Dotting the e: a happy ending

Many sites are reporting the fact that the Brontë commemorative plaque at Poets' Corner in Westminster Abbey has now been corrected and has the diaeresis above the e. All thanks to author Sharon Wright. From The Guardian:

An 85-year injustice has been rectified at Poets’ Corner in Westminster Abbey with the corrected spelling of one of the greatest of all literary names. Reader, it is finally Brontë, not Bronte.

An amended memorial to Charlotte, Emily and Anne Brontë was unveiled on Thursday with added diaereses (two dots) that ensure people pronounce it with two syllables. As if it rhymed with Monty, not font.

The memorial was installed in 1939 and, for whatever reason, came without the diaereses that the Brontës used.

The correction came about after an approach to the abbey by Sharon Wright, the editor of the Brontë Society Gazette, who visited Poets’ Corner as part of research for a new book.

“The first thing I thought was: ‘They’ve spelt the names wrong!’ Surely I can’t be the first person to notice it. I don’t think I am but I might be the first to call it to anyone’s attention and say ‘can we spell the names right please?’,” Wright said. “These women are three of this country’s greatest writers. They deserve to have their names spelt correctly on the memorial created to honour them.”

Wright remembered feeling genuine indignation when she saw the plaque. “I’m from Bradford like them and I want them celebrated properly in London, or that London, as we say. They are Yorkshire heroines and their name is Brontë, not Bronte.”

Wright said everyone else’s name in Poets’ Corner was spelled correctly, not least the poet Robert Southey who is represented by a magnificent monument and bust.

Southey is something of a villain in Brontë circles in that he told 20-year-old Charlotte that poetry and literary creation could not and should not be a woman’s work. “I thought ‘they’ve got his name right’ before I went stomping off,” Wright said.

She was half expecting a battle to get the name corrected but actually found an open, friendly door and a willingness to correct.

The reasons for the mistake are not clear although timing presumably played a part, in that the tablet was installed on 8 October 1939, soon after the outbreak of the second world war.

It meant there was no fanfare. In a letter dated 2 November that year, Paul de Labilliere, then the dean of Westminster, wrote: “I should greatly wish that its completion should be marked by a ceremonial unveiling but in these times anything of that sort is out of the question.”

The installation was sponsored by the Brontë Society, founded in 1893 and one of the oldest literary societies in the world.

It was July 1947 before there was a formal ceremony at the abbey with the society, by which point bigger issues about rebuilding the nation were on collective minds. Or society members perhaps felt they should be grateful for just being there. “I don’t know,” said Wright. “You know Yorkshire people, we do like to stick our hand up and make a fuss, so I don’t know what happened there.”

The missing diaereses may be as much of a mystery as the diaereses themselves. No one can say with absolute certainty why the Brontë name evolved from their father Patrick’s Irish surname of Prunty or Brunty when he arrived at St John’s College, Cambridge, in 1802.

It may have had something to do with his admiration for Horatio Nelson, who was made Duke of Bronte, and the way Patrick, as someone born in County Down, would pronounce it. It may also have been a gentrification based on a Greek word for thunder.

None of that matters in Wright’s eyes. “This is not about the men, it’s about the women and their name was Brontë, that is how they spelt it from being really little girls. This is a really happy and timely ending to the story.”

Those sentiments were echoed by the dean of Westminster, David Hoyle, who said he was grateful to have the omission pointed out and now put right.

“Memory is not a locked cupboard, but an active thing,” he said. “The Brontë Society have given us a glimpse of their commitment to a lively remembering.” (Mark Brown)

From The Telegraph and Argus:

The diaereses, the name for the two dots above the “e” at the end of the Brontë name, were omitted when it originally commemorated the novelists on October 8, 1939 amid the outbreak of the Second World War.

Journalist and Brontë historian Sharon Wright, editor of the Brontë Society Gazette, raised the issue with the Dean of Westminster, The Very Reverend Dr David Hoyle and the Abbey asked its stonemason to tap the dots in and its conservator to paint them.

Ms Wright, who went to Poets’ Corner for a research trip, said that the dots being left off the sisters’ names “really troubled” her as “the names of the Brontë sisters were spelled incorrectly, they didn’t have the correct punctuation on the e” so it sounded more like “Bront” not “Bronte”.

She added: “There’s no paper record for anyone complaining about this or mentioning this, so I just wanted to put it right, really.

“And it’s lovely because it’s 85 years since it went in, in October. So it’s a sort of timely happy ending, isn’t it nice?”

Ms Wright, who is from Bradford, not far from where the sisters lived in Haworth, says: “These three Yorkshire women, deserve their place here, but they also deserve to have their name spelled correctly.”

In a statement, Rebecca Yorke, director of the Brontë Society, said the group was “very grateful to the Dean of Westminster and his colleagues at the Abbey for their positive response to Sharon’s inquiries”.

She added: “As the Brontës and their work are loved and respected all over the world, it’s entirely appropriate that their name is spelled correctly on their memorial.”

The Dean of Westminster said: “I am grateful to have this omission pointed out and now put right.

“Memory is not a locked cupboard, but an active thing and the Brontë Society have given us a glimpse of their commitment to a lively remembering.” (Rowan Newman)

From BBC News:

The omission of the diaereses - two dots which indicate the pronunciation of the name - was spotted by historian Sharon Wright, editor of the Brontë Society Gazette, who raised the issue with the Dean of Westminster, Dr David Hoyle.

Dr Hoyle asked the abbey's stonemason to add the dots and its conservator to paint them.

Ms Wright, who went to Poets' Corner for a research trip, said the missing diaereses "really troubled" her as the names of the Brontë sisters were spelled incorrectly.

"They didn't have the correct punctuation on the "e" so it sounded more like "Bront" not "Bronte"," she said.

The Brontë name evolved from their father Patrick’s Irish surname of Prunty or Brunty when he entered St John's College, Cambridge, in 1802.

A letter in the abbey archive from Donald Hopewell, president of the Brontë Society, to the Dean of Westminster, dated 1 May 1939, gave clear instructions for the wording of the memorial, which included the diaereses - but they were never incorporated.

Ms Wright said: "I am immensely proud that the correct, unique and immortal name of Charlotte, Emily and Anne is finally complete in Poets’ Corner.

"It is a Brontë story with a happy and timely ending."

Dr Hoyle added: "I am grateful to have this omission pointed out and now put right.

"Memory is not a locked cupboard, but an active thing and the Brontë Society have given us a glimpse of their commitment to a lively remembering."

Rebecca Yorke, director of the Brontë Society, said she was "absolutely thrilled".

"As the Brontës and their work are loved and respected all over the world, it’s entirely appropriate that their name is spelled correctly on their memorial," she said.

"I’m sure that everyone at the Brontë Society and the Brontë Parsonage Museum, as well as Brontë enthusiasts across the world, will be very excited to learn about this new episode in the enduring story of Charlotte, Emily and Anne." (Julia Bryson)

The Times has a leading article about it:

For 85 years since their memorial was unveiled in Westminster Abbey, each of Charlotte, Emily and Anne’s surnames was missing its dots. Yet few naive visitors would have floundered over whether or not it should actually be pronounced “the Bront sisters”. Some modern publications ignore these accents. Though obsolete in most modern English words, this newspaper includes them for the essential and polite reason that the Brontë sisters themselves wrote their names this way.

The dots are a diaeresis — not an umlaut, which only appears in words co-opted from German (and only on a’s, o’s and u’s in modern German, not e’s). A diaeresis indicates that a vowel is sounded separately. The name Brontë, however, is the only example in English where this occurs after a consonant. All the other words in English that use a diaeresis do so in a diphthong, as in Noël, though most have been dropped, as in dais, or a hyphen is preferred (co-ordinate, re-entry, re-elect).

The girls’ father Patrick changed the spelling of his Irish surname Brunty upon attending St John’s College, Cambridge. Quite why no one knows. Apocryphal tales include association with Admiral Nelson, who was Duke of Bronte (in Sicily; no diaeresis) or after the classical Greek word for thunder. He probably would have known to use a diaeresis in a diphthong. Coming from a poor family to an elite university, this was a 19th-century equivalent of Hyacinth Bucket insisting her surname was pronounced “Bouquet”. But unlike Patricia Routledge’s Keeping Up Appearances character attempting to climb the class ladder in the 1990s, Patrick Brunty’s pre-emptive soft rebrand two centuries earlier has been vindicated. Snobbery notwithstanding, this minor augmentation of the family name turned out to be a masterstroke in branding for his literarily adroit offspring. “The Brunty sisters” does not have quite the same ring.

Also on many other news outlets such as The Yorkshire Post, The Telegraph, AP News, The Times, Fine Books & Collections, Mirror, Westminster Abbey, etc.

Coincidentally, Offaly Express is looking forward to a talk by Sharon Wright and Ann Dinsdale next month:

Brontë enthusiasts throughout the Midlands and further afield are in for a major treat on Monday October 7th when a lecture by Ann Dinsdale and Sharon Wright entitled 'The Brontës in Bricks and Mortar' will be given in the Crank House Banagher at 5pm sharp (please note time).

The talk will be followed by an interval for dinner. Afterwards a miscellany of music, song and words will be presented in Corrigans' Corner House pub at 8pm. The event is in honour of Arthur Bell Nicholls and his two wives Charlotte Brontë and Mary Anna Bell Nicholls and will include music and songs familiar to the Brontë family and readings from Brontë literature. (John O'Callaghan)

A contributor to Daily News writes about the transformative power of reading classic novels:

I fell in love with Charlotte Brontë’s “Jane Eyre” and its lessons of resilience and emotional strength some years later. 

As I struggled to confront issues within my identity and self-autonomy, I read about Jane Eyre’s similar journey — one that ended with a message of the importance of self-empowerment and honesty. I gained the strength to love myself authentically and felt okay to confront the somewhat painful emotions inside of myself. 

I no longer questioned my desires. Instead, I embraced them and made peace with myself. (Trinity Rea)

A columnist from The Telegraph weighs in on the whole Jacob-Elordi-as-Heathclif debacle.

Ever wondered why, these days, so many period dramas seem to be cast to make the England of the past look just as diverse as the England of the present? Well, here’s a possible answer. It’s so the directors can avoid being engulfed by rows like this one.

A forthcoming film of Wuthering Heights, to be directed by Emerald Fennell, has come under fire because Jacob Elordi, the actor cast to play Heathcliff, is white. Critics on social media have indignantly protested that, in Emily Brontë’s novel of 1847, the character is described as “dark-skinned.” Meanwhile Michael Stewart, the founder of the Brontë Writing Centre, says: “I feel quite strongly that Emily’s intention was that he was either black or mixed race.”

I bow to his superior expertise, but personally, I have my doubts. Mainly because, in the text, other characters repeatedly refer to Heathcliff as a “gypsy.” Of course, this doesn’t necessarily mean he is a gypsy. He may just be a bit tanned and weather-beaten, but, because these other characters fear and despise him, they call him a “gypsy” as an insult. But if he’d been black, I tend to suspect that, given the period in which the book is set, his enemies would have used a different – and rather more offensive – word with which to abuse him.

In any case, this whole row completely misses the point. Yes, the new film’s casting is odd – but not because of race. It’s because the leads are far too pretty.

Heathcliff, for one, should look wild, cruel, brooding and ragingly intense – not like some cute, winsome, boy-band-style pin-up, as Mr Elordi does. I don’t mean to offend him. He may well be a very fine actor. But, to pull off Wuthering Heights, he’s really going to have to do something about his appearance. 

Sometimes, for the sake of a role, Hollywood actors will lose weight, or gain weight, or head down the gym to build muscle. So, if the adorably fresh-faced Mr Elordi is to make himself look like a plausible Heathcliff, I would politely suggest that he needs to spend six months doing something extremely difficult, stressful and rife with potential disaster. Working on an oil rig, say, or being a press officer for Keir Starmer.

The strangeness of the film’s casting doesn’t end there, though. Believe it or not, the other lead role, that of Catherine Earnshaw, is to be taken by Margot Robbie: the flawlessly slim, blonde, Australian star of last year’s Barbie film. She’s very talented. But she doesn’t exactly scream “windswept Yorkshire moors.”

As I say, the casting is very peculiar. Still, there must be some reason for it. Perhaps, in this new version, Heathcliff takes Catherine on a romantic holiday to Bondi Beach. Then she can show off her bikini body, and he can work on his tan. (Michael Deacon)