Books: The Inns and Taverns of Pickwick
B >>
B.W. Matz >> The Inns and Taverns of Pickwick
Pages:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 | 8
CHAPTER XVIII
PICKWICK AND THE "GEORGE" INN
Certain traditional legends naturally grow round our old London
landmarks and, when once started, no matter how conjectural, they
are hard to overtake or suppress.
The George Inn, Southwark, is an instance of this, and the legend
that is prone to cling to it is that it was the original of the
White Hart Inn of Pickwick fame; the contention being that Dickens,
when writing so faithfully of the "White Hart" in Chapter X of The
Pickwick Papers, where Sam Weller was first discovered, described
the "George" and called it after its near neighbour, the "White
Hart." This contention, we submit, has no justification whatever.
The only reason, therefore, for referring to it here, is with a
view to dispelling the illusion.
It is surprising that so good a Dickensian as the late J. Ashby
Sterry should have been one of those who favoured the idea. Whether
he was the first to do so we are not aware. But in his very
interesting and informative article entitled "Dickens in Southwark,"
in The English Illustrated Magazine for November, 1888, he states it
as his opinion that the "George" was the original of the "White
Hart," and reverted to the same idea in The Bystander (1901). The
following extract from the former article contains the argument he
used to substantiate his claim:
"Moreover it (the 'George') is especially notable as being the spot
where Mr. Pickwick first encountered the immortal Sam Weller. The
'White Hart' is the name, I am aware, given in the book, but it is
said that Dickens changed the sign in order that the place should
not be too closely identified. This was by no means an unusual
custom with the novelist. I think he did the same thing in Edwin
Drood, where the 'Bull' at Rochester is described under the sign
of the 'Blue Boar.' A similar change was made in Great Expectations,
where the same inn is disguised in like fashion, in the account
of the dinner given after Pip was bound apprentice to Joe Gargery.
The 'White Hart' is close by, on the same side of the way, a little
nearer London Bridge, but little, if anything, is remaining of
the old inn, and the whole of the place and its surroundings have
been modernised.
[illustration: The George Inn, Southwark, in 1858. From an
engraving by Fairholt]
"I, however, had the opportunity of comparing both inns some years
ago, and have no hesitation in saying that the 'George' is the inn
where the irrepressible Alfred Jingle and the elderly Miss Rachel
were discovered by the warm-hearted, hot-tempered Wardle. If you
like to go upstairs you can see the very room where Mr. Jingle
consented to forfeit all claims to the lady's hand for the
consideration of a hundred and twenty pounds. Cannot you fancy,
too, the landlord shouting instructions from those picturesque
flower-decked galleries to Sam in the yard below?"
These deductions and views are not in any way convincing to us;
indeed, we find ourselves in complete disagreement with them,
and few Dickensians, we feel sure, will endorse them.
Mr. Ashby Sterry's argument regarding the "Bull" and the "Blue Boar"
at Rochester proves nothing. Dickens described the "Bull" there in
The Pickwick Papers and called it the "Bull" at Rochester, as he did
the "Leather Bottle" at Cobham, the "Angel" at Bury St. Edmunds, the
"Great White Horse" at Ipswich--to name a few parallel cases. When
he described the "Bull" and called it the "Blue Boar," it was in
another book, Great Expectations, not in Edwin Drood, as stated by
Mr. Ashby Sterry, and its location was a fictitious city, i.e. The
Market Town.
The only case in which Dickens deliberately used the name of one inn
for another was that of the "Maypole" and "King's Head" at Chigwell
in Barnaby Rudge. But in this instance he admitted that he had done
so, although it was scarcely necessary, for the inns were very
dissimilar and the novelist's description of the latter could not
be taken for the former.
The case of the "George" and the "White Hart" is different. They
both stood quite near to each other at the time Dickens was writing
The Pickwick Papers, and were both so named and both famous. There
could be no reason, therefore, for him to describe one and call it
by the other's name.
Although they may not have been identical in all particulars as to
structure, the "George" and the "White Hart" were sufficiently alike
to make it possible for a person of imagination to go over the
"George" and be satisfied that such and such a room might do for
the one in which "Mr. Jingle forfeited all claims to the lady's
hand," and imagine, too, that the galleries could be accepted easily
as those over which "the landlord shouted instructions to Sam in
the Yard." But these flights of fancy could be indulged in even
n the New Inn, Gloucester, or any similar old coaching inn, if one
so desired.
Mr. Percy FitzGerald, the greatest authority on The Pickwick Papers,
is of the same opinion as ourselves on the point, and asks: "Why
should notoriety be attached to the 'White Hart,' from which the
'George' was to be shielded?"
No, the "George" is a wonderfully alluring old inn, and for this
reason Dickensians have a warm place in their hearts for it. But
we have no hesitation in saying that it is not the original of the
"White Hart" of Pickwick and Sam Weller fame.
Another distinguished writer, the American novelist and artist,
F. Hopkinson Smith, in his book, Dickens's London, fell into a
similar blunder. Indeed, his book contains some glaring mistakes,
owing, no doubt, to the fact, which he admits, that he gathered his
information from any Tom, Dick or Harry he came in contact with
during his wanderings. In describing his visit to the "George," he
found incidents from Pickwick to fit every nook and cranny in the
building and quoted them with much conviction. But he quoted no
facts, nor did he give any data to substantiate his statements.
Someone told him it was the original of the "White Hart," as they
told him that the house named Dickens House in Lant Street was where
Dickens once lived, irrespective of the fact that the actual house
was demolished years before. Yet that satisfied him, he took no
trouble to make further enquiries and then imagined the rest. In
regard to the "George" he let his imagination run riot, dilated on
this being Miss Wardle's room, this being the room where the couple
were discovered, and further states that Dickens made the inn a
favourite one of his when a boy in Lant Street, and speaks of the
seat he used to sit in. All of which is sheer nonsense.
Dickens may have known the George Inn in those early days, but being
only a mere boy is not likely to have frequented it. Although in
later years--those of Little Dorrit and the Uncommercial Traveller--it
is quite likely he may have visited it. Indeed, Miss Murray, the
present hostess, tells us he did. Her authority was Abraham Dawson,
a well-known carman and carrier in days gone by, who was a nephew of
W. S. Scholefield who owned the inn at the time. Dawson assured her
that he frequently chatted with Dickens in the coffee-room.
Yet the only occasion, so far as we are aware, that the novelist
actually mentions the inn is in Little Dorrit, Book I, Chapter XXII,
where Maggy, speaking of Tip, says: "If he goes into the 'George'
and writes a letter. . . ."
No, the George Inn is just a fine survival of old days--the old days
of which Dickens wrote--and is similar, in many respects, to what the
'White Hart' used to be. As such Dickensians have a great affection
for it, and there is no need to invent stories about it to justify
their reverence.
Mr. A. St. John Adcock is another writer who steers clear of the
confusion. In The Booklover's London, after referring to the
"White Hart," he goes on to say: "If you step aside up George Yard,
which is next to the 'White Hart' yard, you may see the old George
Inn which, with its low ceilings, ancient rafters and old wooden
galleries outside, closely resembles what the 'White Hart' used to
be, and gives us an idea of the inn yards in which the strolling
players of Shakespeare's time used to set up their stages."
Let us leave it at that and retain our regard for the old inn for
what it is, rather than for what it is not.
Pages:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 | 8