The Secret World of Lewis Carroll (TV Movie 2015) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
3 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
Verdict on Wonderland
Goingbegging18 December 2017
The judging of Victorian morals has tended to face all one way - exposing hypocrisy and bogus virtue, wrenching aside one discreet lace-curtain after another. More tricky is the rescuing of reputations that have been tarnished by over-cynical interpreting of episodes that may have been quite innocent. And on this score, surely nobody has divided the critics as sharply as Lewis Carroll.

There is no doubt, it can look bad for Carroll. An unabashed love of photographing small girls, including the daughters of his patron, the Dean of Christ Church. A sudden, unexplained rift with that whole family. And then - most suspicious of all - certain pages torn out of his voluminous diaries, covering exactly this period. No wonder so many scholars have speculated on what lay beneath the surface of this outwardly dull, dry bachelor don, studying for the priesthood. In the present 1-hour BBC documentary, the commentators include Alice's great-granddaughter and Carroll's great-great-grandniece, yet there is no fudging of the issue here.

The consensus seems to be that he was a repressed pedophile, apparently confirmed by reports of him giving away games and puzzles to children on trains. But even this may qualify as "trying to impose modern values on a very different age", as the family-friendly Martha Kearney puts it. And in any case, investigation shows that there was more than one possible explanation for the crisis, other than emotional obsession with Alice. One was her mother's over-protective attitude, which may have led to conflict. Another was a possible infatuation with the children's governess, who would certainly have been off-limits to the priesthood. And then there was the business of elder sister Lorina, since she was over the age of consent, which (incredibly) was only twelve in those days. If the experts are right, a recently discovered nude photograph of someone who was almost certainly Lorina, and looking thoroughly ill-at-ease, was taken by Carroll.

But the one who always looked most ill-at-ease was Carroll himself. Pedo or otherwise, that word 'repressed' is him all over; nobody ever seemed less happy or well-adjusted. In the few photos he ever permitted, we note the starched solemnity, perhaps covering over a mass of frustrated longings. Remembering that he also suffered from a speech impediment, sometimes causing him to pause open-mouthed while no sound came, it may be that only with children could he exchange free, fluent dialogue.

Oddly enough, it's the famous Tenniel illustrations that have always left me feeling a shade uncomfortable. That perfect adult hair-style is wrong for the nine-or-ten year old that Alice is meant to be, and I can too-easily imagine some men finding it titillating.

For my money, Carroll is innocent. I think he was a lonely and frustrated man, with a strong psychological need to create an alternative world of wonder and magic, and in so doing, he enriched children's lives beyond anyone's expectation.
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Fraudulent picture
jawoolf-0708028 September 2018
Two of the expert contributors on this programme complained to the BBC Trust about this programme and the BBC was censured by its own governing body for lying. The picture, supposedly recently discovered, had been readily accessible on the internet and known to scholars for around 20 years, and was known not to be authentic. The experts on Carroll who appeared on the programme were not told of it and thereby prevented from saying this. The provenance of the photo has no connection with England, let alone Carroll. It was bought from a French dealer one of whose specialities was 19th century French medical photographs, and the photo shows the girl's spine is crooked - a fact that was obscured by the BBC's selective use of the photo. The present owner of the photo, a museum, did not appear in the film, and has never claimed the photo is of Lorina by Carroll (it is only "attributed" based on an anonymous inscription on the back.) In fact the inscription uses the name "Lewis Carroll" which nobody in Carroll's lifetime would have used since he invariably used the name "Dodgson" and kept his identity as "Carroll" secret. AND, when Lorina was a young teen he had not yet achieved fame as "Carroll" anyhow since he had not written "Alice in Wonderland" by then! The photo is also not in the format used by his specially made camera.... This was a disgraceful and dishonest bit of work and it is a pity that when the BBC Trust found that the programme had lied, they did not manage to stop it being sold all over the world. It stands now as an example of what the BBC has unfortunately descended to.
12 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Abysmally sensationalist and a wasted opportunity.
lookingglass962 May 2019
I believe the review below entitled "Fraudulent picture" just says it all.

It speaks volumes that instead of celebrating Carroll's life for this 150th anniversary back in 2015, the BBC chose what amounts to an almost character assassination on the man. Although never repeated it is still floating around online and has been exported to several countries.

I am writing this because I'd hate for anyone to be mislead about this documentary, and its claims.

The supposed photo of Lorina Liddell, given a considerable amount airtime at the end of this "documentary" is extremely dubious. The photo comes from a private collection in photos in France, and is only attributed to Carroll due to the date: Carroll was using photography at this time, but so were many hundreds of other photographers.

The World expert, Edward Wakeling, is also given some airtime in this documentary, mainly to talk about the social and cultural differences of the Victorian era to our own. Whilst this relevant for the discussion on the photo, this extremely important point is not brought up again.

Notice that Wakeling and the earlier Carroll expert, Jenny Woolf, are not given time to talk about this photo. That's because the photo segment was added in late: so late that no expert could give their opinion on it. We are instead left with the non professional "gut feeling" of a consultant who is not a Lewis Carroll expert.

World expert Wakeling DID examine this supposed photo: in 1993: and determined it wasn't by Carroll.

However instead of addressing this, the documentary disregards these points to focus on sensationalism. In the ending, the presenter Martha Carney seems to imply that we shouldn't celebrate Carroll's legacy, presumably because he was like every other Victorian photographer of the age.

Wakeling later wrote a scathing article in the Lewis Carroll Society Journal about his experiences on this documentary, and has managed to ensure it is never repeated.

Anyone with a passing interest in Victorian studies, literature, culture, or photography can see right through this deceiving documentary.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed