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

Re: [lewiscarroll] Unpublished (in part) Letter from Carroll to Alice

Expand Messages
  • KarolineLouise@aol.com
    ... Well guys, before anyone wants to rush out an spend money on this thing ( bet you all have your cheque books ready!), I have a copy of the whole text of
    Message 1 of 2 , May 6, 2001
    • 0 Attachment



      "The full text of  this superb letter remains unpublished.  A heavily
      truncated and somewhat  misleading version was published by Alice's son
      Caryl in a magazine article  in 1932; it is this version which appears in
      Letters (Vol. II, p. 876), as
      also in Gordon, p. 230."





      Well guys, before anyone wants to rush out an spend money on this thing ( bet
      you all have your cheque books ready!),  I have a copy of the whole text of
      that letter, taken from the original in Ch. Ch.  At risk of being sued by an
      irate Mary Jean, here's what the  unpublished bit actually  says, so you can
      decide if it's worth it:

      "My dear Mrs. Hargreaves
      I have become conscious of a 'hiatus valde deflendus' [?] in the pleasant
      memories of visits  from 4 ladies from the Deanery. And I should not like the
      5th lady (with whom my relations  have never been what you might call  
      "unfriendly"!)  to go away with the thought that I have been unconscious of
      it and not tried to remedy it.
      I should be so glad if you coud quite conveniently to yourself look in for
      tea _any_ day (To a prisoner in his cell all days are alike)....

      So, four lines (more or less) are "unpublished" in the Collected Letters.
      Though my book quotes part of them  (actually I use "prisoner in his cell "as
      a chapter heading too.

      The "prisoner " ref. is nothing to do with  him missing Alice Hargreaves - he
      means he can't get out at the moment, because his knee is bad!

      I'm not sure if those four lines really merits the hyperbolic description in
      the text, but it is odd that no one has ever quoted them. They seem innocuous
      enough. I wonder if Mrs St.Clair kept them back just so she could claim it as
      a partially unpublished letter and hopefully increase its value? As a family
      they do incline more toward the monetary than historical  considerations I
      believe.

      And Joel, you are right - the collections DOES belong at Ch. Ch.  (properly
      catalogued!) and it's a shame to see it split up like this.

      K
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.