

|
Loading... The Great Charles Dickens Scandal (edition 2012)by Professor Michael Slater
Work detailsThe Great Charles Dickens Scandal by Michael Slater
None.
... All this seems impossibly remote to us. In the 1980s, Kathryn Hughes remarked that if it could be proved beyond reasonable doubt that Dickens had a sexual liaison with Ternan, the effect upon the public mind would be "like finding that Father Christmas had been to a brothel". Nowadays, we are more inclined to admire him for having had a sex life than to condemn him for it; at the very least we feel that it makes him more human. But the truth of the matter is that we still know very little about his erotic life. Did he have sex when he accompanied the erotically liberated Wilkie Collins to Paris? What exactly did he get up to when he roamed the London criminal underground by night? What precisely was the nature of his relationship with Ternan? Despite the highly plausible speculations of, among others, Claire Tomalin, we still do not know. As Michael Slater, towards the end of this wise, witty and highly entertaining volume, observes, echoing Edmund Wilson: "There is … much greater recognition now … of just how odd a case he actually was and nowhere more so than in his relations with women." There are no simple answers to the mystery of Charles Dickens; he remains richly and eternally unfathomable.
References to this work on external resources.
|
Google Books — Loading...RatingAverage: (3)
Is this you?Become a LibraryThing Author. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
An interesting point it makes is that for nearly a century now newspapers have been fascinated by the discovery and rediscovery of the scandal, printing sensationalist articles that attempt to take down the great British moralist and raconteur of home and hearth a peg. But that almost none of them are actually new.
Michael Slater, probably the leading Dickens scholar alive, does vast amounts of minute research, for example citing an article that appeared in 1874 in The Bangor Daily Whig and Courier and another story in 1885 in The Rocky Mountain News. Some of it is fascinating. Some of it is tedious. And sometimes it can be confusing because rather than presenting a unified account, it presents a large number of accounts--some of which have subsequently been falsified, some of which are grounded in clear evidence, and some of which are speculative and thus unproven.
If there is a hero for the book, it is a century of Dickensians--and their opponents--who have gone over layer after layer of minutia in an attempt to piece together events that will likely be permanently lost to history. (