Subject
Fw: John Ruskin (fwd)
From
Date
Body
----------
> From: Camille Scaysbrook <verona_beach@hotpop.com>
>
> ----------------- Message requiring your approval (60 lines)
------------------
> I once contributed to a screenplay which involved John Ruskin - a very
> peculiar man and, like Lewis Carroll, one who has been retroactively
accused
> of paedophilia. I'm not sure whether it's true or not (it's as thorny a
> question as `was Shakespeare gay?' - it's nearly impossible to extract
> today's moralities and expectations from our view and put ourselves in
the
> shoes of an Elizabethan or Victorian). However, Ruskin undoubtedly had an
> odd and naive view of sex. His parents were extremely overbearing (in
> particular his mother), and on his wedding night he rejected his bride as
> `deformed' - that is, she had pubic hair, and no statue or painting he
had
> ever seen of a nude woman had this abberation. The marriage was
scandalously
> annulled on grounds of nonconsummation, and his wife married the artist
John
> Millais (painter of the beautiful Pre-Raphaelite `Ophelia') Ruskin went
on
> to a long and unhappy relationship with a woman named Rose La Touche -
who
> he meet when she was a teenager.
>
> How do I string this back to the topic? Good question. Well ... my
favourite
> part of `Pnin' is where he is discussing his yearning for the old Russian
> translation of `Hamlet'. That's as good as I can get. :)
>
> Camille Scaysbrook
>
> > From: Kiran Krishna <kiran@Physics.usyd.edu.au>
> >
> > I found these extracts in yesterday's The Australian from one of John
> > Ruskin's letters(Review/Books - A passionate man revealed) :
> >
> > "Yesterday, I came on a poor little child lying flat on the pavement in
> > Bologna, sleeping like a corpse, possibly from too little food. I
pulled
> > up immediately - not in pity, but in delight at the folds of its poor
> > little ragged chemise over its thin bosom - and gave the mother money -
> > not in charity, but to keep the flies off it while I made a sketch..."
> >
> > "I used to think Botticelli's little Venus the nicest thing to see in
the
> > word, but when I saw her again yesterday I only thought that to see a
real
> > pitty girl without any clothes but roses would have been ever so much
> > nicer!"
> >
> > Cf., Part 1, Chapter 10 (AnL. Pg 39):
> >
> > 'And, as if I were the fairy tale nurse of some little princess (lost,
> > kidnaped, discovered in gypsy rags through which her nakedness smiled
at
> > the king and his hounds), I recognised the tiny dark-brown mole on her
> > side. With awe and delight (the king crying for joy, the trumpets
blaring,
> > the nurse drunk), I saw again her lovely indrawn abdomen where my
> > southbound mouth had briefly paused; and those puerile hips on which I
> > had kissed the crenulated imprint left by the band of her shorts - that
> > last mad immortal day behind the "Roches Roses"'
> >
> > and Part 2, Ch. 28 (AnL Pg 270)
> >
> > 'Curious: although actually her looks had faded, I definitely realized,
so
> > hopelessly late in the day, how much she looked - had always looked -
like
> > Bottecelli's russet Venus - the same soft nose, the same blurred
beauty.'
> >
> > An interesting coincidence.
> >
> > Kiran
> >
>
> From: Camille Scaysbrook <verona_beach@hotpop.com>
>
> ----------------- Message requiring your approval (60 lines)
------------------
> I once contributed to a screenplay which involved John Ruskin - a very
> peculiar man and, like Lewis Carroll, one who has been retroactively
accused
> of paedophilia. I'm not sure whether it's true or not (it's as thorny a
> question as `was Shakespeare gay?' - it's nearly impossible to extract
> today's moralities and expectations from our view and put ourselves in
the
> shoes of an Elizabethan or Victorian). However, Ruskin undoubtedly had an
> odd and naive view of sex. His parents were extremely overbearing (in
> particular his mother), and on his wedding night he rejected his bride as
> `deformed' - that is, she had pubic hair, and no statue or painting he
had
> ever seen of a nude woman had this abberation. The marriage was
scandalously
> annulled on grounds of nonconsummation, and his wife married the artist
John
> Millais (painter of the beautiful Pre-Raphaelite `Ophelia') Ruskin went
on
> to a long and unhappy relationship with a woman named Rose La Touche -
who
> he meet when she was a teenager.
>
> How do I string this back to the topic? Good question. Well ... my
favourite
> part of `Pnin' is where he is discussing his yearning for the old Russian
> translation of `Hamlet'. That's as good as I can get. :)
>
> Camille Scaysbrook
>
> > From: Kiran Krishna <kiran@Physics.usyd.edu.au>
> >
> > I found these extracts in yesterday's The Australian from one of John
> > Ruskin's letters(Review/Books - A passionate man revealed) :
> >
> > "Yesterday, I came on a poor little child lying flat on the pavement in
> > Bologna, sleeping like a corpse, possibly from too little food. I
pulled
> > up immediately - not in pity, but in delight at the folds of its poor
> > little ragged chemise over its thin bosom - and gave the mother money -
> > not in charity, but to keep the flies off it while I made a sketch..."
> >
> > "I used to think Botticelli's little Venus the nicest thing to see in
the
> > word, but when I saw her again yesterday I only thought that to see a
real
> > pitty girl without any clothes but roses would have been ever so much
> > nicer!"
> >
> > Cf., Part 1, Chapter 10 (AnL. Pg 39):
> >
> > 'And, as if I were the fairy tale nurse of some little princess (lost,
> > kidnaped, discovered in gypsy rags through which her nakedness smiled
at
> > the king and his hounds), I recognised the tiny dark-brown mole on her
> > side. With awe and delight (the king crying for joy, the trumpets
blaring,
> > the nurse drunk), I saw again her lovely indrawn abdomen where my
> > southbound mouth had briefly paused; and those puerile hips on which I
> > had kissed the crenulated imprint left by the band of her shorts - that
> > last mad immortal day behind the "Roches Roses"'
> >
> > and Part 2, Ch. 28 (AnL Pg 270)
> >
> > 'Curious: although actually her looks had faded, I definitely realized,
so
> > hopelessly late in the day, how much she looked - had always looked -
like
> > Bottecelli's russet Venus - the same soft nose, the same blurred
beauty.'
> >
> > An interesting coincidence.
> >
> > Kiran
> >
>