The Controversial Life Of Lewis Carroll | The Real Story Of Alice In Wonderland 

What was the value of showing this audience child porn& then going to historians to prove you just showed up child porn? ZERO value. @AbsoluteHistory a description of the photo would be enough. Poor taste. Disrespectful to the abused child & this audience.

I don't think that Louis Carrol was a pedophile I do think that he had intrusive thoughts like I do but just because you have intrusive thoughts doesn't mean that they are what you are

@@Allison8k It ain't porn, grab a dictionary, try reading it. ZERO value? Nope, got a reaction out of YOU. Do you think the BBC producers are stupid?

14:40 good times 43:50 so good

@@Allison8k fucking reviant

Yes, it's a trippy story.

In my household growing up we called that Tuesday .

I remember watching the movie as a kid and thinking "I'd rather watch dbz" and stopped paying attention. The only thing that left an impression was how creepy the costumes looked lol

I never liked this history I always found them creepy and not natural in my young mind. 🤔🤔

Same, the fact that the version with Johnny Depp is more accurate to the original and is really dark and creepy, shows how dark the whole story is. It seems like a story a pedophile would tell his victims to groom them.

Exactly, you would think that being the great granddaughter of Alice, she would want to side with Alice’s mother to protect the innocence of her child and improve her marriage prospect. Instead, the great granddaughter prefers to romanticize the inappropriate relationship between a young child and a grown man.

TinyPuff It’s an incomplete interview. We don’t know what all was asked, and we don’t know what all else the granddaughter might know to make her think that. And, who knows if her comments have been spliced to look particularly salacious. Just saying. Documentaries are fun, but usually worth a grain of salt.

@@mariecarie1 real documentaries are exactly the opposite - they seek to reveal the truth without any bias.

@@melizmatea no *true* Scotsman wears such a pattern on their kilt!

The fashion at the time was to take pictures of children showing them naked as a sign of their innocence. There was likely no inappropriate relationship between Alice and Dodson. If you look at the photography of that age you see lots of these types of pictures. I think we are looking at them with today’s cynical eyes. Not a bad thing and it’s so important for the protection of children but a different age has different customs.

and don't forget that he openly said that the most supremely beautiful form of the human body was the one of a prepubescent girl... the missing pages from the journal are definitely too suspicious to not be related to his "fascinations" imo.. it's very telling

Michael jackson of his era

He made child pron. especially considering how pron of adults was during that time. I’d say there’s no way we can say we’re just imposing a modern view on a past time period. It’s clearly evident he was.

@@Maryxxiii i absolutely agree that it's not just imposing a modern view on a past time period... because all the people that are defending him and saying that the age of consent back then was 10-13 so that makes it somehow ok, forget that this man was obsessed with little girls faaar before they was even near 10 or 13..

@@edelleaa Right and you could see that he’d done something to her, the way she was looking in the photos was a deep sadness or betrayal. It’s like she refused to look in the camera or towards her “attacker” when her sisters were around. Which I could only imagine she was likely feeling safer at those times vs the time when she was alone with him for the nude photo shoot.

and the woman who said it is from the family, yuck

I don't really know what

Exactly! The mother obviously knew that something was wrong with that man and his relationship with her child.

Because the executive producer is probably a pedo and that woman who is related to Alice probably didn't want shame in the family so they made excuses LIKE THE SISTER WHO WROTE Alice "so I told a lie for a documentary on Carroll, just go with it if they call to talk to you"

Not all moms are the best moms. From many crime stories or snob stories somewhere there happens to b a mom who didn't brought up her kid she/he deserved to be.

I agree, I believe he was a ped

On February 27, 1893, he wrote to an illustrator by the name of E. Gertrude Thomson: "...I confess that I do not admire naked boys in pictures. They always seem to me to need clothes; whereas one hardly sees why the lovely forms of girls should ever be covered up!" Suggesting that girls should be naked all the time goes way beyond wanting to take an occasional photo of them for artistic purposes.

@@snarkaholic gosh

It's amazing how people love to dig up some dirt and the dirt becomes the main character of the story.

@@lil_orbits2658 YES certainly

You nailed it. Raised my red flags, too!

Yes! What a freak.

Lmao he's not saying he finds kids sexy he's trying to emphasise why Lewis perhaps did what he did. Obviously it's disgusting by modern standards and if that happens today then absolutely he would be done for child porn and rightly so.

@@lucyhogarth3988 ohh Lucy, I'm not saying that he finds kids sexy. I'm saying that his defense of the author really falls short 😂

What do you think happened in the HOLY BIBLE?? ALICE IN WONDERLAND IS BASED ON A TRUE STORY... THE NAME ALICE MEANS ROYALTY... WONDERLAND MEANS NOT HOME... YOU KNOW "ANGEL'S WHO KEPT NOT THEIR FIRST ESTATE"..

I had a loving childhood, but I thought Alice in Wonderland was weird. I liked Alice, but the world of wonderland really unnerved me.

@Dana Davison yikes.... a lot of words...and I read them all

they arent justifying. in terms of those days, Lorena was at the age of consent. it was a very different time.

I don't think it's a justification more an explanation of the social norms of the time. And I don't really see a problem with that tbh

This, the BBC, is the organisation that harboured the serial paedophile, Jimmy Savile, in plain sight for decades.

It's not justifying. It's called investigating.

Such a good quote! I feel like that guy was the only one who pulled his head out of the sand and didn't want to pretend a dark side was impossible

- or is one of the greatest pop musicians of the 20th century

*cough cough* JK Rowling *cough cough*

No it isn't. If someone writes a great book then they are a great person. Greatness is a transitive property.

@@ryder389 I know what you mean but honestly the only bad thing about J.K. is her being a hypocrite. Also pretending that she hadn't racialised Hermione was despicable. "I didn't say she was white" not only did you say that but you described it positively when doing so, also both her parents are dentists that live in Australia, I mean, she white.

YAFOS. Dodson, NOT "Carroll." The photo is most likely NOT Lorina. You went down the Rabbit Hole blinded by prejudice. The documentary only showed the scientific evidence leading to one conclusion. No mention of lots of important details. The first expert gave an opinion of the technical aspects of the PHOTOGRAPH and not the CONTENT. That first expert was way out of line in saying Dodgson's name. And hello Mr. Second Expert, ever hear of AI Facial Recognition? Gee, guess what Facial Recognition would say?? Never mentioned, guess why? The photographs are different but close enough for shoddy investigative journalism and conspiracy theory. It is not Lorina Charlotte Liddell. Read up on "epicanthal" WRT eyes. Look at the Dodgson 1860 photo of Lorina (not used in the documentary) compared to this claimed Lorina full-frontal ALSO DATED 1860. Where are the "burns" or "pock-marks" on Lorina's face in the Dodgson photograph? MISSING. Read up on the Era's social environment and of the wet collodion process. Hells Bells, the photograph is dated 1860, BEFORE Dodgson even had a studio at Christ Church. Where the hell was this photograph supposed to be taken? In the Deanery Garden? This ain't in the era of the cellphone where we snap our brains out and post all over the globe in an instant. Read up on the the physical locations of Dodgson's Christ Church and Badcock Yard studios. WAY TOO INVOLVED to arrange this photograph. It would be PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for Dodgson to take such a photograph of Lorina back in this time / era. Take a look of the Dodgson 1870 photograph of Lorina, now 21, this is the look of a woman whom Dodgson, if we believe the full-frontal is genuine, essentially stripped her naked and cold and afraid and took hours to photograph her (essentially Victoria Era rape) and now stares back at her rapist? This is the face of the woman whom Dodgson corresponded with the most, all his life of any of the sisters?? Lorina and Alice were as close as any sisters could be, and Alice names a son "Caryl" The rapist of her sister? Yah, right. This is a scary video because most viewers see it with eyes wide shut right down the internet of CRAP Rabbit Hole.

I also saw Carroll in the rabbit on first glance. I think you have a good eye.

I immediately thought the rabbit represented Carroll when they showed his own illustrations of the rabbit. The clothing, the OCD like tendencies both fit.

I'm sure you are right. I thought that too. The girls were groomed and taken into private areas. They probably were given pills, tinctures or powders back in the day. Anytime I hear someone say, " Everyone took nude photos of girls back then" is making excuses for bad things happening to justify how much they admire someone. Just accept there can be bad people doing good things, and there are good people doing bad things. Example Jarrod founder of Adventures With Purpose/ Michael Jackson/Most CEOs, Planned Parenthood and the Meat industry. But yah, I totally think Lewis Carrol was a pedophile...someone had to tell her to take her clothes of for the camera.

same here I always felt creeped out by the story in general

It was horrible book.

Unfortunately you have just described how the majority of today's children live their lives !

@@Valcour Maybe you should actually read it instead of letting others decide for you.

I agree, it always had a very chaotic vibe. Nothing safe or comforting about it to me.

Agreed. The era is irrelevant.

@LONtoLAX i insist on defending history, that is all.. you cannot take offense over something that was considered acceptable 150 years ago

@@Keef_DGAF yes you can.

Exactly!

People would take picture of children to PORTRAY the innocent, purity, the childhood, the brighter days that we people experience. The reason behind these kind of pictures was for art, and photography to show beautiful, and considering the time period its fine nothing wrong with it.

As a child I found the story odd more than exciting or fun. This was my reaction to scary movies. How similar his story reminds me of Michael Jackson and the controversy therin.

@@madelinecoren483 NOT even close to MJ story.

@@madelinecoren483 except it already has been disproven that mj was fucking innocent

the Jeffery Epstein of the literary world

@@CowGirlKat8691 you do understand that in the mid 19th century the age of consent was 10-13 across the West and that girls of such age got MARRIED to adults regularly even through the 20th century right? nobody is saying lewis carroll was morally right for what he did, but it takes a huge dipshit to automatically disregard every historical person because they don't stand up to modern sensibilities

@@itstoogooditswaytoogood3211 if you did some research you’d find that in European history the average age of marriage for women was not that young. Young marriages typically happened among the richest and poorest. And the “consent” of the girls getting married in that situation wasn’t considered. King Henry VIIIs grandmother was 13 when she gave birth and that was considered very young, even then.

You’re missing the point. Just because in Victorian times, females were regarded as simply breeders doesn’t make it right that grown men married children. That’s why we have always against. It was NEVER right!

@@wandakowalski7063 Sure, but to hold people of a different time to your modern standard is just wrong. The Industrial Revolution changed everything for just about everyone.

Ikr, she's the reason so many people probably didn't come forward, like, she's basically trying to say that what he did was okay

Yes very odd...

I got the same idea about him and not even halfway through the video.

@@JordDraugr you do realise how long ago he wrote the book and all this took place, right? this lady wasn't even a twinkle in her daddy's eye. So to say, SHE was the reason....yeh nah. Life was very different 150 years ago, did you even see where they said consent was 12 years old?

For real.

unfortunately the same can be said about hollywood everyone who works there is a perv its called hollywood because real magic wands are made of the wood from the holly tree and they cast spells over childrens minds disneyland is the biggest child abduction centre in the world yes Walt and all his high up freinds are all paedos hell Michael Jackson even had his own version wake up people paedophillia is massive and growing by the day and not just abuse but sacrifice as well like the sacrificial alter at camp david (called Moloch another name for ba'al or satan) were all the politicians and big wigs go this problem is massive but for the most part ordinairy commen men arn't involved its a pursuit of the Elite.

he's called Will Self and he's a pretty sound guy despite being a heroin addict like someone here said the mental gymnastics the others performed to avoid the 'word' is pretty astonishing

@@markhall42 I don't understand either of you two, Will Self is the one who calls Dodgson a pedophile.

They said his nieces who inherited his works cut them out. They were obviously trying to protect his reputation.

Exactly that. Thank you.

Or a shopping list

I'm sure especially after she drank that strange bottle that says drink me to put her to sleep and numb....#PedophileDisney

By the time of his death, Carroll's Alice had become an iconic character. His family did not want that tainted. Who could blame them.

A real mood

"Explain the reasoning behind your answer" *"It's good"*

SAME😭😂

And the fact that she made it into the video

YuH

Will Self. Will Self, brilliant insightful author akin to human emotion and humanity. Intercourse Bill Cosby. Dodgson never harmed anyone ever. The BBC editing lead you right down the rabbit hole with this stuff. Will Self and Edward Wakeling are answering TWO different questions. One pedophile, the other molestation. Wakeling came back later in the press and said his comments, that appear to defend a pedophile, were "cut-in out of context." Will Self --> what's in Dodgson's head? Ed Wakeling-->what did he do? Have you read the books?

@@mrunning10 I haven’t but I understand they are magical. My mum told me she loved reading them. I have However been touched and interacted with by older men inappropriately and lived within an environment with the mentality of “no real harm was done”, by my mother and father. My life as a result definitely not been end of days, but to say I’ve had almost no healthy relationships with the opposite sex and I still struggle constantly trusting what I even know to be healthy, is an understatement. It’s been challenging. But you know, I’m just saying talking about it for what it is, regardless of one’s profession no matter how good they are. At least this method would give such behavior the stark light would shed on it so the people affect by it deserve to see it.

i actually remember learning something similar thats really weird

heard similar. mandela effect

Really?😳😔

Yes elite pedophilia knows no bounds.

it has nothing to do with romanticizing, how ignorant you are is quite obvious. quite simply speaking it wasnt deigned immoral at the time. You and others like you keep on trying to emphasize current sociological ethics on a timeframe that is far from current. you CANNOT judge another era with current views and be expected to be taken seriously

EraZarE Alice is like 7... messing with a 7 year old is WRONG ANY ERA!!!

My thoughts exactly. "He was in love with her" So...a pedophile.

bruh when they said 12 is the legal age of consent, they all guilty. life expectancy was about 40 though so...

@@didjuforget doesn’t make it right.

BINGO!

EXACTLY! ugh I am so beyond disturbed by him now

@@cheeseguzzler6269 "age of consenting" is actually a really new concept lol. Not saying it's right but you have to consider the time period

Ohhhhh, it's even worse, Dodson befriended many a little girl. And took many a suggestive photograph, four nudes survive to this day. He must have been grooming and abusing and screwing them like crazy!

Exactly. His attraction to female children was unnatural and the fact he carried around puzzles and magic tricks in his pockets to seduce them is very clear.

There is no doubt that Carrol was sexually attracted to prepubescent children? Please, detail the claims of sexual activity he underwent with prepubescent children that are apparently so well evidenced there is no doubt.

@@CherylSimser Why specify female? He entertained children of either gender, it just so happens that the cases discussed here are of girls as this work is focussed on Alice, but by no means did female children appear to uniquely capture his interest in the entertainment of children. Speaking of entertainment, that was the purpose of his puzzles and tricks, not seduction. If you have any evidence that he used puzzles and tricks to seduce anyone please, provide it.

@@piratewhoisquiet As another person commented in a comment thread : "On February 27,1893, he wrote to an illustrator by the name of E. Gertrude Thomson:"... I confess that I do not admire naked boys in pictures. They always seem to me to need clothes ;whereas one hardly sees why the lovely forms of the girls should ever be covered up!" Suggesting that girls should be naked all the time goes way beyond wanting to take an occasional photo of them for artistic purposes." So obviously he was interested in prebubescent females rather than boys. I really don't know why you are so defensive over this, it's pretty obvious that he was a repressed ped, there are to many "coincidences" to explain and prove him to be as innocent as you want him to be .

@@shedevil6034 girl right I'm reading the comments defending carrol, girl like it dont matter if pedophilia was known about because if it was rape you can't say that it wasnt known back then and people didnt see it as that because it's still rape and that wrong in any area

The thing is that it's hard to say if he was full on into her or if he just loved her like his own daughter. So all things considered I think it comes down to the possibility of pedophilia but not necessarily a provable case for such an accusation. In other words it could have been pedophilia buy he could have loved them like a parent loves their child too. So it's hard to tell based on what we know

@@thememe986 if you love your own daughter you will not make her pose naked. You will RESPECT her and PROTECT her and that includes her body, her modesty 😡

@@thememe986 bro ur defending a dead pedophile 💀💀💀

@@_eysha im not defending anyone, I'm saying it's possible but there's two problems. The first is that the standards of the time wouldn't have seen his behavior as THAT weird. And two at this point there's no evidence, atleast that we can access. So I'm saying it's possible but there's no proof

Lol

Can I ask you one question?

1/15/2924: Me too.

Yesss, exactly what I was thinking. Fucking disgusting, everyone in this documentary trying to defect Carol should be ashamed of themselves

As someone who had a repressed paedo father, and the events of my childhood, this documentary and everyone's attitudes really upset me. People like that are the reason I've never come forward

They're actually making me question whether I'm looking too deeply into my childhood and it's so upsetting. 'There aren't any reports' well yeah because people like them make people like me doubt ourselves

And instead of blaming the grown ass man who is creepy around kids, she blames the mom for wanting to cut ties. The actual fuck? And was hinting the mom is a gold digger, like damn woman, that's so backwards.

Seems he was an earlier version of Charlie Chaplin.

Bingo. Well said.

@@loisreese2692 Right wasn't his wife 12 or so when he first started hitting on her? I believe there was a scandal when he married her.

Agree completely. Felt uneasy watching the whole thing...

the family cut ties because not because he was a pedophile , but because he was of the unfaithful kind . They had standards for their child bride to be.

The movie is not the same. The imagination is not actively engaged. Any CHILD being shown and read to or in reading AAIW whom feels a nightmare needs phycological counseling help and especially the parents who gave the child their own neurosis. Go back, listen to Will Self, @5:05, "nightmarish?" already childhood wonder gone, sad.

"nip slip" lmao you ever seen a cherub? Your ideas of fashion and decency are a product of this age, and while I agree with their applicability in this age I don't think it stretches to ages past. What about when it isn't an "art form?" Basically every ancient Greek scientist or philosopher was probably fucking little boys in the ass while inventing geometry and morals, but you don't care about that when you use their science or their morals do you?

LOL, you found one already defending their ART FORM. Like Perverts only just appeared in the last 50 yrs.

During the that era the age of consent was twelve they even said it

The family disowned him and his diaries for that time were destroyed by his family

@@alexiswaller3065 she wasn't 12. Don't gete started on 12 as a good marrying age for girls or boys. Just imagine at 12 being expected to run a household. Get a job. 😆

That's right! Not going to have my daughter marry one from the lower class! Away with you Rev. Dodgson!

@@mrunning10 ewww you

her delusion and denial is madening throughout the documentary

i didn't see it like that at all honestly.. it's obvious the woman is biased and she admitted it herself, so she isn't delusional about it, but there is nothing else she could say really, because they cannot prove for a fact that it was 100% the same person, that's all. like she can't just outright say it like a fact just because 2 experts gave their personal opinions on it you know... that doesn't automatically make it true

The girl has a different face shape and her eyes are a different size and color. Plus there is barley a nose bridge, Lorena has a long one. So no. Plus he posed his sitters, and she's just standing there. I think the experts should take a look at his other photographs then judge.

@@decorusinitio7768 yeah honestly i immediately thought that the girl in the photo looked nothing like her and was surprised when the expert said that he actually thinks its the same person... i could immediately see so many obvious differences. not that it changes anything about the full story in the end but i'm surprised so many people are convinced it's her

EXACTLY, so what or whom was the real reason? Because there is little doubt, heck the grand-daughter says it, Dodgson was in love with Alice. A man who hand-pens that book and presents it to Alice (with Mum's permission) at Christmas is a man in love.

@@mrunning10wtf????

what's the problem? I stand by everything in my comment. do you even know about the Lorina letter to Alice????? @@elisadjones

Well they are right the is no evidance .....but there is enoff Circumstacial evidance to sudggest that something very Odd and scandalouse was going on.

Could you post a copy of those cut out journal pages please? I'd like to come to the same screwed-up imagined conclusion too!

@@piratewhoisquiet There were many nude photos of nude little children that they showed he took, but they found only one of a full frontal picture of a young teenage girl...something that was never OK to take a picture of. Just b/c he wrote a great book doesn't mean he was a great person. It's OK to say that all evidence points to him being a pedophile, and that's why he was banded from being with the girls suddenly and that's why his nieces cut pages out of his diary when he described what happened that got him banded.

@@piratewhoisquiet ONE?? he took photoes of them as young as 6 years old ffs and naked! Did you just look at the whole video with your eyes closed and fingers in your ears or what!?!??!

@@piratewhoisquiet There are many nude photos he took.

@@bettywith2girls you nailed it.

Before I watched that part I knew it'd be Will Self. He's always frank.

The presumption and assumption involved are so void of logic and ignorant that it's amazing period If you don't know something comma you don't know it!!

Who is Loreena?

@@dianahernandez2447 omg...

@@dianahernandez2447 Alice's sister

I was thinking the same thing. Her mother was making sure that he couldn't touch her daughters anymore. When he was let back in their circle he was not to have contact with the girls.

It was just explained that the rift had nothing to with Alice . Pay attention !!

@@roslyndantinori7313 She didn't mention Alice in her comment. She was talking about her SISTER LORENA. Pay attention and read the comment again !!

But if he was caught taking the picture would they not have confiscated the picture from him?

@@carolynsilvers9999 I suspect there were many photos of not just Lorena but many young girls. Being a pedophile was something kept hidden except in circles of associates/friends with the same proclivity. Even in the late 1800s it was a crime. If he kept a few for himself rather than passing them around with like-minded people, he would probably destroyed these later in life. Somehow that photo surfaced - an old acquaintance's perhaps?

Pedo please NOT "peto." Everyone? Will Self said it quite plainly and the producers kept it in. And do you realize (go back reply listen carefully this time around) that as soon as Will Self was done answering the question regarding pedophilia, they cut to Ed Wakeling answering the question regarding abuse and molestation. Two different subjects and yet the editing suggests Ed was defending a pedophile. Replay, listen.

there is NO "plot" this was his life.

It's not strange at all, I find it hard to watch too

You’re not the only one, I started reading horror books from the age 11 and Alice has always unnerved me more than anything written by Stephen King or James Herbert. Even the Disney cartoon makes me uneasy.

It sounded creepy and very dangerous to me too. when you are alone in a place where anything is so absurd and everyone seems so out of here that you can't rely on them as a child or even an adult does look like how it is for a kid in an unhealthy household. the excuse of "she's a strong minded child" is an excuse. A kid still needs to be cared for ! I felt the same for Peter Pan. I worried me

I'm so.sorry you had to deal with that :( I've been touched inappropriately at 3 but idk how I would be if I was abused. Stay strong 💜

@@Lexillios What you describe is also abuse. I am sorry that happened to you.

Love isn't wrong.

@@i5m5bob Love for a little girl coming from a grown man who photographed teenage girls is

@@i5m5bob What in the world is wrong with you?

@@i5m5bob being jailed isn't wrong too

You are really dirgty, woman

Just so you know it was normal back in the 19th century to take photos of nood children in fact it was actually very common for families to put their nood children on Christmas and birthday cards. They did it because in the 19th century nood children were a sign of purity beauty and innocence you can't look at the stuff that Carroll did from 21st century perspective, you have to look at it in a19th century point of view.

@@LillianGish4711 yeah, but a teenager?

@@flor473 she was still considered young then.

In love with or just a pedophile?

@@barbibutton9619 there's been research proving he was not a pedophile, maybe those researchs will one day be debunked and turns out he did in fact have certain feelings for the girls. but as far as I know he was not a pedophile and never did any inappropriate things with or to the children, at least in Victorian standards of what was inappropriate.

the reason the book is scary is because he suffered from a rare migraine condition that used to cause him to hallucinate which is why the story is trippy and psychedelic and he used laudanum (opium tinture) to ease the pain thus further enhancing his travels into a surreal dreamworld and why every hippy loves the book including myself the mans tortured soul is his problem alone inspite of those disturbing photos there is absolutely no proof he abused anyone and you can't label someone by there thoughts and feelings otherwise we would all be under scrutiny for the bad things our uncontrollable mind thinks you can't call him a paedo because of his thoughts and as he was celabate its unlikely he acted on those thoughts you might have thoughts and feelings you can't restrain doesn't mean he did and as he never actualy hurt anyone it would be a huge loss to the world if his books didn't exist they have ignited many ceative fires and along with the Narnia chronicles and books the folk of the faraway tree and wind in the willows our childhoods would of been a dull place without them childhood is the most precious time in your life before society programmes and corrupts you and turns you into another cyborg i'm just glad you weren't my mother theres enough narrowminded creativity destroyers in the world forget about the man the book is what counts and as a middleaged hippy i still love the book as they say God works in mysterious ways if it wasn't for his secret torment we wouldn;t have the worlds 3rd most popular book for adults and children alike anyway it looked to me like Alice was equaly infatuated with Lewis always hanging around pestering him 4 stories so a lesson to all parents if you don't give your child enough love and ATTENTION they will seek it out elsewhere nutrue your childs imagination don't destroy it or they will go looking 4 jimmy's magic chair so beware narrowminded parents your going to create the very scenario your trying to prevent!

@@markhall42 if you enjoy reading books from a man who was high on drugs writing about fantasy places to take a child whom he was grooming the same child he also had partially nude photos of that's your business! I will never support such things children are to be protected by the grown ups not taken advantage of... Do you see the photos of the child did she appear to be in a fantasy land? There is no wonder and no magic in any of this when you know better you are supposed to do better! There was a huge Injustice done to Alice by all the grown ups in her life. He may have never physically touched her we will never know the answer to that but what we see is a grown man with partially nude pictures of a child who looks scared. Which is a sexual violation!

@@candecemo "...a huge injustice done to Alice...?" WTFAUTA?? How is it "advantageous" for Dodgson? What did he gain for the loss of Alice?

Agreed, I was surprised they showed us the whole image without any care for her privacy.

I thought the same thing

@@sdg2450 YES YES YES. I had to find this comment because I know I wasn't the one who thought this

Smae

Pornography? You do know what porn is, right? I'm not defending the artist, but seriously? Why are you sexualizing a child's breasts? Why are women so sexualized here in America? American culture is so sexualized and ashamed of bodies. In many places in Europe, they embrace their bodies. I'm so sickened by the fact that men can be shirtless but women can't. Just another double standard.

My mom didn't let us sleep over at friend's houses, and it was SO annoying. I fought her all the time on it. Once a woman told me I should come over and spend the night with her girls, but I didn't really like her daughters, so I was able to use it as an excuse. I thought, "Wow, that got me out of an awkward situation haha." Fast forward 5 years... turns out her husband was raping and sodomizing the girls.... My mom's rule saved me from a potential horrific night.

@@Persnicketychichi !! Omg my prayers go out to those girls. But same. My mother never allowed me to sleep over and I barely was allowed to go to friends houses especially if they had males in the house. I don’t even think I went to my friends houses till I was in HS and could defend myself more. But it has saved me too from their creepy older brothers and fathers that I later realized were predators…. Im 23 now and I still don’t like sleep outside of my own bed. The world is crazy.

@@stellablue1271 I know. It explained a LOT about why the girls were mean and moody. I just thought they weren't nice, but it was because they were undergoing trauma on a regular basis. Im happy to report he is in prison, and most the girls have moved on to marry and have happy lives.

@@stellablue1271 My mom is/was the same, especially when I was much younger she wanted to meet and know the parents before she would even think of letting me be at their house. That’s exactly why.

Who's turning a blind eye? We've ripped this guy apart so much he looks like chopped liver.

TheYNirvana you could tell she thought of the writer as a hero. However, I liked the guy who said pretty much if you have a person who writes a great book but then that person isn’t a great person it makes a problem.

@@leahhosman8896 Yes I liked him too! You can appreciate a book without sticking up for a problematic writer. Same with songs.

Well, for one thing a direct link between Carroll and that photograph. This documentary shows nothing of the kind. Nothing even hinting at it. Same features likewise is not nearly as good as it sounds, because the brutal truth is lots of people look like each other. Some kind of link between that photograph and Lorena would be good--but all you have is a someone who resembles her. So you have a photograph that cannot be dated, whose history is unknown, whose subject matter resembles someone, but no provenance of who took the photograph, when, where, nor of whom under what circumstances. But some who looked the model knew someone who once owned the same general type of camera. A very weak case as far as evidence goes. And btw, why only two experts? Aren't there other experts in these fields? What are their opinions?

@@TheYNirvana same with everything.. you can like makeup without supporting the behavior of it's creator, you can like movies without liking the actor's or director's behavior ... Etc...

@@DavidMacDowellBlue Oh you are blind, is the same girl.

Exactly,I feel you it was scary to me. I never got the hype around Alice in Wonderland either. Everyone's interpretation of what the story is suppose mean is different so I never got clarification. After watching this I'm glad I never liked it. That man is a pedophile.

Sir- you are right to feel as you do.

@@xoxoso295 only the writer new what was going in his mind. I believe it is not alice's wonderland but his.

Or he sexually touched them and he wrote about it. Idk it’s steam he

Yeah I was watching her and she looked so fake when they would say that it was most likely him like “hmmm yes, I’m going to ignore that :)” like ew

I felt the contrary, the conclusion of this video leaves no real doubt on his perversion, kinda courageous for a british reportage on a british litterature celebrity

But he was a good person.

I also agree. It's not good the naked pictures. But everything adds up to prove that

You are a fool.

@@darkangelprincess101 Picture. Just the one naked picture, not pictures plural. Also you either don't know what proof means or you don't know what pedophile means.

@Kerrie Daly adult married women were indeed very covered, not quite as much as you imply but generally yes. Children, not so at all, as was specifically mentioned in the documentary after the Alice in rags photo is shown.

Pedophilia is the sexual attraction to prepubescent children. Carrol was not "clearly sexually attracted to prepubescent children" To sanction behaviour in the past is not to sanction it in the present, nor is either close to the other. Sexual assault is wrong of course, but you cannot prove Carrol sexually assaulted anyone. It is not obvious that he was a monster nor is it a matter of belief. I believe that which I can prove. What do you believe? There was only one photo of his with a naked subject and by the definition of the time, it was not of a child. Nor is it evident that the nudity was required at all, for all you know it was Lorena's idea! There's certainly no way to prove (and therefore no reason to claim) that Lorena didn't consent to the photo, and there would be no reason for Carrol not to take the photo if Lorena was for it other than if her parents disagreed, because -children- of age maidens were still considered the property of their parents. And it seems at least one of Lorena's parents disagreed. It raises the question, though, are you in favour of children being their parent's property?

You do realize that the full-frontal at the end of the show was NOT Lorina Charlotte Liddell ?

i was thinking the exact same thing

IKRRRR. I was thinking, "This chick looks a lot like Alice", just before I saw her description under her name.

truth, "legality is not Morality" at the time NEITHER were a subject. it was neither Illegal, nor was it immoral.. once again you are subjecting the past to today's standards.. how idiotic are you?

We don't need to theorise why their standards of acceptable photographs were different, we know full well. They didn't sexualise children, nude children are an artistic feature going back centuries representing innocence, fertility, spontaneity and potential. His behaviour also wasn't pedophilic, pedophilia is sexual attraction to prepubescent children. No mental gymnastics required, there's simply no evidence that his interest in the Liddle girls was sexual other than a single photograph, taken of one of the girls when she had clearly begun pubescent development and was likely above the age of consent. That's simply not pedophilia. Also, no we did not always know the behaviour you attribute to Carrol was wrong, search up "ancient Greek pederasty" and ask if whether he was fucking little boys invalidates the Socratic Method because he almost certainly was, and it definitely doesn't. But, while you sit here and profess the eternal moral standards you hold you still use logic and reason. You still use geometry. You still believe in the validity of the Socratic Method. Are you a hypocrite, or is your comment merely garbage?

People are not defending him, people say Victorians didn't care about a grown up man being friends with their children. The Llewelyn Davies boys became friends with J.M. Barrie and called it uncle Jim and they became the inspiration for Peter Pan and naked pictures of the children were taken in lakes or at the beach and the parents took full frontage pictures of their children too and it was fine FOR THEM back then but people don't say the parents shouldn't have been cautious or that is ok for them right now or even back then but they didn't live back then. You can't use a time machine and say: "pay attention!" to the parents and to the children. You can only do it now.

you're right when you say Legality isn't morality. but is it not safe to say the legality of something can shape societies perception on the morality of it?

@@piratewhoisquiet Are you okay? You think that just because the Liddell girl was going through puberty, she was capable of consent?! I’m seriously concerned.

When a mistake was made the page was discarded and another started anew.

I agree. I think Alice's Mother figured out what he was doing and saved her children.

yeah what a dreadful snob how dare she want to protect her sweet innocent little girls from the nasty pedophile that was preying upon them...

...he asked for a lock of hair The elderly man in the blue shirt is keeping real ...hmmmm

@@lizzie0canada9roxya Right, how dare she fear for her children’s safety.

@@90sDRgirl Yes? Lead on please?

To me this book is a great warning story of what happens when you are curious about things that you feel is not good for you; yet follow them !down a rabbit hole". -- GREAT ANALOGY!

You have to take that into account though cause it was the beginning of photography and people were amazed to be immortalized on them.

Unfortunately pedophilia was quite common at the time. Accepted? No. Common? Yes.

@@vintage7256 how do you know he wasn't asexual when even nowadays people think of peadophilia right away but don't even know about asexuality. Only Carroll could say if the pictures weren't just esthetic but that he had an attraction towards children or not but he is dead so we will never know.

@@vintage7256 Still common.

My heartfelt sympathies to you for what happened. I can understand your reaction would be different. Read the books, re-capture childhood, confront, Leviticus 24:19-22, forgive, you are stronger than those God-Damned abusers. Don't stop, you'll know you're done when the books are no longer terrifying.

Exactly👏

wheres Chris Hanson w=TCAP when you need him ..

I was thinking the same thing

No one is acting like it's okay to be sexually interested in girls "that young" because there's no evidence Carrol's interest in the Liddle girls was sexual, at least not before the eldest started coming of age and by that point she isn't "that young" because that's what of age means. How is he a "creep?"

@@BEAUTYnIQ unfortunately, Chris Hanson was not alive when Lewis Carroll was behaving like a pedo.

same or that she was insane in general

to me it was like getting a kid into an unhealthy/dangerous space that resembles an unhealthy relationship

I agree with this but if it's authors that have passed and gain no money from your purchase. (Assuming you buy phisical copies) If it's authors that are alive, if you really want to read their stories, PLEASE pirate them! Don't support then financially

@@kiwifit620 Agreed.

The full-frontal nude is NOT Lorina Charlotte Liddell. It is definitely NOT a photograph taken by Dodgson. The "forensic" evidence does NOT match. Replay, listen this time. Stop submitting to thought control. Grab the Dodgson 1860 photograph of Lorina (not shown in this vid!) and do your own compare. And then ask yourself WHY the BBC did NOT show this picture????? It is not Lorina Charlotte Liddell. It is scary to think most viewers of this documentary come away with that impression. Scary. Rather than THINK, you go blindly right down the Dodgson Rabbit Hole.

@@mrunning10 Considering sheltering molesters has been nigh on a sideline for the BBC for much of living memory, why would they all of a sudden go out of their way to incriminate Carroll (something he does a fine job of doing of his own accord, I might add)?

Dodgson was a pedophile not a predator. The full-frontal is NOT a photograph of Lorina Charlotte Liddell. Dodgson collected purchased all sorts of photographs over a thousand, this one is a medical condition photograph in his collection (replay the first expert, he even said it "this is a dealer's inscription 'from the collection of Charles Dodgson"), a very simple explanation for the full-frontal photograph. They were all supposedly burned by his executors by his instructions by one of the nieces executing his estate per his will. Per the instructions in his will. Pretty conscientious and moral upstanding and ethical man to take such steps. Somehow this controversial photograph missed the fire. There is NO evidence even hinted or circumstantial from any source at the time that Dodgson ever abused, threatened, molested, coerced, connived, cajoled, or set up an instance of behavioral misconduct; misconduct defined in HIS time or OURS. In fact, not mentioned in the documentary is what happens in Dodgson's social life and contacts among many of the children and families AFTER the rift, after all the pictures of all the girls and all the families years later.

Yes yes yes, but what do you think about this Dodgson Problem?

TheOctoberOwl weird comment but ok

I was when I watched this, am I In danger?

SteelRodent exactly, what are these people going to do, dig him up and arrest him?

It was 150 years ago- he's not hurting anyone now. What do you want us to do? Dig him up? Burn his corpse? Also, love the disguised sexism you got there, luv x

They’re probably subconsciously defending themselves really! No one who isn’t interested in children would defend him!

Jesus just got to the face analysis bit and it’s just obvious dude. The guy literally says there’s no indications of a significant difference in any of the facial features and when they’re all isolated it’s very clear :3 she just states all the facts about it over and over then goes “but who knows ey? It was fuckin ages ago”

So true

He was the only one interviewer that spoke the truth and wasn’t afraid to do so, like bitch it’s so OBVIOUS

WTF did you hear that in your head? The first expert NEVER said that. WFT? The first expert gave an opinion of the technical aspects of the PHOTOGRAPH and not the CONTENT. That first expert was way out of line in saying Dodgson's name. Down the Rabbit Hole we go.

@@lovekammer6743 So not.

You mean romanticising, I believe. And what he did absolutely was okay. What is "okay" is subjective, and collectively decided by society. We are more than a hundred and fifty years too late to judge Carrol differently.

Yeah it's almost like they dont realize the story of alice in wonderland is literally a part of his grooming. Its disgusting

@@marthals89 nobody can tell. What if he was asexual? And the pictures only considered esthetic at the Victorian era but that he wasn't sexually attracted to children? We will never know. Only Carroll could tell. Even nowadays people don't know about asexuality. People accused J.M. Barrie of peadophilia on nothing when he likely was a Victorian asexual and that's why he could write Peter Pan. The world asexual didn't exist so how could people tell they were asexual or not?

@@somebodysomeone453 yea nah

@@somebodysomeone453 Yes that is a possability, but still his attachment and behaviore would still have been or should be considered a little Odd at best.

To me she looks kinda scared, like she’s ready to run if she needs to

@@maddiemose9763 That's because you must think Dodgson molested her? Alice is sad in the last Dodgson photograph of her because she has grown and he has not.

Then I m not the only one who got scared 😅

I too was frightened of it. I couldn't imagine anything worse than falling down a hole and suddenly being in such a freaky world. Oddly, I loved The Wizard of Oz, despite almost the exact same thing happening, although in the books - there were more, and I read them all - it was all really happening, not a dream, and was pretty freaking scary. (The time that the Lion and Dorothy are imprisoned by the WW of the W in particular is awful!)

Agree, I was terrified when I was a kid and saw this book :\

Yeah it's a creepy book.

where did she bought it?

Alice was pubescent, not a child at the time. 1864. 12. "Age of Consent" So Alices' great granddaughter who heard it from Alice's son, Caryl, got it wrong? You know better right?

Read.

Whats going on? Pls get some therapeutic help if you are suicidal or overwhelmed by life... If therapy is not possible then there are many good suicide prevention helplines that offer genuine compassion and support. I know life feels impossible sometimes..but do try every option before thinking of suicide.

Carroll's drawings with the blank faces brought that possibility to mind.

It has also been.pointed- out that the art of the time often involved little girls.

Naw

@LONtoLAX what is "it" and how is "it" relevant?

@LONtoLAX who said I said it was ok? Maybe you should check your tongue.

The presenter is talking about the lack of documentation that prove it. Provenance is very important in the art world when attributing something to someone. Experts can weigh in, and the show did have the photo reviewed by 2 experts. But until the greater field of experts on the subject agree to their statements, it isn't considered an accepted truth. Unless someone comes forward with the original plate negative, or another print of the photo that hasn't been cropped and therefore contains LC's handwriting, it is still only someone's opinion.

We know it's her, but it still can't be categorically proven beyond reason of all doubt.

It is NOT Lorina Charlotte Liddell. Why not read up on AI facial recognition and ask why no mention of it on this issue? Ask yourself why the other experts who gave a differing opinion are not shown? And the first expert gave an opinion of the technical aspects of the PHOTOGRAPH and not the CONTENT. That first expert was way out of line in saying Dodgson's name. And hello Mr.Second Expert, ever hear of AI Facial Recognition? The photographs are different but close enough for shoddy investigative journalism and conspiracy theory. It is not Lorina Charlotte Liddell. Read up on "epicanthal" WRT eyes. Look at the Dodgson 1860 photo of Lorina (not used in the documentary) compared to this claimed Lorina full-frontal ALSO DATED 1860. Where are the "burns" or "pock-marks" on Lorina's face in the Dodgson photograph? MISSING. Read up on the Era's social environment and of the wet collodion process. Hells Bells, the photograph is dated 1860, BEFORE Dodgson even had a studio at Christ Church. Where the hell was this photograph supposed to be taken? In the Deanery Garden? This ain't in the era of the cellphone where we snap our brains out and post all over the globe in an instant. Read up on the the physical locations of Dodgson's Christ Church and Badcock Yard studios. WAY TOO INVOLVED to arrange this photograph. It would be PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for Dodgson to take such a photograph of Lorina back in this time / era. Take a look of the Dodgson 1870 photograph of Lorina, now 21, this is the look of a woman whom Dodgson, if we believe the full-frontal is genuine, essentially stripped her naked and cold and afraid and took hours to photograph her (essentially Victoria Era rape) and now stares back at her rapist? This is the face of the woman whom Dodgson corresponded with the most, all his life of any of the sisters?? Lorina and Alice were as close as any sisters could be, and Alice names a son "Caryl" The rapist of her sister? This is a scary video because most viewers see it with eyes wide shut.

@@mrunning10 lmfao. Go admit yourself to a mental hospital