Tell me more ×
History Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for historians and history buffs. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Modern readers of Lewis Carroll's books (Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass) will undoubtedly make some connections between radical changes in perspective following the ingestion of "special" foods and drinks and recreational drug use. These connections may be partially due to the use of imagery from the books by the "drug-culture" of the 1960s and 1970s but also due to a relative familiarity with recreational drug use in modern culture.

Would the original readers of the book (circa 1865) made similar connections?

NOTE: I am not asking if Lewis Carroll intended the books to be about drugs but whether a Victorian era reader would have considered this to be a valid interpretation.

share|improve this question
This always seems to be an issue when looking at various historical events, works or documents through current social movements and norms. Whenever you start off asking from a modern perspective you have pretty much answered your own question IMHO. – MichaelF Mar 8 '12 at 12:39

3 Answers

up vote 10 down vote accepted

It seems unlikely that Victorian Era readers of Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass would have thought of drugs when reading about the special foods and drinks.

This conclusion is based upon the fact that the First and Second Opium Wars started in 1839 and 1858. So you could argue that recreational drug use was not really on the radar of the average Victorian citizen until that point in time. Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass were written in 1865 and 1871, so it is possible that people may have put two and two together.

The most direct reference to recreational drug use did not come about in Victorian England until the Sherlock Holmes stories and The Portrait of Dorian Grey which were both around the 1890s. So it seems that recreational drug use was not really sufficiently popularized until that point which would mean that people wouldn't likely make the connection your question asks.

share|improve this answer
Confessions of an English Opium-Eater‌​ (1821) seems to be a pretty direct reference, and Wikipedia's writeup suggests that the book was quite popular. – Nate Eldredge Jul 28 '12 at 2:40

I would have said not, but I don't think the 60s link between drugs and Alice in Wonderland is anything more than stereotyping and lazy journalism.

A more interesting question is how many people at the time would have got the deliberate links between the books and maths

share|improve this answer
There's enormous amounts of stereotyping and lazy journalism around, but you think there is no 60s link? Are you aware of the well known Jefferson Airplane song White Rabbit? Sample lyrics: "One pill makes you larger, one pill makes you small, and the ones that Mother gives you don't do anything at all. Go ask Alice when she's ten feet tall." – mgkrebbs Mar 8 '12 at 5:25
@mgkrebbs - and that's what the stereotypes are based on - like Procul Harum's use of chaucer when they are short of a lyric hook. – mgb Mar 8 '12 at 5:36
yes, but your initial answer says (it seems) that 60s culture did not link drugs with Alice-i-W, and that the idea that it did make such a link was stereotyping and lazy journalism. – mgkrebbs Mar 8 '12 at 5:58
@ngkrebbs - I meant that the 60s link wasn't all that common, it was just a couple of songs/references but had become a 60s=drugs=Alice in Wonderland meme – mgb Mar 8 '12 at 6:00

First of all, while you specifically pointed out that you were not asking if Lewis Carroll intended the books to be about drugs, it is nonetheless important to note that he truly did not intend that. Lewis Carroll was the pen name of Charles Dodgson, a rector and dean in the Church of England. Dodgson enjoyed making up stories for young children, and it was one of those stories that eventually evolved into the classic tales we all know. Given his occupation, I'd say it is highly unlikely that he had any experience with and perhaps little or no knowledge of the effects of opium or other drugs. Because of this, I would assume that there was nothing associated with drugs that ultimately influenced his story.

Having said all that, I would further suggest that it was highly unlikely that any Victorian era readers would have made any similar connections either. One reason I believe this is that the books from the very beginning were intended as children's stories. As a result, I believe people of that era would have been much more inclined to accept the book as a tale of fancy without attempting to look for any hidden meaning or connections. I am not familiar with anyone having documented any such correlations until the US drug culture of the 1960s, which would further suggest that readers from previous eras did not make these same connections.

For more information on Charles Dodgson, you can read his biography.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.