alice in blunderland

Hey-yo. Happy Independence Day. We celebrated the fourth of July with a visit to one of the bastions of Old World knowledge. There were no fireworks, but it was definitely a holiday. In the British sense of the word.

So yes, on Friday, the first day of my weekend, I voluntarily got up at 7 to run just like on schooldays, in order to be back at the dorm and ready to go at 9:20. Five of us went – Conor, Sarah, Patty, Lissa, and I. We took the Tube to Paddington Station, where we bought tickets for Oxford. There are a lot of great four-for-two deals on the trains here, and we’ve taken advantage of them before to go to Hampton Court and Salisbury, they can get you there for way cheaper. We bought a four-for-two package and one extra single adult since we had five people, and we divided the costs up equally – we all ended up paying about 12 pounds, which is to say ten pounds less than we would’ve each paid had we gone separately. Pay attention, this will be important later.

So, right, we found seats on the 10:20 train, which was pleasantly uncrowded, and we all took out our separate copies of Vanity Fair and tried to read them. Sarah got fifty pages done in an hour, which I find appalling because I managed twelve, but I think her pages are smaller and her print is bigger. What happened in the end, of course, was that we all fell asleep (which means that technically Sarah read fifty pages of that book in less than an hour, but we’re not going to think about that) and stumbled, a little logey, onto the Oxford platform at exactly 11:20. We found some free maps at the station, and we struck out – Conor had heard about a tower from which you could see the entire town, so we bent our steps that way. The first thing I saw was a statue of an ox. Like Oxford. I get it.

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

Lewis Carroll used asterisks to single, in the Alice stories, when things were going to take an especially unbelievable turn – right before Alice shrinks, for instance, and before she grows enormous. So in a variation on that, the above exclamation-point barrier signals the moment when things got amazing. More amazing than usual, I should say. Oxford is absolutely beautiful. I don’t know where to start – i suppose it is, kind of, how I pictured it. (That Oxford was actually a parallel-universe Oxford, but it looked a lot like this one. Never mind, it’s complicated.) Spires, domes, cobbled narrow streets with leaning buildings – wood and stone both – hedges and shady open fields. We walked uphill – we passed a door in a hedge overhung with a sign that said Conservative Club of Oxford, and I swear the air temperature changed when I went by, I got goosebumps – and wandered into a quadrangle framed by a series of stone buildings. The sign on the outside said Nuffield College. It felt a lot like one of our colleges back at Yale, actually, and I suppose it well might given that we stole the idea from them. It was perhaps a little more formal – a fountain, a long sort of canal with lilies – I wondered if this presented a hazard to tipsy revelers on weekends when school was in session – but a lot like one of our courtyards. Beautiful. Anyway, we kept going and we got to this place, Carfax Tower. The tower itself isn’t particularly old – 1818 – but apparently there’s been a tower on this spot since the tenth century, which is kind of cool. It was a beautiful clear day and after a short climb we came out on the roof. Oxford’s a very small city; you could see straight out beyond it, to rolling hills and water.

We broke for lunch – Patty and Sarah went to Pizza Hut, in honor of our great nation – and met back at the Carfax Tower corner. We wanted to see Christ Church College – according to a National Geographic article that I read when I was ten or eleven, this is the “epitome” of Oxford’s academic system (and therefore it was where I determined I wanted to go for undergrad, though it started to look like that was going to be as difficult to negotiate as getting to Parallel-Universe Oxford, given that there education system doesn’t really sync up with ours) – so we walked down a sunny street along the college’s outside wall, looking for an entrance. On the way we got distracted by “The Alice Shop”, a total tourist trap that was nonetheless interesting because, of course, it referred to Carroll’s Alice, Carroll having been a Christ Church professor and the inspirational Alice the daughter of the college dean, and we just read both of the Alice books for class. The store was what you might expect – lots of things you’re scared of knocking over, porcelain knickknacks and tiles. A sign claimed, however, that Alice Liddell (that’s the original Alice) had indeed frequented the shop as a girl, and bought her barley candy there. (This next to a stack of barley candy, priced at about $6 a box.) We browsed for a very long time.

Then we went looking for the Christ Church entrance again. We walked through a beautiful sort of outer courtyard but somehow missed the door in. Don’t laugh, I haven’t graduated from college yet. We came out on another street, near the Christ Church art gallery entrance, but the fellow there said the gallery hadn’t opened yet, and directed us to walk back around and actually go through Christ Church, by the conclusion of which visit the gallery would be open. We ended up, however, wandering off and getting lost in the stacks of a used bookstore. It was fun. I didn’t buy any books because Thackeray was lying heavy in my backpack.

Sooooo, we finally circled back around and got into the college – some don’t charge admission, but clearly people will pay to see this one – for a student rate. The cathedral was closed that day – tear – so we couldn’t see it (though they very nicely reduced our admission rates because of this), but we saw an incredible staircase that was actually used in the Harry Potter movies and took dramatic pictures of ourselves standing on it. Then we visited the dining hall, which dates from 1529, if I remember right – can you imagine? Eating every day in a place so old and storied? It actually reminded all of us of Commons, except with portraits of Henry VIII on the wall. High beautiful ceiling, long tables end-to-end, that sort of thing. There was something cooking, actually, and a menu on the table for that night, so I guess some sort of classes must still be running. Grad students don’t get vacations, right?

Anyway, then we found our way out to the quadrangle, which was enormous and beautiful – simple classical architecture, lots of green, fountains. I was kind of jealous, at which point Sarah decided I needed to be reminded that we go to school in a beautiful place too. Which is true. And if Oxford is the only place that makes you jealous, you’re doing pretty well.

We were excited for the art gallery, which we’d heard had some Reynolds and Gainsborough, and even some da Vinci. We’d thought our Christ Church tickets would get us in, but the old lady at the desk there said no.

Well, said Conor, the guidebook says the admission covers admission to the art gallery.

What guidebook is that? she asked.

Fodor’s.

Well, she said, it’s wrong, the gallery has always been separate. It’s to keep people out. We get schoolchildren who come in to look at the college, and they would just make noise in here. They’re not really interested.

But, she said, it was worth paying extra, because what was in there was “priceless”. So we shelled out fifty pence each – no great wound in the wallet – and went in.

There was a lot of medieval art. This made me happy. I like medieval art a lot. Mainly I like to stand in front of it and imagine the medieval artist standing there, painting it – I like to imagine what they were thinking, what they were worrying about, their superstitions and their beliefs. So I got kind of left behind, because I spent a lot of time in front of some 13th-century triptychs pretending to be medieval. I also noticed that, on the little cards that tell you about the paintings, the paint usually used in these works is “egg tempera”. Egg? Like made from eggs? The ingenuity! How did they do it? Wouldn’t it have been seen as a waste of eggs? Anyway, I spent even longer looking at the paintings trying to imagine the paint in egg form, and then I wanted to smell them to see if they smelled like eggs, which is hard to do subtly. I looked around and all the people in the gallery seemed to be engaged with other paintings so I leaned in really close to an enthroned virgin and child and took a whiff. Nothing. Bummer. Let alone eggs – didn’t smell like anything. Which you wouldn’t expect, after all those years.

The Reynolds, sadly, turned out to be one less-than-impressive portrait, and we couldn’t find any Gainsborough. There was one da Vinci sketch – I quite liked it, sort of a grotesque study of a face – and a few Raphael drawings that weren’t as interesting to me. Good times. And, I think I want to go to Oxford. If there’s anything that could encourage you to do grad school, it’s that place.

After that, we went to the Ashmolean Museum, billed as England’s oldest. The founding date proved to be 1845, which kind of annoyed me. Eighteen forty-five? England can do better than that. I know there were plenty of inquiring minds in the eighteenth century – I expect at least a 1700s establishment. Clearly there are museums in England that are lodged in much older buildings; I guess this is the oldest that has been in continuous operation as a museum? The collection was eclectic and interesting – some Greek and Roman sculptures, a huge array of ancient Egyptian artifacts from huge statuary and a complete shrine to tiny amulets, some pre-Raphaelite Rossetti paintings and drawings included the chalk sketch of a Proserpine now in the Tate, according to Sarah.

At this point it was around quarter to five and I decided to head back to London. The others were planning to stay until 10 at night, and I didn’t really want to do that. So I bade them all farewell – saw a Stradivarius violin on my way out – and headed for the train station, arriving at 4:58 for the 5:01 back to the city. I had a fun ride back, read more Thackeray and listened to a little English girl go on in her little English accent to an adult woman about how her father used to read her the Just So stories and she didn’t understand them at all. I got off at Paddington a little less than an hour later – we were running fast – and set my course for the Hammersmith and City Tube line. On my way out, this guy asks to see my ticket, which doesn’t surprise me, because they don’t always check your tickets at line’s end but sometimes they do. I hand it over without a flicker of anxiety. They went down the aisle during the ride and looked at the tickets – another thing they don’t always do – and the conductor smiled very nicely and punched mine and moved on. But this guy looks at my ticket and as I’m walking forward anticipating no trouble he says, Wait wait wait. This is four-for-two.

Yes, I say.

Where are your other three people? he says.

What? I shrug. They’re not here – I had to come back earlier than them.

No, he says, you can’t do that, you need to be with the other three people.

What? I say, I’ve never heard that before. We’ve done this before and we never had this problem. Which is true.

He gestures for me to come with him and we walk all the way back to the other end of the platform. I am kind of mad. I’ve never heard that you have to come back together, I say. We left together. I had to come back before them because I’m meeting someone – I’m late, actually. This isn’t true, of course but I am working myself up into a self-righteous lather nonetheless. This guy must be mistaken.

But we arrive at the little supervisor booth at the platform’s end and lo and behold, after I explain the situation, the guy inside says, Yes, you need to travel all together, your ticket isn’t valid and your friends tickets aren’t valid anymore.

I never heard that, I repeat, we’ve done this before – and here’s where things get bizarre, because yes I am frustrated, and yes I am tired and this seems like a silly rule and I just want to get back to my room, but I’m not terribly upset. I don’t want to buy an extra ticket, I feel guilty about screwing my friends over, but okay, I have money, it’s not an emergency. But for some reason, as I’m talking to this guy, I start choking up, and suddenly I am freaking crying in the middle of the station. At the same time I am thinking, this is absurd, I’m not sad. Of course the man in the booth is sort of alarmed, and he comes out and I try to explain to him through my freakoid convulsions that I don’t know why I’m falling apart and I manage something about it’s having been a long day (even though really it hasn’t, not in that sense), and he says, here, I’ll get you some water and is in general very civil even though he’s probably thinking, Who is this crazy girl, and how did she get through customs? He tells me to calm down and then asks me if I’ve got my friends’ phone numbers and I say yes and drink the water and hold on to the plastic cup very tightly and he tells me to call them and let them know that their tickets are invalid, and suggests that they buy a 37-pound three-person travel package. At this point, I take out my wallet and make a gurgling sound in lieu of “How much do I owe you?”, but he gets the message and says he’s not going to charge me, and I apologize and thank him, in full-on Miserable Wretch mode. But call your friends, though, he says, because I’m not going to let them through. He unlocks the gate for me and lets me through into the station and I walk straight for my Tube line trying not to look at the people around me, who probably are all wearing expressions that say “Who is that crazy girl, and why did that guy let her loose on us?”

Anyway, I take the Tube back to King’s Cross and manage to get Conor on the phone. I say I’ll help pay for the extra tickets they’ll have to buy, and he’s very nice and just thanks me for letting them know. Of course, the really sucky part is that all this could’ve been avoided if we’d known ahead of time – I could have come back with the adult single ticket, and they with the two-for-fours. But I get to my room and I chill out and read some more about Becky Sharp.

Later that evening I ran into Lissa and Sarah, who said that in fact they hadn’t bought the extra tickets on their way home, and they hadn’t had any trouble – there was no one looking at tickets on the other end when they got into Paddington, not even little ticket-scanner gates in operation. Go figure. So none of us was forced to make any extra expenditure, it’s all good.
I will admit that I’m not proud of the incident. I have compartmentalized it, along with my memories of myself barking like a dog in the middle of an argument when I was in third grade and of some ill-advised declaration of sentiment made more recently. I’ve heard guys complain that the police always let girls off the hook for speeding because girls start crying, and I’m thinking there’s maybe some truth in that, which sucks because I don’t want to be THAT kind of girl.

I want to be the kind of girl who goes to Oxford. That was the greater part of the day, and it was a great day, let’s stay on message.

JJHNOM, Part II

Hey peeps. Here’s a quick midweek one – I’ve got to read Vanity Fair (and have yet to finish Copperfield, but am triaging for now) and it’s time to start preparing for the next essay(s), so I really shouldn’t be writing this but it occurred to me that I haven’t really talked much about our academic trips, and as today was my first time at the Tate Britain, I figured I’d fill you in while it’s still fresh.

We’ve had – how many? – um, four, I think, visits to London museums. They take the place of art history lectures with discolored slides, so they’re most welcome, and helpful. I went to the National Gallery on my own – did I mention that? Really, the only way to go to a museum, especially an art museum, is on your own – what, are you going to follow your friends around the gallery and spend the exact amount of time as them looking at the things they want to look at? See, I would, because I’m not assertive. But going as a class has its benefits as well, you hear from the experts in detail on a handful of works, and you can hang around afterward and get a better look at the paintings that interest you particularly. It was what I did after our visit to the National Portrait Gallery, when they took us through Reynolds but not the Tudors – all those iconic portraits of Queen Elizabeth, that one that they always show of Anne Boleyn, the Holbein Henry! Also got to see a new acquisition – purportedly a portrait of Lady Jane Grey, that I’d read an article about in the New Yorker. There are currently two portraits that might possibly be her, this one in London and then a miniature at YALE (yay, Yale, I love Yale), and there’s a degree of controversy in the whole thing. The thought is that this one at the Portrait Gallery is a copy of a slightly earlier painting (lots of things in the Tudor gallery are copies of paintings done earlier in the century) done from life. It says “Jane” on it (but like zillions of people were called Jane then), and apparently the Tudor costume suggests a person of very high rank, and is surprisingly accurate to the era (suggesting, again, that though it was painted after her death, it was copied carefully from a painting done during the subject’s lifetime.) The jewelry, which is frequently a giveaway as to the sitter’s identity, especially royal sitters, because there are catalogues of all the brooches and necklaces they owned – hasn’t been identified. There’s scoring across the mouth and eyes, like someone tried to deface it, which would be expected given Jane’s controversial history. The problem is – the reason there aren’t many known images of this woman – that her reign was so short, of course, so there was a fairly limited window during which a portrait might have been commissioned. Apparently this painting itself is controversial, not just because of the disputed identity but because some people think the Gallery shouldn’t have spent so much money acquiring it – it’s just a not-so-great painting. (I don’t know how they decide these things. Personally I’m not impressed with the portraits of Elizabeth, from an artistic standpoint, and it baffles me because people were producing much more lifelike portraits at the time; why does the queen look so flat? Although today at the Tate I read that Elizabeth wanted her paintings to be wholly without shadow – I don’t know why, just how she liked to be shown – so she chose an artist whose technique was particularly line-oriented, no shading.) I also saw the portrait of Mary Queen of Scots that was on the cover of the book my grandparents brought me back from Scotland, and the one painting of Shakespeare thought to have been done from life, and Catherine of Aragon and Catherine Parr and Catherine Howard – all good stuff. (But God, did early modern English only have like five given names? Catherine-Mary-Elizabeth-Jane if you’re a girl, and Thomas or Henry if you’re a boy – maybe Henry VIII didn’t even notice he was changing wives.) The interesting thing about the National Portrait Gallery, as my teacher explained, is that it doesn’t necessarily look for art of high quality – its primary function is as a repository for images of notable people. There are, naturally, disputes about taking in well-executed renderings of lesser-knowns. I don’t mind looking at crappy art. I mean, it’s interesting to compare – if there are several images of one person, maybe one good and two or three not so good – what are the salient features that all the artists, skilled and not, include?

Okay, I’ve rattled on about that – other things we’ve done? We went to the Foundling Museum, wherein orphans and children given up by their mothers were kept. Even in its day it was a sort of museum, because people used to come by on Sundays and look at the orphans, as a sort of excursion. Contrary to what you might expect, though, the orphans were by all accounts quite well-cared-for and well-brought-up and well-educated, so they started having to turn away some foundlings, and getting your kid into the Foundling Hospital, if you were an unwilling parent, became rather difficult. Like prep school, except with abandoning children. It was also like a museum – and continues to be – because it was governed, in part, by the 18th-century artist William Hogarth, who invited all his artist friends to be on the board of governors, provided they produced and donated a work to the hospital. So it’s full of paintings by Hogarth, Richard Wilson, sculpture by Rubiliac – all that stuff. We walked around, we saw exhibits about the children – many were given Hogarth’s last name – Hogarth himself never had any children – so there are a lot of people surnamed Hogarth now who go around thinking they’re related to Hogarth when they’re not. There was a list of orphans’ names – “Francis Drake” was particularly popular, an homage to the Elizabethan pirate, it would seem. One of them was called Catherine Speedwell. I think that’s a cool one. I’m saving that for a novel.

We also went, a few weeks ago, to the Soane Museum, an eclectic collection in what used to be the private home of a rather eccentric collector of the eighteenth century. It’s crammed with things, frame-to-frame across the wall; we even saw a room where what appears to be the wall can be pulled out in two parts, opening like a cupboard to reveal another wall of paintings and sketches, which in turn opens out to reveal an open two-level gallery – one can look down into a garden of statues. There’s a lot of Hogarth, tons of fragments of Greco-Roman pottery and sculpture, much fake among the real, I suspect. In the basement, among creepy shackles on the walls and unidentified vases, we found what was labeled as Seti’s sarcophagus, an immense limestone case covered in hieroglyphics. Next to it, on the floor, was the carved wooden inner sarcophagus. Just out. Carved by Nile-dwellers thousands of years ago, and out, in the open air, where someone could mistake it for a bench. What the heck? “This should be in a museum somewhere,” said one of my friends. “I mean, a real museum.”
Anyway! Today was the Tate. As usual, I was up and ran and did my little stomach-crunches and I was totally ready to go at 9:15, but of course the people I was going with weren’t quite together until 9:30ish, and then we had to walk to the Tube station – we’d been told it was a 30-minute Tube ride. It’s okay, we said to each other, maybe we’ll be five minutes late, it’ll be okay. But I thought we could make it. I believed in us. Paddle with a purpose, as they used to say to us in the Appalachian Mountain Club when we were out in the water and the sky was darkening. No need to panic, just paddle with a purpose. (Which some of us had to do all the time anyway, because some of us had a stupid lily-dipping canoe partner. Excuse me, would you like to use a spoon instead?) We actually had to let the first train go by in the Tube station because it was packed so full – we Houdini-ed our way onto the second one and changed for the Victoria line a handful of stop later – ran to the train, got on, pulled into the Tate stop at five to ten. It was, according to my guidebook, a five-minute walk to the museum. We got out, we followed the pointing signs. Made it. Beat the professors there.

Robin Simon – an art historian who’s written a number of books and is a friend of Martin Postle, our professor – took us in. He has actually conducted most of the field trips we’ve been on. We went through the lobby and into a long and beautiful gallery. Professor Simon seemed to be checking for something before he led us in there. “How often do they come?” he asked one of the guards. When he beckoned us in, he gestured to us to keep to the side. “Watch for runners,” he said.

He went on to tell us that he liked this gallery, its architecture was a good example of pared-down classicism, and so on – it’s great for display, though unfortunately it has to be empty now -

At that moment a lean and muscled man in spandex shorts and a T-shirt came sprinting through the entrance at the far end of the gallery. He ran past us, to the end of the gallery, and then left through that door.

“There’s one,” said Simon.

“What is this? What are they doing?” asked one of the more outspoken members of our class.

“It’s a work of art, dear,” said the teacher.

Another man came sprinting up – great form – reached the end of the gallery, and exited. We walked back into the atrium.

“This was done by a clown who won the Turner a few years ago,” said Simon. “He won it for a light bulb that he hung in a room. You would walk into the room, and occasionally the bulb would go on and off.”

“He’s a clown?” I asked.

“Well, I think he’s a clown,” said Simon.

“Oh,” I said. “I thought you meant a real clown.” I’m a quick one. The real-clown explanation would have been more satisfying, because it would have suggested that the artist was actually kind of mocking the art community. Whatevs.

The coolest part of the day – after some more Hogarth and Wilson – was seeing the conservators’ secret chambers. Not secret, actually, probably not called chambers, but that’s what I want to call them. We went around to another entrance of the museum and, with Professor Postle, met a young woman who works restoring and preserving the paintings. We walked down a bare hallway – “Watch out for runners,” said the woman, and indeed it appeared that we’d found the backstage area, a number of sweaty people with water bottles waiting to go on – and took an industrial elevator – a lift! – up to her studio, where she had two paintings mounted on either side of an easel, portraits by Reynolds. She explained the work – cleaning the yellowed varnish that earlier restorers had used to preserve the work, even wiping out additions made by misguided earlier preservers. It’s controversial and difficult to decide, of course – when is a work finished, what does it mean to restore it to its original state? If edits were made twenty years later, should they be taken out? She showed us X-rays and microscope enlargements of samples from the paintings. On another canvas, an unfinished Zoffany, she had completely erased the badly-done face that a later artist had put on one of the figures. Aiya – imagine the pressure! You have to be absolutely sure that what you’re doing is moving the painting toward its original condition. To actually wipe stuff out – well, it’s a lot of power and responsibility. Like Spiderman.
Anyway, that’s that for today. Hopefully that wasn’t too boring. I’m probably going to go to visit Oxford this weekend for the fourth of July, yay. And I will dress in red, white, and blue. Next week is the Bath trip. We’re getting around.

And here’s another plug. I don’t think they’re translating properly as links so just copy and paste it into the url bar.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=xxwOZl8ZMOA