[Originally posted 4 July 2009]
Long summer dream
Sliding round my mind
Those long summer dreams
Are leaving me behind
Hot summer day
Carry me along
To its end where I begin.
Sliding round my mind
Those long summer dreams
Are leaving me behind
Hot summer day
Carry me along
To its end where I begin.
It’s a Beautiful Day
O
|
ne hundred fifty five years ago the Civil War was raging in
North America, the Taiping Rebellion was cooking away in China, and France was
busy intervening in Mexico. In England Victoria was already a quarter century
into the interminable reign that would wind up gasping in the very foothills of
the twentieth century. And on 4 July a mathematician set out on a river
excursion with a fellow clergyman and three little girls, a trip that would
change the face of English literature forever.
Charles Dodgson, soon to be known to a wider public as Lewis
Carroll, was already an accomplished story-teller that July day in 1862 when he
started to entertain the three Liddell sisters—Lorina (13), Alice (10), and
Edith (8)—with an improvised adventure featuring a girl named Alice. He had
entertained his own sisters with stories and drawings when younger, and had
moved on to amuse other children as time passed; we may assume his art improved
with practice. These tales, as Dodgson put it, “lived and died, like summer
midges, each in its own golden afternoon.”
What happened on this particular afternoon to make things
different? Ten-year-old Alice Liddell begged Charles Dodgson to write the story
down—and, as things turned out, she was persistent enough to get him to actually
do it. In the first burst of enthusiasm Dodgson wrote out the headings for the
book—soon to be titled Alice’s Adventures
Under Ground—the very next day, but how far he got past that is unrecorded.
He did not start writing the extant manuscript until November of that year, and
he finished it in February of 1863. Illustrating it took still longer, and it
was not until 26 November of the next year, 1864, that he finally presented it
to Alice. By then he was already hard at work on a revision that would become
the published Alice’s Adventures in
Wonderland.
Now it would be naive indeed to suppose that Alice’s Adventures Under Ground is an
exact transcript of the story Charles Dodgson told the Reverend Duckworth and
the three Liddell sisters that 4th of July. (And of course nobody does make
that supposition.) The author himself tells us that “In writing it out, I added
many fresh ideas, which seemed to grow of themselves upon the original stock”.
On the other hand it must have borne some passing resemblance to the story as
originally told.
The question that I have wondered about for years, nay
decades, is just this: What exactly was the tale that Charles Dodgson told that
4 July now over a century and a half ago? Obviously there is no way directly to
find out, short of coming up with a time-machine and some sort of audio
recorder, but there are hints and indications. First, we may start with what
the author tells us, “I distinctly remember, now as I write, how, in a
desperate attempt to strike out some new line of fairy-lore, I had sent my
heroine straight down a rabbit-hole, to begin with, without the least idea what
was to happen afterwards.” As the long fall, the arrival in the little hall,
and the attempts to get out through the small door into the garden all follow
reasonably naturally from this, we may reasonably assume that they had some
counterpart in the Ur-Alice.
On the other hand there is material that seems unlikely to have
belonged to the original spoken story. The Mouse’s tale, for example, that weaves
tail-like across the page. This is a visual joke, and while we can imagine
Charles Dodgson perhaps indicating by gestures what Alice was picturing, it
seems more naturally at home in the written manuscript. Again, “the driest
thing I know”, lifted from Chepmell’s Short
Course of History, is a joke more likely conceived in the study than while
rowing up the Isis on a hot summer day.
And another thing—the it-was-all-a-dream conclusion. Did
Charles Dodgson reach a conclusion on this expedition? Several things make this
unlikely. Alice Liddell tells us, in her recollections as quoted by Dodgson’s
nephew, that he would break off a story in the middle saying, “That’s all till
next time,” to which the girls would reply, “Ah, but it is next time.” That
this may well have been one of those occasions when the story did not continue
at once we have Dodgson’s own diary entry for the 6th of August, over a month
later, when he tells of continuing his “interminable fairy-tale of Alice’s
Adventures”—some indication that this was an ongoing performance. And it’s very
tempting to suppose that he told the girls the episode of the Mock Turtle and
the Gryphon after the Liddell sisters sang “Beautiful Star” for him on 1 August
1862; the song is burlesqued as “Beautiful Soup.” (On the other hand it is
possible that Dodgson’s burlesque of the song inspired the sisters to sing it
for him correctly, or even that the two had no particular cause-and-effect
relationship.) Another song (“Sally Go Up”), burlesqued in the same scene however,
the Liddell sisters sang the very day before the 4 July expedition. Maybe “Beautiful
Soup” was one of the additions to the written tale.
One odd feature of the book is worth noting here—there are two
distinct parts to it. In the first part Alice is constantly changing size; at
first she has no control over the situation, but then, thanks to advice from a
caterpillar, she acquires the parts of a magic mushroom that allow her to
control her own size. In the second part of the book, however, this is all
forgotten. Once Alice finds her way into the garden the mushroom is never
mentioned again, and in the original story her size (as far as we can tell)
stays constant. (In the published version she starts growing uncontrollably
during the trial scene.) She is said to be fifteen inches high in the MS (a
foot in the published version), but the fact is that it is difficult to tell
exactly what size she is. She interacts with playing cards as though she were
in the same size range (three inches, maybe?), but the game of croquet is
played with ostriches for mallets and hedgehogs for balls—are we supposed to
picture them as miniature ostriches and hedgehogs? Or are the cards gigantic?
The size thing, which is such a major feature of the first part of the book,
has gone completely out the window by this point.
The point where this change happens has its own interest.
Abruptly, just after the encounter with the pigeon in the MS (just after the
Mad Tea Party in the book), Alice sees a door in a tree. She goes inside and
finds herself back in the dark hall with the little door to the garden where
she had been at the beginning of her adventures. This time, thanks to the magic
mushroom, she is in control of her size and manages to make it through the door
into the garden with ease. And it is from this point on that the mushroom and
the size changes so evident up till now are forgotten.
It’s very satisfying that Alice manages to achieve the goal
that frustrated her earlier, but it’s also arbitrary. The door in the tree that
leads to the dark hall comes from nowhere; it has been prepared for in no way,
and it’s really unnecessary. To put it another way, if Alice had never got
through the door into the garden, but instead had further Pig and Pepper style
adventures, we would never have noticed the omission. If Alice had come to the
garden via another route, we as readers would have been perfectly happy. It is
true that getting into the garden is the one element of the story that provides
anything resembling purpose—but it’s hardly a major element. In fact Alice’s
determination to somehow get into the garden is only mentioned once between the
two hall episodes—just after the pigeon encounter.
While I’m not pretending to have exhausted the possibilities
here, there is one plausible reason from the author’s perspective why it may
have been necessary to return to the little hall and the exit to the garden:
because that’s how the story already went. If, to put it as simply as possible,
in an earlier version of the story Alice had made it out into the garden at the
end of the first hallway episode, and had subsequent adventures there; and if
Dodgson had decided to add at this point some of those “fresh ideas, which
seemed to grow of themselves upon the original stock” that take Alice away from
the hallway, then it would be necessary at some point to get Alice back to the
hallway to continue with the earlier version of the story.
Let’s see how this plays out, then. On this hypothesis the
pool of tears, the encounter with the mouse et al (including both the driest
thing I know and the mouse’s tale mentioned above as unlikely to have been part
of the original oral version), the adventures at the white rabbit’s house, the
encounter with the caterpillar (including the advice about the mushroom), and
Alice’s confrontation with the pigeon who thinks she’s a serpent—all these will
have been additions to the earlier story. It is these adventures that contain
and elaborate on the changing-size motif. The reason, then, that the mushroom
and size-changing aspects of the story disappear when Alice gets to the garden
is simple. They weren’t part of the earlier version of the story. Once Dodgson
gets back to the earlier version of the story those elements disappear
precisely because they were later elaborations.
Another point: one of the things that irritated me about the
hallway episode when I was a child is this: Alice, when she’s nine feet tall,
is able to unlock the door and peer out into the garden. But, when she
accidentally shrinks down to about three inches and runs back to the door, it’s
once again locked and the key is back again on that glass table. Now that just
seemed plain arbitrary to me. How did the door get itself locked again? (Yeah,
I know it’s a dream, but still—) And for that matter why on earth didn’t Alice
either hold onto the key, or put it down somewhere where she could reach it
when she was small enough to get through. Hell, why hadn’t she simply left it
in the keyhole? We are supposed to imagine, apparently, that after looking out
through the door she relocked it and thoughtfully placed the key back on the
glass table where it would be inconveniently out of reach the next time she was
small enough to get out through it—and all this without a word of narrative to
support it.
Now let’s suppose for a moment that the original narrative had
gone something like this:
As she said this, she looked down at her hands, and was surprised
to find she had put on one of the rabbit’s little gloves while she was talking.
“How can I have done that?” thought she, “I must be growing small again.” She
got up and went to the table to measure herself by it, and found that, as
nearly as she could guess, she was now about two feet high, and was going on
shrinking rapidly: soon she found out that the reason of it was the nosegay she
held in her hand: she dropped it hastily, just in time to save herself from
shrinking away altogether, and found that she was now only three inches high.
“Now for the garden!” cried Alice, as she hurried back to the
little door, and then she found herself at last in the beautiful garden, among
the bright flowerbeds and the cool fountains.
Although as I've mentioned size is ambiguous in this final
section, at three inches Alice would have been a reasonable height to interact
with playing cards. (The ostriches and hedgehogs are unreasonable whether Alice
is three inches or fifteen inches high, however.)
So as I’ve indicated this hypothesis explains quite nicely
some of the features of the narrative that are otherwise puzzling. Is there any
reason to suppose, however, that Dodgson would be likely to work in this
manner—slicing a narrative open to insert new material?
Yes, there is. The
Hunting of the Snark grew from three fits to eight by the addition of
episodes between the opening two fits and the closing one. Sylvie and Bruno clearly shows signs of this same hollowing-out
process; the original plot-line, abandoned after chapter 12 of Sylvie and Bruno, resumes abruptly at
chapter 20 of Sylvie and Bruno Concluded,
picking up with the same themes and plans that had vanished in the previous
volume. In each case Dodgson cut the work apart to insert new material into the
innards, though in the case of Sylvie and
Bruno at least some of the new material was actually older than the
surrounding text into which it was inserted. And in the change from the MS to
the printed version of Alice’s Adventures
itself we can see the process continuing; the new Pig and Pepper and Mad Tea
Party episodes are added between the pigeon and second hallway episodes. And
with their insertion we can see how material becomes displaced from its
original context.
In the MS we find:
It was so long since she had been of the right size that it felt
quite strange at first, but she got quite used to it in a minute or two, and
began talking to herself as usual: “Well! There’s half my plan done now! How puzzling
all these changes are! I’m never sure what I’m going to be, from one minute to
another! However, I’ve got to my right size again: the next thing is, to get
into that beautiful garden—how is that to be done, I wonder?”
Just as she said this, she noticed that one of the trees had a
doorway leading right into it. “That's very curious,” she thought…
In other words we are reminded immediately before Alice sees
the doorway leading her back to the hall of her intent to get into the garden.
But in the book we have:
“…how is that to be done, I wonder?” As she said this, she came
suddenly upon an open place, with a little house in it about four feet high.
Two chapters later, after the Pig and Pepper and Mad Tea Party
episodes Dodgson returns to this moment:
“At any rate I’ll never go there again!” said Alice, as she picked
her way through the wood. “It’s the stupidest tea-party I ever was at in all my
life!”
Just as she said this, she noticed that one of the trees had a
door leading right into it. “That's very curious,” she thought.
Note how he gets here. Dodgson has taken the original phrase “Just
as she said this” and used it twice in the resultant text, leaving on it (“As
she said this she came suddenly upon…”) and then returning to the original text
with it (“Just as she said this, she noticed that one of the trees…”). In the
process of making this insertion the original preparatory text about Alice’s
plan to get into the garden has become separated by two chapters worth of
material from its payoff (the door in the tree), and that small duplication
shows us exactly where the incision was made.
Now there’s no exact verbal duplication that seems to mark the
point of the original incision (nor does there have to be, but it’s helpful
when there is), but I suggest that “as she hurried back to the little door”
(original episode) may well be parallel to “then she walked down the little
passage” (second hallway episode). The reference to the little passage is wrong
in any case; the door was behind a curtain and led to a little passage out into
the garden; there was no little passage leading to the door. I suspect Dodgson
here engaged in a little careless rewriting.
And another thought: we know that Dodgson continued working on
the story even after the MS had assumed its final form. Note where he added the
two new episodes (Pig and Pepper and the Mad Tea Party): directly at the end of
the earlier new material, by this hypothesis. True, not all the new material
was added here; he expanded the trial scene considerably, for one thing. But it
is interesting; it is as though the MS froze the story at a particular moment
in time as it was being developed. Dodgson starts writing the material for the
insertion; he cuts it short so that the MS actually gets finished and he can
present it to Alice; but for the book he simply keeps on going from that same
point.
Okay, I could continue elaborating on my thoughts, and in fact
have started and abandoned a couple of paragraphs that do just that, but there’s
a barbecue waiting for me down the street and I want to get this published some
time in the foreseeable future. So let me cut to the chase. Is there any remote
chance that the tale as I’ve recovered it, shorn of the various parts I’ve
mentioned as probable additions, represents what Charles Dodgson told Alice and
her sisters that long-ago 4th of July?
Probably not. It might be a stage closer, but, well—the thing
is, there was almost certainly at least one manuscript between the MS we have
and the story as it was told. In pre-computer days it was standard to create a
manuscript (rough draft) before typing up or hand-lettering the presentation
copy. Everything about the extant MS (including the fact that it was a
presentation copy) suggests that it is a final copy, and Dodgson will have
prepared it from a rough draft of some kind. That rough draft will have been
where he worked out the changes and revisions that created the present tale.
The earlier version that I have tentatively reconstructed, even if it be valid,
is just as likely to have been an earlier MS draft as the oral story itself.
And another thing—there were months between Charles Dodgson’s first telling of the story and his
creation of the extant MS. Months to forget, to alter, to blur the details of
the original story. Now we can assume that he had something to go by—he himself tells us he wrote out the “headings”
for the story the very next day, and with any luck he will at least have had
that to go by.
Now here’s my fantasy of how we might have at least the outline
of the story as told on 4 July 1862. (There are too many speculative elements
now for me to even call this a hypothesis.) We know Dodgson wrote out the “headings”
for the story the next day. Canon Duckworth tells us that Dodgson told him “that
he sat up nearly the whole night, committing to a MS. book his recollections of
the drolleries with which he had enlivened the afternoon.” Now maybe Canon
Duckworth is confused, and the MS he’s thinking of was the one we have, the
presentation copy to Alice, and he was just flat wrong about when it was
written and how long it took. But what if his story is correct? The MS book in
this case would be a lost rough draft, precisely the sort of thing that could
have formed the basis for the final MS copy we actually have, and exactly the
sort of thing that my reconstructed Ur-Alice
would look like. Maybe, just maybe, we are this
close to the tale as told.
Now one of the consequences of this is that we have gradually
been losing some of the best parts of the Wonderland story as I’ve been going
through this. Of course we already knew that the Mad Tea Party formed no part
of the story that memorable day, but now we’ve lost the caterpillar as well.
And maybe the croquet scene—remember those troublesome ostriches and hedgehogs?
And of course the trial was a mere sketch of what it would eventually become.
And the gryphon and the mock turtle may have been part of story told at a later
time. What was it about the story, then, that so enthralled Alice, whose
enthusiasm ultimately enriched us all?
Well, we’ll never know, and that’s probably how it should be.
For some things, you just had to be there.
No comments:
Post a Comment