much into his donations and builds a case based upon very little evidence, as often happens.
              > > > >
              > > > > I don't see that either of them have a need to revise their position, they have views and nothing has come up that needs them to rethink their positions. Perhaps the 'apologists' and the 'denialists' should do a rethink!
              > > > >
              > > > > Best wishes,
              > > > >
              > > > > Keith
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > From: karoline5667
              > > > > Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2010 10:10 AM
              > > > > To: lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
              > > > > Subject: [lewiscarroll] New Contrariwise blogpost - 'Wiki-weird II'
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > About the latest Wiki madness. Anyone have any idea who is going about making these kind of ill-informed claims?
              > > > >
              > > > > read the blog
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
              > > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
              > > > > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3098 - Release Date: 08/27/10 19:34:00
              > > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > ----------------------------------------------------------
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
              > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
              > > > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3100 - Release Date: 08/29/10 07:34:00
              > > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > ----------------------------------------------------------
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > No virus found in this incoming message.
              > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
              > > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3100 - Release Date: 08/29/10 07:34:00
              > >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              >
              >
              >
              > No virus found in this incoming message.
              > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
              > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3102 - Release Date: 08/30/10 07:35:00
              >
            • peter wesley-smith
              Jenny, A neighbour of mine was once closely associated with the Smithsonian, and last night I told him Keith s story of the origins of the large donation with
              Message 6 of 21 , Aug 30, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                Jenny,

                A neighbour of mine was once closely associated with the Smithsonian, and last night I told him Keith's story of the origins of the large donation with which it was established. Alas, he knew it well.

                To visit the Smithsonian is a perfectly valid reason in itself for going to Washington DC: no other excuse needed! It's just the other side of the pond.

                Peter



                On 31/08/2010, at 2:30 AM, Jenny wrote:

                 


                I guess he made a distinction between the stupid young clods who come & go, and the institution of Ch.Ch. Christ Church is famous and distinguished and was his dad's alma mata, and his employer. He had quibbles and complaints about it but I don't see any hypocrisy in sticking up for it against the outside world. I think many of us are a bit like this about things we are associated with. We may grumble like anything but if someone else attacks them it is a different story.

                I would absolutely love to go and see the Smithsonian Institution in real life, although I don't know any reason why I would ever go to Washington DC and get the chance

                Jenny.

                >
                > From: Jenny
                > Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 9:30 AM
                > To: lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
                > Subject: [lewiscarroll] Re: Lewis Carroll and "myths"
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > Hmm...you might be interested in a glimpse of exactly what a load of dunderheads these aristos were at ChCh when I tell you what I found written in an old book by the Earl of Warwick. He was a great friend of Harcourt (Edith's fiance) and wrote a little bit about the Liddells too. And he describes certain events which pretty well bring the atmosphere to life. Like Prince Leopold coming to his rooms and finding Warwick had some books he disapproved of, so Leopold putting the books in the shower bath and pulling the string, ruining the books. (haw haw very amusing). And how some fellows brought many cages of rats to Lord Gage's rooms and released them so the room was full of rats running everywhere (haw haw, what a rum wheeze!) Followed by returning to Lord Gage's rooms and slitting his mattress and pillows so the whole place was covered in feathers.(Haw, haw, what a jolly lot of chaps!) It must have been torture having to try and teach these men. To be fair, the Earl also th ought he was wasting his own time being there, and felt that universities shouldn't be just a kind of finishing school for hooray henries, although he didn't quite put it like that.
                >
                > Wonder if I should tell the Smithsonian people about what you say - they are very proud of their institution, and rightly so of course.
                >
                > Jenny
                >
                > --- In lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com, "Keith" <keith@> wrote: A
                > >
                > > Jenny,
                > >
                > > it's good that you have responded to this idea of myths. I'm not into the ground breaking idea though! Wise to be skeptical about everything until there is proof!
                > >
                > > My own view is that his relationship with child friends was based upon acute observation of the personality of the child but that it was mainly a matter of verbal contact and 'in' jokes etc. When I read some of the letters he wrote to child friends I cringe, but of course what I am missing is the unique understanding that he had with any child which ensured that any particular child would read his letter in the way it was intended. Isa Bowman tried to explain such things in her little book but of course she couldn't get it into the written word as it was special to her alone. The man was a natural born teacher who frankly wasted his talents at Christ Church where the aristocrats who went there were a bunch of dunderheads in the main. Some of them did achieve things in public life but this was more the fact that they belonged to the 'old boy's' network, or the aristocracy, rather that the result of anything they learned academically at Christ Church. There were excepti ons of course but in the main the men he tried to teach there were rich and ineffectual parasites. Alice on the other hand was clever and no doubt nowadays she would achieve academically at the top grades but in those days she had no chance of doing so.
                > >
                > > I like your chapter 9!
                > >
                > > The Smithsonian is linked to CLD through one of his ancestors, Christopher Dodgson. The Dodgson's Bishop was tutor to the Percy family in Northumberland before he was a bishop. Hugh Smithson, who changed his name to Percy when he married the female heir, was squire of Airmyn where the bishop's father was vicar. As Smithson rose through the ranks he took the vicar's son with him - eventually to Ireland where Dodgson was made a bishop. Hugh Smithson had an affair with his wife's cousin and an illegitimate child resulted, that child inherited a lot of cash as his mother was well off in her own right. When he died he left the money to a relative on the understanding that if he died childless the money would go to the USA to found an institution named after him. This was how the Smithsonian came into being in a country that its benefactor had never visited! Does that make the Smithsonian illegitimate?!!
                > >
                > > The word I used was 'denialists' - it was Joe who linked the wrong spelling to nylons! Global warming! A subject best avoided!
                > >
                > > Best wishes,
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > From: Jenny
                > > Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 7:15 AM
                > > To: lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
                > > Subject: [lewiscarroll] Lewis Carroll and "myths"
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > It's amusing how these so called "myths" can build up, Keith. I have already read items portraying CLD as first and foremost a charitable philanthropist, which of course he wasn't, but I'm guessing people read a Sunday Times article in February which headlined his charitable donations, then developed ideas from that.
                > >
                > > No, I definitely don't follow a "highly similar" line to Karoline Leach Her hardback book eleven years ago was groundbreaking and highly influential, and I have often acknowledged this, most recently in Smithsonian magazine last April. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/Lewis-Carrolls-Shifting-Reputation.html
                > >
                > > But some of my own research has made me sceptical about aspects of her book and I am no longer interested in the concept of a "Carroll myth." I have found it more useful to consider how Carroll the man tried to fit his unusual personality to his family life, his social and cultural environment, etc.
                > >
                > > As for Wikipedia, I don't bother with it much but I check it sometimes, because as you say, anyone can alter it. When I finally discovered that all Wiki reference to me in connection with Lewis Carroll had disappeared, I had to do something, because it's so widely read and I can't not be on it at all. So yes, it was me who inserted the lines that Karoline has quoted (they're not THAT silly, surely?). But I should have checked with Edward Wakeling before mentioning his views, so I have deleted the reference to him.
                > >
                > > Joe may wish to read "The Deniers" - it's a very good book about the scientists who deny that global warming exists, (sorry - I don't know if any of them wear nylons )
                > >
                > > Hope this makes sense. It's late!
                > >
                > > Jenny
                > >
                > > --- In lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com, "Keith" <keith@> wrote:
                > > >
                > > > I guess all that Edward Wakeling is saying is that he doesn't believe the myths, neither those from the 'apologists' or those the 'denialists' or anyone else's myths about rabbit holes etc. - that's how I read it.
                > > >
                > > > Jenny equally found a new avenue of research which is well worth pursuing but of course it may lead to more myths if anyone reads too much into his donations and builds a case based upon very little evidence, as often happens.
                > > >
                > > > I don't see that either of them have a need to revise their position, they have views and nothing has come up that needs them to rethink their positions. Perhaps the 'apologists' and the 'denialists' should do a rethink!
                > > >
                > > > Best wishes,
                > > >
                > > > Keith
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > From: karoline5667
                > > > Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2010 10:10 AM
                > > > To: lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
                > > > Subject: [lewiscarroll] New Contrariwise blogpost - 'Wiki-weird II'
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > About the latest Wiki madness. Anyone have any idea who is going about making these kind of ill-informed claims?
                > > >
                > > > read the blog
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > ----------------------------------------------------------
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
                > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                > > > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3098 - Release Date: 08/27/10 19:34:00
                > > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > ----------------------------------------------------------
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > No virus found in this incoming message.
                > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                > > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3100 - Release Date: 08/29/10 07:34:00
                > >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > ----------------------------------------------------------
                >
                >
                >
                > No virus found in this incoming message.
                > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3100 - Release Date: 08/29/10 07:34:00
                >


                Peter Wesley-Smith
                PO Box 6159
                Kangaroo Valley NSW 2577
                tel (02) 44 651 299





              • Michael Everson
                ... There s the Library of Congress.... Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
                Message 7 of 21 , Aug 30, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  On 30 Aug 2010, at 22:25, peter wesley-smith wrote:

                  > To visit the Smithsonian is a perfectly valid reason in itself for going to Washington DC: no other excuse needed! It's just the other side of the pond.


                  There's the Library of Congress....

                  Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
                • Keith
                  Just to clarify the Dodgson link to the Percy (Smithson) family. The bishop is mentioned on page 3 chapter 1 of Collingwood as being in his younger days a
                  Message 8 of 21 , Aug 30, 2010
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Just to clarify the Dodgson link to the Percy (Smithson) family.
                     
                    The bishop is mentioned on page 3 chapter 1 of Collingwood as being in his younger days a tutor to the Duke of Northumberland - Percy/Smithson. It was the bishop who wrote to Percy/Smithson about living in a Peel tower in Elsdon and sleeping between two beds to keep from being frozen to death, page 4 of Collingwood. Prior to Elsdon he was vicar of Kirkby Wishe near Ripon, also a Percy living.
                     
                    The bishop, also Charles Dodgson (1722-1795) was LC's great grandfather, on his father's side obviously, his great great grandfather Christopher Dodgson (1696-1750) was the first to break the mould from husbandry and go into the church, he was vicar of Airmynd in Yorkshire. His memorial stone, heavily weathered can still be seen behind the church there. lC's grandfather, also Charles Dodgson, was killed in Ireland in 1803.
                     
                    I researched the family history, both sides in 2003, and have published a little booklet about it.
                     
                    Keith
                     
                     

                    Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 10:25 PM
                    Subject: Re: [lewiscarroll] Re: Lewis Carroll and "myths"

                     

                    Jenny,


                    A neighbour of mine was once closely associated with the Smithsonian, and last night I told him Keith's story of the origins of the large donation with which it was established. Alas, he knew it well.

                    To visit the Smithsonian is a perfectly valid reason in itself for going to Washington DC: no other excuse needed! It's just the other side of the pond.

                    Peter



                    On 31/08/2010, at 2:30 AM, Jenny wrote:

                     


                    I guess he made a distinction between the stupid young clods who come & go, and the institution of Ch.Ch. Christ Church is famous and distinguished and was his dad's alma mata, and his employer. He had quibbles and complaints about it but I don't see any hypocrisy in sticking up for it against the outside world. I think many of us are a bit like this about things we are associated with. We may grumble like anything but if someone else attacks them it is a different story.

                    I would absolutely love to go and see the Smithsonian Institution in real life, although I don't know any reason why I would ever go to Washington DC and get the chance

                    Jenny.

                    >
                    > From: Jenny
                    > Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 9:30 AM
                    > To: lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
                    > Subject: [lewiscarroll] Re: Lewis Carroll and "myths"
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Hmm...you might be interested in a glimpse of exactly what a load of dunderheads these aristos were at ChCh when I tell you what I found written in an old book by the Earl of Warwick. He was a great friend of Harcourt (Edith's fiance) and wrote a little bit about the Liddells too. And he describes certain events which pretty well bring the atmosphere to life. Like Prince Leopold coming to his rooms and finding Warwick had some books he disapproved of, so Leopold putting the books in the shower bath and pulling the string, ruining the books. (haw haw very amusing). And how some fellows brought many cages of rats to Lord Gage's rooms and released them so the room was full of rats running everywhere (haw haw, what a rum wheeze!) Followed by returning to Lord Gage's rooms and slitting his mattress and pillows so the whole place was covered in feathers.(Haw, haw, what a jolly lot of chaps!) It must have been torture having to try and teach these men. To be fair, the Earl also th ought he was wasting his own time being there, and felt that universities shouldn't be just a kind of finishing school for hooray henries, although he didn't quite put it like that.
                    >
                    > Wonder if I should tell the Smithsonian people about what you say - they are very proud of their institution, and rightly so of course.
                    >
                    > Jenny
                    >
                    > --- In lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com, "Keith" <keith@> wrote: A
                    > >
                    > > Jenny,
                    > >
                    > > it's good that you have responded to this idea of myths. I'm not into the ground breaking idea though! Wise to be skeptical about everything until there is proof!
                    > >
                    > > My own view is that his relationship with child friends was based upon acute observation of the personality of the child but that it was mainly a matter of verbal contact and 'in' jokes etc. When I read some of the letters he wrote to child friends I cringe, but of course what I am missing is the unique understanding that he had with any child which ensured that any particular child would read his letter in the way it was intended. Isa Bowman tried to explain such things in her little book but of course she couldn't get it into the written word as it was special to her alone. The man was a natural born teacher who frankly wasted his talents at Christ Church where the aristocrats who went there were a bunch of dunderheads in the main. Some of them did achieve things in public life but this was more the fact that they belonged to the 'old boy's' network, or the aristocracy, rather that the result of anything they learned academically at Christ Church. There were excep ti ons of course but in the main the men he tried to teach there were rich and ineffectual parasites. Alice on the other hand was clever and no doubt nowadays she would achieve academically at the top grades but in those days she had no chance of doing so.
                    > >
                    > > I like your chapter 9!
                    > >
                    > > The Smithsonian is linked to CLD through one of his ancestors, Christopher Dodgson. The Dodgson's Bishop was tutor to the Percy family in Northumberland before he was a bishop. Hugh Smithson, who changed his name to Percy when he married the female heir, was squire of Airmyn where the bishop's father was vicar. As Smithson rose through the ranks he took the vicar's son with him - eventually to Ireland where Dodgson was made a bishop. Hugh Smithson had an affair with his wife's cousin and an illegitimate child resulted, that child inherited a lot of cash as his mother was well off in her own right. When he died he left the money to a relative on the understanding that if he died childless the money would go to the USA to found an institution named after him. This was how the Smithsonian came into being in a country that its benefactor had never visited! Does that make the Smithsonian illegitimate?!!
                    > >
                    > > The word I used was 'denialists' - it was Joe who linked the wrong spelling to nylons! Global warming! A subject best avoided!
                    > >
                    > > Best wishes,
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > From: Jenny
                    > > Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 7:15 AM
                    > > To: lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
                    > > Subject: [lewiscarroll] Lewis Carroll and "myths"
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > It's amusing how these so called "myths" can build up, Keith. I have already read items portraying CLD as first and foremost a charitable philanthropist, which of course he wasn't, but I'm guessing people read a Sunday Times article in February which headlined his charitable donations, then developed ideas from that.
                    > >
                    > > No, I definitely don't follow a "highly similar" line to Karoline Leach Her hardback book eleven years ago was groundbreaking and highly influential, and I have often acknowledged this, most recently in Smithsonian magazine last April. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/Lewis-Carrolls-Shifting-Reputation.html
                    > >
                    > > But some of my own research has made me sceptical about aspects of her book and I am no longer interested in the concept of a "Carroll myth." I have found it more useful to consider how Carroll the man tried to fit his unusual personality to his family life, his social and cultural environment, etc.
                    > >
                    > > As for Wikipedia, I don't bother with it much but I check it sometimes, because as you say, anyone can alter it. When I finally discovered that all Wiki reference to me in connection with Lewis Carroll had disappeared, I had to do something, because it's so widely read and I can't not be on it at all. So yes, it was me who inserted the lines that Karoline has quoted (they're not THAT silly, surely?). But I should have checked with Edward Wakeling before mentioning his views, so I have deleted the reference to him.
                    > >
                    > > Joe may wish to read "The Deniers" - it's a very good book about the scientists who deny that global warming exists, (sorry - I don't know if any of them wear nylons )
                    > >
                    > > Hope this makes sense. It's late!
                    > >
                    > > Jenny
                    > >
                    > > --- In lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com, "Keith" <keith@> wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > > I guess all that Edward Wakeling is saying is that he doesn't believe the myths, neither those from the 'apologists' or those the 'denialists' or anyone else's myths about rabbit holes etc. - that's how I read it.
                    > > >
                    > > > Jenny equally found a new avenue of research which is well worth pursuing but of course it may lead to more myths if anyone reads too much into his donations and builds a case based upon very little evidence, as often happens.
                    > > >
                    > > > I don't see that either of them have a need to revise their position, they have views and nothing has come up that needs them to rethink their positions. Perhaps the 'apologists' and the 'denialists' should do a rethink!
                    > > >
                    > > > Best wishes,
                    > > >
                    > > > Keith
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > From: karoline5667
                    > > > Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2010 10:10 AM
                    > > > To: lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
                    > > > Subject: [lewiscarroll] New Contrariwise blogpost - 'Wiki-weird II'
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > About the latest Wiki madness. Anyone have any idea who is going about making these kind of ill-informed claims?
                    > > >
                    > > > read the blog
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > ----------------------------------------------------------
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
                    > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                    > > > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3098 - Release Date: 08/27/10 19:34:00
                    > > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > ----------------------------------------------------------
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > No virus found in this incoming message.
                    > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                    > > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3100 - Release Date: 08/29/10 07:34:00
                    > >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > ----------------------------------------------------------
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > No virus found in this incoming message.
                    > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                    > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3100 - Release Date: 08/29/10 07:34:00
                    >


                    Peter Wesley-Smith
                    PO Box 6159
                    Kangaroo Valley NSW 2577
                    tel (02) 44 651 299







                    No virus found in this incoming message.
                    Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                    Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3102 - Release Date: 08/30/10 07:35:00


                  • karoline5667
                    ... I m honestly puzzled that you say this Jenny! Let s see - you say the image of Carroll as a pedophile was the result of confusion, mistake and invention on
                    Message 9 of 21 , Aug 31, 2010
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com, "Jenny" <woolf@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > No, I definitely don't follow a "highly similar" line to Karoline Leach

                      I'm honestly puzzled that you say this Jenny!

                      Let's see - you say the image of Carroll as a pedophile was the result of confusion, mistake and invention on the part of his biographers - so do I.

                      You say there was no evidence that Carroll was ever in love with Alice Liddell - so do I.

                      You say Alice Liddell had never been the `real Alice' - so do I

                      You say Carroll's relationships with women have been misunderstood and minimised -so do I

                      You say there was considerable evidence for a guilty, possibly adulterous love affair in the man's past - so, of course, do I (and so far only you have agreed with me about that)

                      You say Carroll almost lost his job over his refusal to take Holy Orders - as do I (and again only you and I have ever said that)

                      Yes, we do differ over details and over some other matters, but I think that's enough to show we do indeed follow a pretty similar line on a lot of key points.

                      Thank you for saying I was groundbreaking - I do very much appreciate it. I have always supported your work as you know, and hope to be able to again in the future.

                      k







                      Her hardback book eleven years ago was groundbreaking and highly influential, and I have often acknowledged this, most recently in Smithsonian magazine last April. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/Lewis-Carrolls-Shifting-Reputation.html


                      Thank you for the kind words, Jenny, but I can't deny I'm just puzzled about a lot of what you're saying lately.
                      > But some of my own research has made me sceptical about aspects of her book and I am no longer interested in the concept of a "Carroll myth." I have found it more useful to consider how Carroll the man tried to fit his unusual personality to his family life, his social and cultural environment, etc.




                      >
                      > As for Wikipedia, I don't bother with it much but I check it sometimes, because as you say, anyone can alter it. When I finally discovered that all Wiki reference to me in connection with Lewis Carroll had disappeared, I had to do something, because it's so widely read and I can't not be on it at all. So yes, it was me who inserted the lines that Karoline has quoted (they're not THAT silly, surely?). But I should have checked with Edward Wakeling before mentioning his views, so I have deleted the reference to him.
                      >
                      > Joe may wish to read "The Deniers" - it's a very good book about the scientists who deny that global warming exists, (sorry - I don't know if any of them wear nylons )
                      >
                      > Hope this makes sense. It's late!
                      >
                      > Jenny
                      >
                      > --- In lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com, "Keith" <keith@> wrote:
                      > >
                      > > I guess all that Edward Wakeling is saying is that he doesn't believe the myths, neither those from the 'apologists' or those the 'denialists' or anyone else's myths about rabbit holes etc. - that's how I read it.
                      > >
                      > > Jenny equally found a new avenue of research which is well worth pursuing but of course it may lead to more myths if anyone reads too much into his donations and builds a case based upon very little evidence, as often happens.
                      > >
                      > > I don't see that either of them have a need to revise their position, they have views and nothing has come up that needs them to rethink their positions. Perhaps the 'apologists' and the 'denialists' should do a rethink!
                      > >
                      > > Best wishes,
                      > >
                      > > Keith
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > From: karoline5667
                      > > Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2010 10:10 AM
                      > > To: lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
                      > > Subject: [lewiscarroll] New Contrariwise blogpost - 'Wiki-weird II'
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > About the latest Wiki madness. Anyone have any idea who is going about making these kind of ill-informed claims?
                      > >
                      > > read the blog
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > No virus found in this incoming message.
                      > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                      > > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3098 - Release Date: 08/27/10 19:34:00
                      > >
                      >
                    • Jenny
                      I am always amazed at how many well known people were connected with or knew each other. I m currently reading the memoirs of Mrs. Oliphant, and she did a
                      Message 10 of 21 , Sep 1, 2010
                      • 0 Attachment
                        I am always amazed at how many well known people were connected with or knew each other. I'm currently reading the memoirs of Mrs. Oliphant, and she did a biography of Irving, she met Drummond and went to Albury and found out about the catholic Apostolic church, - and this is the stuff we did in the Carroll event at Guildford.

                        She didn't reckon much on the apostles by the way. She sounds a lovely woman with a lot of common sense.


                        --- In lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com, "Keith" <keith@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Just to clarify the Dodgson link to the Percy (Smithson) family.
                        >
                        > The bishop is mentioned on page 3 chapter 1 of Collingwood as being in his younger days a tutor to the Duke of Northumberland - Percy/Smithson. It was the bishop who wrote to Percy/Smithson about living in a Peel tower in Elsdon and sleeping between two beds to keep from being frozen to death, page 4 of Collingwood. Prior to Elsdon he was vicar of Kirkby Wishe near Ripon, also a Percy living.
                        >
                        > The bishop, also Charles Dodgson (1722-1795) was LC's great grandfather, on his father's side obviously, his great great grandfather Christopher Dodgson (1696-1750) was the first to break the mould from husbandry and go into the church, he was vicar of Airmynd in Yorkshire. His memorial stone, heavily weathered can still be seen behind the church there. lC's grandfather, also Charles Dodgson, was killed in Ireland in 1803.
                        >
                        > I researched the family history, both sides in 2003, and have published a little booklet about it.
                        >
                        > Keith
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > From: peter wesley-smith
                        > Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 10:25 PM
                        > To: lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
                        > Subject: Re: [lewiscarroll] Re: Lewis Carroll and "myths"
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Jenny,
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > A neighbour of mine was once closely associated with the Smithsonian, and last night I told him Keith's story of the origins of the large donation with which it was established. Alas, he knew it well.
                        >
                        >
                        > To visit the Smithsonian is a perfectly valid reason in itself for going to Washington DC: no other excuse needed! It's just the other side of the pond.
                        >
                        >
                        > Peter
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > On 31/08/2010, at 2:30 AM, Jenny wrote:
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > I guess he made a distinction between the stupid young clods who come & go, and the institution of Ch.Ch. Christ Church is famous and distinguished and was his dad's alma mata, and his employer. He had quibbles and complaints about it but I don't see any hypocrisy in sticking up for it against the outside world. I think many of us are a bit like this about things we are associated with. We may grumble like anything but if someone else attacks them it is a different story.
                        >
                        > I would absolutely love to go and see the Smithsonian Institution in real life, although I don't know any reason why I would ever go to Washington DC and get the chance
                        >
                        > Jenny.
                        >
                        > >
                        > > From: Jenny
                        > > Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 9:30 AM
                        > > To: lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
                        > > Subject: [lewiscarroll] Re: Lewis Carroll and "myths"
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > Hmm...you might be interested in a glimpse of exactly what a load of dunderheads these aristos were at ChCh when I tell you what I found written in an old book by the Earl of Warwick. He was a great friend of Harcourt (Edith's fiance) and wrote a little bit about the Liddells too. And he describes certain events which pretty well bring the atmosphere to life. Like Prince Leopold coming to his rooms and finding Warwick had some books he disapproved of, so Leopold putting the books in the shower bath and pulling the string, ruining the books. (haw haw very amusing). And how some fellows brought many cages of rats to Lord Gage's rooms and released them so the room was full of rats running everywhere (haw haw, what a rum wheeze!) Followed by returning to Lord Gage's rooms and slitting his mattress and pillows so the whole place was covered in feathers.(Haw, haw, what a jolly lot of chaps!) It must have been torture having to try and teach these men. To be fair, the Earl also th ought he was wasting his own time being there, and felt that universities shouldn't be just a kind of finishing school for hooray henries, although he didn't quite put it like that.
                        > >
                        > > Wonder if I should tell the Smithsonian people about what you say - they are very proud of their institution, and rightly so of course.
                        > >
                        > > Jenny
                        > >
                        > > --- In lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com, "Keith" <keith@> wrote: A
                        > > >
                        > > > Jenny,
                        > > >
                        > > > it's good that you have responded to this idea of myths. I'm not into the ground breaking idea though! Wise to be skeptical about everything until there is proof!
                        > > >
                        > > > My own view is that his relationship with child friends was based upon acute observation of the personality of the child but that it was mainly a matter of verbal contact and 'in' jokes etc. When I read some of the letters he wrote to child friends I cringe, but of course what I am missing is the unique understanding that he had with any child which ensured that any particular child would read his letter in the way it was intended. Isa Bowman tried to explain such things in her little book but of course she couldn't get it into the written word as it was special to her alone. The man was a natural born teacher who frankly wasted his talents at Christ Church where the aristocrats who went there were a bunch of dunderheads in the main. Some of them did achieve things in public life but this was more the fact that they belonged to the 'old boy's' network, or the aristocracy, rather that the result of anything they learned academically at Christ Church. There were excep ti ons of course but in the main the men he tried to teach there were rich and ineffectual parasites. Alice on the other hand was clever and no doubt nowadays she would achieve academically at the top grades but in those days she had no chance of doing so.
                        > > >
                        > > > I like your chapter 9!
                        > > >
                        > > > The Smithsonian is linked to CLD through one of his ancestors, Christopher Dodgson. The Dodgson's Bishop was tutor to the Percy family in Northumberland before he was a bishop. Hugh Smithson, who changed his name to Percy when he married the female heir, was squire of Airmyn where the bishop's father was vicar. As Smithson rose through the ranks he took the vicar's son with him - eventually to Ireland where Dodgson was made a bishop. Hugh Smithson had an affair with his wife's cousin and an illegitimate child resulted, that child inherited a lot of cash as his mother was well off in her own right. When he died he left the money to a relative on the understanding that if he died childless the money would go to the USA to found an institution named after him. This was how the Smithsonian came into being in a country that its benefactor had never visited! Does that make the Smithsonian illegitimate?!!
                        > > >
                        > > > The word I used was 'denialists' - it was Joe who linked the wrong spelling to nylons! Global warming! A subject best avoided!
                        > > >
                        > > > Best wishes,
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > From: Jenny
                        > > > Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 7:15 AM
                        > > > To: lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
                        > > > Subject: [lewiscarroll] Lewis Carroll and "myths"
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > It's amusing how these so called "myths" can build up, Keith. I have already read items portraying CLD as first and foremost a charitable philanthropist, which of course he wasn't, but I'm guessing people read a Sunday Times article in February which headlined his charitable donations, then developed ideas from that.
                        > > >
                        > > > No, I definitely don't follow a "highly similar" line to Karoline Leach Her hardback book eleven years ago was groundbreaking and highly influential, and I have often acknowledged this, most recently in Smithsonian magazine last April. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/Lewis-Carrolls-Shifting-Reputation.html
                        > > >
                        > > > But some of my own research has made me sceptical about aspects of her book and I am no longer interested in the concept of a "Carroll myth." I have found it more useful to consider how Carroll the man tried to fit his unusual personality to his family life, his social and cultural environment, etc.
                        > > >
                        > > > As for Wikipedia, I don't bother with it much but I check it sometimes, because as you say, anyone can alter it. When I finally discovered that all Wiki reference to me in connection with Lewis Carroll had disappeared, I had to do something, because it's so widely read and I can't not be on it at all. So yes, it was me who inserted the lines that Karoline has quoted (they're not THAT silly, surely?). But I should have checked with Edward Wakeling before mentioning his views, so I have deleted the reference to him.
                        > > >
                        > > > Joe may wish to read "The Deniers" - it's a very good book about the scientists who deny that global warming exists, (sorry - I don't know if any of them wear nylons )
                        > > >
                        > > > Hope this makes sense. It's late!
                        > > >
                        > > > Jenny
                        > > >
                        > > > --- In lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com, "Keith" <keith@> wrote:
                        > > > >
                        > > > > I guess all that Edward Wakeling is saying is that he doesn't believe the myths, neither those from the 'apologists' or those the 'denialists' or anyone else's myths about rabbit holes etc. - that's how I read it.
                        > > > >
                        > > > > Jenny equally found a new avenue of research which is well worth pursuing but of course it may lead to more myths if anyone reads too much into his donations and builds a case based upon very little evidence, as often happens.
                        > > > >
                        > > > > I don't see that either of them have a need to revise their position, they have views and nothing has come up that needs them to rethink their positions. Perhaps the 'apologists' and the 'denialists' should do a rethink!
                        > > > >
                        > > > > Best wishes,
                        > > > >
                        > > > > Keith
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > > From: karoline5667
                        > > > > Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2010 10:10 AM
                        > > > > To: lewiscarroll@yahoogroups.com
                        > > > > Subject: [lewiscarroll] New Contrariwise blogpost - 'Wiki-weird II'
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > > About the latest Wiki madness. Anyone have any idea who is going about making these kind of ill-informed claims?
                        > > > >
                        > > > > read the blog
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
                        > > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                        > > > > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3098 - Release Date: 08/27/10 19:34:00
                        > > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > ----------------------------------------------------------
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
                        > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                        > > > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3100 - Release Date: 08/29/10 07:34:00
                        > > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > ----------------------------------------------------------
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > No virus found in this incoming message.
                        > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                        > > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3100 - Release Date: 08/29/10 07:34:00
                        > >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Peter Wesley-Smith
                        > PO Box 6159
                        > Kangaroo Valley NSW 2577
                        > tel (02) 44 651 299
                        > peterws@...
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > No virus found in this incoming message.
                        > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                        > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3102 - Release Date: 08/30/10 07:35:00
                        >
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.