The Modern Forgery Hypothesis

[proto57]

Hello Rich

You have now painted a more sympathetic portrait of W. Voynich than the one you painted previously, where you depicted him as a heartless man. He seemed to be a good businessman in his field, and I suppose he had the same weaknesses as most of us. I don't rule out that he did some less-than-exemplary things, but who hasn't done them at some point?

 In any case, a man who suffered years in prison in Siberia for fighting for the freedom of his country deserves respect.

Well you can disagree with my opinions, of course, but not the facts behind them. I only reported to you the facts of the matter... what he had done, and said, and his words as reported to Orioli, and so on. I didn't make these things up, nor do I leave anything out. My blog is rife with the factual evidence we have, about the man... of course Rene's site goes into further details. Based on all of this, though, you, Rene and I, and anyone else, is welcome to form their own opinions on the man. That is our right to do so.

But, for instance, Orioli said what he said, and in the context of the entire book... did you read it?... my opinion is that Orioli was not lying (although wrong about him being a Jew), he was trying to be accurate.

But you seem to actually agree, in that you then excuse his personality and actions because he spent time in prison. OK, that's fine... maybe prison hardened the man, I would consider that possible, too. And maybe his pre-prison life was a noble one, fighting injustices, and maybe I would agree, even, with some of his tactic which led him to prison in the first place (twice, I think). So really, you now seem to agree, somewhat, with my assessment, only you give him an allowance due to his previous hardships. That is a valid alternative take to mine, then. It is the old "nature/nurture" question.

Point being, I stand by my statement, my opinion, that his words and actions point to him being a liar, a scoundrel and somewhat unethical, for whatever reason he was that way, I don't entirely know. Maybe you are right. And I do respect much about the man... even in my case, in which I believe he was clever enough to pass off a pretty bad forgery, one which sustains its percieved authenticity down through generations. That is quite an admirable feat, so I do give him that.

Rich, the idea that Voynich competed with his wife for fame sounds like something out of a novel. I see you have a knack for storytelling.

Again, the basis for my opinion here is based on facts. I researched the life of Ethel in detail, as many of us here have. She was really an amazing woman, one who deserves far more recognition than she does. But back in the late 1800's through early 1900's, she had a certain fame and celebrity... as a humorist, bestselling novelist (the Gadfly was required reading in many Russian schools, and sold hundreds of thousands of copies there), translator. She was also a respected and accomplished composer!

Her father was the famous Boole, who died when she was only 11. Her mother was an artist and illustrator, and publisher. They both befriended the famous "Ace of Spies", Sidney Reilly (AKA Rosenblum), of the Darcy Affair... and the two of them traveled the Continent as "friends", leading to some rumors. You ought to read You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. I don't recommend the similarly titled book by Robin Bruce Lockhart... that one is full of errors.

I could go on. But the point remains that Voynich, for a long time in their relationship, had a reputation that, while admirable to some extent, paled by comparison to hers. Those are all facts... read the books, read the newspaper articles... he was in the background of her dazzling life, in at least one merely being inaccurately described as a "Polish Count". It was not until the announcement of the famous Roger Bacon Cipher Ms. that his name began to meet and even eclipse hers, until the name "Voynich" came to be associated WITH the ms, and no longer, Ethel.

Now, as I said, those are all facts. The opinion part only comes in with my assumption that this would have irked a man of his times, considering the differing views as to the expected and pervasive views of the roles of the sexes were at that time. I think the term "marital hegemony" applies here. I think that in order for you to think that assessment of mine is a "novelization" requires either ignoring the reality of their relative and unequal fame; and/or applying modern sensibilities of our views of gender relationships to a time that saw them very, very differently.

Anyway, you triggered a fun memory... I joked that Ethel, in being a friend and associate of Rosenblum, and Rosenblum being one of the influences for the character James Bond, and Ethel even using his life and backstory as an influence on her protagonist Arthur Burton in the Gadfly... I suggest that this made Ethel the first "Bond Girl". I hope that does not offend your sensibilities... it is a joke, and I don't think it undermines my great respect for the woman. In fact, there are those who theorize that it was Rosenblum who adopted her characters backstory, and not the other way around... I think everyone respected and admired her. I do, too. You ought to read all her books... they are really good, and hold up even today.