JMBarrie
JMBarrie => Davies Family => Topic started by: AnnaPink on September 21, 2005, 09:19:03 PM
-
I know this subject has been pondered on and debated exhaustively, but I did want to ask about this comment Nico makes in his 12-29-1975 letter to AB regarding Michael's death: 'he and Rupert banged on somebody's door on the way to the river and said "Come on out and bathe"'. Wondered if anyone knows anything more about this, as it is the only reference to this incident I've found? I'm wondering specifically who's door this was, and if they had anything more to say on the subject? I know it is very arcane, and really isn't important in the larger scheme of things, so I am a little relunctant to bring it up, but the incident certainly does (in my mind, and apparently in Nico's as well) sway the evidence of the death towards "natural causes" and away from suicide, for pretty obvious reasons.
-
I remember asking Nico if he knew whose dooir - and he didn't... but I agree that this, along with other factors, tips my thinking at least towards an accident - tho evidently not Lisa Chaney!
-
Yes, this piece of information seems to solve
the mystery. They must of went to bathe and
got swept away, Michael being a bad swimmer
Rupert probably tried to save him. I do wonder
why there were reports of them clung together
or bound at the hands. Maybe this was just gossip
or exaggerated rumors.
-
Check out the detailed coroner's report in the two local Oxford newspapers - both in the database (just search for "Oxford"). Frederick Carter - the man who dragged Sandford Pool - stated that "when I fetched up the first body [= Buxton], I found something drop off. I thought it was the limb of a tree, but I then thought it was the other body which dropped from the first one. We took the first body round to the hotel at Sandford, and then went back and dragged in the same spot. We found the second body at 3.15" - the first body having been recovered an hour earlier. The Oxford Chronicle's editor has interpreted this as
BODIES CLASPED
in the paragraph heading... draw your own conclusions!
-
So I finally got to read the coroners report, I own a
MAC computer and for come reason the data base
searches wouldnt work on it. Now I am at my dads
computer (a PC) and the database works fine.
(Good things come to those that wait)
The coroners report is very very interesting.
What I've always been searching for.
Thank you Andrew.
From reading it, I think its
pretty obvious what happened. They went to
bathe, Rupert went in first, swimming out to
a rock and Michael then followed, but not being
a good swimmer struggled at the half way point. Rupert
went to save him and got pulled down himself.
So Sad. Even sadder is the way people
exaggerate, or even twist facts to say they
intentionally had a suicide pact, even more
ludacris, hands bound together or that the
two were lovers. I do admit all the more
romantic, but no less tragic.
Although the mystery in my mind is solved,
Michael for some reason, out of all the
children still remains the most intriguing but I
can't figure out why. I guess thats the magic of it all.
-
To beguin with I beg your pardon for my english. I can read without problems but I'm afraid that my writing can be plenty of incorrections.
I have been some months reading and exploring this wonderful site (thank you Andrew, it's a fantastic work and the best database I've ever seen in an Internet site).
About Michael's death I am a bit confused, mostly because the traces and the opinions of his friends and family are sometimes incongruous, sometimes contradictories, sometimes both.
Even Nico, in his letter dated Dec/21/1975 writes to Andrew:
"I've always had something of a hunch that Michael's drowning was suicide — he was in a way the "type" i.e. exceptionally clever with varying moods. He couldn't swim a yard, though Rupert Buxton with whom he drowned (also exceptionally clever) was a very good swimmer — but why did they choose a known danger spot which already had a memorial announcing a death by drowning? When "found", their arms were round each other. Most presume one went to save the other — probably correct — but which? In a strange way I would prefer it to have been intentional rather than accidental. "
But only eight days later, Dec/29/1975...
"... As for Michael's possible suicide: if I had put money on it I'd invest pretty heavily on "natural causes" "
When someone beloved dies in tragic circunstances one can spent years thinking about what really happened or what could be happened or, even worst, what could have been happened if...
Greetings fom Madrid-Spain
-
Yes, very contradictory. As Nico says, he wanted to believe it was suicide for Michael's sake - i.e. Michael got what he desired - but then when he looked at the evidence objectively, came to agree with me (and Seb Earl among others) that it was probably an accident.
PS Many thanks for your kind comments about the site!
-
Malain, A belated tip which might help you for the future:
I, too, have a Mac (an iMac G5) but I experienced no problem accessing the Oxford newspaper cuttings in Andrew's database. Be sure to use the latest version of Mozilla Firefox as your web browser.
-
Where was Michael's funeral held? There is never a mention of this and I am guessing the church in Hamstead.
-
Yes, pretty sure it was Hampstead Church.
-
Michael's tombstone is tilting. Can we take up a collection to have this made right?
-
Well being a romantic, I have to say that I love tilting tombstones!
-
I too am a romantic, but preventative measures would keep the tombstone from being damaged
-
I would like to help see it's taken care of myself...but i do get what Andrew is saying haha But would like to know it's taken care of.
-
I will see that the grave is taken care of
-
Andrew... you are pretty sure the service for Michael was at
Hamstead Church???? Isn't that an imporant detail that should have been in your book? You were in contact with Nico. He was certainly there. Did Barrie visit Michael's grave in the years following? The death had a MAJOR effect on Barrie and yet it is almost just a mention in your book. Why?
-
Just do a search on 1921 in the Database and you will find a number of letters where it is stated that the funeral was at Hampstead. Nico was not there, however. Peter and Jack were. I believe that Nico was at Cannon Hall, the DuMaurier's house - it was just too much for him.
-
Mention...? Well, those final pages of the last chapter and epilogue are pretty damn powerful. I think the "mention" of it is a right ending in history, plot and style for both the book and the film. Of course many things happened afterward -a number of which Andrew does point to- but there's only so much you can fit into a script or a book (that's why there's a website), and the death of Michael in a way (in many ways!) was the death of Barrie.
-
Thank you, Hannah! I don't consider the name of the church where Michael's funeral took place to be "an important detail", given that I state that he was buried in Hampstead Churchyard. "You were in contact with Nico. He was certainly there." Taylor's comment(s) have a faintly accusational tone. Yes, of course I was in contact with Nico. But no, he was not there. "Did Barrie visit Michael's grave in the years following?" I haven't the faintest idea. Probably. "The death had a MAJOR effect on Barrie and yet it is almost just a mention in your book. Why?" The last 7 pages of my book deal almost exclusively with the effect that Michael's death had on Barrie - what more is there to be said?
-
Andrew, i took some time last night to read the section on Michael's death in some 14 Barrie bios that i have. I am sure you have read most.. No mention of the funeral, but one does mention that Barrie did visit Michael's grave every day he was in London. So often that his friends and especially CA felt it unhealthy for him and that this was driving him into deeper depression. They feared he would take his own life or allow himself to waste away. So yes, those visits to that grave are very important to the life of Sir J. M. Barrie. And what a picture it paints in our minds.
Nico? Don't you say in your book that Nico came down to London from school? Not really important other than 1st hand knowledge.
-
I'm very curious to know which biography says that Barrie visited Michael's grave "every day he was in London" - meaning for the rest of his life?? I can find no mention of it in Mackail, the only reliable biography in Nico's opinion when it comes to facts. Nico certainly never mentioned it to me, which seems odd given that he lived with Barrie "off and on for more than 20 years". Barrie was often referred to in the press as "the hermit of the Adelphi". He didn't drive and had no chauffeur, so the idea that he made a daily (or nocturnal?) pilgrimage from the Strand up to Hampstead churchyard also seems a little far-fetched. But of course such visits - if true - would "very important to the life of Sir J. M. Barrie" -- did I suggest otherwise?
Yes, Nico came down to London from Eton, but no, he did not go to the funeral. If you check his letters to me (published on this website) he says "I was discouraged (praise the Lord!) from going to the funeral and went to stay in Cannon Hall with the du Mauriers — about half a mile from the church."
-
Thanks Andrew - I knew that somehow I knew that Nico was not at the funeral but went to stay at Cannon Hall, but I could not figure out how I knew it! Since Barrie was in such a state himself that he could not bear to look at Nico (because it made him think of Michael) it was good for him to have a place to go. He always seemed to get along well with the du Maurier sisters - after all he and Angela were only a few months apart in age.
The letters from a 1921 search (which I recommended in an earlier post) are very touching by the way. Some are written to Mary Hodgson by women who must have been former domestic servants at 23 - they remembered Michael as a little boy and knew how heartbroken Mary and Nico had to have been. There is also a sad letter from Margaret Llewelyn Davies written to Mary H., which looks as though someone either writing it or reading it was crying - there are tearstains.
Some of the letters do not show up - there is one from Crompton for example which is not viewable.
As to the question of how Michael's death affected Barrie and how it was handled in the book - I think the fact that the book essentially ends with Michael's death pretty much tells the story. From reading the book (30 years ago the first time and Lord knows how many times since!), I had no doubt that Barrie was totally devastated. How an author decides to handle any topic is certainly the author's choice. I don't see how it could have been better handled myself.
-
Thanks for that, ECB - and the alert about Crompton's letter being unviewable - I'll look into it asap. If anyone else spots similar glitches, do please let us know!
-
Why Michael died so young?
-
Why Michael died so young?
He drowned with his friend Rupert Buxton, in an apparent swimming accident near Oxford.
Unless you're looking for a metaphysical explanation... and there is none.