|
Post by guybarry on Feb 7, 2011 5:14:15 GMT -5
I came to Lewis Carroll via Martin Gardner, not the other way round. I was introduced to Gardner's books of mathematical puzzles and diversions (originally from Scientific American) at an early age, and the occasional reference to The Annotated Alice made me curious. I'd almost certainly read Wonderland when I was very young but not really appreciated it; I don't think I'd seen Through the Looking-Glass or any of the rest of Carroll's work. When I saw the volume with all its wonderful comments and explanations of the text, I was captivated.
Consequently, to me, the annotated versions are the Alice books, and when I see the originals on their own they seem strangely lacking. Who these days can really appreciate all Carroll's verse parodies without seeing the originals alongside? Or understand the bizarre chess-game in Through the Looking-Glass without Gardner's detailed analysis? To me, Carroll without Gardner is like a grin without a cat.
It's significant that, when I went in search of my first copy of The Annotated Snark, I couldn't find it under C for Carroll, or even D for Dodgson. I asked the assistant and she immediately knew where to look. "It's by Gardner." Of course it was - why hadn't I realized?
I was greatly saddened to hear of the passing of Martin Gardner last year as I felt he was a true one-off. There aren't many other writers or commentators who have inspired me in so many different ways. Carrollians are poorer for his loss.
|
|