April 1, 2004

Carroll's Fit in Ruskin's Definition of Gothic

            In studying Carroll’s writing style and work, the reader may identify a curious relationship between Ruskin’s “Nature of Gothic” and Carroll’s fit into Gothic definition.  By Ruskin’s characteristics of Gothic, Carroll’s writing prefers grotesqueness over naturalism; reveres equally changefulness and redundancy; ignores rigidity and savageness.

            Although Carroll has Alice meet a number of animals and flowers, many of these speaking animals and plants take on the imagination of a child’s.  Alice in Wonderland first exposes the reader to a bunch of talking animals such as the mouse, the white rabbit, March Hare, and so forth.  In Through the Looking Glass, Alice discovers oversized flowers that can talk.  Carroll makes an infinite number of references to nature—nature in its grotesqueness.

Carroll’s “manner of executing certain figures is always the same, the order of design is perpetually varied, the degradation is less total” (XA 507)…  Carroll is mildly changeful, but not up to the standards of Ruskin Gothic-ness.  Carroll’s writing style in Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass is singularly dominated by the use of linguistic twists and turns whether it is puns, shades of meaning, parodies, or literal meanings.  For example, in Alice in Wonderland, the Hare says, “meaning what you say” (Gardner 95).  In the following book, Through the Looking Glass, the character of the White King responds with his literal take of what’s being said.  However, in storytelling, Caroll arranges a collage of opinions in presenting his own ideas.  According to footnotes published by Martin Gardner, Carroll alludes to and parodies a number of works through his story.  He is forever citing the work and ideas of Dante, Ruskin and other contemporary famous people and ideas.  Caroll redundantly uses the same manner of writing to communicate the variety of popular works and ideas.

            According to Ruskin’s definition of Gothic, Carroll’s style and writing subjects are irrelevant in rigidity and savageness.