Re: [lewiscarroll] Mary Hilton Badcock as 'Alice'
- Karoline,I can also recall that I have read that the timing was wrong in that when CLD sent the picture of Mary Badcock to Tenniel the illustrations for 'Alice' were already well advanced. I'll try and find out where that was but it may take me a day or two as I have a lot of places where it could be!Keith W----- Original Message -----From: Karoline LeachSent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 12:15 PMSubject: [lewiscarroll] Mary Hilton Badcock as 'Alice'I have managed to find a bit of additional info about the source of this story. Lennon (p. 116) locates it to 'A Handbook of the Literature of C.L. Dodgson' (1932) by S.H. Williams and Falconer Madan.Later on p. 305 of her book, Lennon returns to the subject and quotes Carroll's famous letter to Gertrude Thomson in which he says Tenniel DIDN'T use a model. She continues:"Does this mean that Mr. Madan was misinformed about Tenniel having broken his lifelong tradition? did he perhaps use only the photograph of Mary? Yet Mr Madan who was in communication with Colonel Probert, Mar'y's husband, seems quite certain that Tenniel went to Ripon to sketch her."Now, I might be mistaken, but I think I understand from this that the whole story of Dodgson recommending Mary HB to Tenniel seems to have originated, not with Dodgson, but with MARY'S family some years after his death. I wonder if this is correct. If so, it's quite interesting.I think it would be useful to take a look at the original 'handbook' entry. I don't have a copy, so if anyone who does could perhaps send me the or the list details of the relevant section I'd be immensely grateful.ThanksKaroline Leach
visit our homepage at:
to unsubscribe send a blank email to: firstname.lastname@example.org
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
- >I can also recall that I have read that the timing was wrong in that when CLD sent the picture>of Mary Badcock to Tenniel the illustrations for 'Alice' were already well advanced. I'll try and find>out where that was but it may take me a day or two as I have a lot of places where it could be!To save you any trouble, Keith - it's in Hudson (p. 135 in the 1995 paperback reprint).It's maybe also noteworthy that neither Mary nor any member of her family appears anywhere in CLD's diary up to 1868, including the list of 108 'children photographed or to be photographed'. This seems a little odd if, as we are told, he made the acquaintance of the family after seeing Mary's studio portrait and went on to photograph all the daughters himself; whatever else he left out of his diary, he tended to be reasonably thorough about recording social acquaintances and photographic subjects (even the ones who weren't models for 'Alice'). Nor is she mentioned in Collingwood.CheersMike
Eliminate more spam from your inbox by signing up for MSN 8 with its intelligent junk mail filters.