DICKNS-L Archives

Charles Dickens Forum

DICKNS-L@LISTSERV.CONNECT.UCSB.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Patrick McCarthy <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Charles Dickens Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 8 Apr 2011 10:41:40 -0700
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (72 lines)
Friends of the Dickens Forum,

	Stephen Jarvis <[log in to unmask]> pursues his contentions
on the cockney sportsmen of PP:				(pjm)
--
Hi, everyone,

Many thanks to John Danza for his comments. It's an interesting
interpretation that Dickens might have been referring to Seymour's
previous usage of Pickwickian-type pictures rather than cockney
sportsmen as such. But that leads into one additional point I must
make with regard John's comments - because Dickens's statements about
Seymour in the 1847 preface were not necessarily in response to Mrs
Seymour's assertions. In fact, there had been rumours in the
press for some time that Seymour had played a far more
substantial role in the creation of Pickwick than Dickens was
prepared to concede. The earliest such rumour I have traced was in
1838 - years before Mrs Seymour wrote her pamphlet about Pickwick,
and just a year after Pickwick had finished its serial run. The
actual dating of her pamphlet is a matter of some conjecture - I have
seen some comments to the effect that "internal evidence" would place
the pamphlet in the 1850s, though I am not certain what internal
evidence this would be. In any case, the pamphlet was written after
she had exchanged correspondence with Dickens, and so certainly
later than 1838.

All the best

Stephen Jarvis
---
John Danza's Post:
>
> Friends of the Dickens Forum,
>
> The early years of Dickens's career, as he burst, unknown, upon
> the British reading public have occasioned much comment and some
> controversy. Here John Danza <[log in to unmask]> responds
> informedly to the recent post by Stephen Jarvis: (pjm)
> ---
> Hello all,
>
In my opinion, Stephen's comments are a bit of hair splitting. As I read
through my copy of Penn's "Maxims and Hints for an Angler", I see the
similarity with Pickwick, that being Cockney sportsmen in humorous
> situations. The difference between Penn and Pickwick is that in
Penn, the
> humorous situations are of a sporting nature while in Pickwick it
is
> sportsmen in humorous situations that are not sporting in nature.
>
> The comments that Dickens made in 1847 was in response to Mrs.
Seymour's
> assertion that her husband Robert was the originator of Pickwick.
While it's
> absolutely correct that Pickwick would never have existed without
Seymour
> creating the project, it's also true that Seymour had used these
same
> illustrations in several previous projects between 1833 and 1836. I
believe
> that it's this usage that Dickens was referring to ("worn out") in
an
> attempt to degrade Seymour's involvement in Pickwick. While this is
probably
> not Dickens's most shining moment from a human standpoint (a topic
for
> another day), it's certainly true that once the project got
started, it was
> Dickens's text that carried the project forward.
>
> John Danza