Re: Export ban on Carroll photographs.
- --- In lewiscarroll@y..., DOYLE60@a... wrote:
> Also, ownership of certain goods should be retained by whoever ownsit---I
> don't believe the cultural police should come around and invade theDodgson
> family. They own it and can do what they want with it. Why shouldthey give
> up any privacy for me.I don't believe that "eminent domain" is used as a "cultural police"
If you are opposed to the principle of eminent domain, please speak up
cirectly by not dragging in the ficticious term "Cultural Police".
Without eminent domain, none of the current superhighways could have
been built, because some owner holdouts would have held up the
projects by demanding extraordinarily high buyout prices.
Same is true of almost all airports.
Perhaps, you choose to argue that eminent domain can't be used in the
case of "literary posessions" because of .... some valid reason.
I know this action upsets you, but try not to violate Goodwins law.
- Don't know whether I support a ban on exporting Carroll's photos,
but it intrigues me that if the British are so fond of their heritage
why does an aweful lot of it end up in the colonies?
I am a Goons fan, and my sister is a dedicated Dr. Who fan...... and
it is astonishing the amount of tapes etc simply thrown out by the
Beeb. In fact it is because material was shipped accidently or
deliberately to places like Australia that there is anything like a
complete record of these programs exists.
I wonder if the same is true of Lewis Carroll photos and writings
etc. Would the manuscript for Alice's Adventures underGround have
remained at all had it not been put up for auction? Would the photos
locked away in Princeton exist at all had they not been sold? Perhaps
Carroll's diaries would have been better preserved had they been
auctioned to the highest bidder rather than left in the caring hands
of relatives. After all if I were going to pay millions for some bits
of paper and old photos I would want to look after them.
And here's a challenge..... if you found the lost diaries or
unpublished photos in *your* attic/basement/garage sale somewhere
what would *you* do with them?
(Me? well I'd sigh over them very deeply and try not to drool too
much then hand em over to someone who'd look after em but not before
I'd made my millions by writing the definitive book about Lewis
Carroll and those damned diaries!)
- Deb wrote:
< locked away in Princeton >
They are not LOCKED away in Princeton. Oh, this is getting tiring! It's
not how I look at it and it is simply the wrong way to see it. One who says
this must answer to my list. How are they to display photos in albums? How
are they (Princeton and all such facilities) supposed to find the space to
show all these Carroll items? If Carroll, what about the other writers with
goods "locked away"? Let's be practical. If you believe this than you must
answer to these problems I present. Complaints without practical solutions
will fall on deaf ears.
But perhaps you are just speaking figuratively. Then....Never mind.
< writing the definitive book about Lewis Carroll and those damned diaries!) >
But can you quote from them at all, even short "fair use" quoting? You don't
own the writing, the family does. So you have to play it cool with them, I
- pleasanceone wrote:photos
>Oh Deb you are so generous! I can hear the sighing and drooling. I'm afraid I'm not
> And here's a challenge..... if you found the lost diaries or
> unpublished photos in *your* attic/basement/garage sale somewhere
> what would *you* do with them?
> (Me? well I'd sigh over them very deeply and try not to drool too
> much then hand em over to someone who'd look after em but not before
> I'd made my millions by writing the definitive book about Lewis
> Carroll and those damned diaries!)
> Deb :)
that nice. I'd keep it/them, but I would probably donate it/them to a public
instituation when I died. However, I think it would be a Canadian institution.
(duck and cover) However, since it is extremely unlikely to happen I won't have the
issue weighing heavily on my mind.
Lewis Carroll is loved around the world, and there isn't just one item that would
be considered representative of Lewis Carroll--there are editions of books
(presentations, firsts, the 1865 "Alice"), letters, photographs, manuscripts,
diaries, etc. There are lots of great things. Why shouldn't they be spread around
*somewhat*? Britain has "Underground", and the diaries.
The world is getting smaller all the time-- 100 years ago how many of us would be
able to travel extensively? Items get more accessible all the time. I haven't seen
all Britain has to offer yet but it is not out of reach for the average person.
Canada has the Brabant collection, and the painting "The Lady with the Lilacs" by
Arthur Hughes, owned by Carroll and auctioned by the Dodgson's in 1965 (I think).
I can see both sides of the argument but "treasures" leaving their native country,
right or wrong, has been going on for centuries and will continue to go on. Items
that should be available to the public have been passing into private hands for
centuries and will continue to do so.
It was really up to Alice's granddaughter, I suppose, to make a real effort to find
a British museum or library willing to purchase the collection.
In a perfect world the entire Liddell collection would have gone to one British
institution and been available for all to see and enjoy, but it is not a perfect
Can anyone tell me what happens when export is refused? You bought the photograph
album for $___ million dollars at auction and Britain refuses to let it out of the
country. What happens to you, the buyer?