Going around the internet, I'm baffled by many readers' response to Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking-Glass, and What Alice Found There. How can they read those books that way? I mean, do they need guidelines?
Let me help.
- Treat them as fairy tales.
- Don't expect a plot; don't cling to assumptions about what (Victorian) novels should do or shouldn't do.
- Don't look for an explicit moral message; don't expect Alice to learn something (Who are you? The Duchess? "And the moral of that is...").
- Focus on language; enjoy the logic games, word play, puns... and the characters; just have fun.
- Don't expect the books to be exactly like the adaptations and resent them for not being so.
- Separate Lewis Carroll from Charles Lutwidge Dodgson, i.e. get rid of all the theories about his sexuality.
What do I see when reading the Alice books? I see a logical, mathematical mind combined with a rich imagination and love of the grotesque. Being a logician that is also interested in language, Lewis Carroll notices, and jokes about, the illogicality of the English language. And he's an inventor- he makes up words and creates worlds and invents games. What a pity it is to read books as brilliant and delightful and complex as Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking-Glass and see them as nothing but products of a diseased mind! Sigh.
Come to think of it, these are of course "rules" for approaching novels in general, not just Lewis Carroll's Alice books.
______________________________________________
For fun:
Do you know that Lewis Carroll invented the Word Ladder game?
Examples:
- CAT
COT
DOT
DOG
- HEAD
HEAL
TEAL
TELL
TALL
TAIL
(My solution, btw, is different from his:
HEAD
HEAL
HELL
HALL
TALL
TAIL)
- APE
APT
OPT
OAT
MAT
MAN
The Wikipedia page quotes Nabokov as saying "some of my records are: hate—love in three, lass—male in four, and live—dead in five (with "lend" in the middle)".
From HATE to LOVE. The solution I got:
HATE
GATE
GAVE
GIVE
LIVE
LOVE
Too long. Shorter:
HATE
HAVE
CAVE
COVE
LOVE
Finally I came up with something shorter:
HATE
LATE
LAVE
LOVE
Not bad, hmm?
How do you go from LIVE to DEAD?
The solution I got was:
LIVE
LINE
LANE
LAND
LEND
LEAD
DEAD
Too long, I think. A bit googling gave me another solution:
LIVE
LOVE
LORE
LORD
LOAD
LEAD
DEAD
The number of steps is the same. Could you find a shorter solution?
I found another solution but just as long:
ReplyDeleteLIVE
HIVE
HIRE
HERE
HERD
HEAD
DEAD
MAybe Nobokov wasn't so good at counting, eh? ;)
I found a website, a programme, that solved word ladders, and this is its answer:
DeleteLIVE
DIVE
DIRE
DIRL
DIAL
DEAL
DEAD
Just as long. I don't even think "dirl" is a word.
This bothers me though.
But for "dirl" i would have solved it as i tried the tack myself.
DeleteWAit.... This is "just as long". I didn't see it before and thought this was 'the' solution (Nabokov's - or as we now know Kinbote's - that is.)
DeleteHmm....
Well, maybe Nabokov's character has trouble counting. That quote and those records belong to Charles Kinbote.
ReplyDeleteI can't even spell the name correctly, so who am i to say? But let us sue Di for spreading misinformation.
DeleteHahahhaa.
DeleteSince Kinbote is so untrustworthy, I thought he might be lying about this scores, but LIVE to DEAD in five is possible. It requires a real but obscure English word, though - LENE, which replaces your LANE & LAND.
ReplyDeleteThe answer to LASS to MALE is in the Index of Pale Fire, or most of it is. One of the many fine jokes in the Index.
LIVE
DeleteLINE
LENE
LEND
LEAD
DEAD
What does "lene" mean?
I haven't tried LASS to MALE. What's the answer? :D
Ah no, never mind, I got it.
DeleteLASS
MASS
MASE
MALE
or
LASS
LASE
MASE
MALE
Google Chrome doesn't know the word "mase", but it's in OED, so it's OK.
Actually the same can be done with "lind" which is an old English word ... but i don't know if it counts. I mean i had to look it up.
ReplyDeleteIn the Pale Fire index, it's:
ReplyDeleteLASS
LAST
MAST
MALT
MALE
Not every step is in the index. You saved a step!
LENE from the 1913 Webster's. Here it is in context (if the link works), a context that is gibberish to me but is the kind of thing Nabokov and Kinbote understood.
Did I just beat Kinbote? *open champagne*
DeleteThanks for the links. I don't get it, though.