Page:Arthur Rackham (Hudson).pdf/76

 The Rackhams’ first joint home was at 3, Primrose Hill Studios, Fitzroy Road (near Primrose Hill), but he was soon able to move to an attractive, unusual, high-gabled house at 16, Chalcot Gardens, Englands Lane, which had been built in 1881 and enlarged in 1898 by W. Voysey. The back of the house was mostly taken up by two large studios, one used by Mrs Rackham, and the other (which Maxwell Ayrton added for him) by Rackham himself. From this upper studio a spiral staircase ran down into the peaceful garden with its trees. The studio was full of curiosities, and for many years it usually contained a large Persian tabby-cat, called ‘Sir James’ after Barrie, who would put a stop to all work when he brought his comb to be groomed every afternoon. ‘There is nothing disappointing about the little house in Chalcot Gardens,’ wrote Eleanor Farjeon in an article. ‘Outwardly it is not unsuited to the pages of fairy tale. It has a mellow red-and-brown charm, and is the kind of house that could very well have been built of gingerbread and candy. Behind the house is the kind of garden that makes me feel six years old again. …’

When he married, Rackham was earning considerably less than a thousand pounds annually, but he soon reached and passed that figure, and from 1907 onwards his eared income fluctuated for many years between £1,500 and £3,500. In one remarkable year (1920) he earned £7,000. He soon found that he could rely on heavy royalties from his books, and also that he could sell his originals at good prices, especially if they were in colour (it proved worth while for him to add colour to his black-and-white drawings for this purpose). He was able to save and he invested his savings carefully; while his steady support of the Artists’ General Benevolent Institution showed that he was always mindful of those less fortunate than himself.

Rackham’s next undertaking after Peter Pan was the most controversial of his whole career. This was nothing less than a fresh illustration of Alice in Wonderland, a work so completely identified with the drawings by John Tenniel that it seemed to many critics almost