• Обновления [Recent Updates]

Список страниц, недавно добавленных на сайт

Получать уведомления об изменениях на этой странице по E-Mail
Receive an automatic E-Mail notification whenever content changes on this website

The Indianapolis Journal: Mystery of the Murder of Edwin Drood Solved by Readers

Отправлено 11 апр. 2018 г., 2:14 пользователем Sven Karsten   [ обновлено 11 апр. 2018 г., 2:15 ]

The Journal publishes below the prize-winning contributions in the Edwin Drood Mystery Contest. Owing to the unexpectedly large number of contestants the labors of of the Jury of awards have been severe, but they have performed their duty with strict impartiality under the contest conditions. By these conditions it was necessary that the prizes should be awarded to the contributions showing the most plausible ending of Dickens' unfinished novel. The theory upon which the judges acted was that Edwin Drood should be found in one of the Cathedral tombs. The atmosphere of tragedy which marks the story from first to last make it clear, the judges believe, that the author had no intention of resurrecting the hero of the story. The sinister significance which was given by Mr. Dickens to John Jasper's night prowlings In the cathedral, to the incident of Durdle's keys, to the reference to the piles of quick-lime, to the displaced hands of the cathedral clock and, above all, to the horrible ravings of the villain in the opium den, convinced the judges that they must act on the theory that Edwin Drood was murdered and thrown from the cathedral tower, his body concealed in a tomb, covered with quick-lime, and that the hag who presided at the opium den should play an important part in the detectives' efforts to unravel the mystery.

Under this decision a large number of most excellent contributions were necessarily disqualified. About 25 per cent of the solutions received were written on the theory that Drood had either voluntarily disappeared or had been assaulted by Jasper and left for dead but had later recovered. Many of the contestants made the mistake of paying very much more attention to the possible matrimonial alliances of the story than to the unraveling of the mystery of young Drood's disappearance. A considerable number of solutions were disqualified because they largely exceeded the specified space limit. In addition to the prize-winners there was a large number of solutions which were possessed of much merit and the Journal publishes a list of these as having received honorable mention. The contest has aroused great interest throughout the city and State and the Journal wishes to express its thanks to the gentlemen who have acted as Judges for their courtesy and care in the discharge of the duties which they have so cheerfully assumed.

>>> Читать дальше [Read more]

Deanna Madden: Helena Landless

Отправлено 25 февр. 2018 г., 4:47 пользователем Sven Karsten   [ обновлено 25 февр. 2018 г., 4:47 ]

When I was six, I saw a man bitten by a cobra. It happened in the marketplace in Colombo, where my brother Neville and I had been taken by our ayah, a young Indian woman who was hired to watch us. The cobra belonged to a fakir who earned a few rupees by charming it out of a basket. That day a circle of people had gathered around him. The crowd seemed as mesmerized by the fakir's flute as the cobra that was slowly rising from the basket. It was as if time stood still. The only thing that moved was the cobra, and it rose so effortlessly that it hardly seemed real. It reminded me of a rope trick I had seen another fakir perform. Only this time in place of the harmless rope end was the flat hooded head of the cobra. I watched, entranced, until the music died away. We all held our breath, waiting for something to happen. Then the cobra lunged at a man in the crowd wearing a white turban. The man screamed as the cobra sunk its fangs into the arm he had raised to shield his face. The basket was knocked over, and people scattered in all directions. Our ayah hurried us away and afterward begged us not to tell what had happened. We never told, but for a long time both Neville and I were haunted by bad dreams. To this day it is one of my most dreadful memories of Ceylon.

Neville and I were born in Ceylon, he six minutes ahead of me. Our father was an officer in her Majesty's service who died so young we couldn't remember him. Our mother remarried because she had no way to take care of us, let alone herself. She died when we were six, leaving us orphans at the mercy of our stepfather, a tyrant who begrudged us food and sometimes beat us. When he died thirteen years later, we were sent back to England to be wards of Mr. Honeythunder, a philanthropist who took an interest in orphans of the empire. Mr. Honeythunder had no intention of taking us into his household. Even before we arrived in England, he had made arrangements for us. He had found a cleric in Cloisterham, a sleepy cathedral town some three hours distant from London, who would tutor Neville, and a seminary for young women located near the cleric where I could study as well. This was his plan for us until we would come of age, at which time he would wash his hands of us entirely.

>>> Читать дальше [Read more]

Свен Карстен: Идентификация Елены

Отправлено 24 февр. 2018 г., 4:51 пользователем Sven Karsten   [ обновлено 24 февр. 2018 г., 4:55 ]

Рассказывают, будто бы сэр Джон Бра­у­нинг, гу­бер­на­тор Гон­кон­га в 1850-х годах, про­чи­тав первую главу дик­кен­сов­ской "Тайны Эдви­на Друда" на­пи­сал её име­ни­то­му ав­то­ру лич­ное пись­мо, в ко­то­ром ука­зал Дик­кен­су на неко­то­рые несо­от­вет­ствия его опи­са­ний ку­ре­ния опи­ума с ре­аль­но­стью. Сэр Джон утвер­ждал, что ку­ри­тель­ные труб­ки, сде­лан­ные из чер­ниль­ных пу­зырь­ков, яв­ля­ют­ся нон­сен­сом, а в пра­виль­ных ки­тай­ских труб­ках опиум по­ме­ща­ют внутрь мед­но­го шара, укреп­лён­но­го по­се­ре­дине полой бам­бу­ко­вой палки. К пись­му при­ла­гал­ся даже эскиз такой "пра­виль­ной труб­ки". В от­вет­ном пись­ме Чарльз Дик­кенс по­бла­го­да­рил сво­е­го чи­та­те­ля за такое вни­ма­ние к де­та­лям ро­ма­на и за­ме­тил, что все­гда опи­сы­ва­ет толь­ко то, что видел соб­ствен­ны­ми гла­за­ми ‒ и это ка­са­ет­ся не толь­ко пред­ме­тов, но и дей­ству­ю­щих лиц его ро­ма­нов.

Дей­стви­тель­но, и я, и мно­гие дру­гие ис­сле­до­ва­те­ли об­на­ру­жи­ли зна­чи­тель­ное число ре­аль­ных лич­но­стей, с ко­то­рых Дик­кенс спи­сы­вал об­ра­зы своих пер­со­на­жей. Ка­но­ник Уай­стон, слу­жив­ший свя­щен­ни­ком Ро­че­стер­ско­го со­бо­ра в 1842-м году, стал Сеп­ти­му­сом Кри­спарк­лом, образ гро­мо­глас­но­го Лу­ка­са Хо­ни­тан­де­ра спи­сан Дик­кен­сом с ква­ке­ра-ре­фор­ма­то­ра Джона Болда, мэр со­сед­не­го с Ро­че­сте­ром го­род­ка Мэйдсто­у­на по имени Томас Эд­метт стал мэром ро­ман­но­го Клой­стерг­э­ма ту­по­го­ло­вым Сапси, а ши­ро­ко из­вест­ную хо­зяй­ку лон­дон­ско­го опи­ум­но­го при­то­на Ма­туш­ку Аб­дал­лу автор "пе­ре­ли­це­вал" в ска­ред­ную и мсти­тель­ную Прин­цес­су Ку­рил­ку. Без со­мне­ния, и все про­чие пер­со­на­жи "Тайны Эдви­на Друда" взяты пи­са­те­лем из ре­аль­ной жизни ‒ по край­ней мере, их внеш­ний облик, если уж не точ­ные де­та­ли их био­гра­фий.

В одной из преды­ду­щих ста­тей я вы­дви­нул тео­рию, что и сам сюжет "Тайны Эдви­на Друда" яв­ля­ет­ся пе­ре­дел­кой на де­тек­тив­ный лад сю­же­та ро­ма­на Эн­то­ни Трол­ло­па "Смот­ри­тель" ‒ уж слиш­ком много пе­ре­кли­ка­ю­щих­ся между собой де­та­лей об­на­ру­жи­ва­ет­ся в этих двух ро­ма­нах. Вы­ве­ден в ро­мане Дик­кен­са и сам Эн­то­ни Трол­лоп: едкой ка­ри­ка­ту­рой на него мне пред­став­ля­ет­ся образ клер­ка Ба­з­за­рда ‒ ворч­ли­во­го и са­мо­лю­би­во­го без­дель­ни­ка, ав­то­ра неудав­шей­ся пьесы "Тер­нии забот". До на­ча­ла своей пи­са­тель­ской ка­рье­ры, Эн­то­ни Трол­лоп семь лет ра­бо­тал клер­ком в поч­то­вом от­де­ле­нии, и был (по соб­ствен­ным его сло­вам, при­ве­дён­ным в его "Ав­то­био­гра­фии") крайне там несча­стен и неуспе­шен. В своё время на­пи­сал он и пьесу "Did He Steal It?" ‒ вещь на­столь­ко без­дар­ную, что о ней плохо от­зы­ва­лись даже его дру­зья-ак­тё­ры. Света рампы она не уви­де­ла ни­ко­гда, так же, как и пьеса Ба­з­за­рда.


>>> Читать дальше [Read more]

Benny R. Reece: Mystery of Edwin Drood Solved

Отправлено 4 февр. 2018 г., 11:43 пользователем Sven Karsten   [ обновлено 4 февр. 2018 г., 11:43 ]

My favourite example of this way of seeing the novel [using Dickens’ death as the point from which to read the text] is Benny R. Reece’s utterly mad book, The Mystery of Edwin Drood Solved (1989). It argues that Dickens wrote the book as a sort of inverted roman a clef, so that anyone familiar with Greek mythology could arrive at the ending he would never live to write.

Edwin Drood, he claims, is a puzzle designed by an author who had no intention of completing it (and which can therefore be seen as already finished), made to be deciphered by a reader who could identify the clues provided. Based on the assumption that Dickens had patterned his plot on Greek mythology, Reece makes Dickens’ text adopt the complicated family and intrigue patterns of the Olympic pantheon, making it necessary to conclude that Helena (as Artemis) killed Drood (as Orion) because he tried to rape her. Still according to this logic, Honeythunder (Zeus), Tartar (Poseidon) and Durdles (Pluto) are brothers; and Rosa (Eos) is romantically involved with Datchery, Drood, Grewgious and Joe (the omnibus driver), in what Reece accurately describes as a “frankly lewd” romantic subplot (Reece 1989:46). I, for one, never suspected Dickens had it in him.

>>> Читать дальше [Read more]

The Mystery of Edwin Drood … Concluded!

Отправлено 4 февр. 2018 г., 11:12 пользователем Sven Karsten   [ обновлено 4 февр. 2018 г., 11:12 ]

In the summer of 1870, Charles Dickens was exhausted by work and travel and traumatized by the Staplehurst railway accident, which he survived but ten others did not. He died on June 9, leaving unfinished his final novel, The Mystery of Edwin Drood.

Ever since, readers have struggled to figure out how the novel would have ended, and the solutions to its various plot mysteries. Was Edwin Drood murdered, and if so, by whom? Who is the mysterious ‘Dick Datchery’ — a man (or woman?) — clearly in disguise? What is the destiny of the star-crossed nonlovers Drood and Rosa Bud, and the Sri Lankan (‘Ceylonese’) siblings known in England as Neville and Helena Landless? What would the ending have said about Dickens’s final views on the novel’s major themes: the passage of time and regimes, imperialism and colonialism, ‘progress’ and envy, and more?

Several UWGB students taking English 436: Major Authors: Dickens have ‘found’ some lost fragments that look like endings to Edwin Drood. To see the novel concluded, choose your adventure from these possibilities.

>>> Читать дальше [Read more]

Albert Field: The Mystery of Edwin Drood Solved by Charles Dickens

Отправлено 26 янв. 2018 г., 10:08 пользователем Sven Karsten   [ обновлено 26 янв. 2018 г., 10:09 ]

Jasper's only purpose in life has been to hold Ned to him. He cannot have had a happy childhood, with no mother and (much of his life) no father. There was no one else but Ned to satisfy his need for love. And Ned, also having no mother and losing his father during adolescence, needs Jasper's love and loves him in return.

But now Ned is about to leave him both geographically and emotionally; when they dine together, he proposes a toast to Pussy, and that evening leaves her birthday present at the school. Grewgious makes it clear the wedding will take place, and the "lovers" are seen to kiss.

He will lose the only person he ever cared about and (more importantly) the only person who ever cared about him. He will be alone the rest of his life.

When Jasper banned the words "uncle" and "nephew," he was trying to bring them closer. Yet for two men who are too close in age to be father and son, there are only two relationships that are closer. It may be that Jasper wants Ned to feel that he is his brother (which is half true but cannot be revealed). Or it may be that he hopes for the closeness of a special friendship. All of his love is focused on Ned; he wants all of Neds love for himself.

>>> Читать дальше [Read more]

Rolf Parker: Brattleboro's T.P. James - Spiritualist, writer ... and conman?

Отправлено 25 дек. 2017 г., 12:01 пользователем Sven Karsten   [ обновлено 25 дек. 2017 г., 12:01 ]


UPERSTITIONS has it that on Halloween, spirits of the dead come back to walk the earth. If true, T. P. James might choose to return to Brattleboro. This is where James claimed Charles Dickens' ghost dictated to him the ending to the unfinished novel "The Mystery of Edwin Drood." James published the completed novel in Brattleboro on Halloween, in 1873.

And if James's spirit was to come back to Brattleboro, the Market Block on Elliot Street, (the building which currently houses Taylor for Flowers and the Blueberry Haus Ice Cream parlor) might be a logical place to anticipate his return. James' book was first sold at E. J. Carpenter's store, which was in the center of the three shops housed on the first floor. James worked in the The Vermont Record and Farmer's print shop, which was in a narrow section towards the back of the building. The publishing office of the paper shared the second floor with apartments. Later in his career, James came to work as the co-editor and publisher of the Windham County Reformer, the forerunner of the Brattleboro Reformer, and entered the doorway which now fronts the ice cream parlor.

Did James believe his own story, that he channeled Dickens' ghost? Or was he a gifted literary con-man? Dickens died in 1870 leaving millions of people, who had been reading Drood in installments, without an ending to his murder mystery. This presented an obvious opportunity for writers and publishers.

News that work was being done in Brattleboro to complete the novel came in a long sensational article printed in The Springfield Union in July of 1873. Long excerpts of this article were reprinted in newspapers across the country, and in Brattleboro's Record and Farmer, in August of 1873. A shorter excerpt followed in the Record's competitor, the Vermont Phoenix as well as a vigorously skeptical denouncement of it. An anonymous "special correspondent" for the Union, claimed that in 1872, a poorly educated mechanic, a "Mr. A," encountered Dickens' ghost at s ances held by his landlady, who owned a boarding house on Oak Street. During his first s ance, which he attended reluctantly, the table "waltzed exuberantly around the room, and finally tipped over into the mechanic's lap." At another s ance, the mechanic, who "had never written so much as a newspaper paragraph for publication", fell into a trance, took up pen and paper, and proceeded to write.

>>> Читать дальше [Read more]

Edward Salmon: Mystery on Mystery

Отправлено 21 нояб. 2017 г., 13:30 пользователем Sven Karsten   [ обновлено 21 нояб. 2017 г., 13:32 ]

After about a decade of hard work as a litterateur, I was beginning in 1871 to feel that I had secured the very smallest niche possible in the Temple of Fame. I was then, as I am now, a novelist—not a Scott, but still a novelist; not a genius, but a sufficiently capable wielder of the pen as penmen go. To be a great popular writer of fiction has always been my ambition, to be a toiling and inadequately-remunerated scribe has, until quite recently, been my lot.

'If the public or the publishers, or whoever it might have been, had been of the mind of some of my generous critics, I might have been pardoned if I had fancied myself one of those heroes who are born, not made. But whilst one reviewer here detected in my work more than a suggestion of 'quite Dickensesque power,' and another a 'strong Wilkie Collins-like uncanniness,' the public was laughing over Dickens and shuddering before Wilkie Collins and—I was writing. I produced a good deal more than the public ever read. For almost every manuscript that was printed, I placed another in the capacious recesses of several pigeon-holes, charitably determined if I was not permitted to realise the full fruits of my labours, some one, when it was posthumously discovered that my work was worth perusing, should have the opportunity of turning an easy shilling.

'Fame and fortune were, I found, not necessarily identical in the great republic of letters. Of the former I seemed to have enough and to spare; of the latter little or none. But it is unfair to grumble. I earned sufficient to make both ends meet, and lucky is the man who can say so much.

>>> Читать дальше [Read more]

Свен Карстен: О вещах "мелких, никчемных и жалких"

Отправлено 1 нояб. 2017 г., 14:36 пользователем Sven Karsten   [ обновлено 1 нояб. 2017 г., 14:36 ]

У меня на­ко­пи­лось несколь­ко со­об­ра­же­ний, опи­са­ние ко­то­рых не тянет на от­дель­ную ста­тью, но ко­то­рые, как мне пред­став­ля­ют­ся, не ли­ше­ны ин­те­ре­са и могут про­дви­нуть рас­сле­до­ва­ние в нуж­ную сто­ро­ну. По­это­му я решил со­брать эти "poor, mean, miserable things" здесь под еди­ным за­го­лов­ком.

1. Иден­ти­фи­ка­ция Ку­рил­ки, вто­рой под­ход.

Ранее я утвер­ждал, что хо­зяй­ку опи­ум­но­го при­то­на, вы­ве­ден­ную Дик­кен­сом в об­ра­зе Прин­цес­сы Ку­рил­ки, звали Ханна Джон­сон, и она была женою ки­тай­ца А Синга, тоже тор­гов­ца опи­умом, кре­щё­ное имя ко­то­ро­го было Джек. Следы этого ки­тай­ца мы на­хо­дим в ро­мане: во-пер­вых, на пер­вом эс­ки­зе ри­сун­ка об­лож­ки, во-вто­рых, в самом тек­сте, где Прин­цес­са Ку­рил­ка рас­ска­зы­ва­ет Джас­пе­ру, что никто не умеет так хо­ро­шо при­го­то­вить опиум, как она, "ну, воз­мож­но, ис­клю­чая ещё Дже­ка-ки­тай­ца с про­ти­во­по­лож­ной сто­ро­ны двора". В поль­зу тео­рии, что Прин­цес­са Ку­рил­ка была женой Дже­ка-ки­тай­ца и дер­жа­ла, как бы, фи­ли­ал его ку­риль­ни, я при­во­дил ещё и тот факт, что в ре­аль­ной жизни Джек-ки­та­ец вы­гнал свою жену из дома за пьян­ство (она снес­ла в трак­тир и об­ме­ня­ла на вы­пив­ку даже сва­деб­ный по­да­рок Джека, шел­ко­вую ки­тай­скую шаль) — а мы пом­ним, что в ро­мане Ку­рил­ка "шест­на­дцать лет пила, не про­сы­хая". По­это­му, я пред­по­ло­жил, что жена Дже­ка-ки­тай­ца про­сто по­се­ли­лась в подъ­ез­де на­про­тив и от­кры­ла там свою ку­риль­ню (раз уж она на­бра­лась уже опыта у сво­е­го быв­ше­го мужа).

Но, по­хо­же всё-та­ки, Ханна Джон­сон ни при чём в этой ис­то­рии.

>>> Читать дальше [Read more]

Андрей Колотов: Тайна последнего романа Ч. Диккенса

Отправлено 6 окт. 2017 г., 10:34 пользователем Sven Karsten   [ обновлено 6 окт. 2017 г., 10:34 ]

Намедни, обчитавшись сдуру навязчивой рекламы, совершил я трагический и совершенно необдуманный поступок. Скачал с интернета и прочитал роман Ч.Диккенса, «Тайна Эдвина Друда».

Жестокое разочарование постигло меня после прочтения первых же его страниц. Дурной, неудобоваримый перевод, выполненный, как выяснилось позднее, под руководством М.А.Шишмаревой аж в 1916 году для издательства П.П.Сойкина, где нарочито абстрактные описания чередовались с диалогами персонажей, напоминал скорее чрезмерно затянутую пьесу, нежели художественный роман. Для примера:

«Глава II Настоятель — и прочие.

...Не только день, но и год идет к концу. Яркое и все же холодное солнце висит низко над горизонтом за развалинами монастыря, и дикий виноград, оплетающий стену собора и уже наполовину оголенный, роняет темно-красные листья на потрескавшиеся каменные плиты дорожек ... Несколько листочков робко пытаются найти убежище под низким сводом церковной двери; но отсюда их безжалостно изгоняют, отбрасывая ногами, двое запоздалых молельщиков, которые в эту минуту выходят из собора. Затем один запирает дверь тяжелым ключом, а другой поспешно удаляется, зажимая под мышкой увесистую нотную папку.

>>> Читать дальше [Read more]

1-10 of 146